LOEWS
CORPORATION
INDEX
TO ANNUAL REPORT ON
FORM
10-K FILED WITH THE
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
For
the Year Ended December 31, 2004
Item |
|
Page |
No. |
PART
I |
No. |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Business |
3 |
|
|
Carolina
Group Tracking Stock |
3 |
|
|
CNA
Financial Corporation |
4 |
|
|
Lorillard,
Inc. |
12 |
|
|
Loews
Hotels Holding Corporation |
18 |
|
|
Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. |
19 |
|
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC |
22 |
|
|
Bulova
Corporation |
24 |
|
|
Available
information |
25 |
2 |
|
Properties
|
25 |
3 |
|
Legal
Proceedings |
25 |
4 |
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
26 |
|
|
Executive
Officers of the Registrant |
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
II |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Market
for the Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer |
|
|
|
Purchases
of Equity Securities |
27 |
|
|
Management's
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting |
29 |
|
|
Attestation
Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm |
30 |
6 |
|
Selected
Financial Data |
31 |
7 |
|
Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations |
32 |
7 |
A |
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk |
114 |
8 |
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data |
117 |
9 |
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure |
221 |
9 |
A |
Controls
and Procedures |
221 |
9 |
B |
Other
Information |
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
III |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certain
information called for by Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) has been
omitted as Registrant intends to file with the Securities and Exchange
Commission not later than 120 days after the close of its fiscal year a
definitive Proxy Statement pursuant to Regulation 14A. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART
IV |
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules |
221 |
PART
I
Item
1. Business.
Loews
Corporation is a holding company. Its subsidiaries are engaged in the following
lines of business: commercial property and casualty insurance (CNA Financial
Corporation, a 91% owned subsidiary); the production and sale of cigarettes
(Lorillard, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary); the operation of hotels (Loews
Hotels Holding Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary); the operation of
offshore oil and gas drilling rigs (Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc., a 55% owned
subsidiary); the operation of interstate natural gas transmission pipeline
systems (Boardwalk Pipelines, LLC (formerly TGT Pipeline, LLC), a wholly owned
subsidiary); and the distribution and sale of watches and clocks (Bulova
Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary).
Unless
the context otherwise requires, the terms "Company" and "Registrant" as used
herein mean Loews Corporation excluding its subsidiaries.
Information
relating to the major business segments from which the Company's consolidated
revenues and income are derived is contained in Note 23 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Item 8.
CAROLINA
GROUP TRACKING STOCK
The
issuance of Carolina Group stock has resulted in a two class common stock
structure for Loews Corporation. Carolina Group stock, commonly called a
tracking stock, is intended to reflect the economic performance of a defined
group of assets and liabilities of the Company referred to as the Carolina
Group. See Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in
Item 8.
The
Company has attributed the following assets and liabilities to the Carolina
Group:
(a) |
the
Company's 100% stock ownership interest in Lorillard,
Inc.; |
|
|
(b) |
notional,
intergroup debt owed by the Carolina Group to the Loews Group, bearing
interest at the annual rate of 8.0% and, subject to optional prepayment,
due December 31, 2021 (as of February 18, 2005, $1.8 billion was
outstanding); |
|
|
(c) |
any
and all liabilities, costs and expenses of the Company and Lorillard, Inc.
and the subsidiaries and predecessors of Lorillard, Inc., arising out of
or related to tobacco or otherwise arising out of the past, present or
future business of Lorillard, Inc. or its subsidiaries or predecessors, or
claims arising out of or related to the sale of any businesses previously
sold by Lorillard, Inc. or its subsidiaries or predecessors, in each case,
whether grounded in tort, contract, statute or otherwise, whether pending
or asserted in the future; |
|
|
(d) |
all
net income or net losses arising from the assets and liabilities that are
reflected in the Carolina Group and all net proceeds from any disposition
of those assets, in each case, after deductions to reflect dividends paid
to holders of Carolina Group stock or credited to the Loews Group in
respect of its intergroup interest; and |
|
|
(e) |
any
acquisitions or investments made from assets reflected in the Carolina
Group. |
As of
February 18, 2005, there were 68,019,435 shares of Carolina Group stock
outstanding representing a 39.21% economic interest in the Carolina
Group.
The Loews
Group consists of all of the Company's assets and liabilities other than the
39.21% economic interest in the Carolina Group represented by the outstanding
Carolina Group stock, and includes as an asset the notional intergroup debt of
the Carolina Group referred to above.
The
creation of the Carolina Group and the issuance of Carolina Group stock does not
change the Company's ownership of Lorillard, Inc. or Lorillard, Inc.'s status as
a separate legal entity. The Carolina Group and the Loews Group are notional
groups that are intended to reflect the performance of the defined sets of
assets and liabilities of each such
group as described above. The Carolina Group and the Loews Group are not
separate legal entities and the
Item
1. Business |
Carolina
Group Tracking Stock - (Continued) |
attribution
of assets and liabilities of the Company to the Loews Group or the Carolina
Group does not affect title to the assets or responsibility for the liabilities
so attributed.
Each
outstanding share of Carolina Group Stock has 1/10 of a vote per share. Holders
of the Company's common stock and of Carolina Group stock are shareholders of
Loews Corporation and are subject to the risks related to an equity investment
in Loews Corporation.
CNA
FINANCIAL CORPORATION
CNA
Financial Corporation (together with its subsidiaries, "CNA") was incorporated
in 1967 and is an insurance holding company. CNA's property and casualty
insurance operations are conducted by Continental Casualty Company ("CCC"),
incorporated in 1897, and its affiliates, and The Continental Insurance Company
("CIC"), organized in 1853, and its affiliates. CIC became an affiliate of CNA
in 1995 as a result of the acquisition of The Continental Corporation
("Continental"). Life and group insurance operations, which were either sold or
are being managed as a run-off operation, are conducted within CCC and
Continental Assurance Company ("CAC"). The Company owned approximately 91% of
the outstanding common stock and 100% of the Series H preferred stock of CNA as
of December 31, 2004. CNA accounted for 65.17%, 71.26% and 70.38% of the
Company's consolidated total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, respectively.
CNA
serves a wide variety of customers, including small, medium and large
businesses; associations; professionals; and groups and individuals. Insurance
products primarily include property and casualty coverages. CNA services include
risk management, information services, warranty and claims administration. CNA
products and services are marketed through independent agents, brokers, managing
general agents and direct sales.
During
2003, CNA completed a strategic review of its operations and decided to
concentrate its efforts on the property and casualty business. As a result of
this review, the following actions in relation to CNA's insurance operations
were taken:
On April
30, 2004, CNA sold its individual life insurance business. The business sold
included term, universal and permanent life insurance policies and individual
annuity products. CNA's individual long term care and structured settlement
businesses were excluded from the sale.
On
December 31, 2003, CNA sold the majority of its group benefits business. The
business sold included group life and accident, short and long term disability
and certain other products. CNA's group long term care and specialty medical
businesses were excluded from the sale.
CNA is
continuing to service its existing group and individual long term care
commitments and is managing these businesses as a run-off
operation.
During
2003, CNA sold the renewal rights for most of the treaty business of CNA Re and
withdrew from the assumed reinsurance business. CNA is managing the run-off of
its retained liabilities.
On August
1, 2004, CNA sold its retirement plan trust and recordkeeping business
portfolio.
See Note
14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8 for
additional information.
As a
result of the strategic review described above, in 2004 CNA changed how it
manages its core operations and makes business decisions. Accordingly, the
Company revised its reportable business segment structure to reflect these
changes. CNA's core operations, property and casualty operations, are now
reported in two business segments: Standard Lines and Specialty Lines. CNA's
non-core operations are managed in two segments: Life and Group Non-Core and
Other Insurance. Prior period segment disclosures have been conformed to the
current year presentation. See Note 23 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included under Item 8 for additional information.
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
Standard
Lines
Standard
Lines works with an independent agency distribution system and network of
brokers to market a broad range of property and casualty insurance products and
services to small, middle-market and large businesses. The Standard Lines
operating model focuses on underwriting performance, relationships with selected
distribution sources and understanding customer needs.
Standard
Lines includes Property, Casualty and CNA Global.
Property:
Property provides
standard and excess property coverage, as well as boiler and machinery to a wide
range of businesses.
Casualty: Casualty
provides standard casualty insurance products such as workers compensation,
general and product liability and commercial auto coverage through traditional
products to a wide range of businesses. The majority of Casualty customers are
small and middle-market businesses, with less than $1.0 million in annual
insurance premiums. Most insurance programs are provided on a guaranteed cost
basis; however, Casualty has the capability to offer specialized, loss-sensitive
insurance programs to those customers viewed as higher risk and less predictable
in exposure.
Excess
& Surplus ("E&S"): E&S
is included in Casualty. E&S provides specialized insurance and other
financial products for selected commercial risks on both an individual customer
and program basis. Customers insured by E&S are generally viewed as higher
risk and less predictable in exposure than those covered by standard insurance
markets. E&S's products are distributed throughout the United States through
specialist producers, program agents and Property and Casualty's ("P&C")
agents and brokers. E&S has specialized underwriting and claim resources in
Chicago, Denver and Columbus.
Property
and Casualty:
P&C's field structure consists of 33 branch locations across the country
organized into 4 regions. Each branch provides the marketing, underwriting and
risk control expertise on the entire portfolio of products. The Centralized
Processing Operation for small and middle-market customers, located in Maitland,
Florida, handles policy processing and accounting, and also acts as a call
center to optimize customer service. The claims field structure consists of 26
locations organized into two zones, East and West. Also, Standard Lines,
primarily through a wholly owned subsidiary, ClaimsPlus, Inc., a third party
administrator, began providing total risk management services relating to claim
services, risk control, cost management and information services to the large
commercial insurance marketplace in 2003.
CNA
Global: CNA
Global consists of Marine and Global Standard Lines.
Marine
serves domestic and global ocean marine needs, with markets extending across
North America, Europe and throughout the world. Marine offers hull, cargo,
primary and excess marine liability, marine claims and recovery products and
services. Business is sold through national brokers, regional marine specialty
brokers and independent agencies.
Global
Standard Lines is responsible for coordinating and managing the direct business
of CNA's overseas property and casualty operations. This business identifies and
capitalizes on strategic indigenous opportunities and currently has operations
in Hawaii, Europe, Latin America and Canada.
Specialty
Lines
Specialty
Lines provides professional, financial and specialty property and casualty
products and services through a network of brokers, managing general
underwriters and independent agencies. Specialty Lines provides solutions for
managing the risks of its clients, including architects, engineers, lawyers,
healthcare professionals, financial intermediaries and corporate directors and
officers. Product offerings also include surety and fidelity bonds and vehicle
and equipment warranty services.
Specialty
Lines includes the following business groups: Professional Liability Insurance,
Surety and Warranty.
Professional
Liability Insurance ("CNA Pro"): CNA Pro
provides management and professional liability insurance and risk management
services, primarily in the United States. This unit provides professional
liability coverages to
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
various
professional firms, including architects and engineers, realtors, non-Big Four
accounting firms, law firms and technology firms. CNA Pro also has market
positions in directors and officers ("D&O"), errors and omissions,
employment practices, fiduciary and fidelity coverages. Specific areas of focus
include larger firms as well as privately held firms and not-for-profit
organizations where CNA offers tailored products for this client segment.
Products within CNA Pro are distributed through brokers, agents and managing
general underwriters.
CNA Pro,
through CNA HealthPro, also offers insurance products to serve the healthcare
delivery system. Products are distributed on a national basis through a variety
of channels including brokers, agents and managing general underwriters. Key
customer segments include long term care facilities, allied healthcare
providers, life sciences, dental professionals and mid-size and large healthcare
facilities and delivery systems.
Surety: Surety
consists primarily of CNA Surety and its insurance subsidiaries and offers
small, medium and large contract and commercial surety bonds. CNA Surety
provides surety and fidelity bonds in all 50 states through a combined
network of independent agencies. CNA owns approximately 64% of CNA
Surety.
Warranty: Warranty
provides vehicle warranty service contracts that protect individuals and
businesses from the financial burden associated with breakdown,
under-performance or maintenance of a product.
Life
and Group Non-Core
The Life
and Group Non-Core segment consists of Group Operations and Life Operations
(formerly separate reportable segments) including the run-off of the related
group and life products that have been combined into one reportable segment.
Additionally, other run-off life and group operations that were previously
reported in the Other Insurance segment, including group reinsurance, are also
included in the Life and Group Non-Core segment. The segment includes operating
results for periods prior to the sale and the realized gain/loss from the sale
for the group benefits business that was sold on December 31, 2003, the
individual life business that was sold on April 30, 2004, the CNA Trust business
that was sold on August 1, 2004 and the effects of the shared corporate overhead
expenses which continue to be allocated to the sold businesses. Additionally, on
July 1, 2002, CNA sold its federal health plan administrator, Claims
Administration Corporation, and transferred the Mail Handlers Plan to First
Health Group.
Life and
Group Non-Core includes the following lines of business: Life & Annuity,
Health and Other.
Life
& Annuity: Life
& Annuity consists primarily of individual term, universal life and
permanent life insurance products, guaranteed investment contracts, as well as
individual and group annuity products. As discussed above, on April 30, 2004,
certain of these products were sold. The remaining businesses are being managed
as a run-off operation; however certain businesses focused on institutional
investors are accepting new deposits from existing customers.
Health: Health
consists primarily of the Group Benefits business, group long term care,
individual long term care and specialty medical products and related services.
On December 31, 2003, CNA completed the sale of the Group Benefits business. CNA
is continuing to service its existing group and individual long term care
commitments and is managing these businesses as a run-off operation. In January
of 2005, the specialty medical business was sold to Aetna. This business
contributed $14.6 million, $8.1 million and $1.8 million of net income for 2004,
2003 and 2002.
Other: Other
consists primarily of group reinsurance and life settlement contracts. These
businesses are being managed as a run-off operation.
Other
Insurance
Other
Insurance includes the results of certain property and casualty lines of
business placed in run-off. CNA Re, formerly a separate property and casualty
operating segment, is currently in run-off and is now included in the Other
Insurance segment. This segment also includes the results related to the
centralized adjusting and settlement of asbestos and environmental pollution and
mass tort ("APMT") claims as well as the results of CNA's participation in
voluntary insurance pools and various other non-insurance operations. Other
operations also include interest expense on CNA's corporate borrowings and
intercompany eliminations.
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
See Item
7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations - Results of Operations by Business Segment - CNA Financial" for
information with respect to each segment.
Supplementary
Insurance Data
The
following table sets forth supplementary insurance data:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions, except ratio information) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
Ratios - GAAP basis (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
and loss adjustment expense ratio |
|
|
74.6 |
% |
|
112.0 |
% |
|
79.8 |
% |
Expense
ratio |
|
|
31.5 |
|
|
37.3 |
|
|
28.9 |
|
Dividend
ratio |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
0.9 |
|
Combined
ratio |
|
|
106.3 |
% |
|
150.7 |
% |
|
109.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
Ratios - Statutory basis (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
and loss adjustment expense ratio |
|
|
78.1 |
% |
|
118.1 |
% |
|
79.2 |
% |
Expense
ratio |
|
|
27.2 |
|
|
34.6 |
|
|
30.1 |
|
Dividend
ratio |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Combined
ratio |
|
|
105.9 |
% |
|
153.9 |
% |
|
110.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual
Life and Group Life Insurance Inforce (d): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual
Life |
|
$ |
11,566.0 |
|
$ |
330,805.0 |
|
$ |
345,272.0 |
|
Group
Life |
|
|
45,079.0 |
|
|
58,163.0 |
|
|
92,479.0 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
56,645.0 |
|
$ |
388,968.0 |
|
$ |
437,751.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Data - Statutory basis (b): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty companies' capital and surplus (c) |
|
$ |
6,998.0 |
|
$ |
6,170.0 |
|
$ |
6,836.0 |
|
Life
and group companies' capital and surplus |
|
|
1,178.0 |
|
|
707.0 |
|
|
1,645.0 |
|
Property
and casualty companies' written premium to surplus |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ratio |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
1.3 |
|
Life
companies' capital and surplus-percent to total
liabilities |
|
|
56.0 |
% |
|
13.0 |
% |
|
21.0 |
% |
Participating
policyholders-percent of gross life insurance inforce |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
0.5 |
% |
|
0.4 |
% |
__________
(a) |
Trade
ratios reflect the results of CNA's property and casualty insurance
subsidiaries. Trade ratios are industry measures of property and casualty
underwriting results. The loss and loss adjustment expense ratio is the
percentage of net incurred claim and claim adjustment expenses and the
expenses incurred related to uncollectible reinsurance receivables to net
earned premiums. The primary difference in this ratio between accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP") and
statutory accounting practices ("SAP") is related to the treatment of
active life reserves ("ALR") related to long term care insurance products
written in property and casualty insurance subsidiaries. For GAAP, ALR is
classified as claim and claim adjustment expense reserves whereas for SAP,
ALR is classified as unearned premium reserves. The expense ratio, using
amounts determined in accordance with GAAP, is the percentage of
underwriting and acquisition expenses (including the amortization of
deferred acquisition expenses) to net earned premiums. The expense ratio,
using amounts determined in accordance with SAP, is the percentage of
acquisition and underwriting expenses (with no deferral of acquisition
expenses) to net written premiums. The dividend ratio, using amounts
determined in accordance with GAAP, is the ratio of dividends incurred to
net earned premiums. The dividend ratio, using amounts determined in
accordance with SAP, is the ratio of dividends paid to net earned
premiums. The combined ratio is the sum of the loss and loss adjustment
expense, expense and dividend ratios. |
(b) |
Other
data is determined in accordance with SAP. Life and group statutory
capital and surplus as a percent of total liabilities is determined after
excluding separate account liabilities and reclassifying the statutorily
required Asset Valuation Reserve to surplus. |
(c) |
Surplus
includes the property and casualty companies' equity ownership of the life
and group companies' capital and surplus. |
(d) |
The
decline in gross inforce is attributable to the sales of the group
benefits and the individual life businesses. See Note 14 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8 for additional
inforce information. |
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
The
following table displays the distribution of gross written premiums for CNA's
operations by geographic concentration.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
9.3 |
% |
|
8.5 |
% |
|
7.7 |
% |
New
York |
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
7.2 |
|
Florida
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
6.7 |
|
Texas
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
6.2 |
|
New
Jersey |
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
4.6 |
|
Illinois
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
9.1 |
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
4.5 |
|
Massachusetts |
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
2.8 |
|
All
other states, countries or political subdivisions (a) |
|
|
52.0 |
|
|
49.8 |
|
|
51.2 |
|
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
__________
(a) |
No
other individual state, country or political subdivision accounts for more
than 3.0% of gross written premiums. |
Approximately
5.0%, 3.2% and 3.5% of CNA's gross written premiums were derived from outside of
the United States for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. Gross
written premiums from the United Kingdom were approximately 2.3%, 1.8% and 1.7%
of CNA's premiums for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. Premiums
from any individual foreign country excluding the United Kingdom were not
significant.
Property
and Casualty Claim and Claim Adjustment Expenses
The
following loss reserve development table illustrates the change over time of
reserves established for property and casualty claim and claim adjustment
expenses at the end of the preceding ten calendar years for CNA's property and
casualty insurance operations. The table excludes the life subsidiaries, and as
such, the carried reserves will not agree to the Consolidated Financial
Statements included under Item 8. The first section shows the reserves as
originally reported at the end of the stated year. The second section, reading
down, shows the cumulative amounts paid as of the end of successive years with
respect to the originally reported reserve liability. The third section, reading
down, shows re-estimates of the originally recorded reserves as of the end of
each successive year, which is the result of CNA's property and casualty
insurance subsidiaries' expanded awareness of additional facts and circumstances
that pertain to the unsettled claims. The last section compares the latest
re-estimated reserves to the reserves originally established, and indicates
whether the original reserves were adequate or inadequate to cover the estimated
costs of unsettled claims.
The loss
reserve development table for property and casualty companies is cumulative and,
therefore, ending balances should not be added since the amount at the end of
each calendar year includes activity for both the current and prior years.
Additionally, the development amounts in the table below are the amounts prior
to consideration of any related reinsurance bad debt allowance
impacts.
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
|
|
Schedule
of Loss Reserve Development |
|
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
1994(a) |
|
1995(b) |
|
1996 |
|
1997 |
|
1998 |
|
1999(c) |
|
2000 |
|
2001(d) |
|
2002(e) |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally
reported gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reserves for unpaid claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
21,639 |
|
|
31,044 |
|
|
29,357 |
|
|
28,533 |
|
|
28,317 |
|
|
26,631 |
|
|
26,408 |
|
|
29,551 |
|
|
25,648 |
|
|
31,282 |
|
|
31,201 |
|
Originally
reported ceded |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
recoverable |
|
|
2,705 |
|
|
6,089 |
|
|
5,660 |
|
|
5,326 |
|
|
5,424 |
|
|
6,273 |
|
|
7,568 |
|
|
11,798 |
|
|
10,583 |
|
|
13,997 |
|
|
13,788 |
|
Originally
reported net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reserves for unpaid claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
18,934 |
|
|
24,955 |
|
|
23,697 |
|
|
23,207 |
|
|
22,893 |
|
|
20,358 |
|
|
18,840 |
|
|
17,753 |
|
|
15,065 |
|
|
17,285 |
|
|
17,413 |
|
Cumulative
net paid as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One
year later |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
6,510 |
|
|
5,851 |
|
|
5,954 |
|
|
7,321 |
|
|
6,546 |
|
|
7,686 |
|
|
5,981 |
|
|
5,373 |
|
|
4,341 |
|
|
- |
|
Two
years later |
|
|
7,087 |
|
|
10,485 |
|
|
9,796 |
|
|
11,394 |
|
|
12,241 |
|
|
11,935 |
|
|
11,988 |
|
|
10,355 |
|
|
8,727 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Three
years later |
|
|
9,195 |
|
|
13,363 |
|
|
13,602 |
|
|
14,423 |
|
|
16,020 |
|
|
15,247 |
|
|
15,291 |
|
|
12,912 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Four
years later |
|
|
10,624 |
|
|
16,271 |
|
|
15,793 |
|
|
17,042 |
|
|
18,271 |
|
|
18,136 |
|
|
17,292 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Five
years later |
|
|
12,577 |
|
|
17,947 |
|
|
17,736 |
|
|
18,568 |
|
|
20,779 |
|
|
19,586 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Six
years later |
|
|
13,472 |
|
|
19,465 |
|
|
18,878 |
|
|
20,723 |
|
|
21,928 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Seven
years later |
|
|
14,394 |
|
|
20,410 |
|
|
20,828 |
|
|
21,608 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Eight
years later |
|
|
15,024 |
|
|
22,237 |
|
|
21,567 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Nine
years later |
|
|
15,602 |
|
|
22,883 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Ten
years later |
|
|
16,158 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Net
reserves re-estimated as
of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End
of initial year |
|
|
18,934 |
|
|
24,955 |
|
|
23,697 |
|
|
23,207 |
|
|
22,893 |
|
|
20,358 |
|
|
18,840 |
|
|
17,753 |
|
|
15,065 |
|
|
17,285 |
|
|
17,413 |
|
One
year later |
|
|
18,922 |
|
|
24,864 |
|
|
23,441 |
|
|
23,470 |
|
|
23,920 |
|
|
20,785 |
|
|
21,306 |
|
|
17,805 |
|
|
17,496 |
|
|
17,520 |
|
|
- |
|
Two
years later |
|
|
18,500 |
|
|
24,294 |
|
|
23,102 |
|
|
23,717 |
|
|
23,774 |
|
|
22,903 |
|
|
21,377 |
|
|
20,368 |
|
|
18,095 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Three
years later |
|
|
18,088 |
|
|
23,814 |
|
|
23,270 |
|
|
23,414 |
|
|
25,724 |
|
|
22,780 |
|
|
23,890 |
|
|
20,945 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Four
years later |
|
|
17,354 |
|
|
24,092 |
|
|
22,977 |
|
|
24,751 |
|
|
25,407 |
|
|
25,293 |
|
|
24,420 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Five
years later |
|
|
17,506 |
|
|
23,854 |
|
|
24,105 |
|
|
24,330 |
|
|
27,456 |
|
|
25,703 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Six
years later |
|
|
17,248 |
|
|
24,883 |
|
|
23,736 |
|
|
26,037 |
|
|
27,782 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Seven
years later |
|
|
17,751 |
|
|
24,631 |
|
|
25,250 |
|
|
26,239 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Eight
years later |
|
|
17,650 |
|
|
26,023 |
|
|
25,437 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Nine
years later |
|
|
18,193 |
|
|
26,169 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Ten
years later |
|
|
18,230 |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
|
- |
|
Total
net (deficiency)
redundancy |
|
|
704 |
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
(1,740 |
) |
|
(3,032 |
) |
|
(4,889 |
) |
|
(5,345 |
) |
|
(5,580 |
) |
|
(3,192 |
) |
|
(3,030 |
) |
|
(235 |
) |
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation
to gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
re-estimated
reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
reserves re-estimated |
|
|
18,230 |
|
|
26,169 |
|
|
25,437 |
|
|
26,239 |
|
|
27,782 |
|
|
25,703 |
|
|
24,420 |
|
|
20,945 |
|
|
18,095 |
|
|
17,520 |
|
|
- |
|
Re-estimated
ceded
recoverable |
|
|
2,992 |
|
|
8,479 |
|
|
7,650 |
|
|
7,052 |
|
|
7,475 |
|
|
9,745 |
|
|
10,734 |
|
|
16,526 |
|
|
15,850 |
|
|
14,410 |
|
|
- |
|
Total
gross re-estimated
reserves |
|
|
21,222 |
|
|
34,648 |
|
|
33,087 |
|
|
33,291 |
|
|
35,257 |
|
|
35,448 |
|
|
35,154 |
|
|
37,471 |
|
|
33,945 |
|
|
31,930 |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(deficiency) redundancy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos
claims |
|
|
(2,126 |
) |
|
(2,354 |
) |
|
(2,456 |
) |
|
(2,354 |
) |
|
(2,111 |
) |
|
(1,534 |
) |
|
(1,469 |
) |
|
(697 |
) |
|
(696 |
) |
|
(54 |
) |
|
- |
|
Environmental
and mass tort |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
claims
|
|
|
(727 |
) |
|
(770 |
) |
|
(715 |
) |
|
(739 |
) |
|
(520 |
) |
|
(620 |
) |
|
(610 |
) |
|
(148 |
) |
|
(151 |
) |
|
(1 |
) |
|
- |
|
Total
asbestos, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
environmental
and mass tort |
|
|
(2,853 |
) |
|
(3,124 |
) |
|
(3,171 |
) |
|
(3,093 |
) |
|
(2,631 |
) |
|
(2,154 |
) |
|
(2,079 |
) |
|
(845 |
) |
|
(847 |
) |
|
(55 |
) |
|
- |
|
Other
claims |
|
|
3,557 |
|
|
1,910 |
|
|
1,431 |
|
|
61 |
|
|
(2,258 |
) |
|
(3,191 |
) |
|
(3,501 |
) |
|
(2,347 |
) |
|
(2,183 |
) |
|
(180 |
) |
|
- |
|
Total
net (deficiency)
redundancy |
|
|
704 |
|
|
(1,214 |
) |
|
(1,740 |
) |
|
(3,032 |
) |
|
(4,889 |
) |
|
(5,345 |
) |
|
(5,580 |
) |
|
(3,192 |
) |
|
(3,030 |
) |
|
(235 |
) |
|
- |
|
__________
(a) |
Reflects
reserves of CNA's property and casualty insurance subsidiaries, excluding
reserves for CIC and its insurance affiliates, which were acquired on May
10, 1995 (the "Acquisition Date"). Accordingly, the reserve development
(net reserves recorded at the end of the year, as initially estimated,
less net reserves re-estimated as of subsequent years) does not include
CIC. |
(b) |
Includes
CIC gross reserves of $9,713.0 and net reserves of $6,063.0 acquired on
the Acquisition Date and subsequent development
thereon. |
(c) |
Ceded
recoverable includes reserves transferred under retroactive reinsurance
agreements of $784.0 as of December 31, 1999. |
(d) |
Effective
January 1, 2001, CNA established a new life insurance company, CNA Group
Life Assurance Company ("CNAGLA"). Further, on January 1, 2001
approximately $1,055.0 of reserves were transferred from CCC to
CNAGLA. |
(e) |
Effective
October 31, 2002, CNA sold CNA Reinsurance Company Limited ("CNA Re
U.K."). As a result of the sale, net reserves were reduced by
approximately $1,316.0. See Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included under Item 8 for further discussion of the
sale. |
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
Additional
information relating to CNA's property and casualty claim and claim adjustment
expense reserves and reserve development is set forth in Item 7, Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
("MD&A"), and in Notes 1 and 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, included in Item 8.
Investments
See Item
7, MD&A - Investments and Notes 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements, included in Item 8, for information regarding CNA's
investment portfolio.
Other
Competition:
The
property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive both as to rate
and service. CNA's consolidated property and casualty subsidiaries compete not
only with other stock insurance companies, but also with mutual insurance
companies, reinsurance companies and other entities for both producers and
customers. CNA must continuously allocate resources to refine and improve its
insurance products and services.
Rates
among insurers vary according to the types of insurers and methods of operation.
CNA competes for business not only on the basis of rate, but also on the basis
of availability of coverage desired by customers, ratings and quality of
service, including claim adjustment services.
There are
approximately 2,400 individual companies that sell property and casualty
insurance in the United States. CNA's consolidated property and casualty
subsidiaries ranked as the fourteenth largest property and casualty insurance
organization in the United States based upon 2003 statutory net written
premiums.
Regulation:
The
insurance industry is subject to comprehensive and detailed regulation and
supervision throughout the United States. Each state has established supervisory
agencies with broad administrative powers relative to licensing insurers and
agents, approving policy forms, establishing reserve requirements, fixing
minimum interest rates for accumulation of surrender values and maximum interest
rates of policy loans, prescribing the form and content of statutory financial
reports and regulating solvency and the type and amount of investments
permitted. Such regulatory powers also extend to premium rate regulations, which
require that rates not be excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory. In
addition to regulation of dividends by insurance subsidiaries, intercompany
transfers of assets may be subject to prior notice or approval by the state
insurance regulators, depending on the size of such transfers and payments in
relation to the financial position of the insurance affiliates making the
transfer or payment.
Insurers
are also required by the states to provide coverage to insureds who would not
otherwise be considered eligible by the insurers. Each state dictates the types
of insurance and the level of coverage that must be provided to such involuntary
risks. CNA's share of these involuntary risks is mandatory and generally a
function of its respective share of the voluntary market by line of insurance in
each state.
Insurance
companies are subject to state guaranty fund and other insurance-related
assessments. Guaranty fund and other insurance-related assessments are levied by
the state departments of insurance to cover claims of insolvent
insurers.
Reform of
the U.S. tort liability system is another issue facing the insurance industry.
Over the last decade, many states have passed some type of reform. In 2004, for
example, significant tort reform measures were enacted in Ohio and Mississippi.
Nevertheless, a number of state courts have recently modified or overturned such
reforms. Additionally, new causes of action and theories of damages continue to
be proposed in state court actions or by legislatures. Continued
unpredictability in the law means that insurance underwriting and rating is
expected to continue to be difficult in commercial lines, professional liability
and some specialty coverages.
Although
the federal government and its regulatory agencies do not directly regulate the
business of insurance, federal legislative and regulatory initiatives can impact
the insurance industry in a variety of ways. These initiatives and legislation
include tort reform proposals; class action reform proposals; proposals to
establish a privately financed trust to process asbestos bodily injury claims;
proposals to overhaul the Superfund hazardous waste removal and liability
statutes; and various tax proposals affecting insurance companies. In 1999,
Congress passed the Financial Services Modernization or "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" Act
("GLB Act"), which repealed portions of the Glass-Steagall Act and enabled
closer relationships between banks and insurers. Although "functional
regulation" was preserved by the GLB
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
Act for
state oversight of insurance, additional financial services modernization
legislation could include provisions for an alternate federal system of
regulation for insurance companies.
On
February 18, 2005, President Bush signed into law the Class Action Fairness Act
of 2005, which, with limited exceptions, confers federal jurisdiction over any
class action filed after its enactment involving a putative class of 100 or more
members if all aggregated claims exceed $5.0 million and at least one claimant
has diverse residence, for jurisdictional purposes, from at least one defendant.
Federal jurisdiction under the Act may be mandatory, discretionary or disallowed
depending on the composition and citizenship of the class members and certain
defendants. The Act also applies to some individual personal injury lawsuits in
which the claims of 100 or more plaintiffs against the same company have been
joined for trial. Certain types of class actions are exempt from the
jurisdictional provisions of the Act, including those against government
defendants, those that involve only a claim regarding a company's internal
affairs and certain types of securities litigation. Closer scrutiny is required
of class actions in which the benefit reaching the class consists of a coupon or
voucher, especially where attorneys' fees by class counsel have been requested
as part of such a settlement, and a duty on defendants to notify federal and
state officials of every class action settlement is imposed.
CNA's
domestic insurance subsidiaries are subject to risk-based capital requirements.
Risk-based capital is a method developed by the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners ("NAIC") to
determine the minimum amount of statutory capital appropriate for an insurance
company to support its overall business operations in consideration of its size
and risk profile. The formula for determining the risk-based capital
requirements specifies various factors, weighted based on the perceived degree
of risk, which are applied to certain financial balances and financial activity.
The adequacy of a company's actual capital is evaluated by a comparison to the
risk-based capital requirements, as determined by the formula. Companies below
minimum risk-based capital requirements are classified within certain levels,
each of which determines a specified level of regulatory attention applicable to
a company. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, all of CNA's domestic insurance
subsidiaries exceeded the minimum risk-based capital requirements.
Subsidiaries
with insurance operations outside the United States are also subject to
regulation in the countries in which they operate. CNA has operations in the
United Kingdom, Canada and other countries.
Terrorism
Insurance: Information
related to terrorism insurance is set forth in Item 7, MD&A.
Reinsurance:
See Item
7, MD&A, and Notes 1 and 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements, included in Item 8, for information related to CNA's reinsurance
activities.
Item
1. Business |
CNA
Financial Corporation - (Continued) |
Properties:
CNA
Center, owned by CAC, a wholly owned subsidiary of CCC, serves as the executive
office for CNA and its insurance subsidiaries. CNA owns or leases office space
in various cities throughout the United States and in other countries. The
following table sets forth certain information with respect to the principal
office buildings owned or leased by CNA:
|
Size |
|
|
Location |
(square
feet) |
|
Principal
Usage |
|
|
|
|
Owned: |
|
|
|
CNA
Center |
897,490 |
|
Principal
executive offices of CNA |
333
S. Wabash |
|
|
|
Chicago,
Illinois |
|
|
|
1111
E. Broad Street |
83,702 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Columbus,
Ohio |
|
|
|
401
Penn Street |
71,178 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Reading,
Pennsylvania |
|
|
|
Leased: |
|
|
|
2405
Lucien Way |
128,267 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Maitland,
Florida |
|
|
|
40
Wall Street |
126,147 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
New
York, New York |
|
|
|
3500
Lacey Road |
117,749 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Downers
Grove, Illinois |
|
|
|
600
N. Pearl Street |
95,828 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Dallas,
Texas |
|
|
|
675
Placentia Avenue |
88,031 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Brea,
California |
|
|
|
1100
Cornwall Road |
46,515 |
|
Property
and casualty insurance offices |
Monmouth
Junction, New Jersey |
|
|
|
100
CNA Drive |
19,981 |
|
Life
insurance offices |
Nashville,
Tennessee |
|
|
|
LORILLARD,
INC.
Lorillard,
Inc. ("Lorillard"), is engaged, through its subsidiaries, in the production and
sale of cigarettes. The principal cigarette brand names of Lorillard are
Newport, Kent, True, Maverick and Old Gold. Lorillard's largest selling brand is
Newport, the second largest selling cigarette brand in the United States and the
largest selling brand in the menthol segment of the U.S. cigarette market in
2004. Newport accounted for approximately 91.0% of Lorillard's sales in
2004.
Substantially
all of Lorillard's sales are in the United States, Puerto Rico and certain U.S.
territories. Lorillard's major trademarks outside of the United States were sold
in 1977. Lorillard accounted for 22.21%, 19.96% and 22.23% of the Company's
consolidated total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively.
The major
tobacco companies in the United States, including Lorillard, continue to be
faced with a number of issues that have adversely impacted their business,
results of operations and financial condition. These issues include substantial
litigation seeking damages aggregating into the billions of dollars, as well as
other relief; substantial annual payments and marketing and advertising
restrictions provided for in the settlement agreements with each of the 50
states and certain other jurisdictions; the continuing contraction of the U.S.
cigarette market; competition from other major cigarette manufacturers and deep
discount manufacturers and resultant increases in industry-wide promotional
expenses and sales incentives; substantial and potentially increasing federal,
state and local excise taxes; regulation of the manufacture, sale, distribution,
advertising, labeling and use of tobacco products; and increasing sales of
counterfeit cigarettes in the United States. See Results of
Operations-Lorillard, and Liquidity and Capital Resources-Lorillard included in
Item 7 of this Report. See also Item 3 of this Report, and Note 21 of the Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this
Report.
Legislation
and Regulation: Lorillard's
business operations are subject to a variety of federal, state and local laws
and regulations governing, among other things, publication of health warnings on
cigarette packaging, advertising and sales
Item
1. Business |
Lorillard,
Inc. - (Continued) |
of
tobacco products, restrictions on smoking in public places and fire safety
standards. Further, from time to time new legislation or regulations are
proposed and reports are published by government sponsored committees and others
recommending additional regulation of tobacco products.
Federal
Regulation: The
Federal Comprehensive Smoking Education Act, which became effective in 1985,
requires that cigarette packaging and advertising display one of the following
four warning statements, on a rotating basis: (1) "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING:
Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate
Pregnancy." (2) "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces
Serious Risks to Your Health." (3) "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking By
Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth, and Low Birth
Weight." (4) "SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Cigarette Smoke Contains Carbon
Monoxide." This law also requires that each person who manufactures, packages or
imports cigarettes shall annually provide to the Secretary of Health and Human
Services a list of the ingredients added to tobacco in the manufacture of
cigarettes. This list of ingredients may be submitted in a manner that does not
identify the company that uses the ingredients or the brand of cigarettes that
contain the ingredients.
In
addition, from time to time, bills have been introduced in Congress, among other
things, to prohibit all tobacco advertising and promotion; to require new health
warnings on cigarette packages and advertising; to authorize the establishment
of various anti-smoking education programs; to provide that current federal law
should not be construed to relieve any person of liability under common or state
law; to permit state and local governments to restrict the sale and distribution
of cigarettes; concerning the placement of advertising of tobacco products; to
provide that cigarette advertising not be deductible as a business expense; to
prohibit the mailing of unsolicited samples of cigarettes and otherwise to
restrict the sale or distribution of cigarettes in retail stores, by mail or
over the internet; to impose an additional, or to increase existing, excise
taxes on cigarettes; to require that cigarettes be manufactured in a manner that
will cause them, under certain circumstances, to be self-extinguishing; and to
subject cigarettes to regulation in various ways by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services or other regulatory agencies.
In 1996,
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") published regulations that would
have extensively regulated the distribution, marketing and advertising of
cigarettes, including the imposition of a wide range of labeling, reporting,
record keeping, manufacturing and other requirements. Challenges to the FDA's
assertion of jurisdiction over cigarettes made by Lorillard and other
manufacturers were upheld by the Supreme Court in March of 2000 when that Court
ruled that Congress did not give the FDA authority to regulate tobacco products
under the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
Since the
Supreme Court decision, various proposals and recommendations have been made for
additional federal and state legislation to regulate cigarette manufacturers.
Congressional advocates of FDA regulation have introduced legislation that would
give the FDA authority to regulate the manufacture, sale, distribution and
labeling of tobacco products to protect public health, thereby allowing the FDA
to reinstate its prior regulations or adopt new or additional
regulations.
In
February of 2001, a committee convened by the Institute of Medicine, a private,
non-profit organization which advises the federal government on medical issues,
issued a report recommending that Congress enact legislation enabling a suitable
agency to regulate tobacco-related products that purport to reduce exposure to
one or more tobacco toxicants or to reduce risk of disease, and to implement
other policies designed to reduce the harm from tobacco use. The report
recommended regulation of all tobacco products, including potentially reduced
exposure products, known as PREPs.
In 2002
certain public health groups petitioned the FDA to assert jurisdiction over
several PREP type products that have been introduced into the marketplace. These
groups assert that claims made by manufacturers of these products allow the FDA
to regulate the manufacture, advertising and sale of these products as drugs or
medical devices under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. The agency has received
comments on these petitions but has taken no action.
In late
2002 Philip Morris U.S.A., the largest U.S. manufacturer of cigarettes, filed a
request for rulemaking petition with the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC")
seeking changes in the existing FTC regulatory scheme for measuring and
reporting tar and nicotine to the federal government and for inclusion in
cigarette advertising. The agency procedures allow for interested parties to
submit comments on this proposal. The agency has received comments on these
petitions but has taken no action.
Item
1. Business |
Lorillard,
Inc. - (Continued) |
In 1986,
the Surgeon General of the United States and the National Academy of Sciences
reported that environmental tobacco smoke ("ETS") exposes nonsmokers to an
increased risk of lung cancer and respiratory illness. In addition, in 1993, the
United States Environmental Protection Agency released a report (the "EPA Risk
Assessment") concluding that ETS is a human lung carcinogen in adults, and
causes respiratory effects in children, The EPA Risk Assessment has not been
used as a basis for any regulatory action by the EPA. In May 2000, the
Department of Health and Human Service's National Toxicology Program listed ETS
as "known to be a human carcinogen." Various public health organizations have
also issued statements on environmental tobacco smoke and its health effects and
many scientific papers on ETS have been published since the EPA Risk Assessment,
with varying conclusions.
Lorillard
cannot predict the ultimate outcome of these proposals, reports and
recommendations, though if enacted, certain of these proposals could have a
material adverse effect on Lorillard's business and the Company's financial
position or results of operations in the future.
A federal
law enacted in October 2004 repeals the federal supply management program for
tobacco growers and compensates tobacco quota holders and growers with payments
to be funded by an assessment on tobacco manufacturers and importers. Cigarette
manufactures and importers are responsible for paying 96.3% of a $10.14 billion
payment to tobacco quota holders and growers over a ten-year period. The law
provides that payments will be based on shipments for domestic
consumption.
State
and Local Regulation: In recent
years, many state, local and municipal governments and agencies, as well as
private businesses, have adopted legislation, regulations or policies which
prohibit or restrict, or are intended to discourage, smoking, including
legislation, regulations or policies prohibiting or restricting smoking in
various places such as public buildings and facilities, stores, restaurants and
bars and on airline flights and in the workplace. This trend has increased
significantly since the release of the EPA Risk Assessment.
In
September of 1997, the California Environmental Protection Agency released a
report (the "Cal/EPA Report") concluding that ETS causes specified development,
respiratory, carcinogenic and cardiovascular effects including lung and nasal
sinus cancer, heart disease, sudden infant death syndrome, respiratory
infections and asthma induction and exacerbation in children. The Cal/EPA Report
was subsequently released as a monograph by the National Cancer Institute in
November of 1999. The California Air Resources Board is in the process of
determining whether to identify ETS as a toxic air contaminant. If that state
does so, it could adopt measures to reduce or eliminate emissions, including
further restrictions regarding venues where smoking is permitted or controls on
cigarette emissions.
Two
states, Massachusetts and Texas, have enacted legislation requiring each
manufacturer of cigarettes sold in those states to submit an annual report
identifying for each brand sold certain "added constituents," and providing
nicotine yield ratings and other information for certain brands. Neither law
allows for the public release of trade secret information.
A New
York law requires cigarettes sold in that state to meet a mandated standard for
ignition propensity. Such ignition propensity standards were established in 2003
and became effective in June of 2004. Lorillard developed proprietary technology
to comply with the standards and was compliant by the effective
date.
Other
similar laws and regulations have been enacted or considered by other state and
local governments. Lorillard cannot predict the impact which these regulations
may have on Lorillard's business, though if enacted, they could have a material
adverse effect on Lorillard's business and the Company's financial position or
results of operations in the future.
Excise
Taxes: Cigarettes
are subject to substantial federal, state and local excise taxes in the United
States and, in general, such taxes have been increasing. The federal excise tax
on cigarettes is $19.50 per thousand cigarettes (or $0.39 per pack of 20
cigarettes). State excise taxes, which are levied upon and paid by the
distributors, are also in effect in the fifty states, the District of Columbia
and many municipalities. Increases in state excise taxes on cigarette sales in
2004 ranged from $0.10 per pack to $0.75 per pack in 7 states. The average state
excise tax, including the District of Columbia, increased to $0.78 per pack (of
20 cigarettes) in 2004 from $0.73 in 2003. Proposals for additional increases in
federal, state and local excise taxes continue to be considered. The combined
state and municipal taxes range from $0.03 to $3.00 per pack of cigarettes.
Advertising
and Marketing: Lorillard
advertises its products to adult smokers in magazines, newspapers, direct mail
and point-of-sale display materials. In addition, Lorillard promotes its
cigarette brands to adult smokers through
Item
1. Business |
Lorillard,
Inc. - (Continued) |
distribution
of store coupons, retail price promotions, and personal contact with
distributors and retailers. Although Lorillard's sales are made primarily to
wholesale distributors rather than retailers, Lorillard's sales personnel
monitor retail and wholesale inventories, work with retailers on displays and
signs, and enter into promotional arrangements with retailers from time to
time.
As a
general matter, Lorillard allocates its marketing expenditures among brands on
the basis of marketplace opportunity and profitable return. In particular,
Lorillard focuses its marketing efforts on the premium segment of the U.S.
cigarette industry, with a specific focus on Newport.
Advertising
of tobacco products through television and radio has been prohibited since 1971.
In addition, on November 23, 1998, Lorillard and the three other largest major
cigarette manufacturers entered into a Master Settlement Agreement ("MSA") with
46 states, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and certain
other U.S. territories to settle certain health care cost recovery and other
claims. These manufacturers had previously settled similar claims brought by the
four remaining states which together with the MSA are generally referred to as
the "State Settlement Agreements." Under the State Settlement Agreements the
participating cigarette manufacturers agreed to severe restrictions on their
advertising and promotion activities. Among other things, the MSA prohibits the
targeting of youth in the advertising, promotion or marketing of tobacco
products; bans the use of cartoon characters in all tobacco advertising and
promotion; limits each tobacco manufacturer to one event sponsorship during any
twelve-month period, which may not include major team sports or events in which
the intended audience includes a significant percentage of youth; bans all
outdoor advertising of tobacco products with the exception of small signs at
retail establishments that sell tobacco products; bans tobacco manufacturers
from offering or selling apparel and other merchandise that bears a tobacco
brand name, subject to specified exceptions; prohibits the distribution of free
samples of tobacco products except within adult-only facilities; prohibits
payments for tobacco product placement in various media; and bans gift offers
based on the purchase of tobacco products without sufficient proof that the
intended gift recipient is an adult.
Many
states, cities and counties have enacted legislation or regulations further
restricting tobacco advertising. There may be additional local, state and
federal legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to the advertising and
promotion of cigarettes in the future. Lorillard cannot predict the impact of
such initiatives on its marketing and sales efforts.
Lorillard
funds a Youth Smoking Prevention Program, which is designed to discourage youth
from smoking. The program addresses youth, parents and, through the "We Card"
program, retailers, to prevent purchase of cigarettes by underage purchasers.
Lorillard has determined not to advertise its cigarettes in magazines with large
readership among people under the age of 18.
Distribution
Methods: Lorillard
sells its products primarily to distributors, who in turn service retail
outlets; chain store organizations; and government agencies, including the U.S.
Armed Forces. Upon completion of the manufacturing process, Lorillard ships
cigarettes to public distributing warehouse facilities for rapid order
fulfillment to wholesalers and other direct buying customers. Lorillard retains
a portion of its manufactured cigarettes at its Greensboro central distribution
center and Greensboro cold-storage facility for future finished goods
replenishment.
As of
December 31, 2004, Lorillard had approximately 700 direct buying customers
servicing more than 400,000 retail accounts. Lorillard does not sell cigarettes
directly to consumers. During 2004, 2003 and 2002, sales made by Lorillard to
McLane Company, Inc., comprised 20%, 20% and 17%, respectively, of Lorillard's
revenues. No other customer accounted for more than 10% of 2004, 2003 or 2002
sales. Lorillard does not have any backlog orders.
Most of
Lorillard's customers buy cigarettes on a next-day-delivery basis. Approximately
90% of Lorillard's customers purchase cigarettes using electronic funds
transfer, which provides immediate payment to Lorillard.
Raw
Materials and Manufacturing: In its
production of cigarettes, Lorillard uses burley leaf tobacco, and flue-cured
leaf tobacco grown in the United States and abroad, and aromatic tobacco grown
primarily in Turkey and other Near Eastern countries. A domestic supplier
manufactures all of Lorillard's reconstituted tobacco.
Lorillard
purchases more than 99% of its domestic leaf tobacco from Dimon International,
Inc. Lorillard directs Dimon in the purchase of tobacco according to Lorillard's
specifications for quality, grade, yield, particle size, moisture content and
other characteristics. Dimon purchases and processes the whole leaf and then
dries and packages it for shipment to and storage at Lorillard's Danville,
Virginia facility. In the event that Dimon becomes unwilling or unable to supply
leaf
Item
1. Business |
Lorillard,
Inc. - (Continued) |
tobacco
to Lorillard, Lorillard believes that it can readily obtain high-quality leaf
tobacco from well-established, alternative industry sources.
Due to
the varying size and quality of annual crops and other economic factors, tobacco
prices have historically fluctuated. The passage of "The American Jobs Creation
Act of 2004" (also known as the FSC-ETI bill ) on October 22, 2004 eliminated
historical U.S. price supports that accompanied production controls which
inflated the market price of U.S. tobacco. Lorillard believes the elimination of
production controls and price supports will favorably impact the cost of U.S.
tobacco.
Lorillard
stores its tobacco in 29 storage warehouses on its 130-acre Danville facility.
To protect against loss, amounts of all types and grades of tobacco are stored
in separate warehouses. Because of the aging requirements for tobacco, Lorillard
maintains large quantities of leaf tobacco at all times. Lorillard believes its
current tobacco supplies are adequately balanced for its present production
requirements. If necessary, Lorillard can purchase aged tobacco in the open
market to supplement existing inventories.
Lorillard
produces cigarettes at its Greensboro, North Carolina manufacturing plant, which
has a production capacity of approximately 185 million cigarettes per day and
approximately 43 billion cigarettes per year. Through various automated systems
and sensors, Lorillard actively monitors all phases of production to promote
quality and compliance with applicable regulations.
Prices:
Lorillard
believes that the volume of U.S. cigarette sales is sensitive to price changes.
Changes in pricing by Lorillard or other cigarette manufacturers could have an
adverse impact on Lorillard's volume of units sold, which in turn could have an
adverse impact on Lorillard's profits and earnings. Lorillard makes independent
pricing decisions based on a number of factors. Lorillard cannot predict the
potential adverse impact of price changes on industry volume or Lorillard
volume, on the mix between premium and discount sales, on Lorillard's market
share or on Lorillard's profits and earnings. In addition, Lorillard and other
cigarette manufacturers, from time to time, engage in significant promotional
activities. These sales promotion costs are accounted for as a reduction in net
sales revenue and therefore impact average prices.
Properties:
Lorillard's
manufacturing facility is located on approximately 80 acres in Greensboro, North
Carolina. This 942,600 square-foot plant contains modern high-speed cigarette
manufacturing machinery. The Greensboro facility also includes a warehouse with
shipping and receiving areas totaling 54,800 square feet. In addition, Lorillard
owns tobacco receiving and storage facilities totaling approximately 1,500,000
square feet in Danville, Virginia. Lorillard's executive offices are located in
a 130,000 square-foot, four-story office building in Greensboro. Its 93,800
square-foot research facility is also located in Greensboro.
Lorillard's
principal properties are owned in fee. With minor exceptions, Lorillard owns all
of the machinery it uses. Lorillard believes that its properties and machinery
are in generally good condition. Lorillard leases sales offices in major cities
throughout the United States, a cold-storage facility in Greensboro and
warehousing space in 25 public distributing warehouses located throughout the
United States.
Competition:
The
domestic U.S. market for cigarettes is highly competitive. Competition is
primarily based on a brand's price, including level of discounting and other
promotional activities, positioning, consumer loyalty, retail display, quality
and taste. Lorillard's principal competitors are the two other major U.S.
cigarette manufacturers, Philip Morris ("PM") and Reynolds American Inc.
("RAI").
Lorillard
believes its ability to compete even more effectively has been restrained by the
Philip Morris Retail Leaders program and the combination of RJ Reynolds Tobacco
Company ("RJR") and Brown & Williamson ("B&W") into RAI discussed below.
The terms of Philip Morris' merchandising contracts preclude Lorillard from
obtaining visible space in the retail store to effectively promote its brands.
As a result, in a large number of retail locations, Lorillard either has a
severely limited or no opportunity to competitively support its promotion
programs thereby limiting its sales potential.
Lorillard's
8.8% market share of the 2004 U.S. domestic cigarette industry was third highest
overall. Philip Morris and RAI accounted for approximately 47.4% and 28.8%,
respectively, of wholesale shipments in 2004. Among the three major
manufacturers, Lorillard ranked third behind Philip Morris and RAI with a 12.0%
share of the premium segment in 2004.
Item
1. Business |
Lorillard,
Inc. - (Continued) |
In July
of 2004, RJR, the second largest cigarette manufacturer in the United States,
and B&W, the third largest cigarette manufacturer were combined. The
consolidation of these two competitors as RAI has resulted in further
concentration of the U.S. tobacco industry, with the top two companies, Philip
Morris USA and the newly created RAI, having a combined market share of
approximately 76.2%. In addition, this transaction combines in one company the
third and fourth leading menthol brands, Kool and Salem, which have a combined
share of the menthol segment of approximately 19.7%. This concentration of U.S.
market share could make it more difficult for Lorillard and others to compete
for shelf space in retail outlets and could impact price competition among
menthol brands, either of which could have a material adverse effect on the
results of operations and financial condition of the Company.
See Item
7, MD&A - Results of Operations - Lorillard for information regarding the
business environment, including selected market share data for
Lorillard.
LOEWS
HOTELS HOLDING CORPORATION
The
subsidiaries of Loews Hotels Holding Corporation ("Loews Hotels"), a wholly
owned subsidiary of the Company, presently operate the following 20 hotels.
Loews Hotels accounted for 2.07%, 1.74% and 1.53% of the Company's consolidated
total revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively.
|
Number
of |
|
Name
and Location |
Rooms |
Owned,
Leased or Managed |
|
|
|
Loews
Annapolis |
220 |
|
Owned |
Annapolis,
Maryland |
|
|
Loews
Beverly Hills Hotel |
137 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2008 (a) |
Beverly
Hills, California |
|
|
Loews
Coronado Bay Resort |
440 |
|
Land
lease expiring 2034 |
San
Diego, California |
|
|
Loews
Denver |
185 |
|
Owned |
Denver,
Colorado |
|
|
Don
CeSar Beach Resort, a Loews Hotel |
347 |
|
Management
contract (a)(b) |
St.
Pete Beach, Florida |
|
|
Hard
Rock Hotel, |
650 |
|
Management
contract (c) |
at
Universal Orlando |
|
|
Orlando,
Florida |
|
|
House
of Blues Hotel, a Loews Hotel |
370 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2005 (a) |
Chicago,
Illinois |
|
|
The
Jefferson, a Loews Hotel |
100 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2010 (a) |
Washington,
D.C. |
|
|
Loews
Le Concorde |
405 |
|
Land
lease expiring 2069 |
Quebec
City, Canada |
|
|
Loews
L'Enfant Plaza |
370 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2005 (a) |
Washington,
D.C. |
|
|
Loews
Miami Beach Hotel |
790 |
|
Land
lease expiring 2096 |
Miami
Beach, Florida |
|
|
Loews
New Orleans Hotel |
285 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2018 (a) |
New
Orleans, Louisiana |
|
|
Loews
Philadelphia Hotel |
585 |
|
Owned |
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania |
|
|
Portofino
Bay Hotel, |
750 |
|
Management
contract (c) |
at
Universal Orlando, a Loews Hotel |
|
|
Orlando,
Florida |
|
|
The
Regency, a Loews Hotel |
350 |
|
Land
lease expiring 2013, with renewal option |
New
York, New York |
|
|
for
47 years |
Royal
Pacific Resort |
1,000 |
|
Management
contract (c) |
at
Universal Orlando, a Loews Hotel |
|
|
Orlando,
Florida |
|
|
Loews
Santa Monica Beach |
340 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2018, with |
Santa
Monica, California |
|
|
renewal
option for 5 years (a) |
Loews
Vanderbilt Plaza |
340 |
|
Owned |
Nashville,
Tennessee |
|
|
Loews
Ventana Canyon Resort |
400 |
|
Management
contract expiring 2009, with |
Tucson,
Arizona |
|
|
renewal
options for 5 years (a) |
Loews
Hotel Vogue |
140 |
|
Owned |
Montreal,
Canada |
|
|
Item
1. Business |
Loews
Hotels Holding Corporation -
(Continued) |
_________
(a) |
These
management contracts are subject to termination rights. |
(b) |
A
Loews Hotels subsidiary is a 20% owner of the hotel, which is being
operated by Loews Hotels pursuant to a management
contract. |
(c) |
A
Loews Hotels subsidiary is a 50% owner of these hotels
located at
the Universal
Orlando theme park,
through
a
joint venture
with Universal Studios and the Rank Group. The hotels are constructed on
land leased by the joint
venture from the
resort's owners and are being operated by Loews Hotels pursuant to a
management contract. |
The
hotels owned by Loews Hotels are subject to mortgage indebtedness aggregating
approximately $144.4 million at December 31, 2004 with interest rates ranging
from 3.4% to 6.3%, and maturing between 2006 and 2028. In addition, certain
hotels are held under leases which are subject to formula derived rental
increases, with rentals aggregating approximately $13.7 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004.
Competition
from other hotels and lodging facilities is vigorous in all areas in which Loews
Hotels operates. The demand for hotel rooms in many areas is seasonal and
dependent on general and local economic conditions. Loews Hotels properties also
compete with facilities offering similar services in locations other than those
in which its hotels are located. Competition among luxury hotels is based
primarily on location and service. Competition among resort and commercial
hotels is based on price as well as location and service. Because of the
competitive nature of the industry, hotels must continually make expenditures
for updating, refurnishing and repairs and maintenance, in order to prevent
competitive obsolescence.
DIAMOND
OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
Diamond
Offshore Drilling Inc. ("Diamond Offshore"), is engaged, through its
subsidiaries, in the business of owning and operating drilling rigs that are
used primarily in the drilling of offshore oil and gas wells on a contract basis
for companies engaged in exploration and production of hydrocarbons. Diamond
Offshore owns 45 offshore rigs. Diamond Offshore accounted for 5.48%, 4.18% and
4.70% of the Company's consolidated total revenue for the years ended December
31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Diamond
Offshore owns and operates 30 semisubmersibles. Semisubmersible rigs consist of
an upper working and living deck resting on vertical columns connected to lower
hull members. Such rigs operate in a "semi-submerged" position, remaining
afloat, off bottom, in a position in which the lower hull is approximately 55
feet to 90 feet below the water line and the upper deck protrudes well above the
surface. Semisubmersibles are typically anchored in position and remain stable
for drilling in the semi-submerged floating position due in part to their wave
transparency characteristics at the water line. Semisubmersibles can also be
held in position through the use of a computer controlled thruster
("dynamic-positioning") system to maintain the rig's position over a drillsite.
Three semisubmersible rigs in Diamond Offshore's fleet have this
capability.
Diamond
Offshore owns and operates nine high specification semisubmersibles. These
semisubmersibles have high-capacity deck loads and are generally capable of
working in water depths of 4,000 feet or greater or in harsh environments and
have other advanced features. As of January 31, 2005, six of the nine high
specification semisubmersibles were located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, while
the remaining three rigs were located offshore Brazil, Indonesia and Malaysia.
Diamond
Offshore owns and operates 21 other semisubmersibles which generally work in
maximum water depths up to 4,000 feet and many have diverse capabilities that
enable them to provide both shallow and deep water service in the U.S. and in
other markets outside the U.S. As of January 31, 2005, Diamond Offshore was
actively marketing 18 of these semisubmersibles. Four of these semisubmersibles
were located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico; four were located offshore Mexico; four
were located in the North Sea; three were located offshore Australia; two were
located offshore Brazil; and one was located offshore Korea.
Diamond
Offshore currently has three cold-stacked semi-submersible rigs. When Diamond
Offshore anticipates that a rig will be idle for an extended period of time, it
cold stacks the unit by removing the crew and ceasing to actively market the
rig. This reduces expenditures associated with keeping the rig ready to go to
work. One of Diamond Offshore's semisubmersibles has been cold stacked in the
Gulf of Mexico since December 2002, and Diamond Offshore is marketing another
cold stacked semisubmersible, the Ocean
Liberator, for
sale to a third party. The remaining cold-
Item
1. Business |
Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. - (Continued) |
stacked
semisubmersible, the Ocean
Endeavor, will
undergo a major upgrade for ultra-deepwater service commencing in the second
quarter of 2005.
Diamond
Offshore owns 14 jack-ups, all of which were being actively marketed as of
January 31, 2005. Jack-up rigs are mobile, self-elevating drilling platforms
equipped with legs that are lowered to the ocean floor until a foundation is
established to support the drilling platform. The rig hull includes the drilling
rig, jacking system, crew quarters, loading and unloading facilities, storage
areas for bulk and liquid materials, heliport and other related equipment.
Diamond Offshore's jack-ups are used for drilling in water depths from 20 feet
to 350 feet. The water depth limit of a particular rig is principally determined
by the length of the rig's legs. A jack-up rig is towed to the drillsite with
its hull riding in the sea, as a vessel, with its legs retracted. Once over a
drillsite, the legs are lowered until they rest on the seabed and jacking
continues until the hull is elevated above the surface of the water. After
completion of drilling operations, the hull is lowered until it rests in the
water and then the legs are retracted for relocation to another
drillsite.
As of
January 31, 2005, 12 of Diamond Offshore's jack-up rigs were located in the Gulf
of Mexico. Of these rigs, nine are independent-leg cantilevered units, two are
mat-supported cantilevered units, and one is a mat-supported slot unit. Both of
Diamond Offshore's remaining jack-up rigs are internationally based and are
independent-leg cantilevered rigs; one was located offshore Bangladesh, and the
other was located offshore India as of January 31, 2005.
Diamond
Offshore has one drillship, the Ocean
Clipper, which
was located offshore Brazil as of January 31, 2005. Drillships, which are
typically self-propelled, are positioned over a drillsite through the use of
either an anchoring system or a dynamic-positioning system similar to those used
on certain semisubmersible rigs. Deep water drillships compete in many of the
same markets as do high specification semisubmersible rigs.
Markets:
Diamond
Offshore's principal markets for its offshore contract drilling services are the
Gulf of Mexico, including the United States and Mexico, Europe, principally the
U.K. and Norway, South America, Africa and Australia/Southeast Asia. Diamond
Offshore actively markets its rigs worldwide. From time to time Diamond
Offshore's fleet operates in various other markets throughout the world as the
market demands.
Diamond
Offshore believes its presence in multiple markets is valuable in many respects.
For example, Diamond Offshore believes that its experience with safety and other
regulatory matters in the U.K. has been beneficial in Australia and in the Gulf
of Mexico, while production experience gained through Brazilian and North Sea
operations has potential application worldwide. Additionally, Diamond Offshore
believes its performance for a customer in one market segment or area enables it
to better understand that customer's needs and better serve that customer in
different market segments or other geographic locations.
Diamond
Offshore's contracts to provide offshore drilling services vary in their terms
and provisions. Diamond Offshore often obtains its contracts through competitive
bidding, although it is not unusual for Diamond Offshore to be awarded drilling
contracts without competitive bidding. Drilling contracts generally provide for
a basic drilling rate on a fixed dayrate basis regardless of whether or not such
drilling results in a productive well. Drilling contracts may also provide for
lower rates during periods when the rig is being moved or when drilling
operations are interrupted or restricted by equipment breakdowns, adverse
weather conditions or other conditions beyond the control of Diamond Offshore.
Under dayrate contracts, Diamond Offshore generally pays the operating expenses
of the rig, including wages and the cost of incidental supplies. Dayrate
contracts have historically accounted for a substantial portion of Diamond
Offshore's revenues. In addition, Diamond Offshore has worked some of its rigs
under dayrate contracts that include the ability to earn an incentive bonus
based upon performance.
A dayrate
drilling contract generally extends over a period of time covering either the
drilling of a single well or a group of wells (a "well-to-well contract") or a
stated term (a "term contract") and may be terminated by the customer in the
event the drilling unit is destroyed or lost or if drilling operations are
suspended for a period of time as a result of a breakdown of equipment or, in
some cases, due to other events beyond the control of either party. In addition,
certain of Diamond Offshore's contracts permit the customer to terminate the
contract early by giving notice, and in some circumstances may require the
payment of an early termination fee by the customer. The contract term in many
instances may be extended by the customer exercising options for the drilling of
additional wells at fixed or mutually agreed terms, including
dayrates.
The
duration of offshore drilling contracts is generally determined by market demand
and the respective management strategies of the offshore drilling contractor and
its customers. In periods of rising demand for offshore rigs,
contractors
Item
1. Business |
Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. - (Continued) |
typically
prefer well-to-well contracts that allow contractors to profit from increasing
dayrates. In contrast, during these periods customers with reasonably definite
drilling programs typically prefer longer term contracts to maintain dayrate
prices at a consistent level. Conversely, in periods of decreasing demand for
offshore rigs, contractors generally prefer longer term contracts to preserve
dayrates at existing levels and ensure utilization, while customers prefer
well-to-well contracts that allow them to obtain the benefit of lower dayrates.
To the extent possible, Diamond Offshore seeks to have a foundation of long-term
contracts with a reasonable balance of single-well, well-to-well and short-term
contracts to minimize the downside impact of a decline in the market while still
participating in the benefit of increasing dayrates in a rising market. However,
no assurance can be given that Diamond Offshore will be able to achieve or
maintain such a balance from time to time.
Customers:
Diamond
Offshore provides offshore drilling services to a customer base that includes
major and independent oil and gas companies and government-owned oil companies.
Several customers have accounted for 10.0% or more of Diamond Offshore's annual
consolidated revenues, although the specific customers may vary from year to
year. During 2004, Diamond Offshore performed services for 53 different
customers with Petróleo Brasileiro S. A. ("Petrobras") and PEMEX - Exploración Y
Producción ("PEMEX") accounting for 12.6% and 10.5% of Diamond Offshore's annual
total consolidated revenues, respectively. During 2003, Diamond Offshore
performed services for 52 different customers with Petrobras and BP P.L.C.
("BP") accounting for 20.3% and 11.9% of Diamond Offshore's annual total
consolidated revenues, respectively. During 2002, Diamond Offshore performed
services for 46 different customers with Petrobras, BP, and Murphy Exploration
and Production Company accounting for 19.0%, 18.9% and 10.4% of Diamond
Offshore's annual total consolidated revenues, respectively. During periods of
low demand for offshore drilling rigs, the loss of a single significant customer
could have a material adverse effect on Diamond Offshore's results of
operations.
Competition:
The
offshore contract drilling industry is highly competitive and is influenced by a
number of factors, including the current and anticipated prices of oil and
natural gas, the expenditures by oil and gas companies for exploration and
development of oil and natural gas and the availability of drilling rigs. In
addition, demand for drilling services remains dependent on a variety of
political and economic factors beyond Diamond Offshore's control, including
worldwide demand for oil and natural gas, the ability of the Organization of
Petroleum Exporting Countries ("OPEC") to set and maintain production levels and
pricing, the level of production of non-OPEC countries and the policies of the
various governments regarding exploration and development of their oil and
natural gas reserves.
Customers
often award contracts on a competitive bid basis, and although a customer
selecting a rig may consider, among other things, a contractor's safety record,
crew quality, rig location and quality of service and equipment, an oversupply
of rigs can create an intensely competitive market in which price is the primary
factor in determining the selection of a drilling contractor. In periods of
increased drilling activity, rig availability often becomes a consideration,
particularly with respect to technologically advanced units. Diamond Offshore
believes competition for drilling contracts will continue to be intense in the
foreseeable future. Contractors are also able to adjust localized supply and
demand imbalances by moving rigs from areas of low utilization and dayrates to
areas of greater activity and relatively higher dayrates. Such movements,
reactivations or a decrease in drilling activity in any major market could
depress dayrates and could adversely affect utilization of Diamond Offshore's
rigs.
Regulation:
Diamond
Offshore's operations are subject to numerous international, U.S., state and
local laws and regulations that relate directly or indirectly to its operations,
including certain regulations controlling the discharge of materials into the
environment, requiring removal and clean-up under certain circumstances, or
otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. For example, Diamond
Offshore may be liable for damages and costs incurred in connection with oil
spills for which it is held responsible. Laws and regulations protecting the
environment have become increasingly stringent in recent years and may, in
certain circumstances, impose "strict liability" rendering a company liable for
environmental damage without regard to negligence or fault on the part of such
company. Liability under such laws and regulations may result from either
governmental or citizen prosecution. Such laws and regulations may expose
Diamond Offshore to liability for the conduct of or conditions caused by others,
or for acts of Diamond Offshore that were in compliance with all applicable laws
at the time such acts were performed. The application of these requirements or
the adoption of new requirements could have a material adverse effect on Diamond
Offshore.
The
United States Oil Pollution Act of 1990 ("OPA ‘90"), and similar legislation
enacted in Texas, Louisiana and other coastal states, addresses oil spill
prevention and control and significantly expands liability exposure across all
segments of the oil and gas industry. OPA ‘90 and such similar legislation and
related regulations impose a variety of obligations on Diamond Offshore related
to the prevention of oil spills and liability for damages resulting from such
Item
1. Business |
Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. - (Continued) |
spills.
OPA ‘90 imposes strict and, with limited exceptions, joint and several liability
upon each responsible party for oil removal costs and a variety of public and
private damages.
Indemnification
and Insurance: Diamond
Offshore's operations are subject to hazards inherent in the drilling of oil and
gas wells such as blowouts, reservoir damage, loss of production, loss of well
control, cratering or fires, the occurrence of which could result in the
suspension of drilling operations, injury to or death of rig and other personnel
and damage to or destruction of Diamond Offshore's customer's or a third party's
property or equipment. Damage to the environment could also result from Diamond
Offshore's operations, particularly through oil spillage or uncontrolled fires.
In addition, offshore drilling operations are subject to perils peculiar to
marine operations, including capsizing, grounding, collision and loss or damage
from severe weather. Diamond Offshore has insurance coverage and contractual
indemnification for certain risks, but there can be no assurance that such
coverage or indemnification will adequately cover Diamond Offshore's loss or
liability in certain circumstances or that Diamond Offshore will continue to
carry such insurance or receive such indemnification.
Diamond
Offshore's retention of liability for property damage is between $1.0 million
and $2.5 million per incident, depending on the value of the equipment, with an
additional aggregate annual deductible of $4.5 million.
Operations
Outside the United States: Operations
outside the United States accounted for approximately 56.0%, 51.6% and 55.5% of
Diamond Offshore's total consolidated revenues for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Diamond Offshore's non-U.S. operations are
subject to certain political, economic and other uncertainties not normally
encountered in U.S. operations, including risks of war and civil disturbances
(or other risks that may limit or disrupt markets), expropriation and the
general hazards associated with the assertion of national sovereignty over
certain areas in which operations are conducted. No prediction can be made as to
what governmental regulations may be enacted in the future that could adversely
affect the international drilling industry. Diamond Offshore's operations
outside the United States may also face the additional risk of fluctuating
currency values, hard currency shortages, controls of currency exchange and
repatriation of income or capital.
During
2003, Diamond Offshore entered into contracts to operate four of its
semisubmersible rigs offshore Mexico for PEMEX, the national oil company of
Mexico. The terms of these contracts expose Diamond Offshore to greater risks
than it normally assumes, such as exposure to greater environmental liability.
While Diamond Offshore believes that the financial terms of the contracts and
Diamond Offshore's operating safeguards in place mitigate these risks, there can
be no assurance that Diamond Offshore's increased risk exposure will not have a
negative impact on Diamond Offshore's future operations or financial
results.
Properties:
Diamond
Offshore owns an eight-story office building containing approximately
182,000-net rentable square feet on approximately 6.2 acres of land located in
Houston, Texas, where Diamond Offshore has its corporate headquarters, two
buildings totaling 39,000 square feet and 20 acres of land in New Iberia,
Louisiana, for its offshore drilling warehouse and storage facility, and a
13,000-square foot building and five acres of land in Aberdeen, Scotland, for
its North Sea operations. Additionally, Diamond Offshore currently leases
various office, warehouse and storage facilities in Louisiana, Australia,
Brazil, Indonesia, Scotland, Norway, Vietnam, Netherlands, Malaysia, Bangladesh,
India, Korea, Singapore and Mexico to support its offshore drilling
operations.
BOARDWALK
PIPELINES, LLC
Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC (formerly TGT Pipelines, LLC, "Boardwalk Pipelines") is engaged,
through its subsidiaries, in the operation of interstate natural gas
transmission pipeline systems. Boardwalk Pipelines includes Texas Gas
Transmission, LLC ("Texas Gas"), acquired in May of 2003, and Gulf South
Pipeline Company, LP ("Gulf South"), acquired in December of 2004. Boardwalk
Pipelines accounted for 1.74% and 0.87% of the Company's consolidated total
revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
Texas
Gas
Texas Gas
owns and operates a natural gas pipeline system originating in the Louisiana
Gulf Coast area and in East Texas and running north and east through Louisiana,
Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and into Ohio, with smaller
diameter lines extending into Illinois.
Item
1. Business |
Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC - (Continued) |
Texas
Gas' pipeline transmission system is composed of: approximately 5,900 miles of
mainline, storage, and branch transmission pipelines, having a mainline delivery
capacity of approximately 2.8 billion cubic feet ("Bcf") of gas per day; 31
compressor stations; and natural gas storage reservoirs in nine underground
storage fields located in Indiana and Kentucky, having storage capacity of
approximately 178 Bcf of gas, of which approximately 55 Bcf is working gas.
Recent
requests for additional storage capacity have exceeded the physical capabilities
of Texas Gas' system, thereby prompting Texas Gas to expand its storage
facilities. In February, Texas Gas received Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
("FERC") approval to commence expansion of its Western Kentucky storage complex
for service to two customers beginning November 1, 2005. Texas Gas estimates
that this project will cost approximately $20.7 million and will allow the
additional withdrawal of 82,000 MMBtu per day.
Texas Gas
owns a majority of its storage gas which it uses, in part to meet operational
balancing needs on their system, in part to meet the requirements of Texas Gas's
firm and interruptible storage customers, and in part to meet the requirements
of its "No-Notice" ("NNS") transportation service, which allows Texas Gas's
customers to temporarily draw from its storage gas during the winter season to
be repaid in-kind during the following summer season. A small amount of storage
gas is also used to provide "Summer No-Notice" ("SNS") transportation service,
designed primarily to meet the needs of summer-season electrical power
generation facilities. SNS customers may temporarily draw from Texas Gas's
storage gas in the summer, to be repaid during the same summer season. A large
portion of the gas delivered by Texas Gas to its market area is used for space
heating, resulting in substantially higher daily requirements during winter
months.
Texas
Gas' direct market area encompasses eight states in the South and Midwest and
includes the Memphis, Tennessee; Louisville, Kentucky; Cincinnati, Ohio; and the
Evansville and Indianapolis, Indiana metropolitan areas. Texas Gas also has
indirect market access to the Northeast through interconnections with
unaffiliated pipelines. At December 31, 2004, Texas Gas had transportation
contracts with approximately 500 shippers, including distribution companies,
municipalities, intrastate pipelines, direct industrial users, electrical
generators, marketers and producers.
Gulf
South
Gulf
South owns and operates a natural gas pipeline and gathering system located in
parts of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Gulf South is
connected to several major regional supply hubs and market centers for natural
gas, including Aqua Dulce, Carthage, Venice, Mobile Bay, Perryville and the
Henry Hub, which serves as the designated delivery point for natural gas futures
contracts traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Gulf
South's pipeline system is composed of: approximately 6,800 miles of
transmission pipeline, having a peak day delivery capacity of approximately 3.0
Bcf of gas per day, and 1,200 miles of gathering pipeline; 32 compressor
stations; and natural gas storage reservoirs in two underground storage fields
located in Louisiana and Mississippi having working gas storage capacity of
approximately 68.5 Bcf of gas.
Gulf
South uses its storage gas to offer customers flexibility in meeting peak day
delivery requirements. Gulf South currently sells firm and interruptible storage
services at its Bistineau gas storage facility located in north central
Louisiana under market-based rates. Gulf South is developing a large,
high-deliverability storage cavern at a leased facility located in
Napoleonville, Louisiana that, when operational, is expected to add up to 6.0
Bcf of firm working gas capacity. This facility is expected to be in service and
available for sale at market-based rates in the fourth quarter of
2008.
Gulf
South transports natural gas to a broad mix of customers throughout the Gulf
Coast region. At December 31, 2004, Gulf South had transportation contracts with
approximately 200 shippers, including local distribution companies,
municipalities, intrastate and interstate pipelines, direct industrial users,
electrical generators, marketers and producers.
Regulation:
The
natural gas pipeline operations of Boardwalk Pipelines are subject to regulation
by the FERC under the Natural Gas Act of 1938 ("NGA") and Natural Gas Policy Act
of 1978 ("NGPA"). They are also subject to the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act
of 1968, as amended by Title I of the Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, which
regulates safety requirements in the design, construction, operation and
maintenance of interstate natural gas pipelines. The FERC regulates, among other
things, the rates and charges for the transportation and storage of natural gas
in interstate commerce, the extension, enlargement or abandonment of
jurisdictional facilities, and the financial accounting of regulated pipeline
companies.
Item
1. Business |
Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC - (Continued) |
The
maximum rates that may be charged by Texas Gas and Gulf South for their gas
transportation and storage services are established through the FERC ratemaking
process. Key determinants in the ratemaking process are costs of providing
service, allowed rate of return and volume throughout assumptions. The allowed
rate of return must be approved by the FERC in each rate case. Rate design and
the allocation of costs between the demand and commodity rates also impact
profitability. Texas Gas is currently obligated to file a new rate case with the
FERC, with rates to be effective no later than November 1, 2005. Gulf South
currently has no obligation to file a new rate case. Most of Gulf South's
transportation services are provided at less than the current maximum applicable
rates allowed by its tariff. Gulf South charges market based rates for that
portion of its storage services provided from its Bistineau gas storage facility
(and those it will provide at the storage field it is developing in Louisiana)
pursuant to authority granted to it by the FERC.
Competition:
Boardwalk Pipelines competes primarily with other interstate and intrastate
pipeline systems in the transportation and storage of natural gas. The principal
elements of competition among pipelines are rates, terms of service, access to
supply basins, and flexibility and reliability of service. In addition, the
FERC's continuing efforts to increase competition in the natural gas industry
are having the effect of increasing the natural gas transportation options of
the traditional customer bases of Texas Gas and Gulf South. As a result,
segmentation and capacity release have created an active secondary market which
is increasingly competitive with them. The business of Boardwalk Pipelines is,
in part, dependent on the volumes of natural gas consumed in the United States.
Natural gas competes with other forms of energy available to their customers,
including electricity, coal, and fuel oils.
Properties: The
operating subsidiaries of Boardwalk Pipelines own their respective pipeline
systems in fee, with certain immaterial portions, such as offshore assets, being
held jointly with third parties. A substantial portion of these systems is
constructed and maintained pursuant to rights-of-way, easements, permits, and
licenses or consents on and across property owned by others. Texas Gas owns its
main office building and other facilities located in Owensboro, Kentucky. Gulf
South maintains its headquarters facilities in approximately 55,000 square feet
of leased office space located in Houston, Texas. Storage facilities are either
owned or contracted for under long-term leases.
BULOVA
CORPORATION
Bulova
Corporation ("Bulova") is engaged in the distribution and sale of watches,
clocks and timepiece parts for consumer use. Bulova accounted for 1.16%, 1.01%
and 0.95% of the Company's consolidated total revenue for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Bulova's
principal watch brands are Bulova, Caravelle, Wittnauer and Accutron. Clocks are
principally sold under the Bulova brand name. All watches and substantially all
clocks are purchased from foreign suppliers. Bulova's principal markets are the
United States, Canada and Mexico. Bulova's product breakdown includes luxury
watch lines represented by Wittnauer and Accutron, a mid-priced watch line
represented by Bulova, and a lower-priced watch line represented by
Caravelle.
Properties: Bulova
owns an 80,000 square foot facility in Woodside, New York which it uses for
executive and sales offices, watch distribution, service and warehouse purposes.
Bulova also owns 6,100 square feet of office space in Hong Kong which it uses
for quality control and sourcing purposes. Bulova leases a 31,000 square foot
facility in Toronto, Canada, which it uses for watch and clock sales and
service; and a 27,000 square foot office and manufacturing facility in Ontario,
Canada which it uses for its grandfather clock operations. Bulova also leases
facilities in Mexico, Federal District, and Fribourg, Switzerland.
EMPLOYEE
RELATIONS
The
Company, inclusive of its operating subsidiaries as described below, employed
approximately 22,000 persons at December 31, 2004.
CNA
employed approximately 10,600 full-time equivalent employees and has experienced
satisfactory labor relations.
Lorillard
employed approximately 3,100 persons. Approximately 1,100 of these employees are
represented by labor unions covered by three collective bargaining agreements.
Item
1. Business |
Employee
Relations - (Continued) |
Lorillard
has collective bargaining agreements covering hourly rated production and
service employees at various Lorillard plants with the Bakery, Confectionery,
Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union, and the National
Conference of Fireman and Oilers/SEIU.
Loews
Hotels employed approximately 2,100 persons, approximately 700 of whom are union
members covered under collective bargaining agreements. Loews Hotels has
experienced satisfactory labor relations.
Diamond
Offshore employed approximately 4,200 persons including international crew
personnel furnished through independent labor contractors. Diamond Offshore has
experienced satisfactory labor relations and does not currently consider the
possibility of a shortage of qualified personnel to be a material factor in its
business.
Boardwalk
Pipelines employed approximately 1,100 persons, approximately 115 of which are
covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Boardwalk Pipelines has
experienced satisfactory labor relations.
Bulova
employed approximately 550 persons, approximately 180 of whom are union members.
Bulova has experienced satisfactory labor relations.
AVAILABLE
INFORMATION
The
Company's website address is www.loews.com. The
Company makes available, free of charge, through its website its Annual Report
on Form 10-K, 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, as
amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically
filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC").
Copies of the Company's Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Corporate
Governance Guidelines, Audit Committee charter, Compensation Committee charter
and Nominating and Governance Committee charter have also been posted and are
available on the Company's website.
Item
2. Properties.
Information
relating to the properties of Registrant and its subsidiaries is contained under
Item 1.
Item
3. Legal Proceedings.
Insurance
Related -
Information with respect to insurance related legal proceedings is incorporated
by reference to Note 21, "Legal Proceedings - Insurance Related" of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.
Tobacco
Related - Approximately 4,075 product liability cases are pending against
cigarette manufacturers in the United States. Lorillard is a defendant in
approximately 3,750 of these cases. The Company is a defendant in five of the
pending cases. Information with respect to tobacco related legal proceedings is
incorporated by reference to Note 21, "Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related" of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8. Additional
information regarding tobacco related legal proceedings is contained below and
in Exhibit 99.01.
The
pending product liability cases are comprised of the following types of
cases:
"Conventional
product liability cases" are brought by individuals who allege cancer or other
health effects caused by smoking cigarettes, by using smokeless tobacco
products, by addiction to tobacco, or by exposure to environmental tobacco
smoke. Approximately 1,350 cases are pending, including approximately 1,065
cases against Lorillard. The 1,350 cases include approximately 1,020 cases
pending in a single West Virginia court that have been consolidated for trial.
Lorillard is a defendant in nearly 940 of the 1,020 consolidated West Virginia
cases. The Company is a defendant in two of the conventional product liability
cases and is not a party to any of the consolidated West Virginia
cases.
"Class
action cases" are purported to be brought on behalf of large numbers of
individuals for damages allegedly caused by smoking. Eleven of these cases are
pending against Lorillard. One of these cases, Schwab
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., is on
behalf of a purported nationwide class composed of purchasers of "light"
cigarettes. The Company is a defendant in two of the class action cases.
Lorillard is not a defendant in approximately 30 additional "lights" class
action cases that are pending against other cigarette manufacturers. Reference
is made to Exhibit 99.01 to this Report for a list of pending Class Action Cases
in which Lorillard is a party.
Item
3. Legal Proceedings |
Tobacco
Related - (Continued) |
"Reimbursement
cases" are brought by or on behalf of entities who seek reimbursement of
expenses incurred in providing health care to individuals who allegedly were
injured by smoking. Plaintiffs in these cases have included the U.S. federal
government, U.S. state and local governments, foreign governmental entities,
hospitals or hospital districts, American Indian tribes, labor unions, private
companies, and private citizens. Lorillard is a defendant in four of the seven
Reimbursement cases pending in the United States. The Company is a defendant in
one of the pending Reimbursement cases. Lorillard and the Company also are named
as defendants in an additional case pending in Israel. Reference is made to
Exhibit 99.01 to this Report for a list of pending Reimbursement Cases in which
Lorillard is a party.
Included
in this category is the suit filed by the federal government, United
States of America v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., that
sought disgorgement and injunctive relief. Trial of this matter began during
September of 2004 and is proceeding. During February of 2005, an appellate court
ruled that the government may not seek disgorgement of profits, although this
order is not final because the government has advised the court that it will
seek rehearing of this decision.
"Contribution
cases" are brought by private companies, such as asbestos manufacturers or their
insurers, who are seeking contribution or indemnity for court claims they
incurred on behalf of individuals injured by their products but who also
allegedly were injured by smoking cigarettes. One such case is pending against
Lorillard and other cigarette manufacturers. The Company is not a defendant in
this matter. Reference is made to Exhibit 99.01 to this Report for the identity
of the pending Contribution case in which Lorillard is a party.
"Flight
Attendant cases" are brought by non-smoking flight attendants alleging injury
from exposure to environmental smoke in the cabins of aircraft. Plaintiffs in
these cases may not seek punitive damages for injuries that arose prior to
January 15, 1997. Lorillard is a defendant in each of the approximately 2,665
pending Flight Attendant cases. The Company is not a defendant in any of the
Flight Attendant cases.
Excluding
the flight attendant and the consolidated West Virginia suits, approximately 400
product liability cases are pending against cigarette manufacturers in U.S.
courts. Lorillard is a defendant in approximately 150 of the 400 cases. The
Company, which is not a defendant in any of the flight attendant or the
consolidated West Virginia matters, is a defendant in five of the
actions.
Other
tobacco-related litigation includes "Tobacco Related Anti-Trust Cases."
Reference is made to Exhibit 99.01 to this Report for a list of pending Tobacco
Related Anti-Trust Cases in which Lorillard is a party.
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
None
EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
|
|
|
First |
|
|
|
Became |
Name |
Position
and Offices
Held |
Age |
Officer |
|
|
|
|
Gary
W. Garson |
Senior
Vice President, General Counsel and |
58 |
1988 |
|
Secretary |
|
|
Herbert
C. Hofmann |
Senior
Vice President |
62 |
1979 |
Peter
W. Keegan |
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
60 |
1997 |
Arthur
L. Rebell |
Senior
Vice President |
63 |
1998 |
Andrew
H. Tisch |
Office
of the President and Chairman |
55 |
1985 |
|
of
the Executive Committee |
|
|
James
S. Tisch |
Office
of the President, President and |
52 |
1981 |
|
Chief
Executive Officer |
|
|
Jonathan
M. Tisch |
Office
of the President |
51 |
1987 |
Preston
R. Tisch |
Chairman
of the Board |
78 |
1960 |
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
Executive
Officers of the Registrant -
(Continued) |
Andrew H.
Tisch and James S. Tisch are brothers, and are nephews of, and Jonathan M. Tisch
is a son of, Preston R. Tisch. None of the other officers or directors of
Registrant is related to any other.
All
executive officers of Registrant have been engaged actively and continuously in
the business of Registrant for more than the past five years.
Officers
are elected and hold office until their successors are elected and qualified,
and are subject to removal by the Board of Directors.
PART
II
Item
5. Market for the Registrant's Common Stock and Related Stockholder Matters and
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Price
Range of Common Stock
Loews
common stock
Loews
Corporation's common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The
following table sets forth the reported high and low sales prices in each
calendar quarter of 2004 and 2003:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
High |
|
Low |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
63.20 |
|
$ |
49.07 |
|
$ |
47.90 |
|
$ |
39.65 |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
|
61.35 |
|
|
55.45 |
|
|
49.02 |
|
|
38.25 |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
|
60.16 |
|
|
53.35 |
|
|
49.18 |
|
|
40.10 |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
|
71.01 |
|
|
55.54 |
|
|
49.48 |
|
|
38.80 |
|
Carolina
Group stock
Carolina
Group stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The following table sets
forth the reported high and low sales prices in each calendar quarter of 2004
and 2003:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
High |
|
Low |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter |
|
$ |
29.85 |
|
$ |
24.46 |
|
$ |
22.95 |
|
$ |
18.00 |
|
Second
Quarter |
|
|
27.90 |
|
|
22.49 |
|
|
27.18 |
|
|
16.86 |
|
Third
Quarter |
|
|
25.04 |
|
|
22.92 |
|
|
28.10 |
|
|
20.70 |
|
Fourth
Quarter |
|
|
30.00 |
|
|
24.05 |
|
|
25.70 |
|
|
22.49 |
|
Dividend
Information
The
Company has paid quarterly cash dividends on Loews common stock in each year
since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.15 per share of Loews common stock were paid
in each calendar quarter of 2004 and 2003.
The
Company paid quarterly cash dividends on Carolina Group stock of $0.445 per
share beginning in the second quarter of 2002. The Company increased its
quarterly cash dividend on Carolina Group stock to $0.455 per share beginning in
the second quarter of 2003. Regular dividends were paid in each calendar quarter
of 2004 and 2003.
Item
5. Market for the Registrant's Common Stock and Related Stockholder
Matters |
|
Securities
Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
The
following table provides certain information as of December 31, 2004 with
respect to the Company's equity compensation plans under which equity securities
of the Company are authorized for issuance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities
remaining |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
|
|
available
for future |
|
|
|
securities |
|
|
|
issuance
under |
|
|
|
to
be
issued
upon |
|
Weighted
average |
|
equity
compensation |
|
|
|
exercise |
|
exercise
price of |
|
plans
(excluding |
|
|
|
of
outstanding
options,
|
|
outstanding
options, |
|
securities
reflected |
|
Plan
category |
|
warrants
and
rights |
|
warrants
and rights |
|
in
the first column) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
security
holders (a) |
|
|
1,257,775
|
|
$ |
50.302
|
|
|
573,450
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
compensation plans approved by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
security
holders (b) |
|
|
560,000
|
|
$ |
25.230
|
|
|
937,750
|
|
Equity
compensation plans not approved |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by
security holders (c) |
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
___________
(a) |
Consists
of the Loews Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan. |
(b) |
Consists
of the Carolina Group 2002 Stock Option Plan. |
(c) |
The
Company has no equity compensation plans that have not been authorized by
its stockholders. |
Approximate
Number of Equity Security Holders
The
Company has approximately 1,770 holders of record of Loews common stock and
approximately 90 holders of record of Carolina Group stock.
MANAGEMENT'S
ANNUAL REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
The
Company's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate
internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company. The Company's internal control system
was designed to provide reasonable assurance to the Company's management and
Board of Directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published
financial statements.
There are
inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any control system, however well
designed, including the possibility of human error and the possible
circumvention or overriding of controls. Further, the design of a control system
must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Management must make
judgments with respect to the relative cost and expected benefits of any
specific control measure. The design of a control system also is based in part
upon assumptions and judgments made by management about the likelihood of future
events, and there can be no assurance that a control will be effective under all
potential future conditions. As a result, even an effective system of internal
controls can provide no more than reasonable assurance with respect to the fair
presentation of financial statements and the processes under which they were
prepared.
The
Company's management assessed the effectiveness of the Company's internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004. Management excluded
from this assessment the business of Gulf South, which was acquired on December
29, 2004 and which was immaterial to the Company's 2004 consolidated financial
results. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO") in
Internal
Control - Integrated Framework. Based
on this assessment, the Company's management believes that, as of December 31,
2004, the Company's internal control over financial reporting was
effective.
Deloitte
& Touche LLP, the registered public accounting firm that audited the
Company's financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, has
issued an attestation report on management's assessment of the Company's
internal control over financial reporting. The attestation report of Deloitte
& Touche LLP follows this report.
ATTESTATION
REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Stockholders of Loews Corporation:
We have
audited management's assessment, included in the accompanying Management's
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting, that Loews
Corporation and subsidiaries (the "Company") maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on criteria
established in Internal
Control—Integrated Framework issued by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission ("COSO").
The Company's management is responsible 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 management's assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the
Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) ("PCAOB"). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all
material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, evaluating management's 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 audit provides a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
A
company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or
under the supervision of, the company's principal executive and principal
financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the
company's 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
generally accepted accounting principles. A company's 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 company's
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, management's assessment that the Company maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, is fairly stated, in
all material respects, based on the criteria established in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by COSO.
Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on the
criteria established in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by
COSO.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB, the Company's
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2004 and our report dated February 28, 2005
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements
and financial statement schedules.
Deloitte
& Touche LLP
New York,
New York
February
28, 2005
Item
6. Selected Financial Data.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Results
of Operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
15,242.3 |
|
$ |
16,461.0 |
|
$ |
17,456.5 |
|
$ |
18,728.2 |
|
$ |
20,633.0 |
|
Income
(loss) before taxes and minority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest |
|
$ |
1,822.0 |
|
$ |
(1,378.4 |
) |
$ |
1,640.7 |
|
$ |
(829.1 |
) |
$ |
3,135.9 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(666.1 |
) |
$ |
978.6 |
|
$ |
(547.7 |
) |
$ |
1,835.5 |
|
Discontinued
operations - net |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
|
13.9 |
|
|
13.1 |
|
Cumulative
effect of changes in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
accounting
principles - net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
|
(53.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
$ |
(587.1 |
) |
$ |
1,848.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) attributable to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operations |
|
$ |
1,046.8 |
|
$ |
(781.3 |
) |
$ |
837.9 |
|
$ |
(547.7 |
) |
$ |
1,835.5 |
|
Discontinued
operations - net |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
|
13.9 |
|
|
13.1 |
|
Cumulative
effect of changes in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
accounting
principles - net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
|
(53.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Loews
common stock |
|
|
1,046.8 |
|
|
(725.9 |
) |
|
771.3 |
|
|
(587.1 |
) |
|
1,848.6 |
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
|
184.5 |
|
|
115.2 |
|
|
140.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
$ |
(587.1 |
) |
$ |
1,848.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(Loss) Per Share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(4.21 |
) |
$ |
4.46 |
|
$ |
(2.81 |
) |
$ |
9.24 |
|
Discontinued
operations - net |
|
|
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
(0.14 |
) |
|
0.07 |
|
|
0.06 |
|
Cumulative
effect of changes in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
accounting
principles - net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
(0.27 |
) |
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(3.91 |
) |
$ |
4.11 |
|
$ |
(3.01 |
) |
$ |
9.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
$ |
3.15 |
|
$ |
2.76 |
|
$ |
3.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
Position: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
$ |
44,298.5 |
|
$ |
42,514.8 |
|
$ |
40,136.7 |
|
$ |
41,159.1 |
|
$ |
41,332.7 |
|
Total
assets |
|
|
73,749.5 |
|
|
77,989.5 |
|
|
70,515.6 |
|
|
75,001.0 |
|
|
71,588.7 |
|
Debt
|
|
|
6,990.3 |
|
|
5,820.2 |
|
|
5,651.9 |
|
|
5,920.3 |
|
|
6,040.0 |
|
Shareholders'
equity |
|
|
12,183.3 |
|
|
11,054.3 |
|
|
11,235.2 |
|
|
9,429.3 |
|
|
10,969.1 |
|
Cash
dividends per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock |
|
|
0.60 |
|
|
0.60 |
|
|
0.60 |
|
|
0.58 |
|
|
0.50 |
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
|
1.82 |
|
|
1.81 |
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Book
value per share of Loews common |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stock |
|
|
66.71 |
|
|
60.92 |
|
|
61.68 |
|
|
49.24 |
|
|
55.62 |
|
Shares
outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock |
|
|
185.58 |
|
|
185.45 |
|
|
185.44 |
|
|
191.49 |
|
|
197.23 |
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
|
67.97 |
|
|
57.97 |
|
|
39.91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
Management's
discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is
comprised of the following sections:
|
Page |
|
No. |
|
|
Overview |
|
Consolidated
Financial Results |
33 |
Acquisition
of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines |
34 |
CNA
Recent Developments |
34 |
Classes
of Common Stock |
35 |
Parent
Company Structure |
35 |
Critical
Accounting Estimates |
36 |
Results
of Operations by Business Segment |
39 |
CNA
Financial |
40 |
Net
Prior year Development |
40 |
Reserves
- Estimates and Uncertainties |
42 |
Reinsurance
|
44 |
Terrorism
Insurance |
48 |
Restructuring
|
48 |
Standard
Lines |
50 |
Specialty
Lines |
57 |
Life
and Group Non-Core |
60 |
Other
Insurance |
61 |
APMT
Reserves |
64 |
Lorillard
|
75 |
Results
of Operations |
75 |
Business
Environment |
78 |
Loews
Hotels |
81 |
Diamond
Offshore |
82 |
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
84 |
Corporate
and Other |
85 |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources |
86 |
CNA
Financial |
86 |
Lorillard
|
92 |
Loews
Hotels |
93 |
Diamond
Offshore |
93 |
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
94 |
Corporate
and Other |
95 |
Investments
|
96 |
Accounting
Standards |
107 |
Forward-Looking
Statements Disclaimer |
108 |
Supplemental
Financial Information |
111 |
OVERVIEW
Loews
Corporation is a holding company. Its subsidiaries are engaged in the following
lines of business: commercial insurance (CNA Financial Corporation ("CNA"), a
91% owned subsidiary); the production and sale of cigarettes (Lorillard, Inc.
("Lorillard"), a wholly owned subsidiary); the operation of hotels (Loews Hotels
Holding Corporation ("Loews Hotels"), a wholly owned subsidiary); the operation
of offshore oil and gas drilling rigs (Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. ("Diamond
Offshore"), a 55% owned subsidiary); the operation of interstate natural gas
transmission
pipeline systems
(Boardwalk Pipelines, LLC
("Boardwalk Pipelines"), a
wholly owned subsidiary) and the
distribution
and sale of watches and clocks (Bulova Corporation ("Bulova"), a wholly owned
subsidiary). Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms "Company," "Loews"
and "Registrant" as used herein mean Loews Corporation excluding its
subsidiaries.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Overview
- (Continued) |
Consolidated
Financial Results
Consolidated
net income (including both the Loews Group and Carolina Group) for the year
ended December 31, 2004 was $1,231.3 million, compared to a net loss of $610.7
million in the prior year.
The
following table summarizes the net income (loss) and earnings per share
information:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) attributable to Loews common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) before net investment gains (losses) (a) |
|
$ |
1,191.7 |
|
$ |
(1,044.4 |
) |
Net
investment gains (losses) (b) |
|
|
(144.9 |
) |
|
263.1 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
1,046.8 |
|
|
(781.3 |
) |
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
- |
|
|
55.4 |
|
Net
income (loss) attributable to Loews common stock |
|
|
1,046.8 |
|
|
(725.9 |
) |
Net
income attributable to Carolina Group stock |
|
|
184.5 |
|
|
115.2 |
|
Consolidated
net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per
share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) per share of Loews common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(4.21 |
) |
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
- |
|
|
0.30 |
|
Net
income (loss) per share of Loews common stock |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income per share of Carolina Group stock |
|
$ |
3.15 |
|
$ |
2.76 |
|
__________
(a) |
Includes
income of $116.5 (after tax) for the year ended December 31, 2004 from an
investee's sale of four ultra large crude oil
tankers. |
(b) |
Includes
a loss of $352.9 (after tax and minority interest) for the year ended
December 31, 2004 related to CNA's sale of its individual life insurance
business and a loss of $116.4 (after tax and minority interest) for the
year ended December 31, 2003 related to CNA's sale of its Group Benefits
business. |
Net
income attributable to Loews common stock for the year ended 2004 amounted to
$1,046.8 million or $5.64 per share, compared to a loss of $725.9 million or
$3.91 per share in the prior year.
Income
before net investment gains (losses) attributable to Loews common stock amounted
to $1,191.7 million in the year ended 2004 compared to a loss of $1,044.4
million in the prior year. Results for 2004 include charges at CNA of $162.5
million (after tax and minority interest) due to the impact of the Hurricanes
Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne, partially offset by income of $116.5 million
(after taxes) from Hellespont Shipping Corporation, a 49%-owned company,
following the sale of its four ultra-large oil tankers. The 2003 results include
charges by CNA for net prior year development of $1,667.4 million (after tax and
minority interest) and an increase in bad debt reserves for insurance and
reinsurance receivables of $356.9 million (after tax and minority
interest).
Net
income attributable to Loews common stock includes net investment losses of
$144.9 million (after tax and minority interest), compared to net investment
gains of $263.1 million (after tax and minority interest) in the prior year. Net
investment losses in 2004 are due primarily to a loss of $352.9 million (after
tax and minority interest) from CNA's sale of its individual life insurance
business.
Carolina
Group net income for 2004 was $545.9 million, compared to $468.3 million in the
prior year. Net income for 2003 included a $27.5 million charge ($17.1 million
after taxes) to settle litigation with tobacco growers and a $28.0 million
charge ($17.5 million after taxes) to resolve indemnification claims and
trademark matters in connection with the 1977 sale by Lorillard of its
international business. Net income attributable to Carolina Group stock for 2004
was $184.5 million, or $3.15 per share of Carolina Group stock, compared to
$115.2 million, or $2.76 per share of Carolina Group stock in the prior
year.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Overview
- (Continued) |
Consolidated
revenues for the year ended 2004 amounted to $15.2 billion compared to $16.5
billion in the prior year. The decline in revenues reflects CNA's sale of its
Group Benefits business in December of 2003 and the sale of the individual life
insurance business in April of 2004.
Acquisition
of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines
In May of 2003, Boardwalk Pipelines acquired Texas Gas for approximately $1.05
billion, including assumed debt. Texas Gas is an interstate natural gas
transmission company which owns and operates a natural gas pipeline system
originating in the Louisiana Gulf Coast area and in East Texas and running north
and east through Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana
and into Ohio, with smaller diameter lines extending into Illinois.
The Texas Gas pipeline transmission system has a mainline delivery capacity of
approximately 2.8
billion cubic feet ("Bcf") of gas per day and is composed of approximately 5,900
miles of mainline, storage, and branch transmission pipelines and 31 compressor
stations. Texas Gas owns and operates natural gas storage reservoirs in nine
underground storage fields located in Indiana and Kentucky. The certificated
storage capacity of Texas Gas's fields is approximately 178 Bcf of gas, of which
approximately 55 Bcf is working gas.
In December of
2004, Boardwalk Pipelines acquired Gulf South for approximately $1.14 billion.
Gulf South is an interstate natural gas transmission company that owns and
operates a natural gas pipeline and gathering system located in parts of Texas,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida. Gulf South's pipeline transmission
system is composed of approximately 6,800 miles of transmission pipelines, 1,200
miles of gathering pipeline and 32 compressor stations. Gulf South has 68.5 Bcf
of working gas storage capacity.
See Note
14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for further
information.
CNA
Recent Developments
During 2003, CNA completed a strategic review of its operations and decided to
concentrate efforts on its property and casualty business. As a result of this
review and several significant charges in 2003, a capital plan was developed to
replenish statutory capital of the property and casualty subsidiaries. A summary
of the capital plan, related actions and other significant business decisions is
discussed below:
On April 30, 2004, CNA sold its individual life insurance business. The business
sold included term, universal and permanent life insurance policies and
individual annuity products. CNA's individual long term care and structured
settlement businesses were excluded from the sale.
On December 31, 2003, CNA sold the majority of its group benefits business. The
business sold included group life and accident, short and long term disability
and certain other products. CNA's group long term care and specialty medical
businesses were excluded from the sale.
During 2003, CNA sold the renewal rights for most of the treaty business of CNA
Re and withdrew from the assumed reinsurance business. CNA is managing the
run-off of its retained liabilities.
See Note
14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for further
information.
During 2003, CNA undertook an expense initiative, of which the primary
components were a reduction of the workforce by approximately five percent,
lower commissions and other acquisition costs, principally related to workers
compensation, and reduced spending in other areas. CNA achieved the targeted
workforce reduction in 2003. Actions related to reducing commissions and other
acquisition expenses began in 2003 and were completed in 2004.
During 2004, CNA undertook additional expense initiatives that produced expense
savings of approximately $100.0 million. The primary components of the expense
initiatives were a reduction in certain business expenses through more stringent
expense policies and guidelines, reduced facilities cost through consolidation
of locations, and to a lesser extent, workforce reductions. CNA is currently
formulating plans to reach its goal of an additional $100.0 million of expense
reductions in 2005.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
CNA
Recent Developments - (Continued) |
In
November of 2003, CNA established a capital plan to replenish statutory capital
impacted by the strategic review and charges for prior year development and
related matters. Under the capital plan, in November of 2003, CNA sold to Loews
$750.0 million of a new series of convertible preferred stock which converted
into 32,327,015 shares of CNA common stock in April of 2004, and received
commitments from Loews for additional capital support of up to $650.0 million
through the purchase of surplus notes of Continental Casualty Company ("CCC"),
CNA's principal insurance subsidiary, in the event certain additions to CCC's
statutory capital were not achieved through asset sales. As a result of this
commitment, Loews purchased $300.0 million principal amount of surplus notes in
February of 2004 in relation to CNA's sale of the individual life business and
$46.0 million principal amount of surplus notes in February of 2004 in relation
to the sale of the group benefits business. The $300.0 million surplus note was
repaid in June of 2004, and the $46.0 million surplus note was repaid in
December of 2004, thereby fulfilling all of the commitments under the capital
plan.
Classes
of Common Stock
The
issuance of Carolina Group stock has resulted in a two class common stock
structure for Loews Corporation. Carolina Group stock, commonly called a
tracking stock, is intended to reflect the economic performance of a defined
group of assets and liabilities of the Company referred to as the Carolina
Group. The principal assets and liabilities attributed to the Carolina Group are
(a) the Company's 100% stock ownership interest in Lorillard, Inc.; (b)
notional, intergroup debt owed by the Carolina Group to the Loews Group ($1.9
billion outstanding at December 31, 2004), bearing interest at the annual rate
of 8.0% and, subject to optional prepayment, due December 31, 2021; and (c) any
and all liabilities, costs and expenses arising out of or related to tobacco or
tobacco-related businesses.
As of
December 31, 2004, the outstanding Carolina Group stock represents a 39.19%
economic interest in the economic performance of the Carolina Group. The Loews
Group consists of all the Company's assets and liabilities other than the 39.19%
economic interest represented by the outstanding Carolina Group stock, and
includes as an asset the notional, intergroup debt of the Carolina
Group.
The
existence of separate classes of common stock could give rise to occasions where
the interests of the holders of Loews common stock and Carolina Group stock
diverge or conflict or appear to diverge or conflict. Subject to its fiduciary
duties, the Company's board of directors could, in its sole discretion, from
time to time, make determinations or implement policies that affect
disproportionately the groups or the different classes of stock. For example,
the Company's board of directors may decide to reallocate assets, liabilities,
revenues, expenses and cash flows between groups, without the consent of
shareholders. The board of directors would not be required to select the option
that would result in the highest value for holders of Carolina Group
stock.
As a
result of the flexibility provided to Loews's board of directors, it might be
difficult for investors to assess the future prospects of the Carolina Group
based on the Carolina Group's past performance.
The
creation of the Carolina Group and the issuance of Carolina Group stock does not
change the Company's ownership of Lorillard, Inc. or Lorillard, Inc.'s status as
a separate legal entity. The Carolina Group and the Loews Group are notional
groups that are intended to reflect the performance of the defined sets of
assets and liabilities of each such group as described above. The Carolina Group
and the Loews Group are not separate legal entities and the attribution of
assets and liabilities to the Loews Group or the Carolina Group does not affect
title to the assets or responsibility for the liabilities.
Holders
of the Company's common stock and of Carolina Group stock are shareholders of
Loews Corporation and are subject to the risks related to an equity investment
in Loews Corporation.
Parent
Company Structure
The
Company is a holding company and derives substantially all of its cash flow from
its subsidiaries, principally Lorillard. The Company relies upon its invested
cash balances and distributions from its subsidiaries to generate the funds
necessary to meet its obligations and to declare and pay any dividends to its
stockholders. The ability of the Company's subsidiaries to pay dividends is
subject to, among other things, the availability of sufficient funds in such
subsidiaries, applicable state laws, including in the case of the insurance
subsidiaries of CNA, laws and rules governing the payment of dividends by
regulated insurance companies. Claims of creditors of the Company's subsidiaries
will
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Parent
Company Structure - (Continued) |
generally
have priority as to the assets of such subsidiaries over the claims of the
Company and its creditors and stockholders (see Liquidity and Capital Resources
- - CNA Financial, below).
At
December 31, 2004, the book value per share of Loews common stock was $66.71,
compared to $60.92 at December 31, 2003.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
The
preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
("GAAP") requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and the related notes.
Actual results could differ from those estimates.
The
consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in
accordance with GAAP, applied on a consistent basis. The Company continually
evaluates the accounting policies and estimates used to prepare the consolidated
financial statements. In general, management's estimates are based on historical
experience, evaluation of current trends, information from third party
professionals and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable
under the known facts and circumstances.
The
accounting policies discussed below are considered by management to be critical
to an understanding of the Company's consolidated financial statements as their
application places the most significant demands on management's judgment. Due to
the inherent uncertainties involved with this type of judgment, actual results
could differ significantly from estimates and may have a material adverse impact
on the Company's results of operations or equity.
Insurance
Reserves
Insurance
reserves are established for both short and long-duration insurance contracts.
Short-duration contracts are primarily related to property and casualty
insurance policies where the reserving process is based on actuarial estimates
of the amount of loss, including amounts for known and unknown claims.
Long-duration contracts typically include long term care products and are
estimated using actuarial estimates about mortality and morbidity, as well as
assumptions about expected investment returns. Workers compensation lifetime
claim reserves and accident and health claim reserves are calculated using
mortality and morbidity assumptions based on CNA and industry experience, and
are discounted at interest rates that range from 3.5% to 6.5% at December 31,
2004 and 2003. The reserve for unearned premiums on property and casualty and
accident and health contracts represents the portion of premiums written related
to the unexpired terms of coverage. The inherent risks associated with the
reserving process are discussed in the Reserves - Estimates and Uncertainties
section below.
Reinsurance
Amounts
recoverable from reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with claim and
claim adjustment expense reserves or future policy benefits reserves and are
reported as receivables in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The ceding of
insurance does not discharge
the primary liability of CNA. An estimated allowance for doubtful accounts
is
recorded
on the basis of periodic
evaluations of balances due from reinsurers, reinsurer solvency, management's
experience and current economic conditions. Further information on reinsurance
is provided in the Reinsurance section below.
Tobacco
and Other Litigation
Lorillard
and other cigarette manufacturers continue to be confronted with substantial
litigation. Plaintiffs in most of the cases seek unspecified amounts of
compensatory damages and punitive damages, although some seek damages ranging
into the billions of dollars. Plaintiffs in some of the cases seek treble
damages, statutory damages, disgorgement of profits, equitable and injunctive
relief, and medical monitoring, among other damages.
Lorillard
believes that it has valid defenses to the cases pending against it. Lorillard
also believes it has valid bases for appeal of the adverse verdicts against it.
To the extent the Company is a defendant in any of the lawsuits, the Company
believes that it is not a proper defendant in these matters and has moved or
plans to move for dismissal of all such claims against it. While Lorillard
intends to defend vigorously all tobacco products liability litigation, it is
not possible to
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Critical
Accounting Estimates - (Continued) |
predict
the outcome of any of this litigation. Litigation is subject to many
uncertainties, and it is possible that some of these actions could be decided
unfavorably. Lorillard may enter into discussions in an attempt to settle
particular cases if it believes it is appropriate to do so.
On May
21, 2003 the Florida Third District Court of Appeal vacated the judgment entered
in favor of a class of Florida smokers in the case of Engle
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. The
judgment reflected an award of punitive damages to the class of approximately
$145.0 billion, including $16.3 billion against Lorillard. The court of appeals
also decertified the class ordered during pre-trial proceedings. Plaintiffs are
seeking review of the case by the Florida Supreme Court. The Company and
Lorillard believe that the appeals court's decision should be upheld upon
further appeals.
During
May of 2004, a jury in the Circuit Court of Louisiana, Orleans Parish, awarded
$591.0 million to fund cessation programs for Louisiana smokers in the case of
Scott
v. The American Tobacco Company, et al. The jury
was not asked to apportion damages in its verdict so Lorillard's share of the
judgment has not been determined. The court denied defendants' motion for
judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, for new trial.
Lorillard and the other defendants in this matter have initiated an appeal from
the judgment to the Louisiana Court of Appeals. Pursuant to Louisiana law, the
trial court entered an order setting the amount of the appeal bond at $50.0
million for all defendants, of which Lorillard secured $12.5 million. While
Lorillard believes the limitation on the appeal bond amount is valid and
required by Louisiana law, and that any challenges to the amount of the bond
would fail, in the event of a successful challenge the amount of the appeal bond
could be set as high as 150% of the judgment and judicial interest combined. If
such an event occurred, Lorillard's share of the appeal bond is
uncertain.
Except
for the impact of the State Settlement Agreements as described in Note 21 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Report,
management is unable to make a meaningful estimate of the amount or range of
loss that could result from an unfavorable outcome of pending litigation and,
therefore, no provision has been made in the Consolidated Financial Statements
for any unfavorable outcome. It is possible that the Company's results of
operations, cash flows and its financial position could be materially adversely
affected by an unfavorable outcome of certain pending or future
litigation.
CNA is
also involved in various legal proceedings that have arisen during the ordinary
course of business. CNA evaluates the facts and circumstances of each situation,
and when CNA determines it necessary, a liability is estimated and
recorded.
Valuation
of Investments and Impairment of Securities
Invested
assets are exposed to various risks, such as interest rate, market and credit
risks. Due to the level of risk associated with certain invested assets and the
level of uncertainty related to changes in the value of these assets, it is
possible that changes in risks in the near term could have an adverse material
impact on the Company's results of operations or equity.
The
Company's investment portfolio is subject to market declines below book value
that may be other-than-temporary. CNA has an impairment committee, which reviews
its investment portfolio on a quarterly basis with ongoing analysis as new
information becomes available. Any decline that is determined to be
other-than-temporary is recorded as an impairment loss in the results of
operations in the period in which the determination occurred.
The
Company continues to monitor potential changes in authoritative guidance related
to recognizing other-than-temporary impairments. Any such changes may cause the
Company to recognize impairment losses in results of operations which would not
be recognized under the current guidance, or to recognize such losses in earlier
periods, especially those due to increases in interest rates. Such changes could
also impact the recognition of investment income on impaired securities. While
the impact of changes in authoritative guidance could increase earnings
volatility in future periods, because fluctuations in the fair value of
securities are already reflected in shareholders' equity, any changes would not
be expected to have a significant impact on equity. Further information on CNA's
process for evaluating impairments is provided in the "Investments - CNA"
section below.
Securities
in the parent company's investment portfolio that are not part of its cash
management activities are classified as trading securities in order to reflect
the Company's investment philosophy. These investments are carried at fair value
with the net unrealized gain or loss included in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Critical
Accounting Estimates - (Continued) |
Long
Term Care Products
CNA's
reserves and deferred acquisition costs for its long term care product offerings
are based on certain assumptions including morbidity, policy persistency and
interest rates. Actual experience may differ from these assumptions. The
recoverability of deferred acquisition costs and the adequacy of the reserves
are contingent on actual experience related to these key assumptions and other
factors including potential future premium increases and future health care cost
trends. The Company's results of operations and/or equity may be materially,
adversely affected if actual experience varies significantly from these
assumptions.
Pension
and Postretirement Benefit Obligations
The
Company is required to make a significant number of assumptions in order to
estimate the liabilities and costs related to its pension and postretirement
benefit obligations to employees under its benefit plans. The assumptions that
have the most impact on pension costs are the discount rate, the expected return
on plan assets and the rate of compensation increases. These assumptions are
evaluated relative to current market factors such as inflation, interest rates
and fiscal and monetary policies. Changes in these assumptions can have a
material impact on pension obligations and pension expense. Further information
on the Company's pension and postretirement benefit obligations is included in
Note 18 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item
8.
Loans
to National Contractor
CNA
Surety Corporation ("CNA Surety") has provided significant surety bond
protection for a large national contractor that undertakes projects for the
construction of government and private facilities, a substantial portion of
which have been reinsured by CCC. In order to help this contractor meet its
liquidity needs and complete projects which had been bonded by CNA Surety,
commencing in 2003 CNA has provided loans to the contractor through a credit
facility. In December of 2004, the credit facility was amended to increase the
maximum available loans to $106.0 million from $86.0 million. The amendment also
provides that CNA may in its sole discretion further increase the amounts
available for loans under the credit facility, up to an aggregate maximum of
$126.0 million. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, there were $99.0 million and
$80.0 million of total debt outstanding under the credit facility. Additional
loans in January and February of 2005 brought the total debt outstanding under
the credit facility, less accrued interest, to $104.0 million as of February 24,
2005. The Company, through a participation agreement with CNA, provided funds
for and owned a participation of $29.0 million and $25.0 million of the loans
outstanding as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and has agreed to participation of
one-third of any additional loans which may be made above the original $86.0
million credit facility limit up to the $126.0 million maximum available
line.
In
connection with the amendment to increase the maximum available line under the
credit facility in December of 2004, the term of the loan under the credit
facility was extended to mature in March of 2009 and the interest rate was
reduced prospectively from 6.0% over prime rate to 5.0% per annum, effective as
of December 27, 2004, with an additional 3.0% interest accrual when borrowings
under the facility are at or below the original $86.0 million limit. Loans under
the credit facility are secured by a pledge of substantially all of the assets
of the contractor and certain of its affiliates. In connection with the credit
facility, CNA has also guaranteed or provided collateral for letters of credit
which are charged against the maximum available line and, if drawn upon, would
be treated as loans under the credit facility. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
these guarantees and collateral obligations aggregated $13.0 million and $7.0
million.
The
contractor implemented a restructuring plan intended to reduce costs and improve
cash flow, and appointed a chief restructuring officer to manage execution of
the plan. In the course of addressing various expense, operational and strategic
issues, however, the contractor has decided to substantially reduce the scope of
its original business and to concentrate on those segments determined to be
potentially profitable. As a consequence, operating cash flow, and in turn the
capacity to service debt, has been reduced below previous levels. Restructuring
plans have also been extended to accommodate these circumstances. In light of
these developments, the Company has taken an impairment charge of $80.5 million
pretax ($48.8 million after-tax and minority interest) for the fourth quarter of
2004 with respect to amounts loaned under the facility. Any draws under the
credit facility beyond $106.0 million or further changes in the national
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Critical
Accounting Estimates - (Continued) |
contractor's
business plan or projections may necessitate further impairment charges.
Indemnification and subrogation rights, including rights to contract proceeds on
construction projects in the event of default, exist that reduce CNA Surety's
and ultimately the Company's exposure to loss. While CNA believes that the
contractor's restructuring efforts may be successful and provide sufficient cash
flow for its operations, the contractor's failure to achieve its restructuring
plan or perform its contractual obligations under the credit facility or under
CNA's surety bonds could have a material adverse effect on the Company's results
of operations and/or equity. If such failures occur, CNA estimates the surety
loss, net of indemnification and subrogation recoveries, but before the effects
of minority interest, to be approximately $200.0 million pretax. In addition,
such failures could cause the remaining unimpaired amount due under the credit
facility to be uncollectible.
Further
information on the Company's exposure to this national contractor and this
credit agreement is provided in Note 22 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included under Item 8 and the Liquidity and Capital Resources section
below.
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS BY BUSINESS SEGMENT
As a
result of the strategic review and other actions described above in "CNA Recent
Developments," in 2004 CNA changed how it manages its core operations and makes
business decisions. Accordingly, the Company and CNA have revised the reportable
business segment structure to reflect these changes.
CNA now
manages its property and casualty operations in two operating segments which
represent CNA's core operations: Standard Lines and Specialty Lines. The
non-core operations are managed in the Life and Group Non-Core and Other
Insurance segments. Standard Lines includes standard property and casualty
coverages sold to small and middle market commercial businesses primarily
through an independent agency distribution system, and excess and surplus lines,
as well as insurance and risk management products sold to large corporations in
the U.S., as well as globally. Specialty Lines includes professional, financial
and specialty property and casualty products and services. Life and Group
Non-Core primarily includes the results of the life and group lines of business
sold or placed in run-off. Other Insurance includes the results of certain
property and casualty lines of business placed in run-off, including CNA Re
(formerly included in the Property and Casualty segment). This segment also
includes the results related to the centralized adjusting and settlement of
Asbestos, Environment Pollution and Mass Tort ("APMT") claims as well as the
results of CNA's participation in voluntary insurance pools, which are primarily
in run-off, and various other non-insurance operations.
The
changes made to the Company's reportable segments were as follows: (1) Standard
Lines and Specialty Lines (formerly included in the Property and Casualty
segment) are now reported as separate individual segments; (2) CNA Global
(formerly included in Specialty Lines) which consists of marine and global
standard lines is now included in Standard Lines; (3) CNA Guaranty and Credit
(formerly included in Specialty Lines) is currently in run-off and is now
included in the Other Insurance segment; (4) CNA Re (formerly included in the
Property and Casualty segment) is currently in run-off and is also now included
in the Other Insurance segment; (5) Group Operations and Life Operations
(formerly separate reportable segments) have now been combined into one
reportable segment where the run-off of the retained group and life products
will be managed; and (6) certain run-off life and group operations (formerly
included in the Other Insurance segment) are now included in the Life and Group
Non-Core segment.
Throughout
this MD&A the results of operations include discussion and results for all
of CNA's businesses, including those sold or exited as described
above.
In 2004,
expenses incurred related to uncollectible reinsurance receivables were
reclassified from "Other operating expenses" to "Insurance claims and
policyholders' benefits." This change in expenses incurred related to
uncollectible reinsurance receivables impacted the loss and loss adjustment
expense and the expense ratios. In addition, investment gains (losses) related
to the Corporate trading portfolio were reclassified to net investment income on
the Consolidated Statements of Operations. Prior period amounts and ratios have
been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. These
reclassifications had no impact on net income (loss) or the combined ratios in
any period.
In
addition, until 2003, the operations of Bulova were formerly reported in its own
operating segment and are now included in the Corporate and Other segment. Prior
period segment disclosures have been conformed to the current year
presentation.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations by Business Segment -
(Continued) |
CNA
Financial
Insurance
operations are conducted by subsidiaries of CNA Financial Corporation ("CNA").
CNA is a 91% owned subsidiary of the Company.
Net
Prior Year Development
The
results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were
impacted by net prior year development recorded for the property and casualty
and the Other Insurance segments. Changes in estimates of claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense reserves and premium accruals for prior accident years
are defined as net prior year development within this MD&A. These changes
can be favorable or unfavorable. The development discussed below is the amount
prior to consideration of any related reinsurance allowance
impacts.
The
following tables summarize pretax net prior year development by segment for the
property and casualty segments and the Other Insurance segment for the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
allocated
claim adjustment expense development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
the impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
105.0 |
|
$ |
75.0 |
|
$ |
23.0 |
|
$ |
203.0 |
|
APMT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55.0 |
|
|
55.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
75.0 |
|
|
78.0 |
|
|
258.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
before
impact of premium development |
|
|
113.0 |
|
|
58.0 |
|
|
87.0 |
|
|
258.0 |
|
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development,
excluding impact of corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aggregate
reinsurance treaties |
|
|
(96.0 |
) |
|
(33.0 |
) |
|
12.0 |
|
|
(117.0 |
) |
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
5.0 |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
1.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development |
|
|
(97.0 |
) |
|
(28.0 |
) |
|
9.0 |
|
|
(116.0 |
) |
Total
2004 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pretax) |
|
$ |
16.0 |
|
$ |
30.0 |
|
$ |
96.0 |
|
$ |
142.0 |
|
Total
2004 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(after-tax
and minority interest) |
|
$ |
9.1 |
|
$ |
18.3 |
|
$ |
56.6 |
|
$ |
84.0 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
claim
adjustment expense development excluding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the
impact of corporate aggregate reinsurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
1,424.0 |
|
$ |
313.0 |
|
$ |
355.0 |
|
$ |
2,092.0 |
|
APMT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
795.0 |
|
|
795.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,424.0 |
|
|
313.0 |
|
|
1,150.0 |
|
|
2,887.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(485.0 |
) |
|
(56.0 |
) |
|
(102.0 |
) |
|
(643.0 |
) |
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year development before |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
impact
of premium development |
|
|
939.0 |
|
|
257.0 |
|
|
1,048.0 |
|
|
2,244.0 |
|
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium development, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
211.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
(32.0 |
) |
|
185.0 |
|
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
269.0 |
|
|
31.0 |
|
|
58.0 |
|
|
358.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable premium development |
|
|
480.0 |
|
|
37.0 |
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
543.0 |
|
Total
2003 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pretax) |
|
$ |
1,419.0 |
|
$ |
294.0 |
|
$ |
1,074.0 |
|
$ |
2,787.0 |
|
Total
2003 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(after-tax
and minority interest) |
|
$ |
831.3 |
|
$ |
172.2 |
|
$ |
629.4 |
|
$ |
1,632.9 |
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) net prior year claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
allocated
claim adjustment expense development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
the impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
(191.0 |
) |
$ |
55.0 |
|
$ |
248.0 |
|
$ |
112.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
(93.0 |
) |
|
(148.0 |
) |
Pretax
(favorable) unfavorable net prior year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development
before impact of premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development |
|
|
(205.0 |
) |
|
14.0 |
|
|
155.0 |
|
|
(36.0 |
) |
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium development, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
(103.0 |
) |
|
(10.0 |
) |
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
29.0 |
|
|
62.0 |
|
|
101.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) premium development |
|
|
86.0 |
|
|
46.0 |
|
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
91.0 |
|
Total
2002 unfavorable (favorable) net prior year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development
(pretax) |
|
$ |
(119.0 |
) |
$ |
60.0 |
|
$ |
114.0 |
|
$ |
55.0 |
|
Total
2002 unfavorable (favorable) net prior year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development
(after-tax and minority interest) |
|
$ |
(68.9 |
) |
$ |
34.9 |
|
$ |
66.2 |
|
$ |
32.2 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Reserves
- - Estimates and Uncertainties
CNA
maintains reserves to cover its estimated ultimate unpaid liability for claim
and claim adjustment expenses, including the estimated cost of the claims
adjudication process, for claims that have been reported but not yet settled
("case reserves") and claims that have been incurred but not reported ("IBNR").
Claim and claim adjustment expense reserves are reflected as liabilities and are
included on the Consolidated Balance Sheets under the heading "Insurance
reserves." Adjustments to prior year reserve estimates, if necessary, are
reflected in the results of operations in the period that the need for such
adjustments is determined. The carried case and IBNR reserves are provided in
the Insurance Segment Results sections of this MD&A and in Note 9 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
The level
of reserves maintained by CNA represents management's best estimate, as of a
particular point in time, of what the ultimate settlement and administration of
claims will cost based on its assessment of facts and circumstances known at
that time. Reserves are not an exact calculation of liability but instead are
complex estimates that are derived by CNA, generally utilizing a variety of
actuarial reserve estimation techniques, from numerous assumptions and
expectations about future events, both internal and external, many of which are
highly uncertain.
Among the
many uncertain future events about which CNA makes assumptions and estimates,
many of which have become increasingly unpredictable, are claims severity,
frequency of claims, mortality, morbidity, expected interest rates, inflation,
claims handling and case reserving policies and procedures, underwriting and
pricing policies, changes in the legal and regulatory environment and the lag
time between the occurrence of an insured event and the time it is ultimately
settled, referred to in the insurance industry as the "tail." These factors must
be individually considered in relation to CNA's evaluation of each type of
business. Many of these uncertainties are not precisely quantifiable,
particularly on a prospective basis, and require significant management
judgment.
Given the
factors described above, it is not possible to quantify precisely the ultimate
exposure represented by claims and related litigation. As a result, CNA
regularly reviews the adequacy of its reserves and reassesses its reserve
estimates as historical loss experience develops, additional claims are reported
and settled and additional information becomes available in subsequent
periods.
In
addition, CNA is subject to the uncertain effects of emerging or potential
claims and coverage issues that arise as industry practices and legal, judicial,
social and other environmental conditions change. These issues have had, and may
continue to have, a negative effect on CNA's business by either extending
coverage beyond the original underwriting intent or by increasing the number or
size of claims. Recent examples of emerging or potential claims and coverage
issues include:
|
· |
increases
in the number and size of water damage claims, including those related to
expenses for testing and remediation of mold
conditions; |
|
· |
increases
in the number and size of claims relating to injuries from medical
products, and exposure to lead; |
|
· |
the
effects of accounting and financial reporting scandals and other major
corporate governance failures, which have resulted in an increase in the
number and size of claims, including director and officer and errors and
omissions insurance claims; |
|
· |
class
action litigation relating to claims handling and other practices;
|
|
· |
increases
in the number of construction defect claims, including claims for a broad
range of additional insured endorsements on policies;
and |
|
· |
increases
in the number of claims alleging abuse by members of the
clergy. |
The
impact of these and other unforeseen emerging or potential claims and coverage
issues is difficult to predict and could materially adversely affect the
adequacy of CNA's claim and claim adjustment expense reserves and could lead to
future reserve additions. See the Insurance Segment Results sections of this
MD&A for a discussion of changes in reserve estimates and the impact on the
Company's results of operations.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
CNA's
experience has been that establishing reserves for casualty coverages relating
to APMT claim and claim adjustment expenses is subject to uncertainties that are
greater than those presented by other claims. Estimating the ultimate cost of
both reported and unreported APMT claims is subject to a higher degree of
variability due to a number of additional factors, including among
others:
|
· |
coverage
issues, including whether certain costs are covered under the policies and
whether policy limits apply; |
|
· |
inconsistent
court decisions and developing legal
theories; |
|
· |
increasingly
aggressive tactics of plaintiffs' lawyers; |
|
· |
the
risks and lack of predictability inherent in major
litigation; |
|
· |
changes
in the volume of asbestos and environmental pollution and mass tort claims
which cannot now be anticipated; |
|
· |
continued
increase in mass tort claims relating to silica and silica-containing
products; |
|
· |
the
impact of the exhaustion of primary limits and the resulting increase in
claims on any umbrella or excess policies CNA has
issued; |
|
· |
the
number and outcome of direct actions against CNA;
and |
|
· |
CNA's
ability to recover reinsurance for APMT
claims. |
It is
also not possible to predict changes in the legal and legislative environment
and the impact on the future development of APMT claims. This development will
be affected by future court decisions and interpretations, as well as changes in
applicable legislation. It is difficult to predict the ultimate outcome of large
coverage disputes until settlement negotiations near completion and significant
legal questions are resolved or, failing settlement, until the dispute is
adjudicated. This is particularly the case with policyholders in bankruptcy
where negotiations often involve a large number of claimants and other parties
and require court approval to be effective. A further uncertainty exists as to
whether a national privately financed trust to replace litigation of asbestos
claims with payments to claimants from the trust will be established and
approved through federal legislation, and, if established and approved, whether
it will contain funding requirements in excess of CNA's carried loss
reserves.
Due to
the factors described above, among others, establishing reserves for APMT claim
and claim adjustment expenses is subject to uncertainties that are greater than
those presented by other claims. Traditional actuarial methods and techniques
employed to estimate the ultimate cost of claims for more traditional property
and casualty exposures are less precise in estimating claim and claim adjustment
reserves for APMT, particularly in an environment of emerging or potential
claims and coverage issues that arise from industry practices and legal,
judicial and social conditions. Therefore, these traditional actuarial methods
and techniques are necessarily supplemented with additional estimation
techniques and methodologies, many of which involve significant judgments that
are required of management. Due to the inherent uncertainties in estimating
reserves for APMT claim and claim adjustment expenses and the degree of
variability due to, among other things, the factors described above, CNA may be
required to record material changes in its claim and claim adjustment expense
reserves in the future, should new information become available or other
developments emerge. See the APMT Reserves section of this MD&A for
additional information relating to APMT claims and reserves.
CNA's
recorded reserves, including APMT reserves, reflect management's best estimate
as of a particular point in time based upon known facts, current law and
management's judgment. The reserve analyses performed by CNA's actuaries result
in point estimates. Management uses these point estimates as the primary factor
in determining the carried reserve. The carried reserve may differ from the
actuarial point estimate as the result of management's consideration of the
factors noted above including, but not limited to, the potential volatility of
the projections associated with the specific product being analyzed and the
effects of changes in claims handling, underwriting and other factors impacting
claims costs that may not be quantifiable through actuarial analysis. For APMT
reserves, the reserve analysis
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
performed
by CNA's actuaries results in both a point estimate and a range. Management uses
the point estimate as the primary factor in determining the carried reserve but
also considers the range given the volatility of APMT exposures, as noted
above.
For
Standard Lines, the December 31, 2004 carried net claim and claim adjustment
expense reserve is slightly higher than the actuarial point estimate. For
Specialty Lines, the December 31, 2004 carried net claim and claim adjustment
expense reserve is also slightly higher than the actuarial point estimate. For
both Standard Lines and Specialty Lines, the difference is primarily due to the
2004 accident year. The data from the current accident year is very immature
from a claim and claim adjustment expense point of view so it is prudent to wait
until experience confirms that the loss ratios should be adjusted. For Other
Insurance, the December 31, 2004 carried net claim and claim adjustment expense
reserve is slightly higher than the actuarial point estimate. While the
actuarial estimates for APMT exposures reflect current knowledge, CNA management
feels it is prudent, based on the history of developments in this area, to
reflect some volatility in the carried reserve until the ultimate outcome of the
issues associated with these exposures is clearer.
In light
of the many uncertainties associated with establishing the estimates and making
the assumptions necessary to establish reserve levels, CNA reviews its reserve
estimates on a regular basis and makes adjustments in the period that the need
for such adjustments is determined (see discussion on Net Prior Year
Development, above). These reviews have resulted in CNA identifying information
and trends that have caused CNA to increase its reserves in prior periods and
could lead to the identification of a need for additional material increases in
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, which could materially adversely
affect CNA's business, insurer financial strength and debt ratings, and the
Company's results of operations and equity. See the Ratings section of this
MD&A.
The
following table presents estimated volatility in carried claim and claim
adjustment expense reserves for the Standard Lines, Specialty Lines and Other
Insurance segments. In
addition to the gross carried loss reserves presented below, Claim and Claim
Adjustment Expense Reserves as reflected on the Consolidated Balance Sheet
include $3,680.0 million at December 31, 2004, related to the Life and Group
Non-Core segment.
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
Carried |
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Loss |
|
Volatility
in |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Reserves |
|
Reserves |
|
(In
millions, except %) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
14,302.0 |
|
|
+/-
7.0 |
% |
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
4,860.0 |
|
|
+/-
7.0 |
% |
Other
Insurance |
|
|
8,678.0 |
|
|
+/- 25.0 |
% |
The
estimated volatility noted above does not represent an actuarial range around
CNA's gross loss reserves, and it does not represent the range of all possible
outcomes. The volatility represents an estimate of the inherent volatility
associated with estimating loss reserves for the specific type of business
written by each segment, and along with the associated reserve balances, allows
for the quantification of potential earnings impacts in future reporting
periods. The primary characteristics influencing the estimated level of
volatility are the length of the claim settlement period, the potential for
changes in medical and other claim costs, changes in the level of litigation or
other dispute resolution processes, changes in the legal environment and the
potential for different types of injuries emerging. Ceded reinsurance
arrangements may reduce the volatility. Since ceded reinsurance arrangements
vary by year, volatility in gross reserves may not result in comparable impacts
to net income or shareholders' equity.
Reinsurance
CNA
assumes and cedes reinsurance to other insurers, reinsurers and members of
various reinsurance pools and associations. CNA utilizes reinsurance
arrangements to limit its maximum loss, provide greater diversification of risk,
minimize exposures on larger risks and to exit certain lines of business. The
ceding of insurance does not discharge the primary liability of CNA. Therefore,
a credit exposure exists with respect to property and casualty and life
reinsurance ceded to the extent that any reinsurer is unable to meet the
obligations or to the extent that the reinsurer disputes the liabilities assumed
under reinsurance agreements.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Property
and casualty reinsurance coverages are tailored to the specific risk
characteristics of each product line and CNA's retained amount varies by type of
coverage. Treaty reinsurance is purchased to protect specific lines of business
such as property, workers' compensation and professional liability. Corporate
catastrophe reinsurance is also purchased for property and workers' compensation
exposure. Most treaty reinsurance is purchased on an excess of loss basis. CNA
also utilizes facultative reinsurance in certain lines.
CNA's
overall reinsurance program includes certain property and casualty contracts,
such as the corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties discussed in more detail
later in this section, that are entered into and accounted for on a "funds
withheld" basis. Under the funds withheld basis, CNA records the cash remitted
to the reinsurer for the reinsurer's margin, or cost of the reinsurance
contract, as ceded premiums. The remainder of the premiums ceded under the
reinsurance contract not remitted in cash is recorded as funds withheld
liabilities. CNA is required to increase the funds withheld balance at stated
interest crediting rates applied to the funds withheld balance or as otherwise
specified under the terms of the contract. The funds withheld liability is
reduced by any cumulative claim payments made by CNA in excess of CNA's
retention under the reinsurance contract. If the funds withheld liability is
exhausted, interest crediting will cease and additional claim payments are
recoverable from the reinsurer. The funds withheld liability is recorded in
reinsurance balances payable in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Interest
cost on funds withheld and other deposits is credited during all periods in
which a funds withheld liability exists. Pretax interest cost, which is included
in net investment income, was $267.0 million, $344.0 million and $239.0 million
in 2004, 2003 and 2002. The amount subject to interest crediting rates on such
contracts was $2,570.0 million and $2,789.0 million at December 31, 2004 and
2003. Certain funds withheld reinsurance contracts, including the corporate
aggregate reinsurance treaties, require interest on additional premiums arising
from ceded losses as if those premiums were payable at the inception of the
contract. Additionally, on the corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties
discussed below, if CNA exceeds certain aggregate loss ratio thresholds, the
rate at which interest charges are accrued would increase and be retroactively
applied to the inception of the contract or to a specified date. Any such
retroactive interest is accrued in the period the additional premiums arise or
the loss ratio thresholds are met. The amount of retroactive interest, included
in the totals above, was $46.0 million, $147.0 million and $10.0 million in
2004, 2003 and 2002.
The
amount subject to interest crediting on these funds withheld contracts will vary
over time based on a number of factors, including the timing of loss payments
and ultimate gross losses incurred. CNA expects that it will continue to incur
significant interest costs on these contracts for several years.
The
following table summarizes the amounts receivable from reinsurers at December
31, 2004 and 2003.
December
31, |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
receivables related to insurance reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expense |
|
$ |
13,984.1 |
|
$ |
14,215.9 |
|
Ceded
future policy benefits |
|
|
1,259.6 |
|
|
1,218.2 |
|
Ceded
policyholders' funds |
|
|
64.8 |
|
|
6.6 |
|
Billed
reinsurance receivables |
|
|
685.2 |
|
|
813.1 |
|
Reinsurance
receivables |
|
|
15,993.7 |
|
|
16,253.8 |
|
Allowance
for uncollectible reinsurance |
|
|
(531.1 |
) |
|
(572.6 |
) |
Reinsurance
receivables, net of allowance for uncollectible
reinsurance |
|
$ |
15,462.6 |
|
$ |
15,681.2 |
|
CNA has
established an allowance for uncollectible reinsurance receivables. The
allowance for uncollectible reinsurance receivables was $531.1 million and
$572.6 million at December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003. The net decrease in
the allowance was primarily due to a release of a previously established
allowance related to The Trenwick Group resulting from the execution of
commutation agreements in 2004, partially offset by a net increase in the
allowance for other reinsurance receivables. The provision incurred related to
uncollectible reinsurance receivables is presented as a component of "Insurance
claims and policyholders' benefits" on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Prior to
the April of 2004 sale of its individual life and annuity business to Swiss Re
Life & Health America Inc. ("Swiss Re"), CNA had reinsured a portion of this
business through coinsurance, yearly renewable term and facultative programs to
various reinsurers. As a result of the sale of the individual life and annuity
business, 100% of the net reserves were reinsured to Swiss Re. Subject to
certain exceptions, Swiss Re assumed the credit risk of the business that was
previously reinsured to other carriers. As of December 31, 2004, CNA ceded
$1,012.0 million of future policy benefits to Swiss Re. In connection with the
sale of the group benefits business, CNA ceded insurance reserves to Hartford
Financial Services, Inc. ("Hartford"). As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, these
ceded reserves were $1,726.0 million and $1,473.0 million.
CNA
attempts to mitigate its credit risk related to reinsurance by entering into
reinsurance arrangements only with reinsurers that have credit ratings above
certain levels and by obtaining substantial amounts of collateral. The primary
methods of obtaining collateral are through reinsurance trusts, letters of
credit and funds withheld balances. Such collateral was approximately $4,561.0
million and $5,255.0 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
In
certain circumstances, including significant deterioration of a reinsurer's
financial strength ratings, CNA may engage in commutation discussions with
individual reinsurers. The outcome of such discussions may result in a lump sum
settlement that is less than the recorded receivable, net of any applicable
allowance for doubtful accounts. Losses arising from commutations could have an
adverse material impact on the Company's results of operations or
equity.
In 2003,
CNA commuted all remaining ceded and assumed reinsurance contracts with four
Gerling entities. The commutations resulted in a pretax loss of $109.0 million,
which was net of a previously established allowance for doubtful accounts of
$47.0 million. CNA has no further exposure to the Gerling companies that are in
run-off.
CNA's
largest recoverables from a single reinsurer at December 31, 2004,
including prepaid reinsurance premiums, were approximately $2,236.0 million from
subsidiaries of The Allstate Corporation, $2,163.0 million from subsidiaries of
Swiss Reinsurance Group, $1,843.0 million from subsidiaries of Hannover
Reinsurance (Ireland), Ltd., $1,726.0 million from Hartford Life Group Insurance
Company, $944.0 million from American Reinsurance Company, and $603.0 million
from subsidiaries of the Berkshire Hathaway Group.
In 2002,
CNA entered into a corporate aggregate reinsurance treaty covering substantially
all of CNA's property and casualty lines of business (the "2002 Cover"). Ceded
premium related to the reinsurer's margin of $10.0 million was recorded in 2002.
No losses were ceded during 2002 under this contract, and the 2002 Cover was
commuted as of December 31, 2002.
CNA has
an aggregate reinsurance treaty related to the 1999 through 2001 accident years
that covers substantially all of CNA's property and casualty lines of business
(the "Aggregate Cover"). The Aggregate Cover provides for two sections of
coverage. These coverages attach at defined loss ratios for each accident year.
Coverage under the first section of the Aggregate Cover, which is available for
all accident years covered by the treaty, has a $500.0 million limit per
accident year of ceded losses and an aggregate limit of $1.0 billion of ceded
losses for the three accident years. The ceded premiums associated with the
first section are a percentage of ceded losses and for each $500.0 million of
limit the ceded premium is $230.0 million. The second section of the Aggregate
Cover, which only relates to accident year 2001, provides additional coverage of
up to $510.0 million of ceded losses for a maximum ceded premium of $310.0
million. Under the Aggregate Cover, interest charges on the funds withheld
liability accrue at 8.0% per annum. The aggregate loss ratio for the three-year
period has exceeded certain thresholds which requires additional premiums to be
paid and an increase in the rate at which interest charges are accrued. This
rate will increase to 8.25% per annum commencing in 2006. Also, if an additional
aggregate loss ratio threshold is exceeded, additional premiums of 10.0% of
amounts in excess of the aggregate loss ratio threshold are to be paid
retroactively with interest. Any such premiums would be recorded in the period
in which the loss ratio threshold is met.
During
2003, as a result of the unfavorable net prior year development recorded related
to accident years 2000 and 2001, the $500.0 million limit related to the 2000
and 2001 accident years under the first section was fully utilized and losses of
$500.0 million were ceded under the first section of the Aggregate Cover. In
2001, as a result of reserve additions including those related to accident year
1999, the $500.0 million limit related to the 1999 accident year under the first
section was fully utilized and losses of $510.0 million were ceded under the
second section as a result of losses related to the World Trade Center ("WTC")
event. The aggregate limits for the Aggregate Cover have been fully
utilized.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
The
impact of the Aggregate Cover was as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
earned premium |
|
$ |
(1.0 |
) |
$ |
(258.0 |
) |
|
|
|
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
|
|
|
Interest
charges |
|
|
(82.0 |
) |
|
(147.0 |
) |
$ |
(51.0 |
) |
Pretax
(expense) benefit |
|
$ |
(83.0 |
) |
$ |
95.0 |
|
$ |
(51.0 |
) |
In 2001,
CNA entered into a one-year aggregate reinsurance treaty related to the 2001
accident year covering substantially all property and casualty lines of business
in the Continental Casualty Company pool (the "CCC Cover"). The loss protection
provided by the CCC Cover has an aggregate limit of approximately $761.0 million
of ceded losses. The ceded premiums are a percentage of ceded losses. The ceded
premium related to full utilization of the $761.0 million of limit is $456.0
million. The CCC Cover provides continuous coverage in excess of the second
section of the Aggregate Cover discussed above. During 2003, the CCC Cover was
fully utilized. Under the CCC Cover, interest charges on the funds withheld
generally accrue at 8.0% per annum. The interest rate increases to 10.0% per
annum if the aggregate loss ratio exceeds certain thresholds. In 2004, the
aggregate loss ratio exceeded this threshold which required the interest rate to
increase retroactively to the beginning of the contract, generating retroactive
interest charges of $46.0 million which were recorded in 2004.
At CNA's
discretion, the contract can be commuted annually on the anniversary date of the
contract. The CCC Cover requires mandatory commutation on December 31, 2010, if
the agreement has not been commuted on or before such date. Upon mandatory
commutation of the CCC Cover, the reinsurer is required to release to CNA the
existing balance of the funds withheld account if the unpaid ultimate ceded
losses at the time of commutation are less than or equal to the funds withheld
account balance. If the unpaid ultimate ceded losses at the time of commutation
are greater than the funds withheld account balance, the reinsurer will release
the existing balance of the funds withheld account and pay CNA the present value
of the projected amount the reinsurer would have had to pay from its own funds
absent a commutation. The present value is calculated using 1-year London
InterBank Offered Rate ("LIBOR") as of the date of the commutation.
The
impact of the CCC Cover was as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
earned premium |
|
|
|
$
(100.0 |
) |
$
(101.0 |
) |
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
|
143.0 |
|
148.0 |
|
Interest
charges |
|
$ |
(91.0 |
) |
|
(59.0 |
) |
|
(37.0 |
) |
Pretax
(expense) benefit |
|
$ |
(91.0 |
) |
$ |
(16.0 |
) |
$ |
10.0 |
|
The
impact by segment of the Aggregate Cover and the CCC Cover was as
follows:
Years
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
(114.0 |
) |
$ |
70.0 |
|
$ |
(53.0 |
) |
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
9.0 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
Other
Insurance |
|
|
(59.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
Pretax
(expense) benefit |
|
$ |
(174.0 |
) |
$ |
79.0 |
|
$ |
(41.0 |
) |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Terrorism
Insurance
CNA and
the insurance industry incurred substantial losses related to the 2001 WTC
event. For the most part, the industry was able to absorb the loss of capital
from these losses, but the capacity to withstand the effect of any additional
terrorism events was significantly diminished.
The
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (the "Act") established a program within
the Department of the Treasury under which the federal government will share the
risk of loss by commercial property and casualty insurers arising from future
terrorist attacks. The Act expires on December 31, 2005. Each participating
insurance company must pay a deductible, ranging from 7.0% of direct earned
premiums from commercial insurance lines in 2003 to 15.0% in 2005, before
federal government assistance becomes available. For losses in excess of a
company's deductible, the federal government will cover 90.0% of the excess
losses, while companies retain the remaining 10.0%. Losses covered by the
program will be capped annually at $100.0 billion; above this amount, insurers
are not liable for covered losses and Congress is to determine the procedures
for and the source of any payments. Amounts paid by the federal government under
the program over certain phased limits are to be recouped by the Department of
the Treasury through policy surcharges, which cannot exceed 3.0% of annual
premium.
CNA is
required to participate in the program, but it does not cover life or health
insurance products. State law limitations applying to premiums and policies for
terrorism coverage are not generally affected under the program. The Act
requires insurers to offer terrorism coverage through 2004. On June 18, 2004,
the Department of the Treasury announced its decision to extend this offer
requirement until December 31, 2005.
While the
Act provides the property and casualty industry with an increased ability to
withstand the effect of a terrorist event through 2005, given the
unpredictability of the nature, targets, severity or frequency of potential
terrorist events, the Company's results of operations or equity could
nevertheless be materially adversely impacted by them. CNA is attempting to
mitigate this exposure through its underwriting practices, policy terms and
conditions (where applicable). In addition, under state laws, CNA is generally
prohibited from excluding terrorism exposure from its primary workers
compensation. In those states that mandate property insurance coverage of damage
from fire following a loss, CNA is also prohibited from excluding terrorism
exposure under such coverage.
Terrorism-related
reinsurance losses are not covered by the Act. CNA's assumed reinsurance
arrangements either exclude terrorism coverage or significantly limit the level
of coverage.
The bills
described above would extend the Act for two additional years and require that
terrorism coverage be made available for all years. Deductibles under the bills
would be held at 15.0% in 2006 and raised to 20.0% in 2007. Notwithstanding
these developments, enactment of a law extending the Act is not
assured.
If the
Act is not extended CNA will, among other steps, seek to exclude risks with
perceived terrorism exposure, to the extent permitted by law. Strict
underwriting standards and risk avoidance measures will be taken where
exclusions are not permitted. Annual policy renewals with effective dates of
January 1, 2005 or later will be underwritten with the assumption that the Act
will not be extended and that no Federal backstop for terrorism exposure will be
available. In July
2004, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners adopted a Model
Bulletin available for use in states that intend to approve terrorism coverage
limitations in the event the Act is not reauthorized. Since that time, a number
of states have announced that they will approve, on an expedited basis,
conditional exclusions which fall within certain limitations. Other states
appear unlikely to approve terrorism exclusions. There is
no assurance that CNA will be able to eliminate or limit terrorism exposure
risks in coverages, or that regulatory authorities will approve policy
exclusions for terrorism.
Restructuring
In 2001,
CNA finalized and approved two separate restructuring plans. The first plan
related to CNA's Information Technology operations. The remaining accrual of
$3.0 million was released during 2004. The second plan related to restructuring
the property and casualty segments and Life and Group Non-Core segment,
discontinuation of the variable life and annuity business and consolidation of
real estate locations (the "2001 Plan").
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
2001
Plan
The
overall goal of the 2001 Plan was to create a simplified and leaner organization
for customers and business partners. The major components of the plan included a
reduction in the number of strategic business units ("SBUs") in the property and
casualty operations, changes in the strategic focus of the Life and Group
Non-Core segment (formerly Life Operations and Group Operations) and
consolidation of real estate locations. The reduction in the number of property
and casualty SBUs resulted in consolidation of SBU functions, including
underwriting, claims, marketing and finance. The strategic changes in Group
Operations included a decision to discontinue the variable life and annuity
business.
During
2002, $32.0 million pretax, or $18.4 million after-tax and minority interest, of
this accrual was reduced. No restructuring or other related charges or releases
related to the 2001 Plan were incurred in 2003 or 2004.
All lease
termination costs and impaired asset charges, except lease termination costs
incurred by operations in the United Kingdom and software write-offs incurred by
Life and Group Non-Core segment, were charged to the Other Insurance segment
because office closure and consolidation decisions were not within the control
of the other segments affected. Lease termination costs incurred in the United
Kingdom related solely to the operations of CNA Re. All other charges were
recorded in the segment benefiting from the services or existence of an employee
or an asset.
The
following tables summarize the 2001 Plan Initial Accrual and the activity in
that accrual through December 31, 2004 by type of restructuring cost and by
segment.
|
|
Employee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination |
|
Lease |
|
Impaired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
Related |
|
Termination |
|
Asset |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
Costs |
|
Costs |
|
Charges |
|
Costs |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001
Plan Initial Accrual |
|
$ |
68.0 |
|
$ |
56.0 |
|
$ |
30.0 |
|
$ |
35.0 |
|
$ |
189.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35.0 |
) |
|
(35.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2001 |
|
|
66.0 |
|
|
56.0 |
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
152.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
(9.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(13.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(53.0 |
) |
|
(12.0 |
) |
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(69.0 |
) |
Reduction
of accrual |
|
|
(10.0 |
) |
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(32.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2002 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
34.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
38.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
19.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
$
14.0 |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
$
15.0 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life
and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Group |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Non-Core |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001
Plan Initial Accrual |
|
$ |
42.0 |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
$ |
54.0 |
|
$ |
89.0 |
|
$ |
189.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(35.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
(2.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2001 |
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
19.0 |
|
|
87.0 |
|
|
152.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13.0 |
) |
|
(13.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(34.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(18.0 |
) |
|
(16.0 |
) |
|
(69.0 |
) |
Reduction
of accrual |
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(22.0 |
) |
|
(32.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2002 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
38.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
(17.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
20.0 |
|
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
|
(5.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
$
15.0 |
|
$ |
15.0 |
|
Approximately
$3.0 million of the remaining accrual for the 2001 Plan, primarily related to
lease termination costs, is expected to be paid in 2005.
Segment
Results
The
following is a discussion of the results of operations for CNA's operating
segments. In evaluating the results of the Standard Lines and Specialty Lines,
management utilizes the combined ratio, the loss ratio, the expense ratio, and
the dividend ratio. These ratios are calculated using GAAP financial results.
The loss ratio is the percentage of net incurred claim and claim adjustment
expenses to net earned premiums. The expense ratio is the percentage of
underwriting and acquisition expenses, including the amortization of deferred
acquisition costs, to net earned premiums. The dividend ratio is the ratio of
dividends incurred to net earned premiums. The combined ratio is the sum of the
loss, expense and dividend ratios.
Standard
Lines
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Standard Lines for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
(In
millions, except %) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
written premiums |
|
$ |
4,582.0 |
|
$ |
4,561.0 |
|
$ |
4,755.0 |
|
Net
earned premiums |
|
|
4,917.0 |
|
|
4,530.0 |
|
|
4,678.0 |
|
Income
(loss) before net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
202.0 |
|
|
(855.9 |
) |
|
151.7 |
|
Net
realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
126.2 |
|
|
211.1 |
|
|
(71.1 |
) |
Net
income (loss) |
|
|
328.2 |
|
|
(644.8 |
) |
|
42.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
and loss adjustment expense |
|
|
70.7 |
% |
|
98.1 |
% |
|
73.1 |
% |
Expense
|
|
|
34.6 |
|
|
42.7 |
|
|
31.5 |
|
Dividend
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
1.6 |
|
Combined
|
|
|
105.5 |
% |
|
143.0 |
% |
|
106.2 |
% |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
2004
Compared with 2003
Net
results increased $973.0 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. This improvement
was due primarily to decreased unfavorable net prior year development of $836.6
million after-tax and minority interest ($1,403.0 million pretax), a decrease in
the bad debt provision recorded for insurance receivables of $52.0 million
after-tax and minority interest ($88.0 million pretax), a decrease in the bad
debt provision for reinsurance receivables of $43.8 million after-tax and
minority interest ($74.0 million pretax), decreased dividend development of
$41.1 million after-tax and minority interest ($69.0 million pretax), a decrease
in certain insurance related assessments of $31.9 million after-tax and minority
interest ($54.0 million pretax) and increased net investment income of $52.0
million after-tax and minority interest ($88.0 million pretax), primarily due to
reduced interest charges of $57.5 million after-tax and minority interest ($97.0
million pretax) related to the corporate aggregate and other reinsurance
treaties. These favorable items were partially offset by decreased net realized
investment results of $84.9 million after-tax and minority interest ($142.0
million pretax) and increased catastrophe losses in 2004. The impact of
catastrophes was $167.0 million after-tax and minority interest ($282.0 million
pretax) and $64.0 million after-tax and minority interest ($110.0 million
pretax) for 2004 and 2003, as discussed below. These catastrophe impacts are net
of anticipated reinsurance recoveries, and include the effect of reinstatement
premiums and estimated insurance assessments. See the Investments section of the
MD&A for further discussion on net investment income and net realized
investment gains (losses).
Net
written premiums for Standard Lines increased $21.0 million in 2004 as compared
with 2003. This increase was primarily driven by decreased premiums ceded of
$270.0 million to corporate aggregate and other reinsurance treaties in 2004 as
compared with 2003. The 2003 cessions were principally due to the unfavorable
net prior year development recorded in 2003. This favorable impact was partially
offset by lower new business as competition increases and carriers protect
renewals, as well as intentional underwriting actions in business classified as
high hazard. Specifically impacting retention was the impact of intentional
underwriting actions, including reductions in certain silica-related risks and
workers compensation policies classified as high hazard. The net written premium
results are consistent with CNA's strategy of portfolio optimization. CNA's
priority is a diversified portfolio in profitable classes of
business.
Standard
Lines averaged rate increases of 4.0%, 16.0% and 25.0% for 2004, 2003 and 2002
for the contracts that renewed during those periods. Retention rates of 70.0%,
72.0% and 69.0% were achieved for those contracts that were up for renewal.
Competitive market pressures are expected to continue to contribute to the
moderation in rate increases as the property and casualty market pricing
continues to soften.
Net
earned premiums increased $387.0 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. This
increase was primarily driven by decreased ceded premiums of $270.0 million
related to corporate aggregate and other reinsurance treaties.
The
combined ratio decreased 37.5 points in 2004 as compared with 2003. The loss
ratio decreased 27.4 points in 2004 as compared with 2003. These improvements
were primarily due to decreased net unfavorable prior year development of
$1,403.0 million and a decrease in the bad debt provision recorded for
reinsurance receivables of $74.0 million. These favorable impacts on the 2004
loss ratio were partially offset by increased catastrophe losses. Catastrophe
losses of $260.0 million and $110.0 million were recorded in 2004 and 2003. The
increased 2004 catastrophe losses were primarily due to a $235.0 million loss
resulting from Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $16.0 million was recorded in 2004, including
$113.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development and $97.0 million of favorable premium development.
Unfavorable net prior year development of $1,419.0 million, including $939.0
million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve
development and $480.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded
in 2003.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the gross and net carried reserves as of December 31,
2004 and 2003 for Standard Lines.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
6,904.0 |
|
$ |
6,416.0 |
|
Gross
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
7,398.0 |
|
|
7,866.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Gross Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
14,302.0 |
|
$ |
14,282.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
4,759.0 |
|
$ |
4,585.0 |
|
Net
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
4,544.0 |
|
|
4,382.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
9,303.0 |
|
$ |
8,967.0 |
|
Approximately
$190.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense development recorded during 2004 resulted from increased
severity trends for workers compensation on large account policies primarily in
accident years 2002 and prior. Favorable premium development on retrospectively
rated large account policies of $50.0 million was recorded in relation to this
unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claims adjustment expense
development.
Approximately
$60.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development was recorded in involuntary pools in which CNA's
participation is mandatory and primarily based on premium writings.
Approximately $15.0 million of this unfavorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense development was related to CNA's share of the
National Workers Compensation Reinsurance Pool ("NWCRP"). During 2004, the NWCRP
reached an agreement with a former pool member to settle their pool liabilities
at an amount less than their established share. The result of this settlement
will be a higher allocation to the remaining pool members, including CNA. The
remainder of this unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense development was primarily due to increased severity trends
for workers compensation exposures in older years.
Approximately
$60.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development resulted from the change in estimates due to increased
severity trends for excess and surplus business driven by excess liability,
liquor liability and coverages provided to apartment and condominium complexes.
Approximately $105.0 million of favorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense development resulted from reserve studies of commercial
auto liability policies and the liability portion of package policies. The
change was due to improvement in the severity and number of claims for this
business. Approximately $85.0 million of favorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense development was due to improvement in the
severity and number of claims for property coverages primarily in accident year
2003.
Other
favorable net prior year premium development of approximately $50.0 million
resulted primarily from higher audit and endorsement premiums on workers
compensation policies.
In
addition to the above, during 2004, CNA executed commutation agreements with
several members of the Trenwick Group. These commutations resulted in
unfavorable claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development which was
more than offset by a release of a previously established allowance for
uncollectible reinsurance.
The
following discusses net prior year development for Standard Lines recorded in
2003.
Approximately
$495.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development was recorded related to construction defect claims in 2003.
Based on analyses completed during the third quarter of 2003, it became apparent
that the assumptions regarding the number of claims, which were used to estimate
the expected losses, were no longer appropriate. The analyses indicated that the
number of claims reported was higher than expected primarily in states other
than California. States where this activity is most evident include Texas,
Arizona, Nevada, Washington and Colorado. The number of claims reported in
states other than California during the first six months of 2003 was almost
35.0% higher than the last six months of 2002. The number of claims reported
during the last six
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
months of
2002 increased by less than 10.0% from the first six months of 2002. In
California, claims resulting from additional insured endorsements increased
throughout 2003. Additional insured endorsements are regularly included on
policies provided to subcontractors. The additional insured endorsement names
general contractors and developers as additional insureds covered by the policy.
Current California case law (Presley
Homes, Inc. v. American States Insurance Company, (June
11, 2001) 90 Cal App. 4th 571, 108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 686) specifies that an
individual subcontractor with an additional insured obligation has a duty to
defend the additional insured in the entire action, subject to contribution or
recovery later. In addition, the additional insured is allowed to choose one
specific carrier to defend the entire action. These additional insured claims
can remain open for a longer period of time than other construction defect
claims because the additional insured defense obligation can continue until the
entire case is resolved. The adverse reserve development recorded related to
construction defect claims was primarily related to accident years 1999 and
prior.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of approximately $595.0 million, including $518.0
million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve
development and $77.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded
for large account business including workers compensation coverages in 2003.
Many of the policies issued to these large accounts include provisions tailored
specifically to the individual accounts. Such provisions effectively result in
the insured being responsible for a portion of the loss. An example of such a
provision is a deductible arrangement where the insured reimburses CNA for all
amounts less than a specified dollar amount. These arrangements often limit the
aggregate amount the insured is required to reimburse CNA. Analyses completed
during 2003 indicated that the provisions that result in the insured being
responsible for a portion of the losses would have less of an impact due to the
larger size of claims as well as the increased number of claims. The net prior
year development recorded was primarily related to accident years 2000 and
prior.
Approximately
$98.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 resulted from a program covering
facilities that provide services to developmentally disabled individuals. This
net prior year development was due to an increase in the size of known claims
and increases in policyholder defense costs. With regard to average claim size,
updated data showed the average claim size increasing at an annual rate of
approximately 20.0%. Prior data had shown average claim size to be level.
Similar to the average claim size, updated data showed the average policyholder
defense cost increasing at an annual rate of approximately 20.0%. Prior data had
shown average policyholder defense cost to be level. The net prior year
development recorded was primarily for accident years 2001 and
prior.
Approximately
$40.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was for excess workers compensation
coverages due to increasing severity. The increase in severity means that a
higher percentage of the total loss dollars will be CNA's responsibility since
more claims will exceed the point at which CNA's coverage begins. The net prior
year development recorded was primarily for accident year 2000.
Approximately
$73.0 million of unfavorable development recorded in 2003 was the result of a
commutation of all ceded reinsurance treaties with the Gerling Global Group of
companies ("Gerling"), related to accident years 1999 through 2001, including
$41.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
development and $32.0 million of unfavorable premium development.
Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $40.0 million recorded in 2003 was related to a program
covering tow truck and ambulance operators, primarily impacting the 2001
accident year. CNA had previously expected that loss ratios for this business
would be similar to its middle market commercial automobile liability business.
During 2002, CNA ceased writing business under this program.
Approximately
$25.0 million of unfavorable net prior year premium development recorded in 2003
was related to a second quarter of 2003 reevaluation of losses ceded to a
reinsurance contract covering middle market workers compensation exposures. The
reevaluation of losses led to a new estimate of the number and dollar amount of
claims that would be ceded under the reinsurance contract. As a result of the
reevaluation of losses, CNA recorded approximately $36.0 million of unfavorable
claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development, which was
ceded under the contract. The net prior year development was recorded for
accident year 2000.
Approximately
$11.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was related to directors and
officers exposures in Global Lines. The unfavorable net prior year reserve
development was primarily due to securities class action cases related to
certain known corporate
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
malfeasance
cases and investment banking firms. This net prior year development recorded was
primarily for accident years 2000 through 2002.
The
following premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment expense development
was recorded in 2003 as a result of the elimination of deficiencies and
redundancies in reserve positions within the segment. Unfavorable net prior year
development of approximately $210.0 million related to small and middle market
workers compensation exposures and approximately $110.0 million related to
E&S lines was recorded in 2003. Offsetting these increases was $210.0
million of favorable net prior year development in the property line of
business, including $79.0 million related to the September 11, 2001 WTC
event.
Also,
offsetting the unfavorable premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development was a $216.0 million underwriting benefit from cessions to
corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties recorded in 2003. The benefit is
comprised of $485.0 million of ceded losses and $269.0 million of ceded premiums
for accident years 2000 and 2001.
The
expense ratio decreased 8.1 points in 2004 as compared with 2003. This decrease
in 2004 was primarily due to an increased net earned premium base, an $88.0
million decrease in the provision for uncollectible insurance receivables, a
$54.0 million decrease in certain insurance related assessments and reduced
expenses as a result of expense reduction initiatives as compared with the same
period in 2003. Partially offsetting these favorable impacts was $14.0 million
of estimated underwriting assessments related to the 2004 Florida
hurricanes.
During
2004, additional bad debt provisions for insurance receivables of $150.0 million
were recorded as compared to $242.0 million recorded in 2003. The substantial
bad debt provisions for insurance receivables in 2004 and 2003 were primarily
related to Professional Employer Organization ("PEO") accounts. During 2002,
Standard Lines ceased writing coverages for PEO businesses, with the last
contracts expiring on June 30, 2003. In the third quarter of 2003, CNA performed
a review of PEO accounts to estimate ultimate losses and the indicated
recoveries under retrospective premium or high-deductible provisions of the
insurance contracts. Based on the 2003 analysis of the credit standing of the
individual PEO accounts and the amount of collateral held, CNA recorded an
increase in the bad debt provision. In the third quarter of 2004, the review of
PEO accounts was updated and the population of accounts reviewed was expanded to
include Temporary Help accounts as well. Payroll audits performed since the last
study identified that the exposure base for many accounts was higher than
expected. In addition, recovery estimates were updated based on current credit
information on the insured. Based on the updated study, CNA recorded an
estimated bad debt provision of $95.0 million in the third quarter of 2004 for
these accounts.
In 2004,
the expense ratio was adversely impacted by an additional $55.0 million bad debt
provision for insurance receivables. The primary drivers of the provision were
the completion of updated ultimate loss projections on all large account
business where the insured is currently in bankruptcy and a comprehensive review
of all billed balances that are past due.
The
dividend ratio decreased 2.0 points in 2004 as compared with 2003 due to
favorable net prior year dividend development of $23.0 million in 2004, as
compared to unfavorable net prior year dividend development of $46.0 million in
2003, primarily related to workers compensation products. The favorable 2004
dividend development was related to a review that was completed in 2004 which
indicated dividends were lower than prior expectations based on decreased usage
of dividend programs.
2003
Compared with 2002
Net
results decreased $687.2 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. The decrease in
net results was primarily driven by increased unfavorable net prior year
development of $900.8 million after-tax and minority interest ($1,538.0 million
pretax), an increase in the bad debt provision for insurance and reinsurance
receivables of $174.0 million after-tax and minority interest ($297.0 million
pretax), an increase in certain insurance-related assessments of $44.2 million
after-tax and minority interest ($74.0 million pretax), and decreased net
investment income primarily due to increased interest expense of $70.3 million
after-tax and minority interest ($120.0 million pretax) related to additional
cessions to the corporate aggregate and other reinsurance treaties. Partially
offsetting these decreases were increases in net realized investment gains and
$84.8 million after-tax and minority interest ($145.0 million pretax) of
increased limited partnership income. See the Investments section of this
MD&A for further discussion on net investment income and net
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
realized
investment gains (losses). Net results for 2002 also included a $38.2 million
after-tax and minority interest ($43.0 million pretax) cumulative effect of a
change in accounting principle charge related to goodwill
impairment.
Net
written premiums for Standard Lines decreased $194.0 million and net earned
premiums decreased $148.0 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. These decreases
were due primarily to increased ceded premiums of $259.0 million, including
premiums ceded to corporate aggregate and other reinsurance treaties, primarily
as a result of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003. Premiums also decreased as a
result of a shift in the mix of business to high deductible policies, which
generally have lower premiums. Partially offsetting these declines were
increased premiums across most P&C and E&S lines as a result of new
business initiatives and rate increases.
The
combined ratio increased 36.8 points in 2003 as compared with 2002. The loss
ratio increased 25.0 points due principally to an increase in unfavorable net
prior year development in 2003 as compared with 2002, as discussed below, an
increase in the bad debt expense reserve for reinsurance receivables of $55.0
million and $110.0 million of catastrophe losses which occurred during 2003.
Catastrophe losses were $38.0 million in 2002. Based on CNA's credit exposure to
reinsurance receivables, an increase in the bad debt reserve was deemed
appropriate. See the Reinsurance section of this MD&A for additional
information. Partially offsetting these unfavorable variances was an improvement
in the current net accident year loss ratio.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $1,419.0 million, including $939.0 million of
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$480.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2003.
Favorable net prior year development of $119.0 million, including $205.0 million
of favorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
and $86.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in
2002.
The
discussion of the net prior year development recorded in 2003 was discussed in
the "2004 compared with 2003" section above.
The
following discusses net prior year development for Standard Lines recorded in
2002.
Approximately
$140.0 million of favorable net prior year development was attributable to
participation in the Workers Compensation Reinsurance Bureau ("WCRB"), a
reinsurance pool, and residual markets. The favorable prior year reserve
development for WCRB was the result of information received from the WCRB that
reported the results of a recent actuarial review. This information indicated
that CNA's net required reserves for accident years 1970 through 1996 were $60.0
million less than the carried reserves. In addition, during 2002, CNA commuted
accident years 1965 through 1969 for a payment of approximately $5.0 million to
cover carried reserves of approximately $13.0 million, resulting in further
favorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
development of $8.0 million. The favorable residual market net prior year
development was the result of lower than expected paid loss activity during
recent periods for accident years dating back to 1984. The paid losses during
2002 on prior accident years were approximately 60.0% of the previously expected
amount.
In
addition, Standard Lines had favorable net prior year development, primarily in
the package liability and auto liability lines of business due to the then new
claims initiatives. These new claims initiatives, which included specialized
training on specific areas of the claims adjudication process, enhanced claims
litigation management, enhanced adjuster-level metrics to monitor performance
and more focused metric-based claim file review and oversight, were expected to
produce significant reductions in ultimate claim costs. Based on management's
best estimate of the reduction in ultimate claim costs, approximately $100.0
million of favorable net prior year development was recorded in 2002.
Approximately one-half of this favorable net prior year development was recorded
in accident years prior to 1999, with the remainder of the favorable net prior
year development recorded in accident years 1999 to 2001.
Approximately
$50.0 million of favorable net prior year development during 2002 was recorded
in commercial automobile liability. Most of the favorable development was from
accident year 2000. An actuarial review completed during 2002 showed that
underwriting actions had resulted in reducing the number of commercial
automobile liability claims for then recent accident years, especially the
number of large losses.
Approximately
$45.0 million of favorable net prior year development was recorded in property
lines during 2002. The favorable net prior year development was principally from
accident years 1999 through 2001, and was the result of the
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
low
number of large losses in recent years. Although property claims are generally
reported relatively quickly, determining the ultimate cost of the claim can
involve a significant amount of time between the occurrence of the claim and
settlement.
Offsetting
these favorable net prior year developments were approximately $100.0 million of
unfavorable premium development in middle market workers compensation,
approximately $70.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense development in programs written in CNA E&S,
approximately $30.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense development on a contractors account package policy
program and approximately $20.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense development on middle market general
liability coverages. The unfavorable net prior year development on workers
compensation was principally due to additional reinsurance premiums for accident
years 1999 through 2001.
A CNA
E&S program, covering facilities that provide services to developmentally
disabled individuals, accounts for approximately $50.0 million of the
unfavorable net prior year development. The net prior year development was due
to an increase in the size of known claims and increases in policyholder defense
costs. These increases became apparent as the result of an actuarial review
completed during 2002, with most of the development from accident years 1999 and
2000. The other program which contributed to the CNA E&S development covered
tow truck and ambulance operators in the 2000 and 2001 accident years. This
program was started in 1999. CNA expected that loss ratios for this business
would be similar to its middle market commercial automobile liability business.
Reviews completed during 2002 resulted in estimated loss ratios on the tow truck
and ambulance business that were 25 points higher than the middle market
commercial automobile liability loss ratios.
The
marine business recorded unfavorable net prior year development of approximately
$15.0 million during 2002. The net prior year development for the marine
business was due principally to unfavorable reserve development on hull and
liability coverages from accident years 1999 and 2000 offset by favorable
reserve development on cargo coverages recorded for accident year 2001. Reviews
completed during 2002 showed additional reported losses on individual large
accounts and other bluewater business that drove the unfavorable hull and
liability development.
The
unfavorable net prior year development on contractors account package policies
was the result of a review completed during 2002. Since this program is no
longer being written, CNA expected that the change in reported losses would
decrease each quarterly period. However, in the recent quarterly periods, the
change in reported losses was higher than prior quarters, resulting in the
unfavorable reserve development.
The
expense ratio increased 11.2 points due to increased expenses and decreased net
earned premiums in 2003 as compared with 2002. Acquisition expenses were
unfavorably impacted by an increase in the bad debt expense reserve for
insurance receivables of $242.0 million. The increase in the bad debt provision
for insurance receivables was primarily the result of a review of PEO accounts
as well as certain accounts that have been turned over to third parties for
collection. During 2002, Standard Lines ceased writing coverages for PEO
businesses, with the last contracts expiring on June 30, 2003. The review
analyzed losses and the related receivable including the associated collateral
held by CNA. Upon completion of the review, it was determined that the ultimate
loss estimates were larger than previously expected, which increased the amount
of uncollateralized receivables. Based on these factors, an increase in the
provision was recorded.
Additionally,
acquisition expenses increased as a result of a $44.0 million increase in
certain insurance-related assessments recorded in 2003 as compared with a $30.0
million reduction in accruals for certain insurance-related assessments
resulting from changes, due to legislation, in the basis on which the
assessments were recorded in 2002. Also increasing the expense ratio was
approximately $62.0 million of expenses related to eBusiness in 2003. The 2002
eBusiness expenses were included in the Other Insurance segment.
The
dividend ratio increased 0.6 points in 2003 as compared with 2002 due primarily
to increased unfavorable net prior year dividend development. The $42.0 million
increase in unfavorable dividend development was primarily related to workers
compensation products. A review was completed in 2003 indicating dividend
development that was higher than prior expectations. This development related to
accident years 2002 and prior.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Specialty
Lines
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Specialty Lines for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
(In
millions, except %) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
written premiums |
|
$ |
2,391.0 |
|
$ |
2,038.0 |
|
$ |
1,574.0 |
|
Net
earned premiums |
|
|
2,277.0 |
|
|
1,840.0 |
|
|
1,451.0 |
|
Income
(loss) before net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
295.3 |
|
|
(30.6 |
) |
|
80.1 |
|
Net
realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
49.6 |
|
|
66.7 |
|
|
(22.1 |
) |
Net
income |
|
|
344.9 |
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
53.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
and loss adjustment expense |
|
|
63.3 |
% |
|
89.6 |
% |
|
73.5 |
% |
Expense
|
|
|
26.1 |
|
|
27.6 |
|
|
29.3 |
|
Dividend
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Combined
|
|
|
89.6 |
% |
|
117.4 |
% |
|
103.0 |
% |
2004
Compared with 2003
Net
results improved $308.8 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. This improvement
was due primarily to decreased unfavorable net prior year development of $156.1
million after-tax and minority interest ($264.0 million pretax), a decrease in
the bad debt provision for reinsurance receivables of $71.2 million after-tax
and minority interest ($120.0 million pretax), a decrease in certain insurance
related assessments of $7.3 million after-tax and minority interest ($12.0
million pretax) and increased net investment income. These improvements were
partially offset by decreased net realized investment gains of $17.1 million
after-tax and minority interest ($30.0 million pretax) and increased catastrophe
losses in 2004. The impact of catastrophes was $10.0 million after-tax and
minority interest ($16.0 million pretax) and $2.7 million after-tax and minority
interest ($4.0 million pretax) in 2004 and 2003, as discussed below. See the
Investments section of this MD&A for further discussion on net investment
income and net realized investment gains.
Net
written premiums for Specialty Lines increased $353.0 million and net earned
premiums increased $437.0 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. This increase
was primarily due to rate increases and improved retention, principally in
Professional Liability Insurance and decreased premiums ceded to corporate
aggregate and other reinsurance treaties of $26.0 million in 2004 as compared
with 2003. The 2003 ceded premiums were principally driven by the unfavorable
net prior year development in 2003.
Specialty
Lines averaged rate increases of 9.0%, 29.0% and 31.0% in 2004, 2003 and 2002
for the contracts that renewed during those periods. Retention rates of 83.0%,
81.0% and 77.0% were achieved for those contracts that were up for renewal. CNA
expects rate achievement will moderate as competition for premiums continues to
accelerate in these lines of business.
The
combined ratio decreased 27.8 points in 2004 as compared with 2003. The loss
ratio decreased 26.3 points due principally to decreased unfavorable net prior
year development of $264.0 million, a $120.0 million decrease in bad debt
reserves for uncollectible reinsurance and an improvement in the current net
accident year loss ratio. These favorable impacts to the loss ratio were
partially offset by increased catastrophe losses. Catastrophe losses of $15.0
and $4.0 million were recorded in 2004 and 2003. The increased catastrophe
losses in 2004 were due to $12.0 million of losses resulting from Hurricanes
Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne.
Unfavorable
net prior year development was $30.0 million, including $58.0 million of
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense and $28.0 million of
favorable premium development, in 2004. Unfavorable net prior year development
of $294.0 million, including $257.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense development and $37.0 million of unfavorable premium
development, was recorded for the same period in 2003.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the gross and net carried reserves as of December 31,
2004 and 2003 for Specialty Lines.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
1,659.0 |
|
$ |
1,605.0 |
|
Gross
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
3,201.0 |
|
|
2,595.0 |
|
Total
Gross Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
4,860.0 |
|
$ |
4,200.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
1,191.0 |
|
$ |
1,087.0 |
|
Net
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
2,042.0 |
|
|
1,832.0 |
|
Total
Net Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
3,233.0 |
|
$ |
2,919.0 |
|
In 2004,
CNA finalized commutation agreements with several members of the Trenwick Group.
These commutations resulted in unfavorable claim and claim adjustment expense
reserve development which was more than offset by a release of a previously
established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance. Additionally, unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
resulted from the increased emergence of several large D&O claims primarily
in recent accident years.
The
following discusses net prior year development for Specialty Lines recorded in
2003.
Approximately
$50.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was related to increased severity
in excess coverages provided to facilities providing health care services. The
increase in reserves was based on reviews of individual accounts where claims
had been expected to be less than the point at which CNA's coverage applied. The
current claim trends indicated that the layers of coverage provided by CNA would
be impacted. The net prior year development recorded was primarily for accident
years 2001 and prior.
Approximately
$68.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was for surety coverages related
primarily to workers compensation bond exposure from accident years 1990 and
prior and large losses for accident years 1999 and 2002. Approximately $21.0
million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development was recorded in the surety line of business in 2003
as the result of recent developments on one large claim.
Approximately
$75.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was related to directors and
officers exposures in CNA Pro. The unfavorable net prior year reserve
development was primarily due to securities class action cases related to
certain known corporate malfeasance cases and investment banking firms. This net
prior year development recorded was primarily for accident years 2000 through
2002.
Approximately
$84.0 million of losses were recorded during 2003 as the result of a commutation
of ceded reinsurance treaties with Gerling covering CNA HealthPro, relating to
accident years 1999 through 2002. Further information regarding this commutation
is provided in the Reinsurance section of this MD&A.
The
following net prior year development was recorded in 2003 as a result of the
elimination of deficiencies and redundancies in reserve positions within the
segment. An additional $50.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development was recorded related to
medical malpractice and long term care facilities. Partially offsetting this
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development was
a $25.0 million underwriting benefit from cessions to corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties. The benefit was comprised of $56.0 million of ceded losses
and $31.0 million of ceded premiums for accident years 2000 and
2001.
The
expense ratio decreased 1.5 points primarily due to the increased earned premium
base and a decrease of $12.0 million in certain insurance related assessments
recorded in 2003. Additionally, the expense ratio was favorably impacted by
decreased underwriting expenses due to CNA's expense
initiatives.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
2003
Compared with 2002
Net
income was $36.1 million in 2003 as compared with $53.3 million in 2002. The
decrease in net results was primarily due to increased unfavorable net prior
year development of $137.1 million after-tax and minority interest ($234.0
million pretax), an increase in the bad debt provision for reinsurance
receivables of $45.1 million after-tax and minority interest ($77.0 million
pretax) and increased interest expense of $3.6 million after-tax and minority
interest ($5.0 million pretax) related to additional cessions to the corporate
aggregate reinsurance treaties. The unfavorable impacts to net results were
principally offset by improved current net accident year results primarily
attributable to premium rate increases and increased net realized investment
results. See the Investments section of this MD&A for further discussion of
net investment income and net realized gains (losses). Net results for 2002 also
included a $4.7 million after-tax and minority interest ($8.0 million pretax)
cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle charge related to goodwill
impairment.
Net
written premiums for Specialty Lines increased $464.0 million and net earned
premiums increased $389.0 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. These increases
were due primarily to rate increases and increased new business, primarily in
CNA Pro.
The
combined ratio increased 14.4 points in 2003 as compared with 2002. The loss
ratio increased 16.1 points due principally to increased unfavorable net prior
year development, as discussed below. Additionally, the loss ratio was
negatively impacted by a $77.0 million increase in the bad debt provision for
reinsurance receivables, a $22.0 million increase in unallocated loss adjustment
expense ("ULAE") reserves and $49.0 million of current accident year losses for
Surety, related to large losses in 2003, and $20.0 million of current accident
year losses for directors and officers exposures in CNA Pro, which primarily
related to recent securities class action cases related to certain mutual fund
firms. These items were partially offset by the improvement in the current net
accident year loss ratio on the other lines of business and the impact of higher
net earned premiums.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $294.0 million, including $257.0 million of net
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$37.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2003 for
Specialty Lines. Unfavorable net prior year development of $60.0 million,
including $14.0 million of net unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development and $46.0 million of unfavorable premium
development, was recorded in 2002 for Specialty Lines.
The
discussion of the net prior year development recorded in 2003 was included in
the "2004 compared with 2003" section above.
The
following discusses net prior year development for Specialty Lines recorded in
2002.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of approximately $180.0 million was recorded for CNA
HealthPro in 2002 and was driven principally by medical malpractice excess
products provided to hospitals and physicians and coverages provided to long
term care facilities, principally national for-profit nursing homes.
Approximately $100.0 million of the net prior year unfavorable development was
related to assumed excess products and loss portfolio transfers, and was
primarily driven by unexpected increases in the number of excess claims in
accident years 1999 and 2000. The percentage of total claims greater than $1.0
million has increased by 33.0%, from less than 3.0% of all claims to more than
4.0% of all claims. CNA HealthPro no longer writes assumed excess products and
loss portfolio transfers.
Approximately
$50.0 million of the unfavorable net prior year development was related to long
term care facilities. The unfavorable net prior year development was principally
recorded for accident years 1997 through 2000. The average value of claims
closed during the first several months of 2002 increased by more than 50.0% when
compared to claims closed during 2001. In response to those trends, CNA
HealthPro has reduced its writings of national for-profit nursing home chains.
Excess products provided to healthcare institutions and physician coverages in a
limited number of states were responsible for the remaining development in CNA
HealthPro. The unfavorable net prior year development on excess products
provided to institutions for accident years 1996 through 1999 resulted from
increases in the size of claims experienced by these institutions. Due to the
increase in the size of claims, more claims were exceeding the point at which
these excess products apply. The unfavorable net prior year development on
physician coverages was recorded for accident years 1999 through 2001 in Oregon,
California, Arizona and Nevada. The average claim size in these states has
increased by 20.0%, driving the change in losses.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Offsetting
this unfavorable net prior year development was favorable net prior year
development in CNA Pro and for Enron related exposures. Programs providing
professional liability coverage to accountants, lawyers and realtors primarily
drove favorable net prior year development of approximately $110.0 million in
CNA Pro. Reviews of this business completed during 2002 showed little activity
for older accident years (principally prior to 1999), which reduced the need for
reserves on these years. The reported losses on these programs for accident
years prior to 1999 increased by approximately $5.0 million during 2002. This
increase compared to the total reserve at the beginning of 2002 of approximately
$180.0 million, net of reinsurance. Additionally, favorable net prior year
development of $20.0 million was associated with the Enron settlement. CNA had
established a $20.0 million reserve for accident year 2001 for an excess layer
associated with Enron related surety losses; however the case was settled for
less than the attachment point of this excess layer.
A $12.0
million underwriting benefit was recorded for cessions to the corporate
aggregate reinsurance treaties in 2002. The benefit was comprised of $41.0
million of ceded losses and $29.0 million of ceded premium for accident year
2001.
The
expense ratio decreased 1.7 points primarily due to the increased net earned
premium base, partially offset by an increase in certain insurance related
assessments of $11.0 million.
Life
and Group Non-Core
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Life and Group
Non-Core.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
earned premiums |
|
$ |
921.0 |
|
$ |
2,376.0 |
|
$ |
3,408.0 |
|
(Loss)
income before net realized investment losses |
|
|
(26.2 |
) |
|
102.0 |
|
|
184.5 |
|
Net
realized investment losses |
|
|
(349.0 |
) |
|
(97.6 |
) |
|
(103.6 |
) |
Net
(loss) income |
|
|
(375.2 |
) |
|
4.4 |
|
|
42.6 |
|
2004
Compared with 2003
Net
earned premiums for Life and Group Non-Core decreased $1,455.0 million in 2004
as compared with 2003. The decrease in net earned premiums was due primarily to
the absence of premiums from the group benefits business and reduced premiums
for the individual life business. Net earned premiums for the sold life and
group businesses were $115.0 million and $1,459.0 million for 2004 and 2003. Net
earned premiums also decreased in most of the remaining lines of business which
are in runoff, and this decline is expected to continue in the future. Partially
offsetting this decrease was an increase in net earned premiums in the specialty
medical business, which continued to issue new policies prior to its sale in
January 2005.
Net
results decreased by $379.6 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. The decrease
in net results related primarily to net realized investment losses, including
the realized loss of approximately $352.9 million after-tax and minority
interest ($618.6 million pretax) from the sale of the individual life business
and reduced results from the group benefits and individual life businesses. Net
realized investment losses in 2003 include a loss recorded on the sale of Group
Benefits business of $116.4 million after-tax and minority interest ($176.0
million pretax). Net results for the sold life and group businesses were losses
of $389.7 million and $32.5 million, including the loss on sales and the effects
of shared corporate overhead expenses, in 2004 and 2003. These items were
partially offset by reduced increases in individual long term care reserves of
$19.2 million after-tax and minority interest ($32.0 million pretax) in 2004 as
compared with 2003. Also included in the net results of 2004 and 2003 were the
adverse impacts of $23.7 million after-tax and minority interest ($40.0 million
pretax) and $29.8 million after-tax and minority interest ($50.0 million pretax)
related to certain accident and health exposures ("IGI Program") and CNA's past
participation in accident and health reinsurance programs.
2003
Compared with 2002
Net
earned premiums for Life and Group Non-Core decreased $1,032.0 million in 2003
as compared with 2002. The decrease in net earned premiums was due primarily to
the transfer of the Mail Handlers Plan. The Mail Handlers Plan contributed net
earned premiums of $1,151.0 million in 2002. This decline was partially offset
by premium growth in
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
the
disability, specialty medical, life and accident and long term care products
within group benefits due to increased new sales and rate increases, and higher
sales of structured settlement annuities, growth in life insurance products and
rate increases on the individual long term care product inforce
blocks.
Net
income decreased by $38.2 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. Net income in
2003 was adversely impacted by $116.4 million after-tax and minority interest
($176.0 million pretax) loss recorded on the sale of the Group Benefits
business. In 2002, net income was adversely impacted by impairment losses. See
the Investments section of this MD&A for additional information.
Additionally, the decrease in net income was due to unfavorable net prior year
claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development of $29.8
million after-tax and minority interest ($50.0 million pretax) that was recorded
in relation to CNA's past participation in several insurance pools, which is
part of the group reinsurance run-off business, and increases in individual long
term care reserves of $3.6 million after-tax and minority interest ($7.0 million
pretax) due to increased severity and claim frequency. Additionally a change in
the discount rate on prior year disability and life waiver of premium reserves
from 6.5% to 6.0%, resulted in a $12.6 million after-tax and minority interest
($22.0 million pretax) decrease in net income. The change in discount rate
reflected the decreasing portfolio yield and the then current investment
environment. The decrease was also due to severance costs of $2.7 million
after-tax and minority interest ($4.0 million pretax) related to the individual
long term care product. These items were partially offset by an improvement in
net results for life settlement contracts of $22.5 million after-tax and
minority interest ($39.0 million pretax), increased favorable net prior year
development related to a $6.3 million after-tax and minority interest ($11.0
million pretax) release of WTC event reserves, and the absence of the cumulative
effect of a change in accounting principle of $7.3 million after-tax and
minority interest ($12.0 million pretax) recorded in 2002 relating to the
write-down of impaired goodwill.
Other
Insurance
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for the Other Insurance
segment, including APMT and intrasegment eliminations.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
352.7 |
|
$ |
743.0 |
|
$ |
953.2 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
241.0 |
|
|
218.0 |
|
|
262.0 |
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
|
123.1 |
|
|
(653.9 |
) |
|
21.5 |
|
2004
Compared with 2003
Revenues
decreased $390.3 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. The decrease in revenues
was due primarily to reduced net earned premiums in CNA Re due to the exit of
the assumed reinsurance market in October of 2003 and decreased realized
investment gains of $62.0 million pretax. CNA Re had earned premiums of $125.0
million and $536.0 million in 2004 and 2003. See the Investments section of this
MD&A for additional information on net realized investment gains (losses)
and net investment income.
Net
income increased $777.0 million in 2004 as compared with 2003. The increase in
net income was due primarily to a $580.5 million after-tax and minority interest
($978.0 million pretax) decrease in unfavorable net prior year development, a
$153.3 million after-tax and minority interest ($258.0 million pretax) decrease
in the provision for uncollectible reinsurance receivables, the absence in 2004
of a $40.2 million after-tax and minority interest ($67.0 million pretax)
increase in ULAE reserves recorded in 2003 and a $14.6 million after-tax and
minority interest ($24.0 million pretax) decrease in certain insurance related
assessments. Additionally, the net results were favorably impacted by $12.8
million after-tax and minority interest ($21.0 million pretax) of non-recurring
income related to a release of purchase accounting reserves related to real
estate leases assumed in connection with the 1995 acquisition of
Continental.
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $96.0 million was recorded during 2004, including
$87.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development and $9.0 million of unfavorable premium development.
Unfavorable net prior year development of $1,074.0 million was recorded in 2003,
including $1,048.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense reserve development and $26.0 million of unfavorable
premium development.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the gross and net carried reserves as of December 31,
2004 and 2003 for Other Insurance.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
3,803.0 |
|
$ |
4,342.0 |
|
Gross
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
4,875.0 |
|
|
5,330.0 |
|
Total
Gross Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
8,678.0 |
|
$ |
9,672.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
1,485.0 |
|
$ |
1,879.0 |
|
Net
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
1,691.0 |
|
|
1,858.0 |
|
Total
Net Carried Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
3,176.0 |
|
$ |
3,737.0 |
|
In 2004,
CNA executed commutation agreements with several members of the Trenwick Group.
These commutations resulted in unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense reserve development partially offset by a release of a
previously established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance. The remainder of
the unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development in 2004 resulted from several other small commutations and
increases to net reserves due to reducing ceded losses, partially offset by a
release of a previously established allowance for uncollectible
reinsurance.
The
following discusses net prior year development for the Other Insurance segment
recorded during 2003.
This
development was primarily driven by $795.0 million of unfavorable net prior year
claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development related to
APMT. See the APMT Reserves section of this MD&A for further discussion of
APMT development.
In
addition to APMT development, there was unfavorable net prior year development
recorded in 2003 related to CNA Re of $149.0 million and $75.0 million related
to voluntary pools.
Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $25.0 million was recorded in CNA Re primarily for directors
and officers exposures. The unfavorable net prior year development was a result
of a claims review that was completed during the second quarter of 2003. The
unfavorable net prior year development was primarily due to securities class
action cases related to certain known corporate malfeasance cases and investment
banking firms. The unfavorable net prior year development recorded was for
accident years 2000 and 2001.
The CNA
Re unfavorable net prior year development for 2003 was also due to a general
change in the pattern of how losses emerged over time as reported by the
companies that purchased reinsurance from CNA Re. Losses have continued to show
large increases for accident years in the late 1990s and into 2000 and 2001.
These increases are greater than the increases indicated by patterns from older
accident years and had a similar effect on several lines of business.
Approximately $67.0 million unfavorable net prior year development recorded in
2003 was related to proportional liability exposures, primarily from multi-line
and umbrella treaties in accident years 1997 through 2001. Approximately $32.0
million of unfavorable net prior year development recorded in 2003 was related
to assumed financial reinsurance for accident years 2001 and prior and
approximately $24.0 million of unfavorable net prior year development was
related to professional liability exposures in accident years 2001 and
prior.
Additionally,
CNA Re recorded $15.0 million of unfavorable net prior year development for
construction defect related exposures. Because of the unique nature of this
exposure, losses have not followed expected development patterns. The continued
reporting of claims in California, the increase in the number of claims from
states other than California and a review of individual ceding companies'
exposure to this type of claim resulted in an increase in the estimated
reserve.
The
following premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment expense development,
was recorded in 2003 as a result of the elimination of deficiencies and
redundancies in the reserve positions of individual products within CNA Re.
Unfavorable net prior year premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development of approximately
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
$42.0
million related to Surety exposures, $32.0 million related to excess of loss
liability exposures and $12.0 million related to facultative liability exposures
were recorded in the third quarter of 2003.
Offsetting
this unfavorable net prior year development was approximately $55.0 million of
favorable net prior year development related to the WTC event as well as a $45.0
million underwriting benefit from cessions to corporate aggregate reinsurance
treaties recorded in 2003. The benefit from cessions to the corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties was comprised of $102.0 million of ceded losses and $57.0
million of ceded premiums for accident years 2000 and 2001. See the Reinsurance
section of this MD&A for further discussion of CNA's aggregate reinsurance
treaties.
Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $75.0 million was recorded during the third quarter of 2003
related to an adverse arbitration decision involving a single large property and
business interruption loss on a voluntary insurance pool. The decision was
rendered against a voluntary insurance pool in which CNA was a participant. The
loss was caused by a fire which occurred in 1995. CNA no longer participates in
this pool.
2003
Compared with 2002
Revenues
decreased $210.2 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. The decrease in revenues
was due primarily to reduced revenues from CNA UniSource and reduced net earned
premiums in CNA Re due to the decision in October of 2003 to exit the assumed
reinsurance market. These unfavorable impacts to revenue were partially offset
by increased realized investment gains and increased limited partnership
income.
Net
results declined $675.4 million in 2003 as compared with 2002. The decrease in
net results was due primarily to a $562.6 million after-tax and minority
interest ($960.0 million pretax) increase in unfavorable net prior year
development primarily regarding APMT, a $39.7 million after-tax and minority
interest ($67.0 million pretax) increase in ULAE reserves, a $10.8 million
after-tax and minority interest ($18.0 million pretax) increase in certain
insurance related assessments, a $138.0 million after-tax and minority interest
($236.0 million pretax) increase in the bad debt provision for reinsurance
receivables, decreased net investment income due primarily to a reduction of
invested assets resulting from the sale of CNA Re U.K., and increased interest
expense of $7.2 million after-tax and minority interest ($12.0 million pretax)
related to additional cessions to the corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties.
The 2003 net results were favorably impacted by increased net realized
investment gains of $21.7 million after-tax and minority interest ($59.1 million
pretax) and the absences of $36.1 million after-tax and minority interest ($62.0
million pretax) of eBusiness expenses and a $16.2 million after-tax and minority
interest ($27.0 million pretax) reduction of the accrual for restructuring and
other related charges. See the Investments section of this MD&A for further
discussion on net investment income and net realized gains
(losses).
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $1,074.0 million was recorded in 2003, including
$1,048.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development and $26.0 million of unfavorable premium development.
Unfavorable net prior year development of $114.0 million, including $155.0
million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve
development, and $41.0 million of favorable premium development, was recorded in
2002.
The
discussion of the net prior year development recorded in 2003 was included in
the "2004 compared with 2003" section above.
The
following discusses net prior year development recorded in 2002 for Other
Insurance.
The
development recorded in 2002 consisted primarily of CNA Re unfavorable net prior
year development.
The
unfavorable net prior year development recorded in 2002 related primarily to CNA
Re and was the result of an actuarial review completed during 2002 and was
primarily recorded in the directors and officers, professional liability errors
and omissions, and surety lines of business. Several large losses, as well as
continued increases in the overall average size of claims for these lines, have
resulted in higher than expected loss ratios.
Additionally,
during 2002, CNA Re revised its estimate of premiums and losses related to the
WTC event. In estimating CNA Re's WTC event losses, CNA performed a
treaty-by-treaty analysis of exposure. CNA's original loss estimate was based on
a number of assumptions including the loss to the industry, the loss to
individual lines of business
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
and the
market share of CNA Re's cedants. Information that became available in the first
quarter of 2002 resulted in CNA Re increasing its estimate of WTC event related
premiums and losses on its property facultative and property catastrophe
business. The impact of increasing the estimate of gross WTC event losses by
$144.0 million was fully offset on a net of reinsurance basis (before the impact
of the CCC Cover) by higher reinstatement premiums and a reduction of return
premiums. Approximately $95.0 million of CNA Re's net WTC loss estimate was
attributable to CNA Re U.K., which was sold in 2002.
A $32.0
million underwriting benefit was recorded for CNA Re for the corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties in 2002. The benefit was comprised of $93.0 million of
ceded losses and $61.0 million of ceded premiums for accident year
2001.
Many
ceding companies have sought provisions for the collateralization of assumed
reserves in the event of a financial strength ratings downgrade or other
triggers. Before exiting the reinsurance market, CNA Re had been impacted by
this trend and had entered into several contracts with rating or other triggers.
See the Ratings section of this MD&A for more information.
Additionally,
personal insurance unfavorable net prior year development of $35.0 million was
recorded in 2002 on accident years 1997 through 1999. The unfavorable net prior
year development was principally due to the then continuing policyholder defense
costs associated with remaining open personal insurance claims. The unfavorable
net prior year development was partially offset by favorable reserve development
on other run-off business driven principally by financial and mortgage guarantee
coverages from accident years 1997 and prior. The favorable net prior year
development on financial and mortgage guarantee coverages resulted from a review
of the underlying exposures and the outstanding losses, which showed that
salvage and subrogation continues to be collected on these types of claims,
thereby reducing estimated future losses net of anticipated reinsurance
recoveries.
APMT
Reserves
CNA's
property and casualty insurance subsidiaries have actual and potential exposures
related to APMT claims.
Establishing
reserves for APMT claim and claim adjustment expenses is subject to
uncertainties that are greater than those presented by other claims. Traditional
actuarial methods and techniques employed to estimate the ultimate cost of
claims for more traditional property and casualty exposures are less precise in
estimating claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for APMT, particularly in
an environment of emerging or potential claims and coverage issues that arise
from industry practices and legal, judicial, and social conditions. Therefore,
these traditional actuarial methods and techniques are necessarily supplemented
with additional estimating techniques and methodologies, many of which involve
significant judgments that are required of management. Accordingly, a high
degree of uncertainty remains for CNA's ultimate liability for APMT claim and
claim adjustment expenses.
In
addition to the difficulties described above, estimating the ultimate cost of
both reported and unreported APMT claims is subject to a higher degree of
variability due to a number of additional factors, including among others: the
number and outcome of direct actions against CNA; coverage issues, including
whether certain costs are covered under the policies and whether policy limits
apply; allocation of liability among numerous parties, some of whom may be in
bankruptcy proceedings, and in particular the application of "joint and several"
liability to specific insurers on a risk; inconsistent court decisions and
developing legal theories; increasingly aggressive tactics of plaintiffs'
lawyers; the risks and lack of predictability inherent in major litigation;
increased filings of claims in certain states; enactment of national federal
legislation to address asbestos claims; a future increase in asbestos and
environmental pollution claims which cannot now be anticipated; a future
increase in number of mass tort claims relating to silica and silica-containing
products, and the outcome of ongoing disputes as to coverage in relation to
these claims; a further increase of claims and claims payments that may exhaust
underlying umbrella and excess coverages at accelerated rates; and future
developments pertaining to CNA's ability to recover reinsurance for asbestos and
environmental pollution claims.
CNA
regularly performs ground up reviews of all open APMT accounts to evaluate the
adequacy of CNA's APMT reserves. In performing its comprehensive ground up
analysis, CNA considers input from its professionals with direct responsibility
for the claims, inside and outside counsel with responsibility for
representation of CNA, and its actuarial staff. These professionals review,
among many factors, the policyholder's present and predicted future exposures,
including such factors as claims volume, trial conditions, prior settlement
history, settlement demands and defense costs; the impact of asbestos defendant
bankruptcies on the policyholder; the policies issued by CNA, including such
factors as
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
aggregate
or per occurrence limits, whether the policy is primary, umbrella or excess and
the existence of policyholder retentions and/or deductibles; the existence of
other insurance; and reinsurance arrangements.
With
respect to other court cases and how they might affect CNA's reserves and
reasonable possible losses, the following should be noted. State and federal
courts issue numerous decisions each year, which potentially impact losses and
reserves in both a favorable and unfavorable manner. Examples of favorable
developments include decisions to allocate defense and indemnity payments in a
manner so as to limit carriers' obligations to damages taking place during the
effective dates of their policies; decisions holding that injuries occurring
after asbestos operations are completed are subject to the completed operations
aggregate limits of the policies; and decisions ruling that carriers' loss
control inspections of their insured's premises do not give rise to a duty to
warn third parties to the dangers of asbestos.
Examples
of unfavorable developments include decisions limiting the application of the
absolute pollution exclusion and decisions holding carriers liable for defense
and indemnity of asbestos and pollution claims on a joint and several
basis.
CNA's
ultimate liability for its environmental pollution and mass tort claims is
impacted by several factors including ongoing disputes with policyholders over
scope and meaning of coverage terms and, in the area of environmental pollution,
court decisions that continue to restrict the scope and applicability of the
absolute pollution exclusion contained in policies issued by CNA after 1989. Due
to the inherent uncertainties described above, including the inconsistency of
court decisions, the number of waste sites subject to cleanup and in the area of
environmental pollution, the standards for cleanup and liability, the ultimate
liability of CNA for environmental pollution and mass tort claims may vary
substantially from the amount currently recorded.
Due to
the inherent uncertainties in estimating reserves for APMT claim and claim
adjustment expenses and due to the significant uncertainties previously
described related to APMT claims, the ultimate liability for these cases, both
individually and in aggregate, may exceed the recorded reserves. Any such
potential additional liability, or any range of potential additional amounts,
cannot be reasonably estimated currently, but could be material to CNA's
business and insurer financial strength and debt ratings and the Company's
results of operations and/or equity. Due to, among other things, the factors
described above, it may be necessary for CNA to record material changes in its
APMT claim and claim adjustment expense reserves in the future, should new
information become available or other developments emerge.
The
following table provides data related to CNA's APMT claim and claim adjustment
expense reserves.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
|
Pollution
and |
|
|
|
Pollution
and |
|
|
|
Asbestos |
|
Mass
Tort |
|
Asbestos |
|
Mass
Tort |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
reserves |
|
$ |
3,218.0 |
|
$ |
755.0 |
|
$ |
3,347.0 |
|
$ |
839.0 |
|
Ceded
reserves |
|
|
(1,532.0 |
) |
|
(258.0 |
) |
|
(1,580.0 |
) |
|
(262.0 |
) |
Net
reserves |
|
$ |
1,686.0 |
|
$ |
497.0 |
|
$ |
1,767.0 |
|
$ |
577.0 |
|
Asbestos
CNA's
property and casualty insurance subsidiaries have exposure to asbestos-related
claims. Estimation of asbestos-related claim and claim adjustment expense
reserves involves limitations such as inconsistency of court decisions, specific
policy provisions, allocation of liability among insurers and insureds and
additional factors such as missing policies and proof of coverage. Furthermore,
estimation of asbestos-related claims is difficult due to, among other reasons,
the proliferation of bankruptcy proceedings and attendant uncertainties the
targeting of a broader range of businesses and entities as defendants, the
uncertainty as to which other insureds may be targeted in the future and the
uncertainties inherent in predicting the number of future claims.
In the
past several years, CNA has experienced, at certain points in time, significant
increases in claim counts for asbestos-related claims. The factors that led to
these increases included, among other things, intensive advertising campaigns by
lawyers for asbestos claimants, mass medical screening programs sponsored by
plaintiff lawyers and the
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
addition
of new defendants such as the distributors and installers of products containing
asbestos. During 2004 the rate of new filings appears to have decreased from the
filing rates seen in the past several years. Various challenges to mass
screening claimants have been mounted. Nevertheless, CNA continues to experience
an overall increase in total asbestos claim counts. The majority of asbestos
bodily injury claims are filed by persons exhibiting few, if any, disease
symptoms. Recent studies have concluded that the percentage of unimpaired
claimants to total claimants ranges between 66.0% and up to 90.0%. Some courts,
including the federal district court responsible for pre-trial proceedings in
all federal asbestos bodily injury actions, have ordered that so-called
"unimpaired" claimants may not recover unless at some point the claimant's
condition worsens to the point of impairment.
Several
factors are, in CNA management's view, negatively impacting asbestos claim
trends. Plaintiff attorneys who previously sued entities who are now bankrupt
are seeking other viable targets. As a result, companies with few or no previous
asbestos claims are becoming targets in asbestos litigation and, although they
may have little or no liability, nevertheless must be defended. Additionally,
plaintiff attorneys and trustees for future claimants are demanding that policy
limits be paid lump-sum into the bankruptcy asbestos trusts prior to
presentation of valid claims and medical proof of these claims. Various
challenges to these practices are currently in litigation and the ultimate
impact or success of these tactics remains uncertain. Plaintiff attorneys and
trustees for future claimants are also attempting to devise claims payment
procedures for bankruptcy trusts that would allow asbestos claims to be paid
under lax standards for injury, exposure and causation. This also presents the
potential for exhausting policy limits in an accelerated fashion.
As a
result of bankruptcies and insolvencies, CNA management has observed an increase
in the total number of policyholders with current asbestos claims as additional
defendants are added to existing lawsuits and are named in new asbestos bodily
injury lawsuits. New asbestos bodily injury claims have also increased
substantially in 2003, but the rate of increase has moderated in
2004.
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA carried approximately $1,686.0 million and
$1,767.0 million of claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, net of
reinsurance recoverables, for reported and unreported asbestos-related claims.
CNA recorded $54.0 million and $642.0 million of unfavorable asbestos-related
net claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003. CNA recorded no asbestos related net claim and claim
adjustment expense reserve development for the year ended December 31, 2002.
The 2004
unfavorable net prior year development was primarily related to a commutation
loss related to Trenwick. CNA paid
asbestos-related claims, net of reinsurance recoveries, of $135.0 million,
$121.0 million and $21.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002.
CNA
recorded $1,826.0 million and $642.0 million in unfavorable gross and net prior
year development for the year ended December 31, 2003 for reported and
unreported asbestos-related claims, principally due to potential losses from
policies issued by CNA with high attachment points, which previous exposure
analysis indicated would not be reached. CNA examined the claims filing trends
to determine time frames within which high excess policies issued by CNA could
be reached. Elevated claims volumes and increased claims values, together with
certain adverse court decisions affecting the ability of policyholders to access
excess policies, supported the conclusion that excess policies with high
attachment points previously thought not to be exposed may now potentially be
exposed. The ceded reinsurance arrangements on these excess policies are
different from the primary policies. In
general, more extensive reinsurance arrangements apply to the excess policies.
As a result, the prior year development shows a higher ratio of ceded to gross
amounts than the reserves established in prior periods, resulting in a higher
percentage of reserves ceded as of December 31, 2003 versus prior
periods.
CNA has
resolved a number of its large asbestos accounts by negotiating settlement
agreements. Structured settlement agreements provide for payments over multiple
years as set forth in each individual agreement. At December 31, 2004, CNA had
eleven structured settlement agreements with a reserve net of reinsurance of
$175.0 million. As to the eleven structured settlement agreements existing at
December 31, 2004, payment obligations under those settlement agreements are
projected to terminate by 2016. At December 31, 2003, CNA had structured
settlement agreements with nine of its policyholders for which it had future
payment obligations with a reserve, net of reinsurance, of $188.0
million.
In 1985,
47 asbestos producers and their insurers, including CIC, executed the Wellington
Agreement. The agreement intended to resolve all issues and litigation related
to coverage for asbestos exposures. Under this agreement, signatory insurers
committed scheduled policy limits and made the limits available to pay asbestos
claims based upon coverage blocks designated by the policyholders in 1985,
subject to extension by policyholders. CIC was a signatory insurer to the
Wellington Agreement. At December 31, 2004, CNA had obligations for four
accounts. With respect to these four
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
remaining
unpaid Wellington obligations, CNA has evaluated its exposure and the expected
reinsurance recoveries under these agreements and has a recorded reserve of
$17.0 million, net of reinsurance. At December 31, 2003, CNA had fulfilled its
Wellington Agreement obligations as to all but five accounts and had a recorded
reserve of $23.0 million, net of reinsurance.
CNA has
also used coverage in place agreements to resolve large asbestos exposures.
Coverage in place agreements are typically agreements between CNA and its
policyholders identifying the policies and the terms for payment of asbestos
related liabilities. Claims payments are contingent on presentation of adequate
documentation showing exposure during the policy periods and other documentation
supporting the demand for claims payment. Coverage in place agreements may have
annual payment caps. Coverage in place agreements are evaluated based on claims
filings trends and severities. As of December 31, 2004, CNA had negotiated
thirty-three coverage in place agreements. CNA has evaluated these commitments
and the expected reinsurance recoveries under these agreements and has recorded
a reserve of $76.0 million, net of reinsurance as of December 31, 2004. As of
December 31, 2003, CNA had negotiated thirty-two such agreements and had
established a reserve of $109.0 million, net of reinsurance.
CNA
categorizes active asbestos accounts as large or small accounts. CNA defines a
large account as an active account with more than $100,000 of cumulative paid
losses. CNA has made closing large accounts a significant management priority.
At December 31, 2004, CNA had 180 large accounts and had established reserves of
$368.0 million, net of reinsurance. At December 31, 2003, CNA had 160 large
accounts with reserves of $405.0 million, net of reinsurance. Large accounts are
typically accounts that have been long identified as significant asbestos
exposures. In the 2003 ground up reserve study, CNA observed that underlying
layers of primary, umbrella and lower layer excess policies were exhausting at
accelerated rates due to increased claims volumes, claims severities and
increased defense expense incurred in litigating claims. Those accounts where
CNA had issued high excess policies were evaluated in the study to determine
potential impairment of the high excess layers of coverage. Management concluded
that high excess coverage previously thought not to be exposed could potentially
be exposed should current adverse claim trends continue.
Small
accounts are defined as active accounts with $100,000 or less cumulative paid
losses. At December 31, 2004, CNA had 1,109 small accounts, approximately 82.9%
of its total active asbestos accounts, with reserves of $141.0 million, net of
reinsurance. At December 31, 2003, CNA had 1,065 small accounts and established
reserves of $147.0 million, net of reinsurance. Small accounts are typically
representative of policyholders with limited connection to asbestos. As entities
which were historic targets in asbestos litigation continue to file for
bankruptcy protection, plaintiffs' attorneys are seeking other viable targets.
As a result, companies with few or no previous asbestos claims are becoming
targets in asbestos litigation and nevertheless must be defended by CNA under
its policies. Bankruptcy filings and increased claims filings in the last few
years could potentially increase costs incurred in defending small
accounts.
CNA also
evaluates its asbestos liabilities arising from its assumed reinsurance business
and its participation in various pools. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA had
$148.0 million and $157.0 million of reserves, net of reinsurance, related to
these asbestos liabilities arising from CNA's assumed reinsurance obligations
and CNA's participation in pools, including Excess & Casualty Reinsurance
Association ("ECRA").
At
December 31, 2004 and 2003, the unassigned IBNR reserve was $707.0 million and
$684.0 million, net of reinsurance. This IBNR reserve relates to potential
development on accounts that have not settled and potential future claims from
unidentified policyholders.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
The
tables below depict CNA's overall pending asbestos accounts and associated
reserves at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent
of |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Net
Paid |
|
Net
Asbestos |
|
Asbestos
Net |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Policyholders |
|
Losses |
|
Reserves |
|
Reserves |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholders
with settlement agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Structured
settlements |
|
|
11 |
|
$ |
39.0 |
|
$ |
175.0 |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
Wellington |
|
|
4 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Coverage
in place |
|
|
33 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
4.5 |
|
Fibreboard |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
54.0 |
|
|
3.2 |
|
Total
with settlement agreements |
|
|
49 |
|
|
57.0 |
|
|
322.0 |
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
policyholders with active accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large
asbestos accounts |
|
|
180 |
|
|
47.0 |
|
|
368.0 |
|
|
21.8 |
|
Small
asbestos accounts |
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
23.0 |
|
|
141.0 |
|
|
8.4 |
|
Total
other policyholders |
|
|
1,289 |
|
|
70.0 |
|
|
509.0 |
|
|
30.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed
reinsurance and pools |
|
|
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
148.0 |
|
|
8.8 |
|
Unassigned
IBNR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
707.0 |
|
|
41.9 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,338 |
|
$ |
135.0 |
|
$ |
1,686.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholders
with settlement agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Structured
settlements |
|
|
9 |
|
$ |
20.0 |
|
$ |
188.0 |
|
|
10.6 |
% |
Wellington |
|
|
5 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
23.0 |
|
|
1.3 |
|
Coverage
in place |
|
|
32 |
|
|
40.0 |
|
|
109.0 |
|
|
6.2 |
|
Fibreboard |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
54.0 |
|
|
3.1 |
|
Total
with settlement agreements |
|
|
47 |
|
|
63.0 |
|
|
374.0 |
|
|
21.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
policyholders with active accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large
asbestos accounts |
|
|
160 |
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
405.0 |
|
|
22.9 |
|
Small
asbestos accounts |
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
147.0 |
|
|
8.3 |
|
Total
other policyholders |
|
|
1,225 |
|
|
51.0 |
|
|
552.0 |
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed
reinsurance and pools |
|
|
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
157.0 |
|
|
8.9 |
|
Unassigned
IBNR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
684.0 |
|
|
38.7 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,272 |
|
$ |
121.0 |
|
$ |
1,767.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Some
asbestos-related defendants have asserted that their insurance policies are not
subject to aggregate limits on coverage. CNA has such claims from a number of
insureds. Some of these claims involve insureds facing exhaustion of products
liability aggregate limits in their policies, who have asserted that their
asbestos-related claims fall within so-called "non-products" liability coverage
contained within their policies rather than products liability coverage, and
that the claimed "non-products" coverage is not subject to any aggregate limit.
It is difficult to predict the ultimate size of any of the claims for coverage
purportedly not subject to aggregate limits or predict to what extent, if any,
the attempts to assert "non-products" claims outside the products liability
aggregate will succeed. CNA's policies also contain other limits applicable to
these claims, and CNA has additional coverage defenses to certain claims. CNA
has attempted to manage its asbestos exposure by aggressively seeking to settle
claims on acceptable terms. There can be no assurance that any of these
settlement efforts will be successful, or that any such claims can be settled on
terms acceptable to CNA. Where CNA cannot settle a claim on acceptable terms,
CNA aggressively litigates the claim. A recent court ruling by the United States
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has supported certain of CNA's positions
with respect to coverage
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
for
"non-products" claims. However, adverse developments with respect to such
matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company's results of
operations and/or equity.
Certain
asbestos litigation in which CNA is currently engaged is described
below:
As more
fully discussed in Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
included under Item 8 under the heading "APMT Reserves" and in this MD&A
under the headings "Asbestos" and "Reserves—Estimates and Uncertainties," the
ultimate cost of reported claims, and in particular APMT claims, is subject to a
great many uncertainties, including future developments of various kinds that
CNA does not control and that are difficult or impossible to foresee accurately.
With respect to the litigation identified below in particular, numerous factual
and legal issues remain unresolved. Rulings on those issues by the courts are
critical to the evaluation of the ultimate cost to CNA. The outcome of the
litigation cannot be predicted with any reliability. Accordingly, the extent of
losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at
this time.
On
February 13, 2003, CNA announced it had resolved asbestos related coverage
litigation and claims involving A.P. Green Industries, A.P. Green Services and
Bigelow - Liptak Corporation. Under the agreement, CNA is required to pay $74.0
million, net of reinsurance recoveries, over a ten year period commencing after
the final approval of a bankruptcy plan of reorganization. The settlement
resolves CNA's liabilities for all pending and future asbestos claims involving
A.P. Green Industries, Bigelow - Liptak Corporation and related subsidiaries,
including alleged "non-products" exposures. The settlement received initial
bankruptcy court approval on August 18, 2003 and CNA expects to procure
confirmation of a bankruptcy plan containing an injunction to protect CNA from
any future claims.
CNA is
engaged in insurance coverage litigation, filed in 2003, with underlying
plaintiffs who have asbestos bodily injury claims against the former Robert A.
Keasbey Company ("Keasbey") in New York state court (Continental
Casualty Co. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau et al., No.
601037/03 (N.Y. County)). Keasbey, a currently dissolved corporation, was a
seller and installer of asbestos-containing insulation products in New York and
New Jersey. Thousands of plaintiffs have filed bodily injury claims against
Keasbey; however, Keasbey's involvement at a number of work sites is a highly
contested issue. Therefore, the defense disputes the percentage of valid claims
against Keasbey. CNA issued Keasbey primary policies for 1970-1987 and excess
policies for 1972-1978. CNA has paid an amount substantially equal to the
policies' aggregate limits for products and completed operations claims.
Claimants against Keasbey allege, among other things, that CNA owes coverage
under sections of the policies not subject to the aggregate limits, an
allegation CNA vigorously contests in the lawsuit. In the litigation, CNA and
the claimants seek declaratory relief as to the interpretation of various policy
provisions. The court dismissed a claim alleging bad faith and seeking
unspecified damages on March 21, 2004; that ruling is now being appealed. With
respect to this litigation in particular, numerous factual and legal issues
remain to be resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of
which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These factors include, among
others: (a) whether CNA has any further responsibility to compensate claimants
against Keasbey under its policies and, if so, under which policies; (b) whether
CNA's responsibilities extend to a particular claimants' entire claim or only to
a limited percentage of the claim; (c) whether CNA's responsibilities under its
policies are limited by the occurrence limits or other provisions of the
policies; (d) whether certain exclusions in some of the policies apply to
exclude certain claims; (e) the extent to which claimants can establish
exposures to asbestos materials as to which Keasbey has any responsibility; (f)
the legal theories which must be pursued by such claimants to establish the
liability of Keasbey and whether such theories can, in fact, be established; (g)
the diseases and damages claimed by such claimants; and (h) the extent that such
liability would be shared with other responsible parties. Accordingly, the
extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily
determinable at this time.
CNA has
insurance coverage disputes related to asbestos bodily injury claims against
Burns & Roe Enterprises, Inc. ("Burns & Roe"). Originally raised in
litigation, now stayed, these disputes are currently part of In
re: Burns & Roe Enterprises, Inc., pending
in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, No. 00-41610. Burns
& Roe provided engineering and related services in connection with
construction projects. At the time of its bankruptcy filing on December 4, 2000,
Burns & Roe faced approximately 11,000 claims alleging bodily injury
resulting from exposure to asbestos as a result of construction projects in
which Burns & Roe was involved. CNA allegedly provided primary liability
coverage to Burns & Roe from 1956-1969 and 1971-1974, along with certain
project-specific policies from 1964-1970. The parties in the litigation are
seeking a declaration of the scope and extent of coverage, if any, afforded to
Burns & Roe for its asbestos liabilities. The litigation has been stayed
since May 14, 2003 pending resolution of the bankruptcy proceedings. With
respect to the Burns & Roe litigation and the pending bankruptcy proceeding,
numerous unresolved factual and legal issues will impact the ultimate exposure
to CNA. With respect to this litigation, numerous
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
factual
and legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to the final result,
the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These factors
include, among others: (a) whether CNA has any further responsibility to
compensate claimants against Burns & Roe under its policies and, if so,
under which; (b) whether CNA's responsibilities under its policies extend to a
particular claimants entire claim or only to a limited percentage of the claim;
(c) whether CNA's responsibilities under its policies are limited by the
occurrence limits or other provisions of the policies; (d) whether certain
exclusions, including professional liability exclusions, in some of CNA's
policies apply to exclude certain claims; (e) the extent to which claimants can
establish exposures to asbestos materials as to which Burns & Roe has any
responsibility; (f) the legal theories which must be pursued by such claimants
to establish the liability of Burns & Roe and whether such theories can, in
fact, be established; (g) the diseases and damages claimed by such claimants;
(h) the extent that any liability of Burns & Roe would be shared with other
potentially responsible parties; and (i) the impact of bankruptcy proceedings on
claims and coverage issue resolution. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond
any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at this
time.
CIC
issued certain primary and excess policies to Bendix Corporation ("Bendix"), now
part of Honeywell International, Inc. ("Honeywell"). Honeywell faces
approximately 75,400 pending asbestos bodily injury claims resulting from
alleged exposure to Bendix friction products. CIC's primary policies allegedly
covered the period from at least 1939 (when Bendix began to use asbestos in its
friction products) to 1983, although the parties disagree about whether CIC's
policies provided product liability coverage before 1940 and from 1945 to 1956.
CIC asserts that it owes no further material obligations to Bendix under any
primary policy. Honeywell alleges that two primary policies issued by CIC
covering 1969-1975 contain occurrence limits but not product liability aggregate
limits for asbestos bodily injury claims. CIC has asserted, among other things,
even if Honeywell's allegation is correct, which CNA denies, its liability is
limited to a single occurrence limit per policy or per year, and in the
alternative, a proper allocation of losses would substantially limit its
exposure under the 1969-1975 policies to asbestos claims. These and other issues
are being litigated in Continental
Insurance Co., et al. v. Honeywell International Inc., No.
MRS-L-1523-00 (Morris County, New Jersey) which was filed on May 15, 2000. In
the litigation, the parties are seeking declaratory relief of the scope and
extent of coverage, if any, afforded to Bendix under the policies issued by CNA.
With respect to this litigation, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be
resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be
predicted with any reliability. These factors include, among others: (a) whether
certain of the primary policies issued by CNA contain aggregate limits of
liability; (b) whether CNA's responsibilities under its policies extend to a
particular claimants entire claim or only to a limited percentage of the claim;
(c) whether CNA's responsibilities under its policies are limited by the
occurrence limits or other provisions of the policies; (d) whether some of the
claims against Bendix arise out of events which took place after expiration of
CNA's policies; (e) the extent to which claimants can establish exposures to
asbestos materials as to which Bendix has any responsibility; (f) the legal
theories which must be pursued by such claimants to establish the liability of
Bendix and whether such theories can, in fact, be established; (g) the diseases
and damages claimed by such claimants; (h) the extent that any liability of
Bendix would be shared with other responsible parties; and (i) whether Bendix is
responsible for reimbursement of funds advanced by CNA for defense and indemnity
in the past. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be
accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
Suits
have also been initiated directly against CNA and other insurers in four
jurisdictions: Ohio, Texas, West Virginia and Montana. In the two Ohio actions,
plaintiffs allege the defendants negligently performed duties undertaken to
protect workers and the public from the effects of asbestos (Varner
v. Ford Motor Co., et al.
(Cuyahoga County, Ohio, filed on June 12, 2003) and Peplowski
v. ACE American Ins. Co., et al. (U.S. D.
C. N.D. Ohio, filed on April 1, 2004)). The state trial court granted insurers,
including CNA, summary judgment against a representative group of plaintiffs,
ruling that insurers had no duty to warn plaintiffs about the dangers of
asbestos. The summary judgment ruling is on appeal. With respect to this
litigation in particular, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be
resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be
predicted with any reliability. These factors include: (a) the speculative
nature and unclear scope of any alleged duties owed to individuals exposed to
asbestos and the resulting uncertainty as to the potential pool of potential
claimants; (b) the fact that imposing such duties on all insurer and non-insurer
corporate defendants would be unprecedented and, therefore, the legal boundaries
of recovery are difficult to estimate; (c) the fact that many of the claims
brought to date are barred by various Statutes of Limitation and it is unclear
whether future claims would also be barred; (d) the unclear nature of the
required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the right of any
particular claimant to recovery; (e) the existence of hundreds of co-defendants
in some of the suits and the applicability of the legal theories pled by the
claimants to thousands of potential defendants. Accordingly, the extent of
losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at
this time.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Similar
lawsuits have also been filed in Texas against CNA beginning in 2002, and other
insurers and non-insurer corporate defendants asserting liability for failing to
warn of the dangers of asbestos (Boson
v. Union Carbide Corp., et al.
(District Court of Nueces County, Texas)). During 2003, many of the Texas claims
have been dismissed as time-barred by the applicable Statute of Limitations. In
other claims, the Texas courts have ruled that the carriers did not owe any duty
to the plaintiffs or the general public to advise on the effects of asbestos
thereby dismissing these claims. Certain of the Texas courts' rulings have been
appealed. With respect to this litigation in particular, numerous factual and
legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to the final result, the
outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These factors
include: (a) the speculative nature and unclear scope of any alleged duties owed
to individuals exposed to asbestos and the resulting uncertainty as to the
potential pool of potential claimants; (b) the fact that imposing such duties on
all insurer and non-insurer corporate defendants would be unprecedented and,
therefore, the legal boundaries of recovery are difficult to estimate; (c) the
fact that many of the claims brought to date are barred by various Statutes of
Limitation and it is unclear whether future claims would also be barred; (d) the
unclear nature of the required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the
right of any particular claimant to recovery; (e) the existence of hundreds of
co-defendants in some of the suits and the applicability of the legal theories
pled by the claimants to thousands of potential defendants. Accordingly, the
extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily
determinable at this time.
CNA was
named in Adams
v. Aetna, Inc., et al. (Circuit
Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia, filed June 23, 2002), a purported class
action against CNA and other insurers, alleging that the defendants violated
West Virginia's Unfair Trade Practices Act in handling and resolving asbestos
claims against their policyholders. The Adams litigation had been stayed pending
disposition
of two cases in the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Those cases were
decided in June of
2004. The
Adams case also involves proceedings
and mediation in the Bankruptcy Court in New York with jurisdiction over the
Manville Bankruptcy. In those proceedings issues have been raised concerning the
preclusive effect of the Manville Bankruptcy settlements with insurers and
resulting injunctions against claims. Those issues are now on appeal to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. With respect
to this litigation in particular, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be
resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be
predicted with any reliability. These factors include: (a) the legal sufficiency
of the novel statutory and common law claims pled by the claimants; (b) the
applicability of claimants' legal theories to insurers who neither defended nor
controlled the defense of certain policyholders; (c) the possibility that
certain of the claims are barred by various Statutes of Limitation; (d) the fact
that the imposition of duties would interfere with the attorney client privilege
and the contractual rights and responsibilities of the parties to CNA's
insurance policies; (e) the potential and relative magnitude of liabilities of
co-defendants. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be
accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
On March
22, 2002, a direct action was filed in Montana (Pennock,
et al. v. Maryland Casualty, et al. First
Judicial District Court of Lewis & Clark County, Montana) by eight
individual plaintiffs (all employees of W.R. Grace & Co. ("W.R. Grace")) and
their spouses against CNA, Maryland Casualty and the State of Montana. This
action alleges that the carriers failed to warn of or otherwise protect W.R.
Grace employees from the dangers of asbestos at a W.R. Grace vermiculite mining
facility in Libby, Montana. The Montana direct action is currently stayed
because of W.R. Grace's pending bankruptcy. With respect to this litigation in
particular, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are
critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any
reliability. These factors include: (a) the unclear nature and scope of any
alleged duties owed to people exposed to asbestos and the resulting uncertainty
as to the potential pool of potential claimants; (b) the potential application
of Statutes of Limitation to many of the claims which may be made depending on
the nature and scope of the alleged duties; (c) the unclear nature of the
required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the right of any
particular claimant to recovery; (d) the diseases and damages claimed by such
claimants; (e) and the extent that such liability would be shared with other
potentially responsible parties; and, (f) the impact of bankruptcy proceedings
on claims resolution. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that
may be accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
CNA is
vigorously defending these and other cases and believes that it has meritorious
defenses to the claims asserted. However, there are numerous factual and legal
issues to be resolved in connection with these claims, and it is extremely
difficult to predict the outcome or ultimate financial exposure represented by
these matters. Adverse developments with respect to any of these matters could
have a material adverse effect on CNA's business, insurer financial strength and
debt ratings, and the Company's results of operations and/or
equity.
As a
result of the uncertainties and complexities involved, reserves for asbestos
claims cannot be estimated with traditional actuarial techniques that rely on
historical accident year loss development factors. In establishing asbestos
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
reserves,
CNA evaluates the exposure presented by each insured. As part of this
evaluation, CNA considers the available insurance coverage; limits and
deductibles; the potential role of other insurance, particularly underlying
coverage below any CNA excess liability policies; and applicable coverage
defenses, including asbestos exclusions. Estimation of asbestos-related claim
and claim adjustment expense reserves involves a high degree of judgment on the
part of CNA management and consideration of many complex factors,
including:
|
· |
inconsistency
of court decisions, jury attitudes and future court
decisions; |
|
· |
specific
policy provisions; |
|
· |
allocation
of liability among insurers and insureds; |
|
· |
missing
policies and proof of coverage; |
|
· |
the
proliferation of bankruptcy proceedings and attendant
uncertainties; |
|
· |
novel
theories asserted by policyholders and their
counsel; |
|
· |
the
targeting of a broader range of businesses and entities as
defendants; |
|
· |
the
uncertainty as to which other insureds may be targeted in the future and
the uncertainties inherent in predicting the number of future
claims; |
|
· |
volatility
in claim numbers and settlement demands; |
|
· |
increases
in the number of non-impaired claimants and the extent to which they can
be precluded from making claims; |
|
· |
the
efforts by insureds to obtain coverage not subject to aggregate
limits; |
|
· |
long
latency period between asbestos exposure and disease manifestation and the
resulting potential for involvement of multiple policy periods for
individual claims; |
|
· |
medical
inflation trends; |
|
· |
the
mix of asbestos-related diseases presented;
and |
|
· |
the
ability to recover reinsurance. |
CNA is
also monitoring possible legislative reforms on the state and national level,
including possible federal legislation to create a national privately financed
trust financed by contributions from insurers such as CNA, industrial companies
and others, which if established, could replace litigation of asbestos claims
with payments to claimants from the trust. It is uncertain at the present time
whether such legislation will be enacted or, if it is, its impact on
CNA.
Environmental
Pollution and Mass Tort
Environmental
pollution cleanup is the subject of both federal and state regulation. By some
estimates, there are thousands of potential waste sites subject to cleanup. The
insurance industry is involved in extensive litigation regarding coverage
issues. Judicial interpretations in many cases have expanded the scope of
coverage and liability beyond the original intent of the policies. The
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
("Superfund") and comparable state statutes ("mini-Superfunds") govern the
cleanup and restoration of toxic waste sites and formalize the concept of legal
liability for cleanup and restoration by "Potentially Responsible Parties"
("PRPs"). Superfund and the mini-Superfunds establish mechanisms to pay for
cleanup of waste sites if PRPs fail to do so and assign liability to PRPs. The
extent of liability to be allocated to a PRP is dependent upon a variety of
factors. Further, the number of waste sites subject to cleanup is unknown. To
date, approximately 1,500 cleanup sites have been identified
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
by the
Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and included on its National Priorities
List ("NPL"). State authorities have designated many cleanup sites as
well.
Many
policyholders have made claims against various CNA insurance subsidiaries for
defense costs and indemnification in connection with environmental pollution
matters. The vast majority of these claims relate to accident years 1989 and
prior, which coincides with CNA's adoption of the Simplified Commercial General
Liability coverage form, which includes what is referred to in the industry as
an absolute pollution exclusion. CNA and the insurance industry are disputing
coverage for many such claims. Key coverage issues include whether cleanup costs
are considered damages under the policies, trigger of coverage, allocation of
liability among triggered policies, applicability of pollution exclusions and
owned property exclusions, the potential for joint and several liability and the
definition of an occurrence. To date, courts have been inconsistent in their
rulings on these issues.
A number
of proposals to modify Superfund have been made by various parties. However, no
modifications were enacted by Congress during 2004 or 2003, and it is unclear
what positions Congress or the Administration will take and what legislation, if
any, will result in the future. If there is legislation, and in some
circumstances even if there is no legislation, the federal role in environmental
cleanup may be significantly reduced in favor of state action. Substantial
changes in the federal statute or the activity of the EPA may cause states to
reconsider their environmental cleanup statutes and regulations. There can be no
meaningful prediction of the pattern of regulation that would result or the
possible effect upon the Company's results of operations or equity.
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA carried approximately $497.0 million and $577.0
million of claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, net of reinsurance
recoverables, for reported and unreported environmental pollution and mass tort
claims. There was $1.0 million and $153.0 million of environmental pollution and
mass tort net claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development recorded
for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003. There was no environmental
pollution and mass tort net claim and claim adjustment expense reserve
development recorded for the year ended December 31, 2002. Additionally, CNA
recorded $15.0 million of current accident year losses related to mass tort in
2004. CNA paid environmental pollution-related claims and mass tort-related
claims, net of reinsurance recoveries, of $96.0 million, $93.0 million and
$116.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002.
CNA has
made resolution of large environmental pollution exposures a management
priority. CNA has resolved a number of its large environmental accounts by
negotiating settlement agreements. In its settlements, CNA sought to resolve
those exposures and obtain the broadest release language to avoid future claims
from the same policyholders seeking coverage for sites or claims that had not
emerged at the time CNA settled with its policyholder. While the terms of each
settlement agreement vary, CNA sought to obtain broad environmental releases
that include known and unknown sites, claims and policies. The broad scope of
the release provisions contained in those settlement agreements should, in many
cases, prevent future exposure from settled policyholders. It remains uncertain,
however, whether a court interpreting the language of the settlement agreements
will adhere to the intent of the parties and uphold the broad scope of language
of the agreements.
CNA
classifies its environmental pollution accounts into several categories, which
include structured settlements, coverage in place agreements and active
accounts. Structured settlement agreements provide for payments over multiple
years as set forth in each individual agreement. At December 31, 2004, CNA had
two structured settlement agreements and has established reserves of $5.0
million, net of reinsurance, to fund future payment obligations under the
agreements. At December 31, 2003, CNA had a structured settlement agreement with
one of its policyholders for which it had future payment obligations with a
recorded reserve of $12.0 million, net of reinsurance.
CNA has
also used coverage in place agreements to resolve pollution exposures. Coverage
in place agreements are typically agreements between CNA and its policyholders
identifying the policies and the terms for payment of pollution related
liabilities. Claims payments are contingent on presentation of adequate
documentation of damages during the policy periods and other documentation
supporting the demand for claims payment. Coverage in place agreements may have
annual payment caps. At December 31, 2004, CNA had negotiated fifteen coverage
in place agreements and had established a reserve of $16.0 million, net of
reinsurance. At December 31, 2003, CNA had six such agreements with a recorded
reserve of $8.0 million, net of reinsurance.
CNA
categorizes active accounts as large or small accounts in the pollution area.
CNA defines a large account as an active account with more than $100,000
cumulative paid losses. At December 31, 2004, CNA had 134 large accounts with a
collective reserve of $75.0 million, net of reinsurance. CNA has made closing
large accounts a significant
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
management
priority. CNA had 144 large accounts with a collective reserve of $86.0 million,
net of reinsurance, at December 31, 2003. Small accounts are defined as active
accounts with $100,000 or less cumulative paid losses. At December 31, 2004, CNA
had 405 small accounts with a collective reserve of $47.0 million, net of
reinsurance. CNA had 432 small accounts with a collective reserve of $53.0
million, net of reinsurance, at December 31, 2003.
CNA also
evaluates its environmental pollution exposures arising from its assumed
reinsurance and its participation in various pools, including ECRA. CNA had a
reserve of $36.0 million and $38.0 million related to these liabilities for the
years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003.
At
December 31, 2004, CNA's unassigned IBNR reserve was $163.0 million, net of
reinsurance. At December 31, 2003, CNA's unassigned IBNR reserve for
environmental pollution was $197.0 million, net of reinsurance. This IBNR
reserve relates to potential development on accounts that have not settled and
potential future claims from unidentified policyholders.
The table
below depicts CNA's overall pending environmental pollution accounts and
associated reserves at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
Percent
of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Net |
|
Pollution |
|
Pollution
Net |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Policyholders |
|
Paid
Losses |
|
Reserves |
|
Reserve |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholders
with Settlement Agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Structured
settlements |
|
|
2 |
|
$ |
14.0 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
Coverage
in place |
|
|
15 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
4.7 |
|
Total
with Settlement Agreements |
|
|
17 |
|
|
19.0 |
|
|
21.0 |
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Policyholders with Active Accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large
pollution accounts |
|
|
134 |
|
|
18.0 |
|
|
75.0 |
|
|
21.9 |
|
Small
pollution accounts |
|
|
405 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
47.0 |
|
|
13.7 |
|
Total
Other Policyholders |
|
|
539 |
|
|
32.0 |
|
|
122.0 |
|
|
35.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed
Reinsurance & Pools |
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
10.5 |
|
Unassigned
IBNR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163.0 |
|
|
47.7 |
|
Total |
|
|
556 |
|
$ |
53.0 |
|
$ |
342.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholders
with Settlement Agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Structured
settlements |
|
|
1 |
|
$ |
17.0 |
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
|
3.1 |
% |
Coverage
in place |
|
|
6 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
Total
with Settlement Agreements |
|
|
7 |
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Policyholders with Active Accounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large
pollution accounts |
|
|
144 |
|
|
21.0 |
|
|
86.0 |
|
|
21.8 |
|
Small
pollution accounts |
|
|
432 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
53.0 |
|
|
13.5 |
|
Total
Other Policyholders |
|
|
576 |
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
139.0 |
|
|
35.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed
Reinsurance & Pools |
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
38.0 |
|
|
9.6 |
|
Unassigned
IBNR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197.0 |
|
|
50.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
583 |
|
$ |
57.0 |
|
$ |
394.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
In 2003,
CNA observed a marked increase in silica claims frequency in Mississippi, where
plaintiff attorneys appear to have filed claims to avoid the effect of tort
reform. In 2004, silica claims frequency in Mississippi has moderated notably
due to implementation of tort reform measures and favorable court decisions. To
date, the most significant silica
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
exposures
identified included a relatively small number of accounts with significant
numbers of new claims reported in 2003 that continued at a lesser rate in 2004.
Establishing claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for silica claims is
subject to uncertainties because of disputes concerning medical causation with
respect to certain diseases, including lung cancer, geographical concentration
of the lawsuits asserting the claims, and the large rise in the total number of
claims without underlying epidemiological developments suggesting an increase in
disease rates or plaintiffs. Moreover, judicial interpretations regarding
application of various tort defenses, including application of various theories
of joint and several liabilities, impede CNA's ability to estimate its ultimate
liability for such claims.
Lorillard
Lorillard,
Inc. and subsidiaries ("Lorillard"). Lorillard, Inc. is a wholly owned
subsidiary of the Company.
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Lorillard for the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as presented in Note 24 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufactured
products |
|
$ |
3,347.8 |
|
$ |
3,255.6 |
|
$ |
3,797.7 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
36.6 |
|
|
39.9 |
|
|
44.1 |
|
Investment
gains (losses) |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
|
36.1 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
1.9 |
|
Total |
|
|
3,385.8 |
|
|
3,285.7 |
|
|
3,879.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales |
|
|
1,965.6 |
|
|
1,893.1 |
|
|
2,149.3 |
|
Other
operating |
|
|
380.6 |
|
|
460.0 |
|
|
432.7 |
|
Interest |
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2,346.2 |
|
|
2,353.2 |
|
|
2,582.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,039.6 |
|
|
932.5 |
|
|
1,297.8 |
|
Income
tax expense |
|
|
397.3 |
|
|
351.2 |
|
|
508.5 |
|
Net
income |
|
$ |
642.3 |
|
$ |
581.3 |
|
$ |
789.3 |
|
2004
Compared with 2003
Revenues
increased by $100.1 million, or 3.0% and net income increased by $61.0 million,
or 10.5% in 2004 as compared to 2003.
Net
income in 2003 included charges of $34.6 million (net of taxes) to settle
litigation with tobacco growers and resolve indemnification claims and trademark
matters in connection with the 1977 sale of Lorillard's international business.
Excluding the 2003 charges, net income increased by $26.4 million, or 4.3% in
2004, as compared to 2003.
The
increase in revenues in 2004, as compared to 2003, is primarily due to higher
net sales of $92.2 million, partially offset by reduced investment income of
$3.3 million. Net sales revenue increased $17.5 million due to higher effective
unit prices reflecting lower sales promotion expenses (accounted for as a
reduction to net sales), an increase of $44.5 million as a result of a reduction
of approximately one percentage point, effective February 9, 2004, in
Lorillard's cash discount rate offered to direct buying accounts and an increase
of $51.7 million due to increased unit sales volume, assuming prices were
unchanged from the prior year. These improvements were partially offset by a
decrease in revenues of $21.5 million due to lower average wholesale unit prices
due to price/sales mix. Unit sales volume increased 0.4% as compared to the
prior year.
Net
income increased in 2004, as compared to 2003, due primarily to lower sales
promotion expenses, a decrease in product liability defense costs as described
below and the absence of charges recorded in 2003 related to the tobacco growers
settlement and the resolution of indemnification claims and trademark matters.
Lorillard regularly reviews
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations -Lorillard - (Continued) |
results
of its promotional spending activities and adjusts its promotional spending
programs in an effort to maintain its competitive position. Accordingly, sales
promotion costs are not necessarily indicative of costs that may be incurred in
subsequent periods.
The
increase in net income in 2004, as compared to 2003, was partially offset by
higher depreciation expense of $8.7 million pretax and higher costs related to
the settlement agreements entered into between the major cigarette
manufacturers, including Lorillard, and each of the 50 states, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and certain U.S. territories
(together, the "State Settlement Agreements"). Lorillard recorded pretax charges
of $845.9 million and $785.2 million ($522.6 million and $489.5 million after
taxes) for 2004 and 2003, respectively, to record its obligations under the
State Settlement Agreements. Lorillard's portion of ongoing adjusted settlement
payments and related legal fees are based on its share of domestic cigarette
shipments in the year preceding that in which the payment is due. Accordingly,
Lorillard records its portions of ongoing settlement payments as part of cost of
manufactured products sold as the related sales occur. The $60.7 million pretax
increase in tobacco settlement costs in 2004, as compared to 2003, is due to the
impact of the inflation adjustment ($25.1 million), higher charges for higher
unit sales ($2.8 million) and other adjustments ($32.8 million) under the State
Settlement Agreements.
Overall,
domestic industry unit sales volume decreased 1.7% in 2004 as compared with
2003. Industry sales for premium brands were 69.3% of the total market in 2004
as compared to 68.8% in 2003.
Lorillard's
total (domestic, Puerto Rico and certain U.S. Territories) gross unit sales
volume increased 0.4% in 2004 as compared to 2003. Domestic wholesale volume
increased 0.2% in 2004 as compared to 2003. Total Newport unit sales volume
increased 1.3% in 2004 and domestic volume increased 1.2% in 2004 as compared
with 2003. These results while reflecting positive change continue to be
affected by on-going competitive promotions and the availability of deep
discount brands.
Deep
discount brands are produced by manufacturers who are subject to lower payment
obligations under the State Settlement Agreements. This cost advantage enables
them to price their brands more than 50% lower than the list prices of premium
brand offerings from major manufacturers. As a result of this price
differential, deep discount brands have grown from an estimated market share in
1998 of less than 1.50% to an estimated 14.25% for 2004. Although the 2004
market share reflects an increase of 0.01 share points versus 2003 or flat
performance, these brands continue to be a significant competitive factor in the
domestic U.S. market.
Menthol
cigarettes as a percent of the total industry remained relatively flat. Newport,
the industry's largest menthol brand, increased its share of the menthol segment
to 32.0% in the fourth quarter of 2004. For the full year 2004, Newport had an
approximate 31.3% share of the menthol segment compared to 30.5% in
2003.
Lorillard's
premium products sold, as a percent of its total domestic volume, remained
relatively flat in 2004 as compared with 2003.
Newport,
a premium brand, accounted for approximately 91.0% of Lorillard's unit sales
volume in 2004 as compared to 90.2% in 2003.
Other
operating expenses in 2003 included an aggregate charge of $55.5 million to
settle litigation with tobacco growers and resolve indemnification and trademark
matters in connection with the 1977 sale of Lorillard's international business.
The costs of litigating and administering product liability claims, as well as
other legal expenses, are also included in other operating expenses. Lorillard's
outside legal fees and other external product liability defense costs were $83.5
million, $93.7 million and $100.2 million, for 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. Numerous factors affect product liability defense costs. The
principal factors are the number and types of cases filed, the number of cases
tried, the results of trials and appeals, the development of the law, the
application of new or different theories of liability by plaintiffs and their
counsel, and litigation strategy and tactics. See Note 21 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Report for detailed
information regarding tobacco litigation. The factors that have influenced past
product liability defense costs are expected to continue to influence future
costs. Although Lorillard does not expect that product liability defense costs
will increase significantly in the future, it is possible that adverse
developments in the factors discussed above, as well as other circumstances
beyond the control of Lorillard, could have a material adverse effect on the
Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash
flows.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
2003
Compared with 2002
Revenues
decreased by $594.1 million, or 15.3% and net income decreased by $208.0
million, or 26.4% in 2003, as compared to 2002.
Net
income in 2003 included charges of $17.1 million and $17.5 million (in each
case, net of taxes) to settle litigation with tobacco growers and resolve
indemnification claims and trademark matters in connection with the 1977 sale of
Lorillard's international business. Excluding these charges, net income would
have decreased by $173.4 million, or 22.0%, in 2003, as compared to
2002.
The
decrease in revenues and net income in 2003, as compared to 2002, is primarily
due to lower net sales of $542.1 million. Net sales revenue decreased due to
lower effective unit prices reflecting higher sales promotion expenses (included
in net sales) and decreased unit sales volume of approximately $86.1 million,
assuming prices were unchanged from the prior year, partially offset by higher
average wholesale unit prices due to price/sales mix, which increased revenues
by approximately $35.0 million. Unit sales volume decreased 2.3% as compared to
the prior year. Lorillard increased promotional expenses in 2003 due to price
pressure in response to higher competitive premium brand promotional spending
and continued increases in excise taxes.
The
decrease in net income in 2003, as compared to 2002, also reflects charges for
the tobacco growers settlement and the resolution of indemnification claims and
trademark matters in connection with the 1977 sale of Lorillard's international
business, partially offset by lower tobacco settlement costs related to the
State Settlement Agreements. Lorillard recorded pretax charges of $785.2 million
and $1,062.2 million ($489.5 million and $646.1 million after taxes) for 2003
and 2002, respectively, to record its obligations under various settlement
agreements. The $277.0 million pretax decrease in tobacco settlement costs in
2003, as compared to 2002, is due to the expiration of up-front payments ($164.5
million), lower charges for lower unit sales volume ($3.5 million) and other
adjustments ($109.0 million) under the State Settlement Agreements.
Lorillard's
total (U.S. domestic, Puerto Rico and certain U.S. Territories) gross unit sales
volume decreased 2.4% in 2003, as compared to 2002. Domestic wholesale volume
decreased 2.8% in 2003, as compared to 2002. Total Newport unit sales volume
decreased by 0.1% in 2003, and domestic U.S. volume decreased 0.6% in 2003, as
compared to 2002. In addition to pricing pressure due to the increases in state
excise taxes and the competitive impact of deep discount brands, Lorillard's
volume in 2003 was affected by generally weak economic conditions and ongoing
limitations imposed by Philip Morris' retail merchandising
arrangements.
On May 5,
2003, Lorillard lowered the wholesale list price of its discount brand,
Maverick, by $55.00 per thousand cigarettes ($1.10 per pack of 20 cigarettes) in
an effort to reposition the brand to be more competitive in the deep discount
price cigarette segment. Maverick accounted for 1.5% of Lorillard's net unit
sales in 2003, as compared to 1.7% in 2002.
Deep
discount price brands are produced by manufacturers who are subject to lower
payment obligations under the State Settlement Agreements. This cost advantage
enables them to price their brands more than 50% lower than the list price of
premium brand offerings from the major cigarette manufacturers. Deep discount
price brands decreased their market share in 2003 by 1.59 share points to
14.24%.
Total
Lorillard and Newport 2003 share of domestic wholesale shipments compared
favorably with the prior year due to wholesale inventory reductions in 2002
following heavy purchases in advance of multiple state tax increases, which tend
to affect cigarette brands with large market shares, such as Newport, more than
others.
Lorillard's
premium products sold as a percent of its total domestic volume remained
relatively flat in 2003 as compared to 2002.
Menthol
cigarettes as a percent of the total industry remained relatively flat. Newport
increased its share of the menthol segment to 31.3% in the fourth quarter of
2003, versus 28.4% in the fourth quarter of 2002. In 2003, Newport had an
approximate 30.5% share of the menthol segment, compared to 29.3% in
2002.
Newport
accounted for approximately 90.2% of Lorillard's unit sales in 2003, as compared
to approximately 88.2% in 2002.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
Overall,
domestic industry unit sales volume decreased 4.1% in 2003, as compared to 2002.
Lorillard domestic unit sales volume decreased 2.8% in 2003 as compared to 2002.
Industry sales for premium brands were 68.8% of the total domestic markets in
2003, as compared to 68.3% in 2002.
Selected
Market Share Data
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(Units
in billions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Lorillard unit volume (1) |
|
|
34.503 |
|
|
34.431 |
|
|
35.444 |
|
Total
industry unit volume (1) |
|
|
394.487 |
|
|
401.224 |
|
|
418.384 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lorillard's
share of the domestic market (1) |
|
|
8.8 |
% |
|
8.6 |
% |
|
8.5 |
% |
Lorillard's
premium segment as a percentage of its total domestic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
volume
(1) |
|
|
95.4 |
% |
|
95.5 |
% |
|
94.7 |
% |
Newport
share of the domestic market (1) |
|
|
7.9 |
% |
|
7.7 |
% |
|
7.5 |
% |
Newport
share of the premium segment (1) |
|
|
11.4 |
% |
|
11.2 |
% |
|
10.9 |
% |
Total
menthol segment market share for the industry (2) |
|
|
26.9 |
% |
|
26.7 |
% |
|
26.0 |
% |
Newport's
share of the menthol segment (2) |
|
|
31.3 |
% |
|
30.5 |
% |
|
29.3 |
% |
Newport
as a percentage of Lorillard's (3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
volume |
|
|
91.0 |
% |
|
90.2 |
% |
|
88.2 |
% |
Net
sales |
|
|
92.2 |
% |
|
90.0 |
% |
|
89.1 |
% |
Sources:
(1) |
Management
Science Associates, Inc. |
(2) |
Lorillard
proprietary data |
(3) |
Lorillard
shipment reports |
Unless
otherwise specified, market share data in this MD&A is based on data made
available by Management Science Associates, Inc. ("MSAI"), an independent
third-party database management organization that collects wholesale shipment
data from various cigarette manufacturers and provides analysis of market share,
unit sales volume and premium versus discount mix for individual companies and
the industry as a whole. MSAI's information relating to unit sales volume and
market share of certain of the smaller, primarily deep discount, cigarette
manufacturers is based on estimates derived by MSAI.
MSAI
divides the cigarette market into two price segments, the premium price segment
and the discount or reduced price segment. According to MSAI, the discount
segment share of market decreased from approximately 31.21% in 2003 to 30.44% in
2004. Virtually all of Lorillard's sales are in the premium price segment where
Lorillard's share amounted to approximately 12.0% in 2004, 12.0% in 2003 and
11.8% in 2002, as reported by MSAI.
Effective
in June of 2004 MSAI changed the way it reports market share information to
include actual units shipped by Commonwealth Brands, Inc. ("CBI"), a marketer of
deep discount brands and implemented a new model for estimating unit sales of
smaller, primarily deep discount marketers. MSAI has restated its reports to
reflect these changes as of January 1, 2001. As a result of these changes,
market shares for Lorillard, PM and RAI are lower than had been reflected under
MSAI's prior methodology and market share for CBI and other lower volume
companies is higher. All industry volume and market share information in this
Report reflects MSAI's revised reporting data.
Despite
the effects of MSAI's new estimation model for deep discount manufacturers,
Lorillard management continues to believe that volume and market share
information for these manufacturers are understated and, correspondingly, share
information for the larger manufacturers, including Lorillard, are overstated by
MSAI.
Business
Environment
The
tobacco industry in the United States, including Lorillard, continues to be
faced with a number of issues that have impacted or may adversely impact the
business, results of operations and financial condition of Lorillard and the
Company, including the following:
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
|
· |
A
substantial volume of litigation seeking compensatory and punitive damages
ranging into the billions of dollars, as well as equitable and injunctive
relief, arising out of allegations of cancer and other health effects
resulting from the use of cigarettes, addiction to smoking or exposure to
environmental tobacco smoke, including claims for reimbursement of health
care costs allegedly incurred as a result of smoking, as well as other
alleged damages. Pending litigation
includes: |
|
· |
a
jury award in Florida of $16.3 billion in punitive damages against
Lorillard in Engle
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al., a
judgment which was vacated by the Florida Third District Court of Appeal
in September of 2003. The Florida Supreme Court heard argument on
plaintiffs' appeal on November 3, 2004. |
|
· |
In
Scott v. The American Tobacco Company, et al., a
jury awarded $591.0 million against the defendants, including Lorillard,
to fund cessation programs for Louisiana smokers. Lorillard's share of the
Scott
judgment has not been determined. The court's final judgment also reflects
its award of judicial interest. As of December 31, 2004, judicial interest
totaled approximately $355.0 million. Judicial interest will continue to
accrue until the judgment is paid. Lorillard and the other defendants have
appealed the Scott
judgment to the Louisiana Court of Appeals. |
|
· |
The
U.S. Department of Justice has brought an action against Lorillard and
other tobacco companies. The government sought, pursuant to the federal
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, disgorgement of profits
from the industry of $280.0 billion that the government contends were
earned as a consequence of a racketeering "enterprise," as well as various
injunctive relief. On February 4, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that disgorgement was not a
proper remedy in this case. The Department of Justice has stated that it
plans to appeal this decision. Trial of this matter began during September
of 2004 and is proceeding. |
See Item
3 - Legal Proceedings and Note 21 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Item 8 of this Report for information with respect to
these actions and other litigation and the State Settlement
Agreements.
|
· |
Substantial
annual payments by Lorillard, continuing in perpetuity, and significant
restrictions on marketing and advertising agreed to under the terms of the
State Settlement Agreements. The State Settlement Agreements impose a
stream of future payment obligations on Lorillard and the other major U.S.
cigarette manufacturers and place significant restrictions on their
ability to market and sell cigarettes. The Company believes that the
implementation of the State Settlement Agreements will materially
adversely affect its consolidated results of operations and cash flows in
future periods. The degree of the adverse impact will depend, among other
things, on the rates of decline in U.S. cigarette sales in the premium and
discount segments, Lorillard's share of the domestic premium and discount
segment, and the effect of any resulting cost advantage of manufacturers
not subject to all of the payment obligations of the State Settlement
Agreements. |
|
· |
In
July of 2004, RJR, the second largest cigarette manufacturer in the United
States, and B&W, the third largest cigarette manufacturer were
combined. The consolidation of these two competitors as RAI has resulted
in further concentration of the U.S. tobacco industry, with the top two
companies, Philip Morris USA and the newly created RAI, having a combined
market share of approximately 76.2% in 2004. In addition, this transaction
combines in one company the third and fourth leading menthol brands, Kool
and Salem, which have a combined share of the menthol segment of
approximately 19.7%. This concentration of U.S. market share could make it
more difficult for Lorillard and others to compete for shelf space in
retail outlets, which is already exacerbated by restrictive marketing
programs of Lorillard's competitors, and could impact price competition
among menthol brands, either of which could have a material adverse effect
on the results of operations and financial condition of the
Company. |
|
· |
The
continuing contraction of the U.S. cigarette market, in which Lorillard
currently conducts its only significant business. As a result of price
increases, restrictions on advertising and promotions, increases in
regulation and excise taxes, health concerns, a decline in the social
acceptability of smoking, increased pressure from anti-tobacco groups and
other factors, U.S. cigarette shipments among the three major U.S.
cigarette |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
manufacturers
have decreased at a compound annual rate of approximately 2.0% over the period
1984 through 2004 according to information provided by MSAI.
|
· |
Competition
from deep discounters who enjoy competitive cost and pricing advantages
because they are not subject to the same payment obligations under the
State Settlement Agreements as Lorillard. Market share for the deep
discount brands increased 0.65 share points from 14.08% in the fourth
quarter of 2003 to 14.73% in the fourth quarter of 2004, as estimated by
MSAI. In 2004, deep discount price brands increased their market share by
0.01 share points to 14.25% as compared to 2003. Lorillard's focus on the
premium market and its obligations under the State Settlement Agreements
make it very difficult to compete successfully in the deep discount
market. |
|
· |
Increases
in industry-wide promotional expenses and sales incentives implemented in
response to declining unit volume, state excise tax increases and
increased competition among the three largest cigarette manufacturers,
including Lorillard, and smaller participants who have gained market share
in recent years, principally in the deep-discount cigarette segment. As a
result of increased competition based on the retail price of brands and
the related increased market share of deep discounters, the ability of
Lorillard and the other major manufacturers to raise prices has been
adversely affected. In light of this environment, Lorillard's ability to
raise prices of its brands has been substantially affected to the extent
that from March of 2002 through December of 2004 the company did not
increase wholesale prices. During this period, increases by manufacturers
in the form of wholesale and retail price promotion allowances served to
effectively reduce the prices of many key brands. While the environment
remains highly price competitive, in December of 2004 and January of 2005,
several manufacturers, including Lorillard, implemented price changes
either in terms of increased wholesale list prices and/or lower
promotional discounts on select brands. |
|
· |
Substantial
federal, state and local excise taxes which are reflected in the retail
price of cigarettes. These taxes have increased significantly. In 1999,
federal excise taxes were $0.24 per pack and state excise taxes ranged
from $0.03 to $1.00 per pack. In 2004, the federal excise tax was $0.39
per pack and combined state and local excise taxes range from $0.03 to
$3.00 per pack. In 2004, excise taxes were increased in seven states
ranging from $0.10 to $0.75 per pack. Proposals continue to be made to
increase federal, state and local excise taxes. Lorillard believes that
increases in excise and similar taxes have had an adverse impact on sales
of cigarettes and that future increases, the extent of which cannot be
predicted, could result in further volume declines for the cigarette
industry, including Lorillard, and an increased sales shift toward lower
priced discount cigarettes rather than premium
brands. |
|
· |
Increases
in actual and proposed state and local regulation of the tobacco industry
relating to the manufacture, sale, distribution, advertising, labeling and
use of tobacco products and government restrictions on
smoking. |
|
· |
Substantial
and increasing regulation of the tobacco industry and governmental
restrictions on smoking. In 2004, the U.S. Senate passed a bill which
would have granted the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") authority to
regulate tobacco products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
That bill was defeated in a Senate-House conference committee in early
October. Lorillard believes that FDA regulations, if enacted, could among
other things result in new restrictions on the manner in which cigarettes
can be advertised and marketed, and may alter the way cigarette products
are developed and manufactured. Lorillard also believes that any such
proposals, if enacted, would provide Philip Morris, as the largest tobacco
company in the country, with a competitive
advantage. |
|
· |
In
October of 2004, the federal supply management program for tobacco growers
was repealed, with tobacco quota holders and growers being compensated
with payments totaling $10.14 billion, funded
by an assessment on tobacco manufacturers and importers. Cigarette
manufacturers and importers are responsible for paying 96.3% of these
payments over a ten-year period. Payments commenced in the fourth quarter
of 2004 and are based on the quantity of cigarettes produced during the
previous quarter for domestic consumption. Lorillard believes that its
obligation to make payments under the new federal law will be partially
offset by the elimination of its payment obligations under the national
Tobacco Growers Settlement Trust (see Note 21 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Report), although
litigation has been commenced on behalf of tobacco growers challenging
this assertion with respect to all or a portion of the payments made by
Lorillard and other participating manufacturers in
2004. |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
|
· |
Sales
of counterfeit cigarettes in the United States continue to adversely
impact sales by the manufacturer of the counterfeited brands, including
Lorillard, and potentially damage the value and reputation of those
brands. |
Loews
Hotels
Loews
Hotels Holding Corporation and subsidiaries ("Loews Hotels"). Loews Hotels
Holding Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the
Company.
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Loews Hotels for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as presented in Note 24 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
$ |
312.9 |
|
$ |
283.6 |
|
$ |
264.3 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
Total |
|
|
315.2 |
|
|
286.0 |
|
|
266.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
|
278.3 |
|
|
258.4 |
|
|
242.7 |
|
Interest |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
9.5 |
|
Total |
|
|
284.0 |
|
|
267.4 |
|
|
252.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
14.2 |
|
Income
tax expense |
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
5.5 |
|
Income
from continuing operations |
|
|
21.4 |
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
8.7 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
Net
income |
|
$ |
21.4 |
|
$ |
66.6 |
|
$ |
12.7 |
|
2004
Compared with 2003
Revenues
increased by $29.2 million, or 10.2%, and income from continuing operations
increased by $10.2 million in 2004, as compared to 2003.
Revenues
increased in 2004, as compared to 2003, due primarily to an increase in revenue
per available room and higher equity income of $6.0 million from joint ventures.
Revenue per available room for 2004 increased by $10.4 million, or 8.3%, to
$135.69, reflecting an increase in occupancy rates of 3.0% and an increase in
average room rates of $8.70, or 5.1%, as compared to 2003.
Revenue
per available room is an industry measure of the combined effect of occupancy
rates and average room rates on room revenues. Other hotel operating revenues
primarily include guest charges for food and beverages.
Income
from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2004 increased due to
higher revenues discussed above, increased equity income from joint ventures and
decreased interest expenses, partially offset by higher operating costs,
increased advertising and depreciation expenses.
2003
Compared with 2002
Revenues
increased by $19.6 million, or 7.4%, and income from continuing operations
increased by $2.5 million in 2003, as compared to 2002.
Revenues
increased in 2003, as compared to 2002, due primarily to an increase in revenue
per available room, higher other hotel operating revenues, and an increase in
equity income from the Universal Orlando properties reflecting the
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Loews Hotels -
(Continued) |
opening
of the Royal Pacific Hotel. Revenue per available room increased by $6.73 or
5.7%, to $125.35, due to increased occupancy and average room
rates.
Net
income in 2003 included a gain from the sale of the Metropolitan Hotel of
approximately $56.7 million ($90.2 million pretax) reported as discontinued
operations. Income from continuing operations increased in 2003 due to the
increase in revenue per available room discussed above, partially offset by
higher operating costs and advertising expenses.
Diamond
Offshore
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and subsidiaries ("Diamond Offshore"). Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. is a 55% owned subsidiary of the
Company.
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Diamond Offshore for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as presented in Note 24 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
$ |
823.4 |
|
$ |
682.9 |
|
$ |
754.1 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
29.8 |
|
Investment
gains (losses) |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
(6.9 |
) |
|
36.5 |
|
Total |
|
|
835.9 |
|
|
688.0 |
|
|
820.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
|
815.2 |
|
|
724.2 |
|
|
706.1 |
|
Interest |
|
|
30.2 |
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
23.6 |
|
Total |
|
|
845.4 |
|
|
748.1 |
|
|
729.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.5 |
) |
|
(60.1 |
) |
|
90.7 |
|
Income
tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
(8.1 |
) |
|
35.7 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
(22.4 |
) |
|
29.2 |
|
Net
(loss) income |
|
$ |
(9.2 |
) |
$ |
(29.6 |
) |
$ |
25.8 |
|
Diamond
Offshore's revenues vary based upon demand, which affects the number of days the
fleet is utilized and the dayrates earned. When a rig is idle, generally no
dayrate is earned and revenues will decrease. Revenues can also increase or
decrease as a result of the acquisition or disposal of rigs, required surveys
and shipyard upgrades. In order to improve utilization or realize higher
dayrates, Diamond Offshore may mobilize its rigs from one market to another.
During periods of unpaid mobilization, however, revenues may be adversely
affected. In response to changes in demand, Diamond Offshore may withdraw a rig
from the market by cold stacking it or may reactivate a rig stacked previously,
which may decrease or increase revenues, respectively. The two most significant
variables affecting revenues are dayrates for rigs and rig utilization rates,
each of which is a function of rig supply and demand in the marketplace. As
utilization rates increase, dayrates tend to increase as well reflecting the
lower supply of available rigs, and vice versa. The same factors, primarily
demand for drilling services, which is dependent upon the level of expenditures
set by oil and gas companies for offshore exploration and development as well as
a variety of political and economic factors, and availability of rigs in a
particular geographical region, affect both dayrates and utilization rates.
These factors are not within Diamond Offshore's control and are difficult to
predict.
Revenue from dayrate drilling contracts is recognized as services are performed.
In connection with such drilling contracts, Diamond Offshore may receive
lump-sum fees for the mobilization of equipment. These fees are earned as
services are performed over the initial term of the related drilling contracts.
Diamond Offshore previously accounted for the excess of mobilization fees
received over costs incurred to mobilize an offshore rig from one market to
another as revenue over the term of the related drilling contracts. Effective
July 1, 2004, Diamond Offshore changed its accounting to defer mobilization fees
received as well as direct and incremental mobilization costs incurred and began
to amortize each, on a straight-line basis, over the term of the related
drilling contracts (which is the period estimated to be benefited
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Diamond Offshore -
(Continued) |
from the
mobilization activity). Straight-line amortization of mobilization revenues and
related costs over the term of the related drilling contracts (which generally
range from two to 60 months) is consistent with the timing of net cash flows
generated from the actual drilling services performed. If Diamond Offshore had
used this method of accounting in prior periods, operating income (loss) and net
income (loss) would not have changed and the impact on contract drilling
revenues and expenses would have been immaterial. Absent a contract,
mobilization costs are recognized currently.
Operating income is primarily affected by revenue factors, but is also a
function of varying levels of operating expenses. Operating expenses generally
are not affected by changes in dayrates and may not be significantly affected by
fluctuations in utilization. For instance, if a rig is to be idle for a short
period of time, Diamond Offshore may realize few decreases in operating expenses
since the rig is typically maintained in a prepared or "ready stacked" state
with a full crew. In addition, when a rig is idle, Diamond Offshore is
responsible for certain operating expenses such as rig fuel and supply boat
costs, which are typically a cost of the operator under drilling contracts.
However, if the rig is to be idle for an extended period of time, Diamond
Offshore may reduce the size of a rig's crew and take steps to "cold stack" the
rig, which lowers expenses and partially offsets the impact on operating
income.
Operating income is also negatively impacted when Diamond Offshore performs
certain regulatory inspections that are due every five years ("5-year survey")
for all of Diamond Offshore rigs. Operating revenue decreases because these
surveys are performed during scheduled down-time in a shipyard. Operating
expenses increase as a result of these surveys due to the cost to mobilize the
rigs to a shipyard, inspection costs incurred and repair and maintenance costs.
Repair and maintenance costs may be required resulting from the survey or may
have been previously planned to take place during this mandatory down-time. The
number of rigs undergoing a 5-year survey will vary from year to
year.
2004
Compared with 2003
Revenues increased by $147.9 million, or 21.5%, and net loss decreased by $20.4
million in 2004, as compared to 2003. Revenues in 2004 increased due primarily
to higher contract drilling revenues of $130.3 million and gains on sales of
marketable securities of $0.3 million as compared to losses of $6.9 million in
the prior year.
Revenues
from high specification floaters and other semisubmersible rigs increased by
$49.8 million in 2004, as compared to 2003. The increase reflects an increase in
utilization of $18.4 million and revenues generated by the Ocean Rover and
Ocean
Vanguard of $36.5
million, partially offset by decreased dayrates of $13.2 million.
Revenues
from jack-up rigs increased $80.6 million, or 82.5%, in 2004 due primarily to
increased utilization of $35.4 million and increased dayrates of $34.3 million
as compared to 2003. In addition, revenues in 2004 included $10.9 million
related to the amortization of mobilization fees.
Investment
income increased by $0.2 million, or 1.7%, primarily due to higher yields on
cash and marketable securities and an increase in invested cash balances in
2004, as compared to 2003.
Net loss
decreased in 2004 due primarily to the higher utilization rates earned by
semisubmersible rigs and improved results from sales of marketable securities as
compared to 2003, partially offset by increased contract drilling expenses and
costs related to compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Results for
2003 were also negatively impacted by a reduced tax benefit related to losses
incurred by Diamond Offshore's rigs operating in international markets,
partially offset by lower depreciation expense.
2003
Compared with 2002
Revenues
decreased by $132.4 million, or 16.1%, in 2003, as compared to 2002. Net loss in
2003 was $29.6 million, compared to net income of $25.8 million in 2002.
Revenues in 2003 decreased due primarily to lower contract drilling revenues of
$72.1 million, losses on sales of marketable securities, as compared to gains in
the prior year, and reduced investment income.
Revenues
from high specification floaters and other semisubmersible rigs decreased by
$58.1 million in 2003, as compared to 2002. The decrease reflects a decline in
dayrates of $81.5 million and decreased utilization of $8.6 million, partially
offset by revenues generated by the recent additions of the Ocean
Patriot and the
Ocean
Vanguard and the
July 2003 completion of the upgrade to high specification capabilities of the
Ocean
Rover
amounting to $25.4 million in 2003.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Diamond Offshore -
(Continued) |
Revenues
from jack-up rigs decreased $1.6 million, or 11.3%, in 2003 due primarily to
decreased utilization of $6.3 million, partially offset by increased dayrates of
$4.7 million as compared to 2002.
Investment
income decreased by $17.8 million, or 59.7%, primarily due to lower yields on
cash and marketable securities and a reduction in invested cash balances in
2003, as compared to 2002.
Net
income decreased in 2003 due primarily to the lower dayrates earned by
semisubmersible rigs, losses on sales of marketable securities as compared to
gains in 2002, lower investment income and increased contract drilling expenses.
Results for 2003 were also negatively impacted by a reduced tax benefit related
to losses incurred by Diamond Offshore's rigs operating in international
markets, partially offset by lower depreciation expense.
In April
of 2003, Diamond Offshore commissioned a study to evaluate the economic lives of
its drilling rigs. As a result of this study, Diamond Offshore recorded changes
in accounting estimates by increasing the estimated service lives to 25 years
for jack-ups and 30 years for semisubmersibles and Diamond Offshore's drillship
and by increasing salvage values to 5.0% for most of its drilling rigs. The
change in estimate was made to better reflect the remaining economic lives and
salvage values of Diamond Offshore's fleet. The effect of this change in
accounting estimate resulted in an increase to net income of $10.2 million
(after-tax and minority interest) for the year ended December 31,
2003.
Boardwalk
Pipelines
Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC and subsidiaries ("Boardwalk Pipelines"). Boardwalk Pipelines,
LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company.
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Boardwalk Pipelines for
the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 as presented in Note 24 of the Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
$ |
264.4 |
|
$ |
143.0 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Total |
|
|
265.1 |
|
|
143.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating |
|
|
153.9 |
|
|
86.2 |
|
Interest |
|
|
30.1 |
|
|
19.4 |
|
Total |
|
|
184.0 |
|
|
105.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81.1 |
|
|
37.6 |
|
Income
tax expense |
|
|
32.3 |
|
|
15.1 |
|
Net
income |
|
$ |
48.8 |
|
$ |
22.5 |
|
Revenues
and net income in 2003 reflect operations of Texas Gas from May 17, 2003, the
date of acquisition. See Note 14 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Revenues
and net income in 2004 reflect a full year of operations for Texas Gas and
operations of Gulf South from December 29, 2004, the date of
acquisition.
Revenues
for Texas Gas in 2004 reflect an increase in storage revenues due to new
contracts and a regulatory settlement. These increases were partially offset by
lower transportation by others revenue due to the expiration of transportation
contracts on third-party pipelines and lower summer no-notice
service.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations -Boardwalk Pipelines -
(Continued) |
Net
income for Texas Gas decreased in 2004 due to an increase in operating expenses
offset by an increase in revenues noted above. The increase in operating
expenses was primarily due to a benefit accrual adjustment in 2003, an increase
in labor and benefit costs and an accrual for environmental costs.
Corporate
and Other
Corporate
operations consist primarily of investment income, including investment gains
(losses) from non-insurance subsidiaries, the operations of Bulova, equity
earnings from Majestic Shipping Corporation ("Majestic"), corporate interest
expenses and other corporate administrative costs. Majestic, a wholly owned
subsidiary, owns a 49% common stock interest in Hellespont Shipping Corporation
("Hellespont").
The
following table summarizes the results of operations for Corporate and Other for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 as presented in Note 24 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufactured
products |
|
$ |
167.4 |
|
$ |
163.2 |
|
$ |
165.8 |
|
Net
investment income (loss) |
|
|
144.0 |
|
|
148.7 |
|
|
(16.7 |
) |
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
(13.2 |
) |
|
7.3 |
|
|
48.6 |
|
Other |
|
|
208.5 |
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
5.6 |
|
Total |
|
|
506.7 |
|
|
328.7 |
|
|
203.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales |
|
|
79.8 |
|
|
79.7 |
|
|
77.2 |
|
Operating |
|
|
127.8 |
|
|
113.6 |
|
|
116.5 |
|
Interest |
|
|
134.2 |
|
|
126.2 |
|
|
127.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
341.8 |
|
|
319.5 |
|
|
320.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164.9 |
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
(117.4 |
) |
Income
tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
57.6 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
(42.2 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
107.0 |
|
$ |
6.7 |
|
$ |
(75.6 |
) |
2004
Compared with 2003
Revenues
increased by $178.0 million and net income increased by $100.3 million in 2004,
as compared to 2003.
In July
of 2004, Hellespont sold all of its ultra-large crude oil tankers. The Company
received cash distributions from Hellespont and recognized income of $179.3
million ($116.5 million after taxes). See Liquidity and Capital Resources -
Corporate and Other. Hellespont had been engaged in the business of owning and
operating four ultra-large crude oil tankers that were used primarily to
transport crude oil from the Persian Gulf to a limited number of ports in the
Far East, Northern Europe and the United States.
Revenues
increased in 2004 due primarily to income of $179.3 million from the Hellespont
transaction noted above, partially offset by decreased net investment income and
investment gains of $25.2 million.
Net
income increased in 2004 due primarily to the increased revenues discussed
above, partially offset by pretax charges in 2004 of $17.8 million related to
the early redemption of long-term debt and $4.9 million related to an estimate
by Bulova for remediation costs of environmental liabilities.
2003
Compared with 2002
Revenues
increased by $125.4 million and net income increased by $82.3 million in 2003,
as compared to 2002.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Results
of Operations - Corporate and Other -
(Continued) |
Revenues
increased in 2003 due primarily to increased net investment income and
investment gains of $124.1 million and higher results from shipping operations
of $4.7 million. Net income increased due primarily to the improved results from
the investment portfolio and increased results from shipping
operations.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
CNA
Financial
Cash
Flow
The
principal operating cash flow sources of CNA's property and casualty and life
insurance subsidiaries are premiums and investment income. The primary operating
cash flow uses are payments for claims, policy benefits and operating
expenses.
For 2004,
net cash provided by operating activities was $1,607.0 million as compared to
$1,760.0 million in 2003. The decrease in cash provided by operating activities
was primarily driven by a decrease in premium collections related to the
dispositions of the life and group businesses and CNA Re. Offsetting the
decrease in premium collections were decreased paid claims and a federal tax
refund received in 2004.
For 2003,
net cash provided by operating activities was $1,760.0 million as compared with
net cash provided of $1,040.0 million in 2002. The increase in cash provided by
operating activities related primarily to a decrease in paid claims and
increased net premium collections in 2003 as compared with 2002.
Cash
flows from investing activities include purchases and sales of financial
instruments, as well as the purchase and sale of businesses, land, buildings,
equipment and other assets not generally held for resale. The change in cash
collateral exchanged as part of the securities lending activity is included as a
cash flow from investing activities.
For 2004,
net cash used for investing activities was $2,019.0 million as compared with
$2,133.0 million in 2003. Cash flows used by investing activities were related
principally to increased purchases of fixed maturity securities in 2004 as
compared to 2003.
For 2003,
net cash used for investing activities was $2,133.0 million as compared with net
cash used of $1,488.0 million in 2002. Cash flows used for investing related
principally to purchases of fixed maturity securities.
The cash
flow from investing activities is impacted by various factors such as the
anticipated payment of claims, financing activity, asset/liability management
and individual security buy and sell decisions made in the normal course of
portfolio management. A consideration in management of the portfolio is the
characteristics of the underlying liabilities and the ability to align the
duration of the portfolio to those liabilities to meet future liquidity needs
and minimize interest rate risk. For portfolios where future liability cash
flows are determinable and are generally long term in nature, CNA management
segregates assets and related liabilities for asset/liability management
purposes. The asset/liability management strategy is used to mitigate valuation
changes due to interest rate risk in those specific portfolios. Another
consideration in the asset/liability matched portfolios is to maintain a level
of income sufficient to support the underlying insurance
liabilities.
For those
securities in the portfolio that are not part of a segregated asset/liability
management strategy, CNA typically manages the portfolio to a target duration
range dictated by the underlying insurance liabilities. In managing these
portfolios, securities are bought and sold based on individual security value
assessments made, but with the overall goal of meeting the duration
targets.
Cash
flows from financing activities include proceeds from the issuance of debt and
equity securities, outflows for repayment of debt and outlays to reacquire
equity instruments.
For the
year ended December 31, 2004, net cash provided from financing activities was
$368.0 million as compared with $386.0 million in 2003. For the year ended
December 31, 2003, net cash provided from financing activities was $386.0
million as compared with $432.0 million in 2002.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
CNA is
closely managing the cash flows related to claims and reinsurance recoverables
from the WTC event. It is anticipated that there will be a significant lag
between the time claim payments are made and the receipt of the corresponding
reinsurance recoverables. CNA has not suffered any liquidity problems resulting
from these payments. As of December 31, 2004, CNA has paid $876.0 million in
claims and of that amount has recovered $486.0 million from
reinsurers.
CNA's
estimated gross pretax losses for the WTC event, recorded in 2001,were $1,648.0
million pretax ($958.3 million after-tax and minority interest). Net pretax
losses before the effect of corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties were $727.0
million. Approximately 1.0%, 59.0% and 29.0% of the reinsurance recoverables on
the estimated losses related to the WTC event are from companies with Standard
& Poor's ("S&P") ratings of AAA, AA or A.
CNA
believes that its present cash flows from operations, investing activities and
financing activities are sufficient to fund its working capital
needs.
Debt
In
December of 2004, CNA acquired three buildings, which previously were leased
under capital leases. As part of the transaction, CNA directly assumed the
underlying debt obligation which the lessor of the three buildings owed to a
third party. By directly assuming the lessor's debt obligation, CNA reduced its
overall debt obligation by $5.0 million.
On
December 15, 2004, CNA completed the sale of $549.0 million of 5.85% ten-year
senior notes in a public offering. CNA contributed approximately $47.0 million
of the net proceeds to its subsidiary CCC for CCC to repurchase its outstanding
Group Surplus Note due 2024 and intends to use approximately $498.0 million of
the net proceeds of this offering to repay at maturity all of its outstanding
6.5% notes due April 15, 2005.
During
2004, Encompass Insurance Company of America ("EICA"), a wholly owned subsidiary
of CNA, sold a $50.0 million surplus note to Allstate Insurance Company. The
EICA note bears interest semi-annually at 2.5% per annum and is due on March 31,
2006.
In May of
2004, CNA Surety issued privately, through a wholly-owned trust, $30.0 million
of preferred securities through two pooled transactions. These securities bear
interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 337.5 basis points with a thirty-year term and
are redeemable after five years. The securities were issued by CNA Surety
Capital Trust I ("Issuer Trust"). The sole asset of the Issuer Trust consists of
a $31.0 million junior subordinated debenture issued by CNA Surety to the Issuer
Trust. The subordinated debenture bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 337.5
basis points and matures in April of 2034. As of December 31, 2004, the interest
rate on the junior subordinated debenture was 5.7%.
On
September 30, 2003, CNA Surety entered into a $50.0 million credit agreement,
which consisted of a $30.0 million two-year revolving credit facility and a
$20.0 million two-year term loan, with semi-annual principal payments of $5.0
million. The credit agreement is an amendment to a $65.0 million credit
agreement, extending the revolving loan termination date from September 30, 2003
to September 30, 2005. The new revolving credit facility was fully utilized at
inception. In June of 2004, CNA Surety reduced the outstanding borrowings under
the credit facility by $10.0 million, and in September of 2004, CNA Surety
increased the outstanding borrowings under the credit facility by $5.0 million
to fund the semi-annual term loan payment.
Under the
amended credit facility agreement, CNA Surety pays a facility fee of 35.0 basis
points on the revolving credit portion of the facility, interest at LIBOR plus
90.0 basis points, and for utilization greater than 50.0% of the amount
available to borrow an additional fee of 5.0 basis points. On the term loan, CNA
Surety pays interest at LIBOR plus 62.5 basis points. At December 31, 2004, the
weighted-average interest rate on the $35.0 million of outstanding borrowings
under the credit agreement, including facility fees and utilization fees, was
3.3%. Effective January 30, 2003, CNA Surety entered into a swap agreement on
the term loan portion of the agreement which uses the 3-month LIBOR to determine
the swap increment. As a result, the effective interest rate on the $10.0
million in outstanding borrowings on the term loan was 2.77% at December 31,
2004. On the $25.0 million revolving credit agreement, the effective interest
rate at December 31, 2004 was 3.49%.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Related
Parties
CNA
Surety has provided significant surety bond protection for a large national
contractor that undertakes projects for the construction of government and
private facilities, a substantial portion of which have been reinsured by CCC.
In order to help this contractor meet its liquidity needs and complete projects
which had been bonded by CNA Surety, commencing in 2003 CNA has provided loans
to the contractor through a credit facility. In December of 2004, the credit
facility was amended to increase the maximum available loans to $106.0 million
from $86.0 million. The amendment also provides that CNA may in its sole
discretion further increase the amounts available for loans under the credit
facility, up to an aggregate maximum of $126.0 million. As of December 31, 2004
and 2003, there were $99.0 million and $80.0 million of total debt outstanding
under the credit facility. Additional loans in January and February of 2005
brought the total debt outstanding under the credit facility, less accrued
interest, to $104.0 million as of February 24, 2005. The Company, through a
participation agreement with CNA, provided funds for and owned a participation
of $29.0 million and $25.0 million of the loans outstanding as of December 31,
2004 and 2003 and has agreed to participation of one-third of any additional
loans which may be made above the original $86.0 million credit facility limit
up to the $126.0 million maximum available line.
In
connection with the amendment to increase the maximum available line under the
credit facility in December of 2004, the term of the loan under the credit
facility was extended to mature in March of 2009 and the interest rate was
reduced prospectively from 6.0% over prime rate to 5.0% per annum, effective as
of December 27, 2004, with an additional 3.0% interest accrual when borrowings
under the facility are at or below the original $86.0 million limit. Loans under
the credit facility are secured by a pledge of substantially all of the assets
of the contractor and certain of its affiliates. In connection with the credit
facility, CNA has also guaranteed or provided collateral for letters of credit
which are charged against the maximum available line and, if drawn upon, would
be treated as loans under the credit facility. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
these guarantees and collateral obligations aggregated $13.0 million and $7.0
million.
The
contractor implemented a restructuring plan intended to reduce costs and improve
cash flow, and appointed a chief restructuring officer to manage execution of
the plan. In the course of addressing various expense, operational and strategic
issues, however, the contractor has decided to substantially reduce the scope of
its original business and to concentrate on those segments determined to be
potentially profitable. As a consequence, operating cash flow, and in turn the
capacity to service debt, has been reduced below previous levels. Restructuring
plans have also been extended to accommodate these circumstances. In light of
these developments, the Company has taken an impairment charge of $80.5 million
pretax ($48.8 million after-tax and minority interest) during the fourth quarter
of 2004, with respect to amounts loaned under the facility. Any draws under the
credit facility beyond $106.0 million or further changes in the national
contractor's business plan or projections may necessitate further impairment
charges.
As a
result of the impairment taken in the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company plans
to recognize income using the effective interest rate method starting in the
first quarter of 2005. Under this method, interest income recognized will be
accrued on the net carrying amount of the loan at the effective interest rate
used to discount the impaired loan's estimated future cash flows. The excess of
the cash received over the interest income recognized will reduce the carrying
amount of the loan. The change in present value, if any, of the loan that is
attributable to changes in the amount or timing of future cash flows will be
recorded similar to the impairment charges previously recorded.
CNA
Surety has advised that it intends to continue to provide surety bonds on behalf
of the contractor during this extended restructuring period, subject to the
contractor's initial and ongoing compliance with CNA Surety's underwriting
standards and ongoing management of CNA Surety's exposure to the contractor. All
bonds written for the national contractor are issued by CCC and its affiliates,
other than CNA Surety, and are subject to underlying reinsurance treaties
pursuant to which all bonds on behalf of CNA Surety are 100% reinsured to one of
CNA Surety's insurance subsidiaries. This arrangement underlies the more limited
reinsurance coverages discussed below.
Through
facultative reinsurance contracts with CCC, CNA Surety's exposure on bonds
written from October 1, 2002 through October 31, 2003 has been limited to $20.0
million per bond, with CCC to incur 100% of losses above that level. For bonds
written on or subsequent to November 1, 2003, CNA Surety's exposure is limited
to $14.5 million per bond, subject to a per principal retention of $60.0 million
and an aggregate limit of $150.0 million, under all facultative
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
insurance
coverage and two excess of loss treaties between CNA Surety and CCC. The first
excess of loss contract, $40.0 million excess of $60.0 million, provides CNA
Surety coverage exclusively for the national contractor, while the second excess
of loss contract, $50.0 million excess of $100.0 million, provides CNA Surety
with coverage for the national contractor as well as other CNA Surety risks. For
bonds written prior to September 30, 2002, there is no facultative reinsurance
and CCC retains 100% of the losses above the per principal retention of $60.0
million.
Renewals
of both excess of loss contracts were effective January 1, 2005. CCC and CNA
Surety are presently discussing a possible restructuring of the reinsurance
arrangements described in the paragraph above, under which all bonds written for
the national contractor would be reinsured by CCC under an excess of $60.0
million treaty and other CNA Surety accounts would be covered by a separate
$50.0 million excess of $100.0 million treaty.
CCC and
CNA Surety continue to engage in periodic discussions with insurance regulatory
authorities regarding the level of bonds provided for this principal and will
continue to apprise those authorities regarding their ongoing exposure to this
account.
Indemnification
and subrogation rights, including rights to contract proceeds on construction
projects in the event of default, exist that reduce CNA Surety's and ultimately
the Company's exposure to loss. While CNA believes that the contractor's
continuing restructuring efforts may be successful and provide sufficient cash
flow for its operations, the contractor's failure to ultimately achieve its
extended restructuring plan or perform its contractual obligations under the
credit facility or under CNA's surety bonds could have a material adverse effect
on the Company's results of operations and/ or equity. If such failures occur,
CNA estimates the surety loss, net of indemnification and subrogation
recoveries, but before the effects of minority interest, to be approximately
$200.0 million pretax. In addition, such failures could cause the remaining
unimpaired amount due under the credit facility to be
uncollectible.
Commitments,
Contingencies and Guarantees
In the
normal course of business, CNA has obtained letters of credit in favor of
various unaffiliated insurance companies, regulatory authorities and other
entities. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, there were approximately $47.0 million
and $58.0 million of outstanding letters of credit.
CNA has
provided guarantees related to irrevocable standby letters of credit for certain
of its subsidiaries. Certain of these subsidiaries have been sold; however, the
irrevocable standby letter of credit guarantees remain in effect. CNA would be
required to make payment on the letters of credit in question if the primary
obligor drew down on these letters of credit and failed to repay such loans in
accordance with the terms of the letters of credit. The maximum potential amount
of future payments that CNA could be required to pay under these guarantees are
approximately $30.0 million at December 31, 2004.
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA had committed approximately $104.0 million and
$154.0 million to future capital calls from various third-party limited
partnership investments in exchange for an ownership interest in the related
partnerships.
In the
normal course of investing activities, CCC had committed approximately $51.0
million as of December 31, 2004 to future capital calls from certain of its
unconsolidated affiliates in exchange for an ownership interest in such
affiliates.
CNA holds
an investment in a real estate joint venture. In the normal course of business,
CNA on a joint and several basis with other unrelated insurance company
shareholders have committed to continue funding any operating deficits of this
joint venture. Additionally, CNA and the other unrelated shareholders, on a
joint and several basis, have guaranteed an operating lease for an office
building, which expires in 2016. The guarantee of the operating lease is a
parallel guarantee to the commitment to fund operating deficits; consequently,
the separate guarantee to the lessor is not expected to be triggered as long as
the joint venture continues to be funded by its shareholders and continues to
make its annual lease payments.
In the
event that the other parties to the joint venture are unable to meet their
commitments in funding the operations of this joint venture, CNA would be
required to assume the obligation for the entire office building operating
lease. The maximum potential future lease payments at December 31, 2004 that CNA
could be required to pay under this guarantee
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
is
approximately $312.0 million. If CNA were required to assume the entire lease
obligation, CNA would have the right to pursue reimbursement from the other
shareholders and would have the right to all sublease revenues.
CNA
invests in multiple bank loan participations as part of its overall investment
strategy and has committed to additional future purchases and sales. The
purchase and sale of these investments are recorded on the date that the legal
agreements are finalized and cash settlement is made. As of December 31, 2004,
CNA had commitments to purchase $41.0 million and commitments to sell $2.0
million of various bank loan participations.
In the
course of selling business entities and assets to third parties, CNA has agreed
to indemnify purchasers for losses arising out of breaches of representation and
warranties with respect to the business entities or assets being sold,
including, in certain cases, losses arising from undisclosed liabilities or
certain named litigation. Such indemnification provisions generally survive for
periods ranging from nine months following the applicable closing date to the
expiration of the relevant statutes of limitation. As of December 31, 2004, the
aggregate amount of quantifiable indemnification agreements in effect for sales
of business entities, assets and third party loans was $950.0
million.
In
addition, CNA has agreed to provide indemnification to third party purchasers
for certain losses associated with sold business entities or assets that are not
limited by a contractual monetary amount. As of December 31, 2004, CNA had
outstanding unlimited indemnifications in connection with the sales of certain
of its business entities or assets for tax liabilities arising prior to a
purchaser's ownership of an entity or asset, defects in title at the time of
sale, employee claims arising prior to closing and in some cases losses arising
from certain litigation and undisclosed liabilities. These indemnification
agreements survive until the applicable statutes of limitation expire, or until
the agreed upon contract terms expire. Additionally, CNA has provided a
contingent guarantee to the lenders of two third parties, related to loans
extended by their lenders. As of December 31, 2004, CNA has recorded
approximately $21.0 million of liabilities related to these indemnification
agreements.
Cash and
securities with carrying values of approximately $18.0 million and $23.0 million
were deposited with financial institutions as collateral for letters of credit
as of December 31, 2004 and 2003. In addition, cash and securities were
deposited in trusts with financial institutions to secure reinsurance
obligations with various third parties. The carrying values of these deposits
were approximately $329.0 million and $254.0 million as of December 31, 2004 and
2003.
Regulatory
Matters
CNA has
established a plan to reorganize and streamline its U.S. property and casualty
insurance legal entity structure. One phase of this multi-year plan was
completed during 2003. This phase served to consolidate CNA's U.S. property and
casualty insurance risks into CCC, as well as realign the capital supporting
these risks. As part of this phase, CNA implemented in the fourth quarter of
2003 a 100% quota share reinsurance agreement, effective January 1, 2003, ceding
all of the net insurance risks of CIC and its 14 affiliated insurance companies
("CIC Group") to CCC. Additionally, the ownership of the CIC Group was
transferred to CCC during 2003 in order to align the insurance risks with the
supporting capital. In subsequent phases of this plan, CNA will continue its
efforts to reduce both the number of U.S. property and casualty insurance
entities it maintains and the number of states in which such entities are
domiciled. In order to facilitate the execution of this plan, CNA, CCC and CIC
have agreed to participate in a working group consisting of several states of
the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
In
connection with the approval process for aspects of the reorganization plan, CNA
agreed to undergo a state regulatory financial examination of CCC and CIC as of
December 31, 2003, including a review of insurance reserves by an independent
actuarial firm. These state regulatory financial examinations are currently
underway. CNA is presently engaged in discussions related to the examination
with state regulatory agencies. Final examination reports are expected to be
issued in the first half of 2005 by the state authorities.
Pursuant
to its participation in the working group referenced above, CNA has agreed to
certain time frames and informational provisions in relation to the
reorganization plan. CNA has also agreed that any proceeds from the sale of any
member of the CIC pool, net of transaction expenses, will be retained in CIC or
one of its subsidiaries until the dividend stipulation discussed below
expires.
Along
with other companies in the industry, CNA has received subpoenas and
interrogatories: (i) from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii,
Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
West
Virginia concerning investigations into practices including contingent
compensation arrangements, fictitious quotes, and tying arrangements; (ii) from
the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York State Attorney General
concerning finite insurance products purchased and sold by CNA; and (iii) from
the New York State Attorney General concerning declinations of attorney
malpractice insurance.
Ratings
Ratings
are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance
companies. CNA's insurance company subsidiaries are rated by major rating
agencies, and these ratings reflect the rating agency's opinion of the insurance
company's financial strength, operating performance, strategic position and
ability to meet its obligations to policyholders. Agency ratings are not a
recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, and may be revised or
withdrawn at any time by the issuing organization. Each agency's rating should
be evaluated independently of any other agency's rating. One or more of these
agencies could take action in the future to change the ratings of CNA's
insurance subsidiaries.
The
actions that can be taken by rating agencies are changes in ratings or
modifiers. "On Review," "Credit Watch" and "Rating Watch" are modifiers used by
the ratings agencies to alert those parties relying on CNA's ratings of the
possibility of a rating change in the near term. Modifiers are utilized when the
agencies are uncertain as to the impact of a CNA action or initiative, which
could prove to be material to the current rating level. Modifiers are generally
used to indicate a possible change in rating within 90 days. "Outlooks"
accompanied with ratings are additional modifiers used by the rating agencies to
alert those parties relying on CNA's ratings of the possibility of a rating
change in the longer term. The time frame referenced in an outlook is not
necessarily limited to ninety days as defined in the Credit-Watch
category.
The table
below reflects the various group ratings issued by A.M. Best, S&P, Moody's
Investors Service ("Moody's") and Fitch as of February 16, 2005 for the Property
and Casualty and Life companies. The table also includes the ratings for CNA's
senior debt and Continental senior debt.
|
Insurance
Financial Strength Ratings |
Debt
Ratings |
|
Property
& Casualty (a) |
Life |
CNA |
Continental |
|
CCC |
CIC |
|
Senior |
Senior |
|
Group |
Group |
CAC(b) |
Debt |
Debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.M.
Best |
A |
A |
A- |
bbb |
Not
rated |
Fitch |
A- |
A- |
A- |
BBB- |
BBB- |
Moody's |
A3 |
A3 |
Baa1 |
Baa3 |
Baa3 |
S&P |
A- |
A- |
BBB+ |
BBB- |
BBB- |
__________
(a) |
All
outlooks for the Property & Casualty companies' financial strength and
holding company debt ratings are negative. |
(b) |
A.M.
Best and Moody's have a stable outlook while Fitch and S&P have
negative outlooks on the CAC rating. |
If CNA's
property and casualty insurance financial strength ratings were downgraded below
current levels, CNA's business and the Company's results of operations could be
materially adversely affected. The severity of the impact on CNA's business is
dependent on the level of downgrade and, for certain products, which rating
agency takes the rating action. Among the adverse effects in the event of such
downgrades would be the inability to obtain a material volume of business from
certain major insurance brokers, the inability to sell a material volume of
CNA's insurance products to certain markets, and the required collateralization
of certain future payment obligations or reserves.
In
addition, CNA believes that a lowering of the debt ratings of Loews by certain
of these agencies could result in an adverse impact on CNA's ratings,
independent of any change in circumstances at CNA. Each of the major rating
agencies which rates Loews currently maintains a negative outlook, but none
currently has Loews on negative Credit Watch.
CNA has
entered into several settlement agreements and assumed reinsurance contracts
that require collateralization of future payment obligations and assumed
reserves if CNA's ratings or other specific criteria fall below certain
thresholds. The ratings triggers are generally more than one level below CNA's
February 16, 2005 ratings.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - CNA Financial -
(Continued) |
Dividend
Paying Ability
CNA's
ability to pay dividends and other credit obligations is significantly dependent
on receipt of dividends from its subsidiaries. The payment of dividends to CNA
by its insurance subsidiaries without prior approval of the insurance department
of each subsidiary's domiciliary jurisdiction is limited by formula. Dividends
in excess of these amounts are subject to prior approval by the respective state
insurance departments.
Dividends
from CCC are subject to the insurance holding company laws of the State of
Illinois, the domiciliary state of CCC. Under these laws, ordinary dividends, or
dividends that do not require prior approval of the Illinois Department of
Financial and Professional Regulation - Division of Insurance (the
"Department"), may be paid only from earned surplus, which is calculated by
removing unrealized gains from unassigned surplus. As of December 31, 2004, CCC
is in a negative earned surplus position. In December of 2004, the Department
approved extraordinary dividend capacity of $125.0 million to be used to fund
CNA's 2005 debt service requirements. It is anticipated that CCC will be in a
positive earned surplus position at the end of the first quarter of 2005 and be
able to begin paying ordinary dividends in the second quarter of 2005 as a
result of a $500.0 million dividend received from its subsidiary, CAC, on
February 11, 2005.
By
agreement with the New Hampshire Insurance Department, the CIC Group may not pay
dividends to CCC until after January 1, 2006.
CNA's
domestic insurance subsidiaries are subject to risk-based capital requirements.
Risk-based capital is a method developed by the NAIC to determine the minimum
amount of statutory capital appropriate for an insurance company to support its
overall business operations in consideration of its size and risk profile. The
formula for determining the amount of risk-based capital specifies various
factors, weighted based on the perceived degree of risk, which are applied to
certain financial balances and financial activity. The adequacy of a company's
actual capital is evaluated by a comparison to the risk-based capital results,
as determined by the formula. Companies below minimum risk-based capital
requirements are classified within certain levels, each of which requires
specified corrective action. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, all of CNA's
domestic insurance subsidiaries exceeded the minimum risk-based capital
requirements.
Lorillard
Lorillard
and other cigarette manufacturers continue to be confronted with substantial
litigation. Plaintiffs in most of the cases seek unspecified amounts of
compensatory damages and punitive damages, although some seek damages ranging
into the billions of dollars. Plaintiffs in some of the cases seek treble
damages, statutory damages, disgorgement of profits, equitable and injunctive
relief, and medical monitoring, among other damages.
Lorillard
believes that it has valid defenses to the cases pending against it. Lorillard
also believes it has valid bases for appeal of the adverse verdicts against it.
To the extent the Company is a defendant in any of the lawsuits, the Company
believes that it is not a proper defendant in these matters and has moved or
plans to move for dismissal of all such claims against it. While Lorillard
intends to defend vigorously all tobacco products liability litigation, it is
not possible to predict the outcome of any of this litigation. Litigation is
subject to many uncertainties, and it is possible that some of these actions
could be decided unfavorably. Lorillard may enter into discussions in an attempt
to settle particular cases if it believes it is appropriate to do
so.
Except
for the impact of the State Settlement Agreements as described below, management
is unable to make a meaningful estimate of the amount or range of loss that
could result from an unfavorable outcome of pending tobacco related litigation
and, therefore, no provision has been made in the Consolidated Financial
Statements for any unfavorable outcome. It is possible that the Company's
results of operations, cash flows and its financial position could be materially
adversely affected by an unfavorable outcome of certain pending litigation.
The State
Settlement Agreements require Lorillard
and the
other Original
Participating Manufacturers ("OPMs") to make aggregate
annual
payments in the following amounts, subject to adjustment for several
factors
described below: $8.4
billion through 2007 and $9.4 billion thereafter. In addition, the OPMs
are
required to pay plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, subject to an aggregate
annual
cap of $500.0 million, as well as an additional aggregate
amount of
up to $125.0 million in each year through 2008. These payment obligations are
the several and not joint obligations of each of the
OPMs. The
Company believes that Lorillard's obligations under the State Settlement
Agreements will materially adversely affect the Company's cash flows and
operating income in future years.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - Lorillard -
(Continued) |
Both the
aggregate payment
obligations of the
OPMs, and the payment obligations of Lorillard, individually, under
the State Settlement Agreements are subject to adjustment for several
factors: inflation;
aggregate volume
of domestic cigarette shipments; market
share; and industry operating income. The
inflation adjustment increases payments on a compounded annual basis by the
greater of 3.0% or the actual total percentage change in the consumer price
index for the preceding year. The inflation adjustment is measured starting with
inflation for 1999. The volume adjustment increases or decreases payments based
on the increase or decrease in the total number of cigarettes shipped in or to
the 50 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico by the OPMs during
the preceding year, as compared to the 1997 base year
shipments. If
volume has increased, the volume adjustment would increase the annual payment by
the same percentage as the number of cigarettes shipped exceeds the 1997 base
number. If volume has decreased, the volume adjustment would decrease the annual
payment by 98.0% of
the percentage reduction in volume. In
addition, downward
adjustments to the annual payments for changes in volume may, subject to
specified conditions and exceptions, be reduced in the event of an increase in
the OPMs aggregate operating income from domestic sales of cigarettes over base
year levels established in the State Settlement Agreements, adjusted for
inflation. Any adjustments resulting from increases in operating income would be
allocated among those OPMs who have had increases.
Lorillard's
cash payment under the State Settlement Agreements in 2004 was approximately
$830.0 million.
Lorillard estimates the amount payable in 2005 will be approximately $875.0
million to $925.0 million,
primarily based on 2004 estimated industry volume. Because of the
many factors discussed above, Lorillard is unable to predict the amount of
payments
under the
State Settlement Agreements in
subsequent
years.
See Item
3 - Legal Proceedings and Note 21 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Item 8 of this Report for additional information
regarding this settlement and other litigation matters.
Lorillard's
marketable securities totaled $1,545.6 million and $1,530.2 million at December
31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. At December 31, 2004, fixed maturity securities
represented 88.8% of the total investment in marketable securities, including
47.2% invested in Treasury Bills with an average duration of approximately 3
months, 25.3% invested in Treasury Notes with an average duration of
approximately 16 months and 27.5% invested in money market
accounts.
The
principal source of liquidity for Lorillard's business and operating needs is
internally generated funds from its operations. Lorillard's operating activities
resulted in a net cash inflow of approximately $631.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004, compared to $711.6 million for the prior year. Lorillard
believes, based on current conditions, that cash flows from operating activities
will be sufficient to enable it to meet its obligations under the State
Settlement Agreements and to fund its capital expenditures. Lorillard cannot
predict the impact on its cash flows of cash requirements related to any future
settlements or judgments, including cash required to bond any appeals, if
necessary, or the impact of subsequent legislative actions, and thus can give no
assurance that it will be able to meet all of those requirements.
Loews
Hotels
Cash and
investments decreased from $74.6 million at December 31, 2003 to $58.6 million
at December 31, 2004. Funds from operations continue to exceed operating
requirements. Funds for other capital expenditures and working capital
requirements are expected to be provided from existing cash balances and
operations.
In
February of 2005, Loews Hotels refinanced a $56.3 million hotel mortgage. The
Company has guaranteed this obligation.
Diamond
Offshore
Cash and
investments increased from $610.3 million at December 31, 2003 to $927.9 at
December 31, 2004. Cash provided by operating activities was $207.4 million in
2004, compared to $162.5 million in 2003. The
increase in cash flow from operations in 2004 is the result of higher
utilization and average dayrates earned by Diamond Offshore's offshore drilling
units as a result of an increase in overall demand for offshore contract
drilling services, particularly in the second half of the year. These favorable
trends were negatively impacted by reactivation costs for previously
cold-stacked rigs and repair costs of damages caused by Hurricane Ivan in the
third quarter of 2004.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - Diamond Offshore -
(Continued) |
In
January of 2005, Diamond Offshore announced the initiation of a major upgrade of
its Victory-class semisubmersible, the Ocean
Endeavor, for
ultra-deepwater service. The modernized rig will be designed to operate in up to
10,000 feet of water at an estimated upgrade cost of approximately $250.0
million of which approximately $110.0 million is expected to be expended in
2005. The rig will be mobilized to a shipyard in Singapore where work is
scheduled to commence in the second quarter of 2005. Delivery of the upgraded
rig is expected in approximately two years.
During
the year ended December 31, 2004, Diamond Offshore spent approximately $13.0
million to upgrade one of its high specification semisubmersible units, the
Ocean
America, with
capabilities making it more suitable for developmental drilling. In addition,
Diamond Offshore spent $76.2 million on its continuing rig maintenance program
(other than rig upgrades), and to meet other corporate capital expenditure
requirements in 2004.
Diamond
Offshore has budgeted an additional $115.0 million of capital expenditures in
2005 in association with its ongoing rig equipment replacement and enhancement
programs and to meet other corporate requirements. Diamond Offshore expects to
finance its 2005 capital expenditures through the use of existing cash balances
or internally generated funds.
Cash
required to meet Diamond Offshore's capital commitments is determined by
evaluating rig upgrades to meet specific customer requirements and by evaluating
Diamond Offshore's ongoing rig equipment replacement and enhancement programs,
including water depth and drilling capability upgrades. It is the opinion of
Diamond Offshore's management that operating cash flows and existing cash
reserves will be sufficient to meet these capital commitments; however, periodic
assessments will be made based on industry conditions. In addition, Diamond
Offshore may, from time to time, issue debt or equity securities, or a
combination thereof, to finance capital expenditures, the acquisition of assets
and businesses or for general corporate purposes. Diamond Offshore's ability to
issue any such securities will be dependent on Diamond Offshore's results of
operations, its current financial condition, current market conditions and other
factors beyond its control.
On August
27, 2004, Diamond Offshore issued $250.0 million aggregate principal amount of
5.2% Senior Notes Due September 1, 2014 (the "Notes"). These Notes were issued
at 99.759% of the principal amount and resulted in net proceeds to Diamond
Offshore of $247.8 million.
At
December 31, 2004, the aggregate accreted value of Diamond Offshore's Zero
Coupon Debentures was $471.2 million. On June 6, 2005, holders of these
debentures have the option to require Diamond Offshore to repurchase the
debentures at the accreted value on the date of repurchase. Diamond Offshore may
fund this repurchase with cash, shares of its common stock, or a combination
thereof.
Diamond
Offshore's credit rating is Baa2 for Moody's Investors Services ("Moody's") and
A- for S&P. In 2003, Moody's lowered its ratings of Diamond Offshore's
long-term debt to Baa1 from A3 and on April 27, 2004 lowered its rating from
Baa1 to Baa2 and changed the rating outlook to stable from negative. On July 27,
2004, S&P lowered Diamond Offshore's debt rating from A to A- and rated its
outlook as stable. Although Diamond Offshore's long-term debt ratings continue
at investment grade levels, lower ratings could result in higher interest rates
on future debt issuances.
Boardwalk
Pipelines
Boardwalk
Pipelines funds its operations and capital requirements with cash flows from
operating activities. Funds from operations for the year ended December 31, 2004
amounted to 104.3 million. Funds from operations from May 17, 2003, the date of
acquisition of Texas Gas, through December 31, 2003 amounted to $61.5 million.
At December 31, 2004 and 2003, cash and investments amounted to $16.2 million
and $19.1 million, respectively.
In
December of 2004, Boardwalk Pipelines borrowed $575.0 million as an interim term
loan in connection with its acquisition of Gulf South for $1.14 billion. In
January of 2005, Boardwalk Pipelines issued $300.0 million principal amount of
5.5% notes due 2017 and $275.0 million principal amount of 5.1% notes due 2015.
The proceeds from these notes, together with available cash, were used to repay
the $575.0 million interim loan. The remainder of the purchase price was funded
by $561.0 million of the Company's available cash.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - Boardwalk Pipelines -
(Continued) |
In March
of 2004, Texas Gas retired the remaining $17.3 million principal amount of its
8.625% Notes upon final maturity. Texas Gas used its existing cash balances to
fund this maturity.
Corporate
and Other
On
January 27, 2005, the Company completed the sale of an additional $100.0 million
principal amount of 5.3% senior notes due 2016 and sold $300.0 million principal
amount of 6.0% senior notes due 2035. The net proceeds from the sale, together
with available cash, will be used in the first quarter of 2005 to redeem the
$400.0 million principal amount of 7.0% senior notes due 2023 at a redemption
price of 102.148% of the principal amount.
The
parent company's cash and investments, net of receivables and payables, at
December 31, 2004 totaled $2.5 billion, as compared to $2.1 billion at December
31, 2003. The increase in net cash and investments is primarily due to cash
distributions of $302.9 million received from Hellespont following the sale of
all of its ultra-large crude oil tankers, net proceeds of $281.4 million from
the issuance of Carolina Group stock and cash dividends from the Company's
subsidiaries, partially offset by the $561.0 million funding of the Gulf South
acquisition. The cash distributions from Hellespont included preferred stock
dividends, redemption of preferred stock and principal and interest payments on
outstanding loans. In March of 2004, the Company issued $300.0 million principal
amount of senior notes at 5.3% due 2016. Proceeds from this issuance were used
in April of 2004 to redeem the Company's $300.0 million 7.6% notes due 2023 at a
redemption price of 103.8125% of the principal amount.
The
Company has an effective Registration Statement on Form S-3 registering the
future sale of its debt and/or equity securities. As of February 18, 2005,
approximately $109.0 million of securities were available for issuance under
this shelf registration statement.
As of
December 31, 2004, there were 185,584,575 shares of Loews common stock
outstanding and 67,967,250 shares of Carolina Group stock outstanding. Depending
on market and other conditions, the Company from time to time may purchase
shares of its, and its subsidiaries', outstanding common stock in the open
market or otherwise.
The
Company continues to pursue conservative financial strategies while seeking
opportunities for responsible growth. These include the expansion of
existing
businesses, full or partial acquisitions
and dispositions,
and opportunities for efficiencies and economies of scale.
Contractual
Cash Payment Obligations
The
Company's contractual cash payment obligations are as follows:
|
|
Payments
Due by Period |
|
|
|
|
|
Less
than |
|
|
|
|
|
More
than |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Total |
|
1
year |
|
1-3
years |
|
4-5
years |
|
5
years |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
$ |
7,040.8 |
|
$ |
1,010.1 |
|
$ |
1,834.5 |
|
$ |
415.8 |
|
$ |
3,780.4 |
|
Operating
leases |
|
|
407.4 |
|
|
75.2 |
|
|
120.9 |
|
|
76.3 |
|
|
135.0 |
|
Claim
and claim expense reserves (a) |
|
|
33,453.0 |
|
|
8,008.0 |
|
|
9,962.0 |
|
|
5,054.0 |
|
|
10,429.0 |
|
Future
policy benefits reserves (b) |
|
|
9,216.0 |
|
|
195.0 |
|
|
352.0 |
|
|
344.0 |
|
|
8,325.0 |
|
Policyholder
funds reserves (b) |
|
|
1,706.0 |
|
|
502.0 |
|
|
997.0 |
|
|
43.0 |
|
|
164.0 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
51,823.2 |
|
$ |
9,790.3 |
|
$ |
13,266.4 |
|
$ |
5,933.1 |
|
$ |
22,833.4 |
|
__________
(a) |
Claim
and claim adjustment expense reserves are not discounted and represent
CNA's estimate of the amount and timing of the ultimate settlement and
administration of claims based on its assessment of facts and
circumstances known as of December 31, 2004. See the Reserves - Estimates
and Uncertainties section of this MD&A for further information. Claim
and claim adjustment expense reserves of $21.0 million related to business
which has been 100% ceded to unaffiliated parties in connection with the
individual life sale are not included. |
(b) |
Future
policy benefits and policyholder funds reserves are not discounted and
represent CNA's estimate of the ultimate amount and timing of the
settlement of benefits based on its assessment of facts and circumstances
known as of December 31, 2004. Future policy benefit reserves of $1,013.0
million and policyholder fund reserves of $60.0 million related to
business which has been 100% ceded to unaffiliated parties in connection
with the individual life sale are not included. Additional information on
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources - Contractual Cash Payment Obligations -
(Continued) |
|
future
policy benefits and policyholder funds reserves is included in Note 1 of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item
8. |
In
addition, as previously discussed, Lorillard has entered into the State
Settlement Agreements which impose a stream of future payment obligations on
Lorillard and the other major U.S. cigarette manufacturers. Lorillard's
portion of ongoing adjusted settlement payments,
including fees to
settling plaintiffs' attorneys, are
based on a number of factors which are described under "Liquidity and Capital
Resources - Lorillard," above. Lorillard's cash payment in 2004 amounted to
approximately $830.0 million and Lorillard estimates its cash payments in 2005
will be approximately $875.0 million to $925.0 million, subject to adjustment.
Payment obligations are not incurred until the related sales occur and therefore
are not reflected in the above table.
INVESTMENTS
Investment
activities of non-insurance companies include investments in fixed income
securities, equity securities including short sales, derivative instruments and
short-term investments, and are carried at fair value. Equity securities, which
are considered part of the Company's trading portfolio, short sales and
derivative instruments are marked to market and reported as investment gains or
losses in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The
Company enters into short sales and invests in certain derivative instruments
for a number of purposes, including: (i) asset and liability management
activities, (ii) income enhancements for its portfolio management strategy, and
(iii) to benefit from anticipated future movements in the underlying markets. If
such movements do not occur as anticipated, then significant losses may
occur.
Monitoring
procedures include senior management review of daily detailed reports of
existing positions and valuation fluctuations to ensure that open positions are
consistent with the Company's portfolio strategy.
Credit
exposure associated with non-performance by the counterparties to derivative
instruments is generally limited to the uncollateralized change in fair value of
the derivative instruments recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The Company mitigates the risk
of non-performance
by monitoring the creditworthiness of counterparties and diversifying
derivatives to multiple counter-parties. The Company, from time to time,
requires collateral from its derivative investment counterparties depending on
the amount of the exposure and the credit rating of the
counterparty.
The
Company does not believe that any of the derivative instruments utilized by it
are unusually complex, nor do the use of these instruments, in the opinion of
management, result in a higher degree of risk. See "Results of Operations,"
"Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk" and Note 4 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Report for
additional information with respect to derivative instruments, including
recognized gains and losses on these instruments.
Insurance
CNA
adopted Statement of Position 03-01, "Accounting and Reporting by Insurance
Enterprises for Certain Nontraditional Long-Duration Contracts and for Separate
Accounts" ("SOP 03-01") as of January 1, 2004. The assets and liabilities of
certain guaranteed investment contracts and indexed group annuity contracts that
were previously segregated and reported as separate accounts no longer qualify
for separate account presentation. Prior to the adoption of SOP 03-01, the asset
and liability presentation of these affected contracts were categorized as
separate account assets and liabilities within the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
The results of operations from separate account business were primarily
classified as other revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. In
accordance with the provisions of SOP 03-01, the classification and presentation
of certain balance sheet and statement of operations items have been modified.
Accordingly, certain investment securities previously classified as separate
account assets have now been reclassified on the balance sheet to the general
account and are reported as available-for-sale or trading securities. The
investment portfolio supporting the indexed group annuity contracts is
classified as held for trading purposes, and is carried at fair value, with both
the net realized and unrealized gains (losses) included within net investment
income in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Consistent with the
requirements of SOP 03-01, prior year amounts have not been conformed to the
current year presentation.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
Beginning
in the fourth quarter of 2004, CNA has designated new purchases related to a
specific investment strategy, that primarily includes convertible bond
securities as held for trading purposes. These securities in the trading
portfolio are carried at fair value, with both the net realized and unrealized
gains (losses) included within net investment income in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations.
Net
Investment Income
The
significant components of CNA's net investment income are presented in the
following table:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities |
|
$ |
1,571.2 |
|
$ |
1,651.1 |
|
$ |
1,854.1 |
|
Short-term
investments |
|
|
56.1 |
|
|
63.2 |
|
|
62.2 |
|
Limited
partnerships |
|
|
212.0 |
|
|
220.6 |
|
|
(33.9 |
) |
Equity
securities |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
18.8 |
|
|
65.4 |
|
Income
from trading portfolio (a) |
|
|
110.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
on funds withheld and other deposits |
|
|
(267.1 |
) |
|
(343.8 |
) |
|
(239.6 |
) |
Other |
|
|
17.1 |
|
|
84.4 |
|
|
81.6 |
|
Total
investment income |
|
|
1,713.3 |
|
|
1,694.3 |
|
|
1,789.8 |
|
Investment
expenses |
|
|
(39.8 |
) |
|
(47.6 |
) |
|
(59.9 |
) |
Net
investment income |
|
$ |
1,673.5 |
|
$ |
1,646.7 |
|
$ |
1,729.9 |
|
__________
(a) |
The
change in net unrealized gains (losses) on trading securities, included in
net investment income, was $2.0 million for the year ended December 31,
2004. |
CNA
experienced slightly higher net investment income in 2004 as compared with 2003.
This increase was due primarily to the reduced interest expense on funds
withheld and other deposits. The interest costs on funds withheld and other
deposits increased in 2003 as a result of additional cessions to the corporate
aggregate reinsurance and other treaties due to adverse net prior year
development. See the Reinsurance section of this MD&A for additional
information for interest costs on funds withheld and other deposits. This
improvement was offset partly by decreases in investment income across all other
available-for-sale asset classes which is largely the result of the impacts of
the Group Benefits and Individual Life sales transactions that are described in
Note 14 - Significant Transactions, included in Item 8 of this Report. Also, the
net investment income of the trading portfolio positively impacted results for
2004.
CNA
experienced lower net investment income in 2003 as compared with 2002. This
decrease was due primarily to lower investment yields on fixed maturity
securities and increased costs on funds withheld and other deposits. The
interest costs on funds withheld and other deposits increased principally as a
result of additional cessions to the corporate aggregate reinsurance and other
treaties due to adverse net prior year development recorded in 2003. This
decrease in net investment income in 2003 was partially offset by increased
limited partnership income. Limited partnership income increased as a result of
improving equity markets and favorable conditions in the fixed income
markets.
The bond
segment of the investment portfolio yielded 4.6% in 2004, 5.1% in 2003 and 6.0%
in 2002.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
Net
Realized Investment (Losses) Gains
The
components of CNA's net realized investment (losses) gains are presented in the
following table:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized
investment (losses) gains: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government bonds |
|
$ |
10.4 |
|
$ |
(69.9 |
) |
$ |
391.6 |
|
Corporate
and other taxable bonds |
|
|
122.8 |
|
|
380.5 |
|
|
(557.0 |
) |
Tax-exempt
bonds |
|
|
42.4 |
|
|
96.7 |
|
|
48.0 |
|
Asset-backed
bonds |
|
|
52.8 |
|
|
41.7 |
|
|
36.5 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
18.7 |
|
|
(11.6 |
) |
|
(27.9 |
) |
Total
fixed maturity securities |
|
|
247.1 |
|
|
437.4 |
|
|
(108.8 |
) |
Equity
securities |
|
|
202.2 |
|
|
114.5 |
|
|
(158.5 |
) |
Derivative
securities |
|
|
(84.1 |
) |
|
78.4 |
|
|
(52.1 |
) |
Short-term
investments |
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
3.2 |
|
|
11.8 |
|
Other
invested assets, including dispositions |
|
|
(597.3 |
) |
|
(156.3 |
) |
|
53.4 |
|
Allocated
to participating policyholders' and minority interests |
|
|
(9.0 |
) |
|
(3.8 |
) |
|
2.0 |
|
Total
realized investment (losses) gains |
|
|
(244.5 |
) |
|
473.4 |
|
|
(252.2 |
) |
Income
tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
94.1 |
|
|
(179.2 |
) |
|
103.3 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
13.3 |
|
|
(28.5 |
) |
|
15.9 |
|
Net
realized investment (losses) gains |
|
$ |
(137.1 |
) |
$ |
265.7 |
|
$ |
(133.0 |
) |
Net
realized investment results decreased $402.8 million after-tax and minority
interest in 2004 as compared with 2003. This decrease in net realized investment
results was primarily due to the loss on the sale of the individual life
insurance business of $352.9 million after-tax and minority interest ($618.6
million pretax), losses on derivatives of $50.2 million after-tax and minority
interest ($84.0 million pretax) and reduced fixed maturity gains. These
decreases were partly offset by a $95.8 million after-tax and minority interest
($162.0 million pretax) gain on the disposition of CNA's equity holdings of
Canary Wharf Group PLC ("Canary Wharf"), a London-based real estate company, and
a reduction in impairment losses for other-than-temporary declines in market
values for fixed maturity and equity securities. Impairment losses of $54.8
million after-tax and minority interest ($93.0 million pretax) were recorded in
2004 across various sectors including an impairment loss of $32.9 million
after-tax and minority interest ($56.0 million pretax) related to loans made
under a credit facility to a national contractor that are classified as fixed
maturities. In 2003, impairment losses of $188.4 million after-tax and minority
interest ($321.0 million pretax) were recorded across various sectors including
the airline, healthcare and energy industries.
The
derivative securities losses recorded in 2004 were primarily due to derivative
securities held to mitigate the effect of changes in long term interest rates on
the value of the fixed maturity portfolio.
Net
realized investment results increased $398.7 million after-tax and minority
interest in 2003 as compared with 2002. This change was due primarily to $188.4
million after-tax and minority interest ($321.0 million pretax) impairment
losses for other-than-temporary declines in market values for fixed maturity and
equity securities recorded in 2003 as compared to $517.2 million after-tax and
minority interest ($890.0 million pretax) recorded in 2002. The impairment
losses recorded in 2002 related primarily to the telecommunications sector. Also
contributing to the increase was improved realized results related to fixed
maturity and derivative securities in 2003. These increases were partially
offset by the $116.4 million after-tax and minority interest ($176.0 million
pretax) loss recorded in 2003 on the sale of the Group Benefits
business.
A primary
objective in the management of the fixed maturity and equity portfolios is to
maximize total return relative to underlying liabilities and respective
liquidity needs. CNA's views on the current interest rate environment, tax
regulations, asset class valuations, specific security issuer and broader
industry segment conditions, and the domestic and global economic conditions,
are some of the factors that may enter into a decision to move between asset
classes. Based on CNA's consideration of these factors, in the course of normal
investment activity CNA may, in pursuit of the total return objective, be
willing to sell securities that, in its analysis, are overvalued on a risk
adjusted basis relative to other
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
opportunities
that are available at the time in the market; in turn CNA may purchase other
securities that, according to its analysis, are undervalued in relation to other
securities in the market. In making these value decisions, securities may be
bought and sold that shift the investment portfolio between asset classes. CNA
also continually monitors exposure to issuers of securities held and broader
industry sector exposures and may from time to time reduce such exposures based
on its views of a specific issuer or industry sector. These activities will
produce realized gains or losses.
The
investment portfolio is periodically analyzed for changes in duration and
related price change risk. Additionally, CNA periodically reviews the
sensitivity of the portfolio to the level of foreign exchange rates or other
factors that contribute to market price changes. A summary of these risks and
specific analysis on changes is included in Item 7A - Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks included herein. Under certain
economic conditions, including but not limited to a changing interest rate
environment, hedging the value of the investment portfolio by utilizing
derivative strategies, which is discussed in greater detail in Notes 1 and 4 of
the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this
Report, may be utilized.
A further
consideration in the management of the investment portfolio is the
characteristics of the underlying liabilities and the ability to align the
duration of the portfolio to those liabilities to meet future liquidity needs,
minimize interest rate risk and maintain a level of income sufficient to support
the underlying insurance liabilities. For portfolios where future liability cash
flows are determinable and long term in nature, CNA segregates assets for asset
liability management purposes.
CNA
classifies its fixed maturity securities (bonds and redeemable preferred stocks)
and its equity securities as either available-for-sale or trading, and as such,
they are carried at fair value. The amortized cost of fixed maturity securities
is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity,
which is included in net investment income. Changes in fair value related to
available-for-sale securities are reported as a component of other comprehensive
income. Changes in fair value of trading securities are reported within net
investment income.
The
following table provides further detail of gross realized gains and losses on
available-for sale fixed maturity and equity securities:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
realized gains (losses) on fixed maturity and equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
realized gains |
|
$ |
704.0 |
|
$ |
1,244.0 |
|
$ |
1,009.0 |
|
Gross
realized losses |
|
|
(457.0 |
) |
|
(807.0 |
) |
|
(1,118.0 |
) |
Net
realized gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities |
|
|
247.0 |
|
|
437.0 |
|
|
(109.0 |
) |
Equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
realized gains |
|
|
225.0 |
|
|
143.0 |
|
|
251.0 |
|
Gross
realized losses |
|
|
(23.0 |
) |
|
(29.0 |
) |
|
(409.0 |
) |
Net
realized gains (losses) on equity securities |
|
|
202.0 |
|
|
114.0 |
|
|
(158.0 |
) |
Net
realized gains (losses) on fixed maturity and equity
securities |
|
$ |
449.0 |
|
$ |
551.0 |
|
$ |
(267.0 |
) |
The
following table provides details of the largest realized losses aggregated by
issuer including: the fair value of the securities at sale date, the amount of
the loss recorded and the period of time that the security had been in an
unrealized loss position prior to sale. The period of time that the security had
been in an unrealized loss position prior to sale can vary due to the timing of
individual security purchases. Also included is a narrative providing the
industry sector along with the facts and circumstances giving rise to the
loss.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
|
|
|
|
Months
in |
|
|
|
Fair
Value |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Date
of |
Loss |
|
Loss
Prior |
|
|
Issuer
Description and Discussion |
Sale |
On
Sale |
|
To
Sale |
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issues
and sells mortgage backed securities. Issuer was chartered
by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States Congress to facilitate housing ownership for low to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
middle
income Americans. Loss was incurred as a result of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unfavorable
interest rate change |
|
$ |
4,766.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company
acquires, sells and operates power generation facilities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
loss reflects intense competition and price pressure in the
sector |
|
|
120.0 |
|
|
18.0 |
|
|
0-24 |
+ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Various
notes and bonds issued by the United States Treasury. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volatility
of interest rates prompted movement to other asset classes |
|
|
4,092.0 |
|
|
15.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of revenue bonds that authorizes the financing of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
water
facilities. Loss was incurred as a result of unfavorable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest
rate change |
|
|
309.0 |
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company
provides networking telecommunications services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
worldwide.
The Company is under price/profit pressure as |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a
result of excess capacity in the industry |
|
|
97.0 |
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of special obligation bonds for school financing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
was incurred as a result of unfavorable interest rate
change |
|
|
152.0 |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
0-6,
13-24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of revenue bonds that supports transportation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
services.
Loss was incurred as a result of unfavorable interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rate
change |
|
|
296.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of revenue bonds that authorizes the financing of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sewer
facilities. Loss was incurred as a result of unfavorable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest
rate change |
|
|
113.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
0-6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of revenue bonds that authorizes the financing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
water facilities. Loss was incurred as a result of
unfavorable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest
rate change |
|
|
200.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Air
transportation carrier for passengers, freight and mail
both |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
domestic
and international. Company was subject to higher fuel |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
costs
and union negotiations |
|
|
24.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
0-6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal
issuer of revenue bonds that authorizes bridge and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tunnel
facilities. Loss was incurred as a result of unfavorable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest
rate change |
|
|
103.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State
issuer of general obligation bonds. Loss was incurred as a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
result
of unfavorable interest rate change |
|
|
222.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State
issuer of general obligation bonds for the purpose of public
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
improvements.
Loss was incurred as a result of unfavorable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
interest
rate change |
|
|
270.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
0-12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,764.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
Valuation
and Impairment of Investments
The
following table details the carrying value of CNA's general account investment
portfolios:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General
account investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities available-for-sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Treasury securities and obligations of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
government
agencies |
|
$ |
4,346.0 |
|
|
11.1 |
% |
$ |
1,900.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
7,788.0 |
|
|
19.9 |
|
|
8,757.0 |
|
|
23.0 |
|
States,
municipalities and political subdivisions- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax-exempt |
|
|
8,857.0 |
|
|
22.6 |
|
|
7,970.0 |
|
|
20.9 |
|
Corporate
securities |
|
|
6,513.0 |
|
|
16.6 |
|
|
6,482.0 |
|
|
17.0 |
|
Other
debt securities |
|
|
3,053.0 |
|
|
7.8 |
|
|
3,264.0 |
|
|
8.6 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
146.0 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
104.0 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
Options
embedded in convertible debt securities |
|
|
234.0 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
201.0 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
Total
fixed maturity securities available-for-sale |
|
|
30,937.0 |
|
|
78.9 |
|
|
28,678.0 |
|
|
75.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities trading: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Treasury securities and obligations of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
government
agencies |
|
|
27.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
125.0 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
securities |
|
|
199.0 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
debt securities |
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity securities trading |
|
|
390.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities available-for-sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock |
|
|
260.0 |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
383.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Non-redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
150.0 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
144.0 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
Total
equity securities available-for-sale |
|
|
410.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
527.0 |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities trading |
|
|
46.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments available-for-sale |
|
|
5,404.0 |
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
7,538.0 |
|
|
19.8 |
|
Short-term
investments trading |
|
|
459.0 |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited
partnerships |
|
|
1,549.0 |
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
1,117.0 |
|
|
2.9 |
|
Other
investments |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
240.0 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
Total
general account investments |
|
$ |
39,231.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
38,100.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
CNA's
general account investment portfolio consists primarily of publicly traded
government bonds, asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, short-term
investments, municipal bonds and corporate bonds.
Investments
in the general account had a total net unrealized gain of $1,197.0 million at
December 31, 2004 compared with $1,348.0 million at December 31, 2003. The
unrealized position at December 31, 2004 was composed of a net unrealized gain
of $1,061.0 million for fixed maturities and a net unrealized gain of $136.0
million for equity securities. The unrealized position at December 31, 2003 was
composed of a net unrealized gain of $1,114.0 million for fixed maturities and a
net unrealized gain of $234.0 million for equity securities.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
Unrealized
gains (losses) on fixed maturity and equity securities are presented in the
following tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
or |
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Greater |
|
Net |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Less
than |
|
than |
|
Unrealized
|
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Cost |
|
Gains |
|
12
Months |
|
12
Months |
|
Gain |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities available-for- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Treasury securities and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obligations
of government agencies |
|
$ |
4,233.0 |
|
$ |
126.0 |
|
$ |
13.0 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
113.0 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
7,706.0 |
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
19.0 |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
82.0 |
|
States,
municipalities and political |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subdivisions-tax-exempt |
|
|
8,699.0 |
|
|
189.0 |
|
|
28.0 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
158.0 |
|
Corporate
securities |
|
|
6,093.0 |
|
|
477.0 |
|
|
52.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
420.0 |
|
Other
debt securities |
|
|
2,769.0 |
|
|
295.0 |
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
284.0 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
142.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
Options
embedded in convertible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
debt
securities |
|
|
234.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity securities available- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for-sale |
|
|
29,876.0 |
|
|
1,198.0 |
|
|
123.0 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
1,061.0 |
|
Fixed
maturity securities trading |
|
|
390.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities available-for-sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock |
|
|
148.0 |
|
|
112.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
112.0 |
|
Non-redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
126.0 |
|
|
24.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.0 |
|
Total
equity securities available-for-sale |
|
|
274.0 |
|
|
136.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136.0 |
|
Equity
securities trading |
|
|
46.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity and equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities |
|
$ |
30,586.0 |
|
$ |
1,334.0 |
|
$ |
123.0 |
|
$ |
14.0 |
|
$ |
1,197.0 |
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Treasury securities and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
obligations
of government agencies |
|
$ |
1,823.0 |
|
$ |
91.0 |
|
$ |
10.0 |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
$ |
77.0 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
8,634.0 |
|
|
146.0 |
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
123.0 |
|
States,
municipalities and political |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subdivisions-tax-exempt |
|
|
7,787.0 |
|
|
207.0 |
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
183.0 |
|
Corporate
securities |
|
|
6,061.0 |
|
|
475.0 |
|
|
40.0 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
421.0 |
|
Other
debt securities |
|
|
2,961.0 |
|
|
311.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
303.0 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
97.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
Options
embedded in convertible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
debt
securities |
|
|
201.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity securities |
|
|
27,564.0 |
|
|
1,237.0 |
|
|
98.0 |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
1,114.0 |
|
Equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock |
|
|
163.0 |
|
|
222.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
220.0 |
|
Non-redeemable
preferred stock |
|
|
130.0 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
14.0 |
|
Total
equity securities |
|
|
293.0 |
|
|
238.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
234.0 |
|
Total
fixed maturity and equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities |
|
$ |
27,857.0 |
|
$ |
1,475.0 |
|
$ |
102.0 |
|
$ |
25.0 |
|
$ |
1,348.0 |
|
CNA's
investment policies for both the general and separate accounts emphasize high
credit quality and diversification by industry, issuer and issue. Assets
supporting interest rate sensitive liabilities are segmented within the general
account to facilitate asset/liability duration management.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
At
December 31, 2004, the carrying value of the general account fixed maturities
was $31,327.0 million, representing 79.9% of the total investment portfolio. The
net unrealized gain of this fixed maturity portfolio was $1,061.0 million,
comprising gross unrealized gains of $1,198.0 million and gross unrealized
losses of $137.0 million. Gross unrealized losses were across various sectors,
the largest of which was corporate bonds. Within corporate bonds, the largest
industry sectors were financial and consumer-cyclical, which as a percentage of
total gross unrealized losses were 40.0% and 28.0%. Gross unrealized losses in
any single issuer were less than 0.1% of the carrying value of the total general
account fixed maturity portfolio.
The
following table provides the composition of fixed maturity securities with an
unrealized loss at December 31, 2004 in relation to the total of all fixed
maturity securities with an unrealized loss by contractual
maturities.
|
|
Percent
of |
|
Percent
of |
|
|
|
Market |
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Value |
|
Loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due
in one year or less |
|
|
8.0 |
% |
|
2.0 |
% |
Due
after one year through five years |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
18.0 |
|
Due
after five years through ten years |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
24.0 |
|
Due
after ten years |
|
|
15.0 |
|
|
40.0 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
27.0 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
The
following table summarizes for fixed maturity and equity securities in an
unrealized loss position at December 31, 2004 and 2003, the aggregate fair value
and gross unrealized loss by length of time those securities have been
continuously in an unrealized loss position.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
Unrealized |
|
Estimated |
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair
Value |
|
Loss |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Loss |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
$ |
7,742.0 |
|
$ |
53.0 |
|
$ |
4,138.0 |
|
$ |
50.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
2,448.0 |
|
|
59.0 |
|
|
834.0 |
|
|
36.0 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
368.0 |
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
11.0 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
51.0 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
Total
investment grade |
|
|
10,560.0 |
|
|
124.0 |
|
|
5,099.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
|
Non-investment
grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
|
188.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
134.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
69.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
10.0 |
|
Total
non-investment grade |
|
|
277.0 |
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
315.0 |
|
|
23.0 |
|
Total
fixed maturity securities |
|
|
10,837.0 |
|
|
137.0 |
|
|
5,414.0 |
|
|
123.0 |
|
Equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
23.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total
equity securities |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
Total
fixed maturity and equity securities |
|
$ |
10,846.0 |
|
$ |
137.0 |
|
$ |
5,456.0 |
|
$ |
127.0 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
A
significant judgment in the valuation of investments is the determination of
when an other-than-temporary decline in value has occurred. CNA follows a
consistent and systematic process for impairing securities that sustain
other-than-temporary declines in value. CNA has established a committee
responsible for the impairment process. This committee, referred to as the
Impairment Committee, is made up of three officers appointed by CNA's Chief
Financial Officer. The Impairment Committee is responsible for analyzing watch
list securities on at least a quarterly basis. The watch list includes
individual securities that fall below certain thresholds or that exhibit
evidence of impairment indicators including, but not limited to, a significant
adverse change in the financial condition and near term prospects of the
investment or a significant adverse change in legal factors, the business
climate or credit ratings.
When a
security is placed on the watch list, it is monitored for further fair value
changes and additional news related to the issuer's financial condition. The
focus is on objective evidence that may influence the evaluation of impairment
factors.
The
decision to impair a security incorporates both quantitative criteria and
qualitative information. The Impairment Committee considers a number of factors
including, but not limited to: (a) the length of time and the extent to which
the fair value has been less than book value, (b) the financial condition and
near term prospects of the issuer, (c) the intent and ability of CNA to retain
its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated
recovery in value, (d) whether the debtor is current on interest and principal
payments and (e) general market conditions and industry or sector specific
factors.
The
Impairment Committee's decision to impair a security is primarily based on
whether the security's fair value is likely to remain significantly below its
book value in light of all of the factors considered. For securities that are
impaired, the security is written down to fair value and the resulting losses
are recognized in realized gains/losses in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Realized
investment losses included $93.0 million, $321.0 million and $890.0 million of
pretax impairment losses for the three years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002. The 2003 and 2002 impairments were primarily the result of the continued
credit deterioration on specific issuers in the bond and equity markets and the
effects on such markets due to the overall slowing of the economy. For the year
ended December 31, 2004, the impairment losses recorded related largely to loans
made under a credit facility to a national contractor, that are classified as
fixed maturities. See the Loans to National Contractor section of the
MD&A.
For 2003,
the impairment losses recorded related primarily to corporate bonds in the
airline, healthcare and energy industries.
For 2002,
the impairment losses recorded related primarily to corporate bonds in the
communications industry sectors including $129.0 million related to WorldCom
Inc., $74.0 million related to Adelphia Communication Corporation, $60.0 million
for Charter Communications, $57.0 million for AT&T Canada and $53.0 million
for Telewest PLC. During 2002, CNA reduced the impairment loss related to the
sale of CNA Re U.K. by approximately $35.1 million after-tax and minority
interest.
CNA's
non-investment grade fixed maturity securities held as of December 31, 2004 that
were in an unrealized loss position had a fair value of $277.0 million. As
discussed previously, a significant judgment in the valuation of investments is
the determination of when an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. CNA's
Impairment Committee analyzes securities placed on the watch list on at least a
quarterly basis. Part of this analysis is to monitor the length of time and
severity of the decline below book value of the watch list securities.
The
following table summarizes the fair value and gross unrealized loss of
non-investment grade securities categorized by the length of time those
securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position and further
categorized by the severity of the unrealized loss position in 10.0% increments
as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
|
|
Estimated |
|
Fair
Value as a Percentage of Book Value |
|
Unrealized
|
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Fair
Value |
|
90-99% |
|
80-89% |
|
70-79% |
|
<70% |
|
Loss |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-investment
grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
$ |
188.0 |
|
$ |
6.0 |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
69.0 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
non-investment grade |
|
$ |
277.0 |
|
$ |
10.0 |
|
$ |
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
13.0 |
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-
investment grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
$ |
134.0 |
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
Total
non-investment grade |
|
$ |
315.0 |
|
$ |
8.0 |
|
$ |
8.0 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
$ |
23.0 |
|
As part
of the ongoing impairment monitoring process, the Impairment Committee has
evaluated the facts and circumstances based on available information for each of
the non-investment grade securities and determined that no further impairments
were appropriate at December 31, 2004. This determination was based on a number
of factors that the Impairment Committee regularly considers including, but not
limited to: the issuers' ability to meet current and future interest and
principal payments, an evaluation of the issuers' financial condition and near
term prospects, and CNA's sector outlook and estimates of the fair value of any
underlying collateral. In all cases where a decline in value is judged to be
temporary, CNA has the intent and ability to hold these securities for a period
of time sufficient to recover the book value of its investment through a
recovery in the fair value of such securities or by holding the securities to
maturity. In many cases, the securities held are matched to liabilities as part
of ongoing asset/liability duration management. As such, the Impairment
Committee continually assesses its ability to hold securities for a time
sufficient to recover any temporary loss in value or until maturity. CNA
maintains sufficient levels of liquidity so as to not impact the asset/liability
management process.
CNA's
equity securities held as of December 31, 2004 that were in an unrealized loss
position had a fair value of $9.0 million. CNA's Impairment Committee, under the
same process as followed for fixed maturity securities, monitors the equity
securities for other-than-temporary declines in value. In all cases where a
decline in value is judged to be temporary, CNA expects to recover the book
value of its investment through a recovery in the fair value of the
security.
Invested
assets are exposed to various risks, such as interest rate, market and credit
risk. Due to the level of risk associated with certain invested assets and the
level of uncertainty related to changes in the value of these assets, it is
possible that changes in these risks in the near term, including increases in
interest rates, could have an adverse material impact on the Company's results
of operations or equity.
The
general account portfolio consists primarily of high quality bonds, 92.8% and
92.9% of which were rated as investment grade (BBB or higher) at December 31,
2004 and 2003, respectively.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the ratings of CNA's general account bond portfolio
at carrying value:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Government and affiliated agency securities |
|
$ |
4,640.0 |
|
|
14.9 |
% |
$ |
2,818.0 |
|
|
9.9 |
% |
Other
AAA rated |
|
|
14,628.0 |
|
|
46.9 |
|
|
12,779.0 |
|
|
44.7 |
|
AA
and A rated |
|
|
5,597.0 |
|
|
17.9 |
|
|
6,329.0 |
|
|
22.1 |
|
BBB
rated |
|
|
4,072.0 |
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
4,631.0 |
|
|
16.2 |
|
Non
investment-grade |
|
|
2,240.0 |
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
2,017.0 |
|
|
7.1 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
31,177.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
28,574.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
At
December 31, 2004 and 2003, approximately 99.0% and 97.0% of the general account
portfolio was U.S. Government agencies or was rated by S&P or Moody's. The
remaining bonds were rated by other rating agencies or CNA
management.
The
following table summarizes the bond ratings of the investments supporting CNA's
separate account products, which guarantee principal and a specified rate of
interest:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions of dollars) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Government and affiliated agency securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
166.0 |
|
|
9.2 |
% |
Other
AAA rated |
|
$ |
156.0 |
|
|
32.1 |
% |
|
737.0 |
|
|
40.7 |
|
AA
and A rated |
|
|
184.0 |
|
|
37.9 |
|
|
374.0 |
|
|
20.7 |
|
BBB
rated |
|
|
117.0 |
|
|
24.0 |
|
|
443.0 |
|
|
24.5 |
|
Non
investment-grade |
|
|
29.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
89.0 |
|
|
4.9 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
486.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
$ |
1,809.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
At
December 31, 2004 and 2003, 100.0% and 98.0% of the separate account portfolio
was U.S. Government agencies or was rated by S&P or Moody's. The remaining
bonds were rated by other rating agencies or CNA management.
Non
investment-grade bonds, as presented in the tables above, are high-yield
securities rated below BBB by bond rating agencies, as well as other unrated
securities that, in the opinion of CNA management, are below investment-grade.
High-yield securities generally involve a greater degree of risk than
investment-grade securities. However, expected returns should compensate for the
added risk. This risk is also considered in the interest rate assumptions for
the underlying insurance products.
The
carrying value of non-traded securities at December 31, 2004 was $199.0 million
which represents 0.5% of CNA's total investment portfolio. These securities were
in a net unrealized gain position of $68.0 million at December 31, 2004. Of the
non-traded securities, 54.0% are priced by unrelated third party
sources.
Included
in CNA's general account fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2004 are
$7,913.0 million of asset-backed securities, at fair value, consisting of
approximately 70.0% in collateralized mortgage obligations ("CMOs"), 16.0% in
corporate mortgage-backed pass-through certificates, 10.0% in corporate
asset-backed obligations and 4.0% in U.S. Government agency issued pass-through
certificates. The majority of CMOs held are actively traded in liquid markets
and are priced by broker-dealers.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Investments
- (Continued) |
The
carrying value of the components of the general account short term investment
portfolio is presented in the following table:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments available-for-sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
paper |
|
$ |
1,655.0 |
|
$ |
4,458.0 |
|
U.S.
Treasury securities |
|
|
2,382.0 |
|
|
1,068.0 |
|
Money
market funds |
|
|
174.0 |
|
|
1,230.0 |
|
Other |
|
|
1,193.0 |
|
|
782.0 |
|
Total
short-term investments available-for-sale |
|
|
5,404.0 |
|
|
7,538.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments trading: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
paper |
|
|
46.0 |
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Treasury securities |
|
|
300.0 |
|
|
|
|
Money
market funds |
|
|
99.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total
short-term investments trading |
|
|
459.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
short-term investments |
|
$ |
5,863.0 |
|
$ |
7,538.0 |
|
CNA
invests in certain derivative financial instruments primarily to reduce its
exposure to market risk (principally interest rate, equity price and foreign
currency risk) and credit risk (risk of nonperformance of underlying obligor).
Derivative securities are recorded at fair value at the reporting date.
CNA also
uses derivatives to mitigate market risk by purchasing S&P 500 index futures
in a notional amount equal to the contract liability relating to Life and Group
Non-Core indexed group annuity contracts.
ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS
In
December of 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued a
complete replacement of SFAS No. 123, "Share-Based Payment" ("SFAS No. 123R"),
which covers a wide range of share-based compensation arrangements, including
share options, restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share
appreciation rights, and employee share purchase plans. SFAS No. 123R requires
companies to use the fair value method in accounting for employee stock options
which results in compensation expense recorded in the income statement.
Compensation expense is measured at the grant date using an option-pricing model
and is recognized over the service period, which is usually the vesting period.
SFAS No. 123R is effective for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2005.
The adoption of SFAS No. 123R is not expected to have a material impact on the
Company's results of operations or equity.
In March
of 2004, the Emerging Issues Task Force ("EITF") reached consensus on the
guidance provided in EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and its Application to Certain Investments ("EITF 03-1"), as
applicable to debt and equity securities that are within the scope of SFAS No.
115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities and equity
securities that are accounted for using the cost method specified in Accounting
Principles Board Opinion No. 18, "The Equity Method of Accounting for
Investments in Common Stock." Under EITF 03-1 an investment is impaired if the
fair value of the investment is less than its cost including adjustments for
amortization, accretion, foreign exchange and hedging. An impairment would be
considered other-than-temporary unless a) the investor has the ability and
intent to hold an investment for a reasonable period of time sufficient for the
recovery of the fair value up to (or beyond) the cost of the investment and b)
evidence indicating that the cost of the investment is recoverable within a
reasonable period of time outweighs evidence to the contrary. This new guidance
for determining whether impairment is other-than-temporary was to be effective
for reporting periods beginning after June 15, 2004. In September of 2004, the
FASB issued FASB Staff Position EITF Issue 03-1-1, which suspended the effective
date for the measurement and recognition guidance included in EITF Issue 03-1
related to other-than-temporary impairment until additional implementation
guidance is provided. Pending adoption of a final rule, the Company continued to
apply existing accounting literature for determining when a decline in fair
value is other-than-temporary.
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Accounting
Standards - (Continued) |
The
Company continues to evaluate the impact of this new accounting standard on its
process for determining other-than-temporary impairment of equity and fixed
maturity securities, including the potential impacts from any revisions to the
original guidance issued. Adoption of this standard as originally issued may
cause the Company to recognize impairment losses in the Consolidated Statements
of Operations which would not have been recognized under the current guidance or
to recognize such losses in earlier periods, especially those due to increases
in interest rates, and could also impact the recognition of investment income on
impaired securities. Such an impact would likely increase earnings volatility in
future periods. However, since fluctuations in the fair value for
available-for-sale securities are already recorded in Accumulated other
comprehensive income, adoption of this standard is not expected to have a
significant impact on equity.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS DISCLAIMER
Investors
are cautioned that certain statements contained in this document as well as some
statements in periodic press releases and some oral statements made by officials
of the Company and its subsidiaries during presentations about the Company, are
"forward-looking" statements within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the "Act"). Forward-looking statements include,
without limitation, any statement that may project, indicate or imply future
results, events, performance or achievements, and may contain the words
"expect," "intend," "plan," "anticipate," "estimate," "believe," "will be,"
"will continue," "will likely result," and similar expressions. In addition, any
statement concerning
future financial performance (including future revenues, earnings or growth
rates), ongoing business
strategies or prospects, and possible actions by the Company or its
subsidiaries, which may be provided by management are also forward-looking
statements as defined by the Act.
Forward-looking
statements are based on current expectations and projections about future events
and are inherently subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties, many of
which are beyond the Company's control, that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those anticipated or projected. These risks and
uncertainties include, among others:
Risks
and uncertainties primarily affecting the Company and the Company's insurance
subsidiaries
|
· |
the
impact of competitive products, policies and pricing and the competitive
environment in which CNA operates, including the ability to implement and
maintain price increases and changes in CNA's book of business;
|
|
· |
product
and policy availability and demand and market responses, including the
level of CNA's ability to obtain rate increases and decline or non-renew
underpriced accounts to achieve premium targets and profitability and to
realize growth and retention estimates; |
|
· |
the
possibility that the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 will not be
extended beyond the end of 2005, as a result of which CNA could incur
substantial additional exposure to losses resulting from terrorist
attacks, which could be increased by current state regulatory restrictions
on terrorism policy exclusions and by regulatory unwillingness to approve
such exclusions prospectively; |
|
· |
development
of claims and the impact on loss reserves, including changes in claim
settlement policies, and additional charges to earnings if loss reserves
are insufficient, including among others, loss reserves related to APMT
exposure which are more uncertain and therefore more difficult to estimate
than loss reserves respecting traditional property and casualty
exposures; |
|
· |
the
impact of regular and ongoing insurance reserve reviews by CNA and ongoing
state regulatory exams of CNA's primary insurance company subsidiaries,
and CNA's responses to the results of those reviews and
exams; |
|
· |
the
effects upon insurance markets and upon industry business practices and
relationships of current litigation, investigations and regulatory
activity by the New York State Attorney General's office and other
authorities concerning contingent commission arrangements with brokers and
bid solicitation activities; |
|
· |
exposure
to catastrophic events, natural and man-made, which are inherently
unpredictable, with a frequency or severity that exceeds CNA's
expectations and results in material losses, or the occurrence of
epidemics; |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Forward-Looking
Statements Disclaimer - (Continued) |
|
· |
exposure
to liabilities due to claims made by insureds and others relating to
asbestos remediation and health-based asbestos impairments, as well as
exposure to liabilities for environmental pollution, mass tort and
construction defect claims; |
|
· |
whether
a national privately financed trust to replace litigation of asbestos
claims with payments to claimants from the trust will be established or
approved through federal legislation, or, if established and approved,
whether it will contain funding requirements in excess of CNA's
established loss reserves or carried loss
reserves; |
|
· |
the
availability and adequacy of reinsurance and the creditworthiness and
performance of reinsurance companies under reinsurance
contracts; |
|
· |
regulatory
limitations, impositions and restrictions upon CNA and its insurance
subsidiaries, including limitations imposed by state regulatory agencies
upon CNA's ability to receive dividends from its insurance subsidiaries
and to pay dividends to the Company, and minimum risk-based capital
standards established by the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners; |
|
· |
the
possibility of further changes in CNA's ratings by ratings agencies,
including the inability to obtain business from certain major insurance
brokers, the inability of CNA to access certain markets or distribution
channels, and the required collateralization of future payment obligations
as a result of such changes, and changes in rating agency policies and
practices; |
|
· |
the
effects of corporate bankruptcies and/or accounting restatements (such as
Enron and WorldCom) on surety bond claims, as well as on the capital
markets, including the resulting decline in value of securities held and
possible additional charges for
impairments; |
|
· |
the
effects of corporate bankruptcies and/or accounting restatements (such as
Enron and WorldCom) on the markets for directors and officers and errors
and omissions coverages; |
|
· |
the
effects of assessments and other surcharges for guaranty funds and
second-injury funds and other mandatory pooling
arrangements; |
|
· |
general
economic and business conditions, including inflationary pressures on
medical care costs, construction costs and other economic sectors that
increase the severity of claims and the impact of current economic
conditions on companies on whose behalf CNA's subsidiaries have issued
surety bonds; |
|
· |
regulatory
initiatives and compliance with governmental regulations, judicial
decisions, including interpretations of policy provisions, decisions
regarding coverage and theories of liability, trends in litigation and the
outcome of any litigation involving CNA, and rulings and changes in tax
laws and regulations; |
|
· |
legal
and regulatory activities with respect to certain non-traditional and
finite-risk insurance products and possible resulting changes in
accounting and financial reporting rules in relation to such
products; |
|
· |
the
effectiveness of current initiatives by claims management to reduce loss
and expense ratio through more efficacious claims handling techniques;
and |
|
· |
changes
in the composition of CNA's operating
segments. |
Risks
and uncertainties primarily affecting the Company and the Company's tobacco
subsidiaries
|
· |
health
concerns, claims and regulations relating to the use of tobacco products
and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke;
|
|
· |
legislation,
including actual and potential excise tax increases, and the effects of
tobacco litigation settlements on pricing and consumption
rates; |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Forward-Looking
Statements Disclaimer - (Continued) |
|
· |
continued
intense competition from other cigarette manufacturers, including
increased promotional activity and the continued growth of the
deep-discount category; |
|
· |
the
continuing decline in volume in the domestic cigarette
industry; |
|
· |
increasing
marketing and regulatory restrictions, governmental regulation and
privately imposed smoking restrictions; |
|
· |
litigation,
including risks associated with adverse jury and judicial determinations,
courts reaching conclusions at variance with the general understandings of
applicable law, bonding requirements and the absence of adequate appellate
remedies to get timely relief from any of the foregoing;
and |
|
· |
the
impact of each of the factors described under "Results of
Operations—Lorillard" in the MD&A portion of this
report. |
Risks
and uncertainties primarily affecting the Company and the Company's energy
subsidiaries
|
· |
the
impact of changes in demand for oil and natural gas and oil and gas price
fluctuations on exploration and production
activity; |
|
· |
costs
and timing of rig upgrades; |
|
· |
utilization
levels and dayrates for offshore oil and gas drilling
rigs; |
|
· |
regulatory
issues affecting natural gas transmission, including ratemaking and other
proceedings particularly affecting the Company's gas transmission
subsidiaries; |
|
· |
the
ability of Texas Gas and Gulf South to renegotiate, extend or replace
existing customer contracts on favorable
terms; |
|
· |
the
successful development and projected cost of planned expansion projects
and investments; and |
|
· |
the
development of additional natural gas reserves and the completion of
projected new liquefied natural gas facilities and expansion of existing
facilities. |
Risks
and uncertainties affecting the Company and the Company's subsidiaries
generally
|
· |
general
economic and business conditions; |
|
· |
changes
in financial markets (such as interest rate, credit, currency, commodities
and equities markets) or in the value of specific
investments; |
|
· |
changes
in domestic and foreign political, social and economic conditions,
including the impact of the global war on terrorism, the war in Iraq, the
future outbreak of hostilities and future acts of
terrorism; |
|
· |
the
economic effects of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, other
terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq; |
|
· |
potential
changes in accounting policies by the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(the "FASB"), the SEC or regulatory agencies for any of the Company's
subsidiaries' industries which may cause the Company or the Company's
subsidiaries to revise their financial accounting and/or disclosures in
the future, and which may change the way analysts measure the business or
financial performance of the Company and the Company's
subsidiaries; |
|
· |
the
impact of regulatory initiatives and compliance with governmental
regulations, judicial rulings and jury
verdicts; |
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Forward-Looking
Statements Disclaimer - (Continued) |
|
· |
the
results of financing efforts; |
|
· |
the
closing of any contemplated transactions and agreements;
and |
|
· |
the
outcome of pending litigation. |
Developments
in any of these areas, which are more fully described elsewhere in this Report,
could cause the Company's results to differ materially from results that have
been or may be anticipated or projected. Forward-looking statements speak only
as of the date of this Report and the Company expressly disclaims any obligation
or undertaking to update these statements to reflect any change in the Company's
expectations or beliefs or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on
which any forward-looking statement is based.
SUPPLEMENTAL
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
The
following supplemental condensed financial information reflects the financial
position, results of operations and cash flows of Loews Corporation with its
investments in CNA and Diamond Offshore accounted for on an equity basis rather
than as consolidated subsidiaries. It does not purport to present the
financial position, results of operations and cash
flows of
the Company in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles because
it does not comply with SFAS No. 94, "Consolidation of All Majority-Owned
Subsidiaries." Management believes, however, that this disaggregated financial
data enhances an understanding of the consolidated financial statements by
providing users with a format that management uses in assessing the Company. See
Notes 1 and 24 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in
Item 8.
Condensed
Balance Sheet Information
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
(Including
CNA and Diamond Offshore on the Equity Method)
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets |
|
$ |
937.6 |
|
$ |
1,306.3 |
|
Investments,
primarily short-term instruments |
|
|
4,184.5 |
|
|
3,793.2 |
|
Total
current assets and investments in securities |
|
|
5,122.1 |
|
|
5,099.5 |
|
Investment
in CNA |
|
|
8,475.9 |
|
|
8,254.8 |
|
Investment
in Diamond Offshore |
|
|
935.1 |
|
|
961.6 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment |
|
|
2,472.3 |
|
|
1,342.5 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
684.7 |
|
|
812.6 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
17,690.1 |
|
$ |
16,471.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders' Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities |
|
$ |
1,553.0 |
|
$ |
2,052.5 |
|
Long-term
debt, less current maturities and unamortized discount |
|
|
3,553.7 |
|
|
2,973.1 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
400.1 |
|
|
391.1 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
5,506.8 |
|
|
5,416.7 |
|
Shareholders'
equity |
|
|
12,183.3 |
|
|
11,054.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity |
|
$ |
17,690.1 |
|
$ |
16,471.0 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Supplemental
Financial Information - (Continued) |
Condensed
Statements of Operations Information
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
(Including
CNA and Diamond Offshore on the Equity Method)
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufactured
products and other |
|
$ |
4,304.7 |
|
$ |
3,858.5 |
|
$ |
4,238.7 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
189.9 |
|
|
191.2 |
|
|
29.5 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
(11.8 |
) |
|
(2.4 |
) |
|
84.7 |
|
Total |
|
|
4,482.8 |
|
|
4,047.3 |
|
|
4,352.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of manufactured products sold and other |
|
|
2,990.0 |
|
|
2,895.1 |
|
|
3,022.2 |
|
Interest |
|
|
176.3 |
|
|
154.7 |
|
|
136.5 |
|
Income
tax expense |
|
|
497.0 |
|
|
375.8 |
|
|
471.8 |
|
Total |
|
|
3,663.3 |
|
|
3,425.6 |
|
|
3,630.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations |
|
|
819.5 |
|
|
621.7 |
|
|
722.4 |
|
Equity
in income (loss) of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA |
|
|
421.0 |
|
|
(1,258.2 |
) |
|
230.4 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
(9.2 |
) |
|
(29.6 |
) |
|
25.8 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
1,231.3 |
|
|
(666.1 |
) |
|
978.6 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principles-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
Item
7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations |
Supplemental
Financial Information - (Continued) |
Condensed
Statements of Cash Flow Information
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
(Including
CNA and Diamond Offshore on the Equity Method)
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operating
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undistributed
(earnings) loss of CNA and Diamond Offshore |
|
|
(394.3 |
) |
|
1,318.5 |
|
|
(190.1 |
) |
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
(56.7 |
) |
|
|
|
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principles |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39.6 |
|
Investment
losses (gains) |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
(84.7 |
) |
Other |
|
|
81.5 |
|
|
144.7 |
|
|
(19.1 |
) |
Changes
in assets and liabilities-net |
|
|
68.1 |
|
|
784.6 |
|
|
(173.3 |
) |
Total |
|
|
998.4 |
|
|
1,582.8 |
|
|
484.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
(increase) decrease in investments |
|
|
(361.5 |
) |
|
(551.5 |
) |
|
338.3 |
|
Securities
sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(480.4 |
) |
Purchases
of CNA preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
(750.0 |
) |
|
(750.0 |
) |
Purchases
of CNA common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73.1 |
) |
Acquisition
of Gas Pipelines-net of cash |
|
|
(1,111.4 |
) |
|
(803.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
(101.4 |
) |
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
(52.0 |
) |
Total |
|
|
(1,574.3 |
) |
|
(2,107.9 |
) |
|
(1,017.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid to shareholders |
|
|
(216.8 |
) |
|
(191.8 |
) |
|
(166.4 |
) |
Increase
(decrease) in long-term debt-net |
|
|
555.8 |
|
|
300.5 |
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
Purchases
of treasury shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(351.2 |
) |
Issuance
of common stock |
|
|
287.8 |
|
|
399.7 |
|
|
1,070.1 |
|
Total |
|
|
626.8 |
|
|
508.4 |
|
|
551.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
change in cash |
|
|
50.9 |
|
|
(16.7 |
) |
|
18.2 |
|
Cash,
beginning of year |
|
|
22.6 |
|
|
39.3 |
|
|
21.1 |
|
Cash,
end of year |
|
$ |
73.5 |
|
$ |
22.6 |
|
$ |
39.3 |
|
Item
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk.
The
Company is a large diversified financial services company. As such, it and its
subsidiaries have significant amounts of financial instruments that involve
market risk. The Company's measure of market risk exposure represents an
estimate of the change in fair value of its financial instruments. Changes in
the trading portfolio would be recognized in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations. Market risk exposure is presented for each class of financial
instrument held by the Company at December 31, assuming immediate adverse market
movements of the magnitude described below. The Company believes that the
various rates of adverse market movements represent a measure of exposure to
loss under hypothetically assumed adverse conditions. The estimated market risk
exposure represents the hypothetical loss to future earnings and does not
represent the maximum possible loss nor any expected actual loss, even under
adverse conditions, because actual adverse fluctuations would likely differ. In
addition, since the Company's investment portfolio is subject to change based on
its portfolio management strategy as well as in response to changes in the
market, these estimates are not necessarily indicative of the actual results
which may occur.
Exposure
to market risk is managed and monitored by senior management. Senior management
approves the overall investment strategy employed by the Company and has
responsibility to ensure that the investment positions are consistent with that
strategy and the level of risk acceptable to it. The Company may manage risk by
buying or selling instruments or entering into offsetting
positions.
Interest
Rate Risk - The Company has exposure to interest rate risk arising from changes
in the level or volatility of interest rates. The Company attempts to mitigate
its exposure to interest rate risk by utilizing instruments such as interest
rate swaps, interest rate caps, commitments to purchase securities, options,
futures and forwards. The Company monitors its sensitivity to interest rate risk
by evaluating the change in the value of its financial assets and liabilities
due to fluctuations in interest rates. The evaluation is performed by applying
an instantaneous change in interest rates by varying magnitudes on a static
balance sheet to determine the effect such a change in rates would have on the
recorded market value of the Company's investments and the resulting effect on
shareholders' equity. The analysis presents the sensitivity of the market value
of the Company's financial instruments to selected changes in market rates and
prices which the Company believes are reasonably possible over a one-year
period.
The
sensitivity analysis estimates the change in the market value of the Company's
interest sensitive assets and liabilities that were held on December 31, 2004
and 2003 due to instantaneous parallel shifts in the yield curve of 100 basis
points, with all other variables held constant.
The
interest rates on certain types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate in
advance of changes in market interest rates, while interest rates on other types
may lag behind changes in market rates. Accordingly the analysis may not be
indicative of, is not intended to provide, and does not provide a precise
forecast of the effect of changes of market interest rates on the Company's
earnings or shareholders' equity. Further, the computations do not contemplate
any actions the Company could undertake in response to changes in interest
rates.
The
Company's debt,
as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003 is denominated in U.S. Dollars. The Company's debt
has been primarily issued at fixed rates, and as such, interest expense would
not be impacted by interest rate shifts. The impact of a 100 basis point
increase in interest rates on fixed rate debt would result in a decrease in
market value of $426.8 million and $394.1 million, respectively. A 100 basis
point decrease would result in an increase in market value of $494.4 million and
$460.5 million, respectively.
Equity
Price Risk - The Company has exposure to equity price risk as a result of its
investment in equity securities and equity derivatives. Equity price risk
results from changes in the level or volatility of equity prices which affect
the value of equity securities or instruments that derive their value from such
securities or indexes. Equity price risk was measured assuming an instantaneous
25% change in the underlying reference price or index from its level at December
31, 2004 and 2003, with all other variables held constant.
Foreign
Exchange Rate Risk - Foreign exchange rate risk arises from the possibility that
changes in foreign currency exchange rates will impact the value of financial
instruments. The Company has foreign exchange rate exposure when it buys or
sells foreign currencies or financial instruments denominated in a foreign
currency. This exposure is mitigated by the Company's asset/liability matching
strategy and through the use of futures for those instruments which are not
matched. The Company's foreign transactions are primarily denominated in
Canadian dollars, British pounds and the European Monetary Unit. The sensitivity
analysis also assumes an instantaneous 20% change in the foreign currency
Item
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk |
|
exchange
rates versus the U.S. dollar from their levels at December 31, 2004 and 2003,
with all other variables held constant.
Commodity
Price Risk - The Company has exposure to commodity price risk as a result of its
investments in gold options. Commodity price risk results from changes in the
level or volatility of commodity prices that impact instruments which derive
their value from such commodities. Commodity price risk was measured assuming an
instantaneous change of 20% from their levels at December 31, 2004 and
2003.
The
following tables present the Company's market risk by category (equity markets,
interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices) on the
basis of those entered into for trading purposes and other than trading
purposes.
Trading
portfolio:
Category
of risk exposure: |
|
Fair
Value Asset (Liability) |
|
Market
Risk |
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(Amounts
in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
markets (1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities |
|
$ |
233.1 |
|
$ |
339.1 |
|
$ |
(59.0 |
) |
$ |
(85.0 |
) |
Options - purchased |
|
|
19.9 |
|
|
22.2 |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
2.0 |
|
- written |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
1.0 |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Warrants |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short
sales |
|
|
(77.6 |
) |
|
(118.4 |
) |
|
19.0 |
|
|
30.0 |
|
Limited
partnership investments |
|
|
427.7 |
|
|
73.5 |
|
|
(30.0 |
) |
|
(18.0 |
) |
Separate
accounts - Equity
securities (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Other
invested assets |
|
|
|
|
|
419.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
Interest
rate (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Futures
- short |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10.0 |
) |
|
(5.0 |
) |
Interest
rate swaps |
|
|
(505.5 |
) |
|
25.0 |
|
|
(46.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
Fixed maturities |
|
|
390.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
459.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other derivatives |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(6.0 |
) |
|
|
|
Separate
accounts - Fixed
maturities |
|
|
|
|
|
304.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
- Short-term
investments |
|
|
|
|
|
413.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold
(3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options - purchased |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
8.0 |
|
- written
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
(12.0 |
) |
__________
Note: |
The
calculation of estimated market risk exposure is based on assumed adverse
changes in the underlying reference price or index of (1) a decrease in
equity prices of 25%, (2) a decrease in interest rates of 100 basis
points and (3) a decrease in gold prices of 20%. Adverse changes on
options which differ from those presented above would not necessarily
result in a proportionate change to the estimated market risk
exposure. |
|
(a) |
In
addition, the Separate Accounts carry positions in equity index futures. A
decrease in equity prices of 25% would result in market risk amounting to
$(289.0) and $(277.0) at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. This
market risk would be offset by decreases in liabilities to customers under
variable insurance contracts. |
Item
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk |
|
Other
than trading portfolio:
Category
of risk exposure: |
|
Fair
Value Asset (Liability) |
|
Market
Risk |
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(Amounts
in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
markets (1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General
accounts (a) |
|
$ |
410.1 |
|
$ |
526.9 |
|
$ |
(103.0 |
) |
$ |
(129.0 |
) |
Separate
accounts |
|
|
55.0 |
|
|
116.5 |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
(29.0 |
) |
Limited
partnership investments |
|
|
1,355.7 |
|
|
1,261.6 |
|
|
(75.0 |
) |
|
(69.0 |
) |
Separate
accounts - Other invested assets |
|
|
|
|
|
414.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
(104.0 |
) |
Interest
rate (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturities (a)(b) |
|
|
33,112.1 |
|
|
28,781.3 |
|
|
(1,855.0 |
) |
|
(1,979.0 |
) |
Short-term
investments (a) |
|
|
7,847.6 |
|
|
11,264.6 |
|
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
(5.0 |
) |
Other
invested assets |
|
|
47.8 |
|
|
237.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
derivative securities |
|
|
(7.9 |
) |
|
5.0 |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
(105.0 |
) |
Separate
accounts (a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturities |
|
|
486.3 |
|
|
1,809.2 |
|
|
(24.0 |
) |
|
(114.0 |
) |
Short-term
investments |
|
|
19.8 |
|
|
81.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
(7,101.0 |
) |
|
(5,871.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
__________
Note: |
The
calculation of estimated market risk exposure is based on assumed adverse
changes in the underlying reference price or index of (1) a decrease in
equity prices of 25% and (2) an increase in interest rates of 100 basis
points. |
|
(a) |
Certain securities are denominated in foreign
currencies. An assumed 20% decline in the underlying exchange rates would
result in an aggregate foreign currency exchange rate risk of $(254.0),
and $(152.0) at December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. |
|
(b) |
Certain
fixed maturities positions include options embedded in convertible debt
securities. A decrease in underlying equity prices of 25% would result in
market risk amounting to $(64.0) and $(32.0) at December 31, 2004 and
2003, respectively. |
Item
8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data are comprised of the following
sections:
|
Page |
|
No. |
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets |
118 |
Consolidated
Statements of Operations |
120 |
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders' Equity |
121 |
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows |
122 |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements: |
|
1. |
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies |
124 |
2. |
|
Investments |
134 |
3. |
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments |
139 |
4. |
|
Derivative
Financial Instruments |
140 |
5. |
|
Earnings
Per Share |
143 |
6. |
|
Loews
and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial
Information |
144 |
7. |
|
Receivables |
151 |
8. |
|
Property,
Plant and Equipment |
152 |
9. |
|
Claim
and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves |
152 |
10. |
|
Leases |
171 |
11. |
|
Income
Taxes |
171 |
12. |
|
Debt |
173 |
13. |
|
Comprehensive
Income (Loss) |
177 |
14. |
|
Significant
Transactions |
177 |
15. |
|
Restructuring
and Other Related Charges |
181 |
16. |
|
Discontinued
Operations |
181 |
17. |
|
Statutory
Accounting Practices (Unaudited) |
182 |
18. |
|
Benefit
Plans |
184 |
19. |
|
Reinsurance |
189 |
20. |
|
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited) |
193 |
21. |
|
Legal
Proceedings |
|
|
|
|
Insurance
Related |
194 |
|
|
|
Tobacco
Related |
196 |
22. |
|
Commitments
and Contingencies |
207 |
23. |
|
Business
Segments |
210 |
24. |
|
Consolidating
Financial Information |
214 |
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
220 |
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(Dollar
amounts in millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
(Notes 1, 2, 3 and 4): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturities, amortized cost of $32,435.1 and $27,664.9 |
|
$ |
33,502.1 |
|
$ |
28,781.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities, cost of $501.5 and $593.1 |
|
|
664.1 |
|
|
888.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited
partnership investments |
|
|
1,783.4 |
|
|
1,335.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
investments |
|
|
42.1 |
|
|
245.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments |
|
|
8,306.8 |
|
|
11,264.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
investments |
|
|
44,298.5 |
|
|
42,514.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
|
219.9 |
|
|
180.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables
(Notes 1 and 7) |
|
|
18,807.2 |
|
|
20,479.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment (Notes 1 and 8) |
|
|
4,840.7 |
|
|
3,879.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
income taxes (Note 11) |
|
|
624.9 |
|
|
530.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
and other intangible assets (Note 1) |
|
|
294.1 |
|
|
311.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
assets (Notes 1, 14, 16, 18 and 19) |
|
|
2,828.3 |
|
|
3,882.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
acquisition costs of insurance subsidiaries (Note 1) |
|
|
1,268.1 |
|
|
2,532.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Separate
account business (Notes 1, 3 and 4) |
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders' Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(Dollar
amounts in millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves (Notes 1 and 9): |
|
|
|
|
|
Claim
and claim adjustment expense |
|
$ |
31,520.5 |
|
$ |
31,730.2 |
|
Future
policy benefits |
|
|
5,882.5 |
|
|
8,160.9 |
|
Unearned
premiums |
|
|
4,522.1 |
|
|
5,000.1 |
|
Policyholders'
funds |
|
|
1,724.6 |
|
|
601.4 |
|
Total
insurance reserves |
|
|
43,649.7 |
|
|
45,492.6 |
|
Payable
for securities purchased (Note 4) |
|
|
595.5 |
|
|
2,147.7 |
|
Securities
sold under agreements to repurchase (Notes 1 and 2) |
|
|
918.0 |
|
|
441.8 |
|
Short-term
debt (Notes 3 and 12) |
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
|
295.9 |
|
Long-term
debt (Notes 3 and 12) |
|
|
5,980.2 |
|
|
5,524.3 |
|
Reinsurance
balances payable (Notes 1 and 14) |
|
|
3,043.1 |
|
|
3,432.0 |
|
Other
liabilities (Notes 1, 3, 15 and 18) |
|
|
4,119.4 |
|
|
4,251.3 |
|
Separate
account business (Notes 1, 3 and 4) |
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
59,883.8 |
|
|
65,263.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
1,682.4 |
|
|
1,671.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingent liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Notes
1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21 and 22) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders'
equity (Notes 1, 2, 5, 12 and 13): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock, $0.10 par value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized
- 100,000,000 shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock, $1.00 par value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized
- 600,000,000 shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued
and outstanding - 185,584,575 and 185,447,050 shares |
|
|
185.6 |
|
|
185.4 |
|
Carolina
Group stock, $0.01 par value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized
- 600,000,000 shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued
- 68,307,250 and 58,305,000 shares |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital |
|
|
1,801.2 |
|
|
1,513.7 |
|
Earnings
retained in the business |
|
|
9,616.6 |
|
|
8,602.1 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income |
|
|
586.9 |
|
|
760.2 |
|
|
|
|
12,191.0 |
|
|
11,062.0 |
|
Less
treasury stock, at cost (340,000 shares of Carolina Group
stock) |
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
7.7 |
|
Total
shareholders' equity |
|
|
12,183.3 |
|
|
11,054.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity |
|
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
(Note 1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums (Note 19) |
|
$ |
8,205.0 |
|
$ |
9,209.8 |
|
$ |
10,209.9 |
|
Net
investment income (Note 2) |
|
|
1,869.3 |
|
|
1,849.9 |
|
|
1,789.2 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains (Note 2) |
|
|
(256.0 |
) |
|
464.1 |
|
|
(131.0 |
) |
Manufactured
products (including excise taxes of $658.1, $651.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
$667.6) |
|
|
3,515.2 |
|
|
3,418.8 |
|
|
3,963.5 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1,908.8 |
|
|
1,518.4 |
|
|
1,624.9 |
|
Total
|
|
|
15,242.3 |
|
|
16,461.0 |
|
|
17,456.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
(Note 1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and policyholders' benefits (Notes 9 and 19) |
|
|
6,445.6 |
|
|
10,286.5 |
|
|
8,420.3 |
|
Amortization
of deferred acquisition costs |
|
|
1,679.8 |
|
|
1,964.6 |
|
|
1,790.2 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products sold (Note 21) |
|
|
2,045.4 |
|
|
1,972.8 |
|
|
2,226.5 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
2,925.4 |
|
|
3,307.1 |
|
|
3,106.0 |
|
Restructuring
and other related charges (Note 15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36.8 |
) |
Interest
|
|
|
324.1 |
|
|
308.4 |
|
|
309.6 |
|
Total
|
|
|
13,420.3 |
|
|
17,839.4 |
|
|
15,815.8 |
|
|
|
|
1,822.0 |
|
|
(1,378.4 |
) |
|
1,640.7 |
|
Income
tax expense (benefit) (Note 11) |
|
|
533.8 |
|
|
(534.1 |
) |
|
579.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
56.9 |
|
|
(178.2 |
) |
|
82.3 |
|
Total |
|
|
590.7 |
|
|
(712.3 |
) |
|
662.1 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
1,231.3 |
|
|
(666.1 |
) |
|
978.6 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net (Note 16) |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle-net (Note 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) attributable to (Note 5): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
1,046.8 |
|
$ |
(781.3 |
) |
$ |
837.9 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Loews
common stock |
|
|
1,046.8 |
|
|
(725.9 |
) |
|
771.3 |
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
|
184.5 |
|
|
115.2 |
|
|
140.7 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) per Loews common share (Note 5): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(4.21 |
) |
$ |
4.46 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
(0.14 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(3.91 |
) |
$ |
4.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
per Carolina Group share (Note 5) |
|
$ |
3.15 |
|
$ |
2.76 |
|
$ |
3.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average number of shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock |
|
|
185.50 |
|
|
185.45 |
|
|
187.59 |
|
Carolina
Group stock |
|
|
58.49 |
|
|
41.74 |
|
|
40.15 |
|
See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings |
|
Accumulated |
|
Common |
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
Loews |
|
Carolina |
|
Additional |
|
Retained |
|
Other |
|
Stock |
|
|
|
Income |
|
Common |
|
Group |
|
Paid-in |
|
in
the |
|
Comprehensive |
|
Held
in |
|
|
|
(Loss) |
|
Stock |
|
Stock |
|
Capital |
|
Business |
|
Income |
|
Treasury |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
January 1, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
191.5 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
48.2 |
|
$ |
8,994.9 |
|
$ |
194.7 |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income |
|
$ |
912.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
912.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
comprehensive gains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
13) |
|
|
343.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
343.6 |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
income |
|
$ |
1,255.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock, $0.60 per |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(112.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock, $1.34 per |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Loews common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Carolina Group stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
1,069.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of Loews common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(343.5 |
) |
Purchases
of Carolina Group stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
Retirement
of Loews treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
(6.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
(335.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
343.5 |
|
Equity
in certain transactions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
subsidiary companies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
185.4 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
1,114.2 |
|
|
9,404.6 |
|
|
538.3 |
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
Comprehensive
loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(610.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
comprehensive gains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
13) |
|
|
221.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
221.9 |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
loss |
|
$ |
(388.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock, $0.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(111.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock, $1.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Loews common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Carolina Group stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
399.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
185.4 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
1,513.7 |
|
|
8,602.1 |
|
|
760.2 |
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
Comprehensive
income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,231.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
comprehensive losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
13) |
|
|
(173.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(173.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Comprehensive
income |
|
$ |
1,058.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock, $0.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(111.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock, $1.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(105.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Loews common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Carolina Group stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Note
6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
281.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
185.6 |
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
$ |
1,801.2 |
|
$ |
9,616.6 |
|
$ |
586.9 |
|
$ |
(7.7 |
) |
See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(used)
by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
(56.7 |
) |
|
33.5 |
|
Cumulative
effect of changes in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39.6 |
|
Provision
for doubtful accounts and cash discounts |
|
|
228.2 |
|
|
780.9 |
|
|
227.4 |
|
Investment
losses (gains) |
|
|
256.0 |
|
|
(464.1 |
) |
|
131.0 |
|
Undistributed
earnings |
|
|
(189.0 |
) |
|
(251.1 |
) |
|
28.5 |
|
Provision
for minority interest |
|
|
56.9 |
|
|
(178.2 |
) |
|
82.3 |
|
Amortization
of investments |
|
|
(21.5 |
) |
|
(108.6 |
) |
|
(186.6 |
) |
Depreciation
and amortization |
|
|
350.8 |
|
|
325.1 |
|
|
312.2 |
|
Provision
for deferred income taxes |
|
|
52.7 |
|
|
179.9 |
|
|
(7.3 |
) |
Other
non-cash items |
|
|
62.4 |
|
|
41.8 |
|
|
54.2 |
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities-net: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
receivables |
|
|
(926.7 |
) |
|
(3,581.4 |
) |
|
(123.2 |
) |
Other
receivables |
|
|
299.6 |
|
|
(761.8 |
) |
|
1,021.0 |
|
Prepaid
reinsurance premiums |
|
|
232.7 |
|
|
(15.5 |
) |
|
(124.2 |
) |
Deferred
acquisition costs |
|
|
193.6 |
|
|
(61.5 |
) |
|
(162.3 |
) |
Insurance
reserves and claims |
|
|
766.4 |
|
|
6,818.6 |
|
|
(931.3 |
) |
Reinsurance
balances payable |
|
|
(354.8 |
) |
|
669.9 |
|
|
144.5 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
413.1 |
|
|
(139.3 |
) |
|
584.9 |
|
Trading
securities |
|
|
100.8 |
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
(227.5 |
) |
Other-net |
|
|
68.6 |
|
|
164.4 |
|
|
(20.5 |
) |
|
|
|
2,821.1 |
|
|
2,783.8 |
|
|
1,788.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of fixed maturities |
|
|
(77,274.1 |
) |
|
(71,835.9 |
) |
|
(81,739.0 |
) |
Proceeds
from sales of fixed maturities |
|
|
60,480.7 |
|
|
58,048.4 |
|
|
78,324.8 |
|
Proceeds
from maturities of fixed maturities |
|
|
9,385.8 |
|
|
12,684.8 |
|
|
6,220.0 |
|
Purchases
of equity securities |
|
|
(661.1 |
) |
|
(394.2 |
) |
|
(914.4 |
) |
Proceeds
from sales of equity securities |
|
|
812.3 |
|
|
594.6 |
|
|
1,197.7 |
|
Purchases
of property and equipment |
|
|
(267.0 |
) |
|
(446.4 |
) |
|
(514.4 |
) |
Proceeds
from sales of property and equipment |
|
|
52.7 |
|
|
106.5 |
|
|
28.2 |
|
Securities
sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
476.2 |
|
|
(110.6 |
) |
|
(1,050.0 |
) |
Change
in short-term investments |
|
|
3,330.8 |
|
|
(1,499.0 |
) |
|
(3,381.9 |
) |
Dispositions,
net of cash |
|
|
647.0 |
|
|
431.4 |
|
|
(177.6 |
) |
Change
in other investments |
|
|
150.8 |
|
|
352.1 |
|
|
74.1 |
|
Acquisition
of Gas Pipelines-net of cash |
|
|
(1,111.4 |
) |
|
(803.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,977.3 |
) |
|
(2,871.6 |
) |
|
(1,932.5 |
) |
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing
Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid |
|
$ |
(216.8 |
) |
$ |
(191.8 |
) |
$ |
(166.4 |
) |
Dividends
paid to minority interests |
|
|
(14.8 |
) |
|
(26.4 |
) |
|
(30.6 |
) |
Purchases
of treasury shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(351.2 |
) |
Purchases
of treasury shares by subsidiaries |
|
|
(18.1 |
) |
|
(17.9 |
) |
|
(43.0 |
) |
Issuance
of common stock |
|
|
287.8 |
|
|
399.7 |
|
|
1,070.1 |
|
Principal
payments on debt |
|
|
(606.0 |
) |
|
(807.5 |
) |
|
(352.9 |
) |
Issuance
of debt |
|
|
1,747.9 |
|
|
706.4 |
|
|
65.0 |
|
Returns
and deposits of policyholder account balances on |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
investment
contracts |
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
(43.6 |
) |
Other |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
(3.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,195.3 |
|
|
84.7 |
|
|
147.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
change in cash |
|
|
39.1 |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
3.1 |
|
Cash,
beginning of year |
|
|
180.8 |
|
|
183.9 |
|
|
180.8 |
|
Cash,
end of year |
|
$ |
219.9 |
|
$ |
180.8 |
|
$ |
183.9 |
|
See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of
presentation - Loews
Corporation is a holding company. Its subsidiaries are engaged in the following
lines of business: commercial property and casualty insurance (CNA
Financial Corporation (“CNA”), a 91% owned subsidiary); the production and sale
of cigarettes (Lorillard, Inc. (“Lorillard”), a wholly owned subsidiary); the
operation of hotels (Loews Hotels Holding Corporation (“Loews Hotels”), a wholly
owned subsidiary); the operation of offshore oil and gas drilling rigs (Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. (“Diamond Offshore”), a 55% owned subsidiary); the
operation of interstate natural gas transmission pipeline systems (Boardwalk
Pipelines, LLC (“Boardwalk Pipelines”), a wholly owned subsidiary) and the
distribution and sale of watches and clocks (Bulova Corporation (“Bulova”), a
97% owned subsidiary). In January of 2005, Bulova became a wholly owned
subsidiary. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “Company,” “Loews”
and “Registrant” as used herein mean Loews Corporation excluding its
subsidiaries.
In
December of 2004, the Company, through a wholly owned subsidiary, Boardwalk
Pipelines acquired
Gulf South Pipeline,
LP (“Gulf South”), from
Entergy-Koch,
LP, a venture between Entergy Corporation and Koch Energy, Inc., a subsidiary of
privately-owned Koch Industries, Inc. The transaction value was approximately
$1.14 billion. The results of Gulf South have been included in the Consolidated
Financial Statements from the date of acquisition. The Company funded the $1.14
billion purchase price, including transaction costs and closing adjustments,
with $561.0 million of its available cash and $575.0 million of proceeds from an
interim loan incurred by Boardwalk Pipelines (see Note 14).
In April
of 2004, CNA sold its individual life insurance business to Swiss Re Life &
Health America Inc. (see Note 14).
Principles
of consolidation - The consolidated financial statements include all significant
subsidiaries and all material intercompany accounts and transactions have been
eliminated. The equity method of accounting is used for investments in
associated companies in which the Company generally has an interest of 20% to
50%.
Accounting
estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and the related notes.
Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Accounting
changes - In June
of 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.” SFAS No. 142 changes the accounting for goodwill and intangible assets
with indefinite lives from an amortization method to an impairment-only
approach. Effective January 1, 2002, the Company recorded a $39.6 million
goodwill impairment charge as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting
principle, adjusted to reflect purchase accounting adjustments, net of income
taxes and minority interest of $5.8 million and $6.4 million, respectively,
primarily related to CNA’s Specialty Lines and Life Operations.
In
January of 2003, the FASB issued Interpretation No. (“FIN”) 46, “Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities, an Interpretation of ARB No. 51.” This
Interpretation clarifies the application of ARB No. 51, “Consolidated Financial
Statements,” to certain entities in which equity investors do not have the
characteristics of a controlling financial interest. Prior to the issuance of
this Interpretation, ARB No. 51 defined a controlling financial interest as
ownership of a majority voting interest. FIN 46 requires an entity to
consolidate a variable interest entity even though the entity does not, either
directly or indirectly, own more than 50% of the outstanding voting shares. FIN
46 defines a variable interest entity as having one or both of the following
characteristics (1) the equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit
the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial
support from other parties or (2) the equity investors lack one or more of the
following (a) the direct or indirect ability to make decisions about the
entity’s activities through voting rights or similar rights, (b) the obligation
to absorb the expected losses of the entity, if they occur, which makes it
possible for the entity to finance its activities and (c) the right to receive
the expected residual returns of the entity, if they occur, which is the
compensation for the risk of absorbing the expected losses. On December 24,
2003, the FASB issued a complete replacement of FIN 46 ("FIN
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
46R”),
which clarified certain complexities of FIN 46. FIN 46R
has changed the basis of consolidation from voting control to a broader
consolidation model based on risks and rewards. The adoption of FIN 46R did not
have a significant impact on the results of operations or equity of the
Company.
In July
of 2003, the Accounting Standards Executive Committee (“AcSEC”) of the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”) issued Statement of Position
(“SOP”) 03-01, “Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain
Nontraditional Long-Duration Contracts and for Separate Accounts.” SOP 03-01
provides guidance on accounting and reporting by insurance enterprises for
certain nontraditional long-duration contracts and for separate accounts. SOP
03-01 was effective for financial statements for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2003. SOP 03-01 did not allow retroactive application to prior
years’ financial statements. CNA adopted SOP 03-01 at January 1, 2004. The
initial adoption of SOP 03-01 did not have a significant impact on the results
of operations or equity of the Company, but did affect the classification and
presentation of certain balance sheet and statement of operations
items.
Under SOP
03-01, the main criterion that needs to be satisfied for separate account
presentation is that results of the investments made by the separate accounts
must be directly passed through to the individual contract holders. Certain of
CNA’s separate accounts have guaranteed returns not related to investment
performance whereby the contract holders do not bear the losses or receive the
gains from the investment performance; rather, amounts less than or in excess of
the guaranteed amounts accrue to CNA. Upon adoption of SOP 03-01, these separate
accounts did not meet the requirements of SOP 03-01 for separate account
presentation. Therefore, the assets supporting these separate accounts are
reflected within general account investments and the related liabilities within
insurance reserves as of December 31, 2004. SOP 03-01 specifically precludes
reclassifying balances for years prior to adoption.
The
adoption of SOP 03-01 did not result in a net impact to total assets, total
liabilities or shareholder’s equity. The difference between assets and
liabilities as reflected within the table below, relates to the net equity of
the above-referenced separate accounts which accrues to CNA, as discussed above.
Prior to adoption of SOP 03-01, this equity amount was presented as Other assets
and equity within the consolidated financial statements. Following adoption of
SOP 03-01, the Other assets amount has been replaced with the actual underlying
investments that are now included within the general account and are reported
based on their investment classification, and the offsetting equity impact is
unchanged.
From an
income statement perspective, SOP 03-01 did not impact net income; however, it
required a reclassification within the income statement. Prior to the adoption
of SOP 03-01, the net results of the separate accounts were primarily included
in Other revenue. Upon adopting SOP 03-01, premiums, benefits, net investment
income and realized gains are included within their natural line items.
Specifically related to the indexed group annuity contracts, the underlying
portfolio consists of limited partnership investments and a trading portfolio
which are classified as held for trading purposes and are carried at fair value,
with both the net realized and unrealized gains (losses) included within net
investment income in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
The
following table provides the balance sheet presentation of assets and
liabilities for certain guaranteed investment contracts and indexed group
annuity contracts upon adoption of SOP 03-01, including the classification of
the indexed group annuity contract investments as trading
securities:
|
|
December
31, |
|
January
1, |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2004
(a) |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
Investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities, available-for-sale |
|
$ |
797.0 |
|
$ |
1,220.0 |
|
Fixed
maturity securities, trading |
|
|
350.0 |
|
|
304.0 |
|
Equity
securities, available-for-sale |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
Equity
securities, trading |
|
|
39.0 |
|
|
|
|
Limited
partnerships |
|
|
351.0 |
|
|
419.0 |
|
Derivatives |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
Short-term
investments, available-for-sale |
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
55.0 |
|
Short-term
investments, trading |
|
|
459.0 |
|
|
414.0 |
|
Total
investments |
|
|
2,023.0 |
|
|
2,416.0 |
|
Accrued
investment income |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
13.0 |
|
Receivables
for securities sold |
|
|
189.0 |
|
|
97.0 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
2,222.0 |
|
$ |
2,527.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Claim
and claim adjustment expense |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
Future
policy benefits |
|
|
522.0 |
|
|
617.0 |
|
Policyholders’
funds |
|
|
1,205.0 |
|
|
1,324.0 |
|
Collateral
on loaned securities and derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
17.0 |
|
Payables
for securities purchased |
|
|
102.0 |
|
|
43.0 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
87.0 |
|
|
47.0 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
$ |
1,917.0 |
|
$ |
2,049.0 |
|
__________
(a) |
Includes
assets and liabilities of the individual life business sold on April 30,
2004. See Note 14 for further information. |
In April
of 2004, the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) reached consensus on the
guidance provided in EITF Issue No. 03-6, “Participating Securities and the
Two-Class Method under SFAS No. 128 Earnings Per Share” (“EITF 03-6”). EITF 03-6
clarifies whether a security should be considered a “participating security” for
purposes of computing earnings per share (“EPS”) and how earnings should be
allocated to a “participating security” when using the two-class method for
computing basic EPS. The adoption of EITF 03-6 did not have a significant impact
on the Company.
In May of
2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (“FSP”)
106-2, “Accounting
and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug,
Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003.” The FSP provides guidance on the
accounting for the effects of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and
Modernization Act of 2003 for employers that provide prescription drug benefits.
FSP 106-2 supersedes FSP 106-1 “Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related
to the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003.”
Adoption of this position has not had a material impact on the Company’s results
of operations or equity.
Investments
- - Investments in securities, which are held principally by insurance
subsidiaries of CNA, are carried as follows:
The
Company classifies its fixed maturity securities (bonds and redeemable preferred
stocks) and its equity securities held principally by insurance subsidiaries as
either available-for-sale or trading, and as such, they are carried at fair
value. During
2004, the Company has designated certain new purchases related to a specific
investment strategy, that primarily includes convertible bond securities as held
for trading purposes. In addition,
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
upon
adoption of SOP 03-01, certain securities were designated as held for trading
purposes within the General Account. Changes in fair value of trading securities
are reported within net investment income. The amortized cost of fixed maturity
securities classified as available-for-sale is adjusted for amortization of
premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity, which are included in net
investment income. Changes in fair value related to available-for-sale
securities are reported as a component of Other comprehensive income in
Shareholders’ equity, net of applicable deferred income taxes and participating
policyholders’ and minority interest. Investments are written down to fair value
and losses are recognized in statement of operations when a decline in value is
determined to be other-than-temporary. See Note 2 for information related to the
Company’s impairment charges.
For
asset-backed securities included in fixed maturity securities, the Company
recognizes income using a constant effective yield based on anticipated
prepayments and the estimated economic life of the securities. When estimates of
prepayments change, the effective yield is recalculated to reflect actual
payments to date and anticipated future payments. The net investment in the
securities is adjusted to the amount that would have existed had the new
effective yield been applied since the acquisition of the securities. Such
adjustments are reflected in net investment income.
Mortgage
loans are carried at unpaid principal balances, including unamortized premium or
discount. Real estate is carried at depreciated cost and policy loans are
carried at unpaid balances. These items are included in “Other investments” in
the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Short-term
investments consist primarily of U.S. government securities, money market funds
and commercial paper. These investments are generally carried at fair value,
which approximates amortized cost.
All
securities transactions are recorded on the trade date. The cost of securities
sold is generally determined by the identified certificate method.
The
Company’s limited partnership investments are recorded at fair value typically
reflecting a reporting lag of up to three months, with changes in fair value
reported in net investment income. Fair value of the Company’s limited
partnership investments represents the Company’s equity in the partnership’s net
assets as determined by the general partner. The carrying value of the Company’s
limited partnership investments was $1,783.4 million and $1,335.1 million as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The majority of the limited
partnerships invest in a substantial number of securities that are readily
marketable. The Company is primarily a passive investor in such partnerships and
does not have influence over the partnerships’ management, who are committed to
operate them according to established guidelines and strategies. These
strategies may include the use of leverage and hedging techniques that
potentially introduce more volatility and risk to the partnerships. In
accordance with FIN 46R, during 2004, the Company consolidated two limited
partnerships where the Company owned a majority interest and were previously
accounted for using the equity method. The net assets of the two limited
partnerships of $113.0 million are reflected under their respective asset
categories in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Other
invested assets include certain derivative securities. Investments in derivative
securities are carried at fair value with changes in fair value reported as a
component of investment gains or losses or other comprehensive income, depending
on their hedge designation. Changes in the fair value of derivative securities
which are not designated as hedges, are reported as a component of investment
gains or losses in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. A derivative is
typically defined as an instrument whose value is “derived” from an underlying
instrument, index or rate, has a notional amount, requires little or no initial
investment, and can be net settled. Derivatives include, but are not limited to,
the following types of investments: interest rate swaps, interest rate caps and
floors, put and call options, warrants, futures, forwards, commitments to
purchase securities, and combinations of the foregoing. Derivatives embedded
within non-derivative instruments (such as call options embedded in convertible
bonds) must be split from the host instrument when the embedded derivative is
not clearly and closely related to the host instrument. Collateralized
debt obligations (“CDOs”) represent a credit enhancement product that is
typically structured in the form of a swap. CNA has determined that this product
is a derivative under SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities.” Changes in the estimated fair value of CDOs, like other
derivative financial instruments with no hedge designation, are recorded in
investment gains or losses as appropriate. The net
impact from CDOs was a realized gain of $5.0 million for the year ended December
31, 2004. The net impact of CDOs was a realized loss of $1.0 million and $6.0
million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. CNA no longer issues
this product.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
Synthetic
guaranteed investment contracts (“GICs”) are guaranteed investment contracts
that simulate the performance of a traditional GIC through the use of financial
instruments. These contracts are accounted for as derivative financial
instruments. A key difference between a synthetic GIC and a traditional GIC is
that the contract owner owns the financial instruments underlying the synthetic
GIC; whereas, the contract owner owns only the contract itself with a
traditional GIC. CNA mitigates its exposure under these contracts by maintaining
the ability to reset the crediting rate on a monthly/quarterly basis. This rate
reset effectively passes any cash flow volatility and asset underperformance
back to the contract owner. CNA no longer issues this product.
The
Company’s derivatives are reported as other invested assets, with the exception
of CDOs and synthetic GICs, which are reported as other assets and/or other
liabilities. Embedded derivative instruments subject to bifurcation are reported
together with the host contract, at fair value. If certain criteria are met, a
derivative may be specifically designated as a hedge of exposures to changes in
fair value, cash flows or foreign currency exchange rates. The accounting for
changes in the fair value of a derivative depends on the intended use of the
derivative and the nature of any hedge designation thereon.
The
Company’s accounting for changes in the fair value of derivative instruments is
as follows:
Nature
of Hedge Designation |
Derivative’s
Change in Fair Value Reflected in |
|
|
No
hedge designation |
Investment
gains (losses). |
Fair
value |
Investment
gains (losses), along with the change in fair value of |
|
the
hedged asset or liability. |
Cash
flow |
Other
comprehensive income (loss), with subsequent |
|
reclassification
to earnings when the hedged transaction, |
|
asset
or liability impacts earnings. |
Foreign
currency |
Consistent
with fair value or cash flow above, depending |
|
on
the nature of the hedging relationship. |
Changes
in the fair value of derivatives held in CNA’s separate accounts are reflected
in separate account earnings. Because separate account investments are generally
carried at fair value with changes therein reflected in separate account
earnings, hedge accounting is generally not applicable to separate account
derivatives.
Securities
sold under agreements to repurchase - The Company lends securities to unrelated
parties, primarily major brokerage firms. Borrowers of these securities must
deposit collateral with the Company of at least 102% of the fair value of the
securities loaned, if the collateral is cash or securities. The Company
maintains effective control over all
loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as fixed
maturity securities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Cash
collateral received on these transactions is invested in short-term investments
with an offsetting liability recognized for the obligation to return the
collateral. Non-cash collateral, such as securities or letters of credit,
received by the Company are not reflected as assets of the Company as there
exists no right to sell or re-pledge the collateral. The fair value of
collateral held and included in short-term investments was $918.0 million and
$430.0 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. The fair value of non-cash
collateral was $3,783.0 million and $505.0 million at December 31, 2004 and
2003.
Insurance
Operations
Premiums
-
Insurance premiums on property and casualty and accident and health insurance
contracts are recognized in proportion to the underlying risk insured which
principally are earned ratably over the duration of the policies after
deductions for ceded insurance premiums. The reserve for unearned premiums on
these contracts represents the portion of premiums written relating to the
unexpired terms of coverage.
An
estimated allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded on the basis of periodic
evaluations of balances due currently or in the future from insureds, including
amounts due from insureds related to losses under high deductible policies,
management’s experience and current economic conditions.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
Property
and casualty contracts that are retrospectively rated contain provisions that
result in an adjustment to the initial policy premium depending on the contract
provisions and loss experience of the insured during the experience period. For
such contracts, CNA estimates the amount of ultimate premiums that CNA may earn
upon completion of the experience period and recognizes either an asset or a
liability for the difference between the initial policy premium and the
estimated ultimate premium. CNA adjusts such estimated ultimate premium amounts
during the course of the experience period based on actual results to date. The
resulting adjustment is recorded as either a reduction of or an increase to the
earned premiums for the period.
Revenues
on interest-sensitive life insurance contracts are composed of contract charges
and fees, which are recognized over the coverage period. Premiums for other life
insurance products and annuities are recognized as revenue when due after
deductions for ceded insurance premiums.
Claim and
claim adjustment expense reserves - Claim
and claim adjustment expense reserves, except reserves for structured
settlements not associated with asbestos and environmental pollution and mass
tort (“APMT”), workers compensation lifetime claims and accident and health
claims, are not discounted and are based on (1) case basis estimates for losses
reported on direct business, adjusted in the aggregate for ultimate loss
expectations; (2) estimates of incurred but not reported losses; (3) estimates
of losses on assumed reinsurance; (4) estimates of future expenses to be
incurred in the settlement of claims; (5) estimates of salvage and subrogation
recoveries; and (6) estimates of amounts due from insureds related to losses
under high deductible policies. CNA management considers current conditions and
trends as well as past CNA and industry experience in establishing these
estimates. The effects of inflation, which can be significant, are implicitly
considered in the reserving process and are part of the recorded reserve
balance. Ceded claim and claim adjustment expense reserves are reported as a
component of Reinsurance receivables in the Consolidated Balance
Sheets.
Structured
settlements have been negotiated for certain property and casualty insurance
claims. Structured settlements are agreements to provide fixed periodic payments
to claimants. Certain structured settlements are funded by annuities purchased
from CAC for which the related annuity obligations are reported in future policy
benefits reserves. Obligations for structured settlements not funded by
annuities are included in claim and claim adjustment expense reserves and
carried at present values determined using interest rates ranging from 4.6% to
7.5% at December 31, 2004 and 2003. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the
discounted reserves for unfunded structured settlements were $872.0 million and
$898.0 million, net of discount of $1,367.0 million and $1,429.0
million.
Workers
compensation lifetime claim reserves and accident and health claim reserves are
calculated using mortality and morbidity assumptions based on CNA and industry
experience, and are discounted at interest rates that range from 3.5% to 6.5% at
December 31, 2004 and 2003. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, such discounted
reserves totaled $1,893.0 million and $2,835.0 million, net of discount of
$460.0 million and $851.0 million.
Future
policy benefits reserves - Reserves
for long term care products are computed using the net level premium method,
which incorporates actuarial assumptions as to interest rates, mortality,
morbidity, persistency, withdrawals and expenses. Actuarial assumptions
generally vary by plan, age at issue and policy duration, and include a margin
for adverse deviation. Interest rates range from 6.0% to 8.6% at December 31,
2004 and 2003, and mortality, morbidity and withdrawal assumptions are based on
CNA and industry experience prevailing at the time of issue. Expense assumptions
include the estimated effects of inflation and expenses to be incurred beyond
the premium paying period. The net reserves for traditional life insurance
products (whole and term life products) including interest-sensitive contracts
were ceded on a 100% indemnity reinsurance basis to Swiss Re in connection with
the sale of the individual life insurance business. See Note 14 for additional
information.
Policyholders’
funds reserves -
Policyholders’ funds reserves include reserves for universal life insurance
contracts and investment contracts without life contingencies. The liability for
policy benefits for universal life-type contracts is equal to the balance that
accrues to the benefit of policyholders, including credited interest, amounts
that have been assessed to compensate CNA for services to be performed over
future periods, and any amounts previously assessed against policyholders that
are refundable on termination of the contract. For investment contracts,
policyholder liabilities are equal to the accumulated policy account values,
which consist of an accumulation of deposit payments plus credited interest,
less withdrawals and amounts assessed through the end of the
period.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
Guaranty
fund and other insurance-related assessments -
Liabilities for guaranty fund and other insurance-related assessments are
accrued when an assessment is probable, when it can be reasonably estimated, and
when the event obligating the entity to pay an imposed or probable assessment
has occurred. Liabilities for guaranty funds and other insurance-related
assessments are not discounted and are included as part of other liabilities in
the Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, the liability
balance was $67.0 million and $70.0 million. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
included in other assets were $9.0 million and $7.0 million of related assets
for premium tax offsets. The related asset is limited to the amount that is able
to be assessed on future premium collections or policy surcharges from business
written or committed to be written.
Reinsurance
- Amounts
recoverable from reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with claim and
claim adjustment expense reserves or future policy benefits reserves and are
reported as receivables in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The cost of
reinsurance is primarily accounted for over the life of the underlying reinsured
policies using assumptions consistent with those used to account for the
underlying policies. The ceding of insurance does not discharge the primary
liability of CNA. An estimated allowance for doubtful accounts is recorded on
the basis of periodic evaluations of balances due from reinsurers, reinsurer
solvency, management’s experience and current economic conditions.
Reinsurance
contracts that do not effectively transfer the underlying economic risk of loss
on policies written by CNA are recorded using the deposit method of accounting,
which requires that premium paid or received by the ceding company or assuming
company be accounted for as a deposit asset or liability. CNA primarily records
these deposits as either reinsurance receivables or other assets for ceded
recoverables and reinsurance balances payable or other liabilities for assumed
liabilities. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA had approximately $117.0 million
and $380.0 million recorded as deposit assets and $156.0 million and $369.0
million recorded as deposit liabilities.
Income on
reinsurance contracts accounted for under the deposit method is recognized using
an effective yield based on the anticipated timing of payments and the remaining
life of the contract. When the estimate of timing of payments changes, the
effective yield is recalculated to reflect actual payments to date and the
estimated timing of future payments. The deposit asset or liability is adjusted
to the amount that would have existed had the new effective yield been applied
since the inception of the contract. This adjustment is reflected in other
revenue or other operating expense as appropriate.
Participating
insurance -
Policyholder dividends are accrued using an estimate of the amount to be paid
based on underlying contractual obligations under policies and applicable state
laws. When limitations exist on the amount of net income from participating life
insurance contracts that may be distributed to policyholders, the policyholders’
share of net income on those contracts that cannot be distributed is excluded
from shareholders’ equity by a charge to operations and the establishment of a
corresponding liability.
Deferred
acquisition costs - Costs,
including commissions, premium taxes and certain underwriting and policy
issuance costs which vary with and are related primarily to the acquisition of
property and casualty insurance business, are deferred and amortized ratably
over the period the related premiums are earned. Anticipated investment income
is considered in the determination of the recoverability of deferred acquisition
costs.
The
excess of first-year commissions over renewal commissions and other first-year
costs of acquiring life insurance business, such as agency and policy issuance
expenses, which vary with and are related primarily to the production of new and
renewal business, have been deferred and are amortized with interest over the
expected life of the related contracts. The excess of first-year ceded expense
allowances over renewal ceded expense allowances reduces applicable unamortized
deferred acquisition costs.
Deferred
acquisition costs related to non-participating traditional life insurance and
accident and health insurance are amortized over the premium-paying period of
the related policies using assumptions consistent with those used for computing
future policy benefits reserves for such contracts. Assumptions as to
anticipated premiums are made at the date of policy issuance or acquisition and
are consistently applied during the lives of the contracts. Deviations from
estimated experience are included in results of operations when they occur. For
these contracts, the amortization period is typically the estimated life of the
policy.
For
universal life and cash value annuity contracts, the amortization of deferred
acquisition costs is recorded in proportion to the present value of estimated
gross margins or profits. The gross margins or profits result from actual
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
earned
interest minus actual credited interest, actual costs of insurance (mortality
charges) minus expected mortality, actual expense charges minus expected
maintenance expenses and surrender charges. Amortization interest rates are
based on rates in effect at the inception or acquisition of the contracts or the
latest revised rate applied to the remaining benefit period, according to
product line. Actual gross margins or profits can vary from CNA’s estimates
resulting in increases or decreases in the rate of amortization. When
appropriate, CNA revises its assumptions of the estimated gross margins or
profits of these contracts, and the cumulative amortization is re-estimated and
adjusted through current results of operations. To the extent that unrealized
gains or losses on available-for-sale securities would result in an adjustment
of deferred acquisition costs had they actually been realized, an adjustment is
recorded to deferred acquisition costs and to unrealized investment gains or
losses within shareholders’ equity.
Deferred
acquisition costs are recorded net of ceding commissions and other ceded
acquisition costs. CNA evaluates deferred acquisition costs for recoverability.
Adjustments, if necessary, are recorded in current results of
operations.
Investments
in life settlement contracts and related revenue recognition - CNA has
purchased investments in life settlement contracts. Under a life settlement
contract, CNA obtains the rights of being the owner and beneficiary to an
underlying life insurance policy. The carrying value of each contract at
purchase and at the end of each reporting period is equal to the cash surrender
value of the policy in accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin 85-4, “Accounting
for Purchases of Life Insurance.” Amounts paid to purchase these contracts that
are in excess of the cash surrender value, at the date of purchase, were
expensed immediately. Periodic maintenance costs, such as premiums, necessary to
keep the underlying policy inforce are expensed as incurred and are included in
other operating expenses. Revenue is recognized and included in other revenue in
the Consolidated Statements of Operations when the life insurance policy
underlying the life settlement contract matures.
Separate
Account Business - Separate
account assets and liabilities represent contract holder funds related to
investment and annuity products, which are segregated into accounts with
specific underlying investment objectives. Effective January 1, 2004, CNA
adopted SOP 03-01, which changed the criteria for determining whether assets and
liabilities meet the requirements of separate account presentation. In 2003 and
2002, separate account balances included funds with balances accruing directly
to the contract holders and also funds with performance measures guaranteed by
CNA. Net income accruing to CNA related to the separate accounts, consisting of
fee revenue and investment results in excess of guaranteed returns, were
primarily included within other revenue in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
CNA
continues to have variable annuity contracts issued by Continental Assurance
Corporation (“CAC”) that meet the criteria for separate account presentation.
The assets and liabilities of these contracts are legally segregated and
reported as assets and liabilities of the separate account business.
Substantially all assets of the separate account business are carried at fair
value. Separate account liabilities are carried at contract values.
Tobacco
product inventories - These inventories, aggregating $203.2 million and $217.4
million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, are stated at the lower of
cost or market, using the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method and primarily consist
of leaf tobacco. If the average cost method of accounting had been used for
tobacco inventories instead of the LIFO method, such inventories would have been
$174.3 million and $186.3 million higher at December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
Watch and
clock inventories - These inventories, aggregating $66.4 million and $66.7
million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, are stated at the lower of
cost or market, using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method.
Goodwill
and other intangible assets - Goodwill and other intangible assets with
indefinite lives are tested for impairment. Goodwill represents the excess of
purchase price over fair value of net assets of acquired entities. Impairment
losses, if any, are included in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Property,
plant and equipment - Property, plant and equipment is carried at cost less
accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is computed principally by the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the various classes of
properties. Leaseholds and leasehold improvements are depreciated or amortized
over the terms of the related leases (including optional renewal periods where
appropriate) or the estimated lives of improvements, if less than the lease
term.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
The
principal service lives used in computing provisions for depreciation are as
follows:
|
Years |
|
|
Buildings
and building equipment |
40 |
Building
fixtures |
10
to 20 |
Offshore
drilling equipment |
15
to 30 |
Pipeline
equipment |
40
to 50 |
Machinery
and equipment |
5
to 12 |
Hotel
equipment |
4
to 12 |
Impairment
of long-lived assets - The Company reviews its long-lived assets for impairment
when changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may
not be recoverable. Long-lived assets and intangibles with finite lives, under
certain circumstances, are reported at the lower of carrying amount or fair
value. Assets to be disposed of and assets not expected to provide any future
service potential to the Company are recorded at the lower of carrying amount or
fair value less cost to sell.
Stock
option plans - The Company has elected to follow Accounting Principles Board
Opinion (“APB”) No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” and related
interpretations in accounting for its employee stock options and awards. Under
APB No. 25, no compensation expense is recognized when the exercise prices of
options equal the fair value (market price) of the underlying stock on the date
of grant.
SFAS No.
123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” requires the Company to disclose
pro forma information regarding option grants made to its employees. SFAS No.
123 specifies certain valuation techniques that produce estimated compensation
charges for purposes of valuing stock option grants. These amounts have not been
included in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations, in accordance
with APB No. 25. Several of the Company’s subsidiaries also maintain their own
stock option plans. The pro forma effect of applying SFAS No. 123 includes the
Company’s share of expense related to its subsidiaries’ plans as well. The
Company’s pro forma net income (loss) and the related basic and diluted income
(loss) per Loews common and Carolina Group shares would have been as
follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) as reported |
|
$ |
1,046.8 |
|
$ |
(725.9 |
) |
$ |
771.3 |
|
Deduct:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
determined
under the fair value based method, net |
|
|
(5.2 |
) |
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
(3.8 |
) |
Pro
forma net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,041.6 |
|
$ |
(731.4 |
) |
$ |
767.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income as reported |
|
$ |
184.5 |
|
$ |
115.2 |
|
$ |
140.7 |
|
Deduct:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
determined
under the fair value based method, net |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
(0.1 |
) |
Pro
forma net income |
|
$ |
184.4 |
|
$ |
115.1 |
|
$ |
140.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
reported |
|
$ |
5.64 |
|
$ |
(3.91 |
) |
$ |
4.11 |
|
Pro
forma |
|
|
5.62 |
|
|
(3.94 |
) |
|
4.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
reported |
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
3.50 |
|
Pro
forma |
|
|
3.15 |
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
3.50 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
Regulatory
accounting - The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) regulates the
operations of Texas Gas. SFAS No. 71, “Accounting for the Effects of Certain
Types of Regulation,” requires Texas Gas to report assets and
liabilities consistent with the economic effect of the manner in which
independent third-party regulators establish rates. Accordingly, certain costs
and benefits are capitalized as regulatory assets and liabilities in order to
provide for recovery from or refund to customers in future periods.
Supplementary
cash flow information - Cash payments made for interest on long-term debt,
including capitalized interest and commitment fees, amounted to approximately
$388.7 million, $289.9 million and $338.5 million for the years ended December
31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Cash refunds received for federal,
foreign, state and local income taxes amounted to approximately $73.7 million,
$113.3 million and $168.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003
and 2002, respectively.
Accounting
pronouncements - In March
of 2004, the EITF reached consensus on the disclosure guidance provided in EITF
Issue No. 03-1, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and its
Application to Certain Investments” (“EITF
03-1”). Under EITF 03-1, an investment is impaired if the fair value of the
investment is less than its cost including adjustments for amortization,
accretion, foreign exchange, and hedging. An impairment would be considered
other-than-temporary unless a) the investor has the ability and intent to hold
an investment for a reasonable period of time sufficient for the recovery of the
fair value up to (or beyond) the cost of the investment and b) evidence
indicating that the cost of the investment is recoverable within a reasonable
period of time outweighs evidence to the contrary. This new guidance for
determining whether the decline in fair value of investment is
other-than-temporary was to be effective for reporting periods beginning after
June 15, 2004. In September of 2004, the FASB issued FSP EITF Issue 03-1-1,
which suspended the effective date for the measurement and recognition guidance
included in EITF 03-1 related to other-than-temporary impairment pending
additional implementation guidance. Pending adoption of a final rule, the
Company continues to apply existing accounting literature for determining when a
decline in fair value is other-than-temporary.
In
October of 2004, the FASB issued FSP 109-2, “Accounting and Disclosure Guidance
for the Foreign Exchange Repatriation Provision within the American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004” (“AJCA”). AJCA introduces a special one-time dividends
received deduction of 85% for the repatriation of certain foreign earnings. A
number of companies are requesting that Congress or the Treasury Department
provide additional clarifying language on key elements of the repatriation
provision. Should the Company, upon consideration of any such potential
clarifying language, ultimately elect to apply the repatriation provision of the
AJCA, the Company does not expect that the impact of such an election would be
material to its results of operations or equity.
In
November of 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs, an Amendment
of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4.” SFAS No. 151 amends the guidance in ARB No. 43,
“Inventory Pricing,” and clarifies the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle
facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted material. SFAS No. 151 is
effective for inventory costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June
15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS No. 151 is not expected to have a significant
impact on the Company’s results of operations or equity.
In
December of 2004, the FASB issued a complete replacement of SFAS No. 123,
“Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS No. 123R”), which covers a wide range of
share-based compensation arrangements, including share options, restricted share
plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights, and employee share
purchase plans. SFAS No. 123R requires companies to use the fair value method in
accounting for employee stock options which results in compensation expense
recorded in the income statement. Compensation expense is measured at the grant
date using an option-pricing model and is recognized over the service period,
which is usually the vesting period. SFAS No. 123R is effective for reporting
periods beginning after June 15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS No. 123R is not
expected to have a significant impact on the Company’s results of operations or
equity.
In
December of 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 153, “Exchanges of Non-Monetary
Assets an amendment of APB Opinion No. 29.” SFAS No. 153 amends the definition
of “exchange” or “exchange transaction” and expands the list of transactions
that would not meet the definition of non-monetary transfer. SFAS No. 153 is not
expected to have a significant impact on the results of operations or equity of
the Company.
Reclassifications
- - Certain amounts applicable to prior periods have been reclassified to conform
to the classifications followed in 2004.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies -
(Continued) |
In 2004,
the expenses incurred related to uncollectible reinsurance receivables were
reclassified from Other operating expenses to Insurance claims and
policyholders’ benefits and investment gains (losses) related to the Corporate
trading portfolio were reclassified to net investment income on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations. Prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform
to the current year presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on net
income (loss) in any period.
Note
2. Investments
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
income consisted of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities |
|
$ |
1,593.1 |
|
$ |
1,670.4 |
|
$ |
1,894.1 |
|
Short-term
investments |
|
|
71.8 |
|
|
103.2 |
|
|
126.7 |
|
Limited
partnerships |
|
|
238.5 |
|
|
220.6 |
|
|
(33.9 |
) |
Equity
securities |
|
|
18.4 |
|
|
23.7 |
|
|
71.0 |
|
Income
(loss) from trading portfolio |
|
|
208.5 |
|
|
117.8 |
|
|
(77.7 |
) |
Interest
expense on funds withheld and other deposits |
|
|
(267.1 |
) |
|
(343.8 |
) |
|
(239.6 |
) |
Other |
|
|
57.6 |
|
|
125.9 |
|
|
120.1 |
|
Total
investment income |
|
|
1,920.8 |
|
|
1,917.8 |
|
|
1,860.7 |
|
Investment
expenses |
|
|
(51.5 |
) |
|
(67.9 |
) |
|
(71.5 |
) |
Net
investment income |
|
$ |
1,869.3 |
|
$ |
1,849.9 |
|
$ |
1,789.2 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments |
|
$ |
(84.1 |
) |
$ |
78.3 |
|
$ |
(52.1 |
) |
Fixed
maturities |
|
|
233.7 |
|
|
444.7 |
|
|
(60.3 |
) |
Equity
securities, including short positions |
|
|
202.2 |
|
|
114.5 |
|
|
(160.7 |
) |
Short-term
investments |
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
(13.4 |
) |
|
86.7 |
|
Other,
including guaranteed separate account business (a) |
|
|
(606.3 |
) |
|
(160.0 |
) |
|
55.4 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
(256.0 |
) |
|
464.1 |
|
|
(131.0 |
) |
Income
tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
98.1 |
|
|
(175.9 |
) |
|
60.0 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
13.3 |
|
|
(26.4 |
) |
|
4.8 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains-net |
|
$ |
(144.6 |
) |
$ |
261.8 |
|
$ |
(66.2 |
) |
__________
(a) |
Includes
a pretax loss of $618.6 ($352.9 after tax and minority interest) related
to CNA’s sale of its individual life insurance business for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and a pretax loss of $172.9 ($116.4 after tax and
minority interest) related to the sale of CNA’s Group Benefits business
for the year ended December 31, 2003. See Note
14. |
Investment
gains of $987.8 million, $1,478.6 million and $1,658.0 million and losses of
$553.4 million, $932.8 million and $1,792.3 million were realized on securities
available-for-sale for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002,
respectively. Investment (losses) gains also include $26.9 million and $61.3
million of net unrealized gains in 2004 and 2003, and $29.3 million of net
unrealized losses in 2002 in the Company’s trading portfolios.
Investment
securities are exposed to various risks, such as interest rate, market and
credit. Due to the level of risk associated with certain investment securities
and the level of uncertainty related to changes in the value of investment
securities, it is possible that changes in these risk factors in the near term
could have an adverse material impact on the Company’s results of operations or
equity.
A primary
objective in the management of the fixed maturity and equity portfolios is to
maximize total return relative to underlying liabilities and respective
liquidity needs. The Company’s views on the current interest rate environment,
tax regulations, asset class valuations, specific security issuer and broader
industry segment conditions, and the domestic and global economic conditions,
are some of the factors that may enter into a decision
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
2. Investments - (Continued) |
to move
between asset classes. Based on the Company’s consideration of these factors, in
the course of normal investment activity the Company may, in pursuit of the
total return objective, be willing to sell securities that, in its analysis, are
overvalued on a risk adjusted basis relative to other opportunities that are
available at the time in the market; in turn the Company may purchase other
securities that, according to its analysis, are undervalued in relation to other
securities in the market. In making these value decisions, securities may be
bought and sold that shift the investment portfolio between asset classes. The
Company also continually monitors exposure to issuers of securities held and
broader industry sector exposures and may from time to time reduce such
exposures based on its views of a specific issuer or industry sector. These
activities could produce realized gains or losses.
The
Company’s investment policies emphasize high credit quality and diversification
by industry, issuer and issue. Assets supporting CNA’s interest rate sensitive
liabilities are segmented within the general account to facilitate
asset/liability duration management.
A
significant judgment in the valuation of investments is the determination of
when an other-than-temporary decline in value has occurred. CNA follows a
consistent and systematic process for impairing securities that sustain
other-than-temporary declines in value. CNA has established a committee
responsible for the impairment process. This committee, referred to as the
Impairment Committee, is made up of three officers appointed by CNA’s Chief
Financial Officer. The Impairment Committee is responsible for analyzing watch
list securities on at least a quarterly basis. The watch list includes
individual securities that fall below certain thresholds or that exhibit
evidence of impairment indicators including, but not limited to, a significant
adverse change in the financial condition and near term prospects of the
investment or a significant adverse change in legal factors, the business
climate or credit ratings.
When a
security is placed on the watch list, it is monitored for further market value
changes and additional news related to the issuer’s financial condition. The
focus is on objective evidence that may influence the evaluation of impairment
factors.
The
decision to impair a security incorporates both quantitative criteria and
qualitative information. The Impairment Committee considers a number of factors
including, but not limited to: (a) the length of time and the extent to which
the fair value has been less than book value, (b) the financial condition and
near term prospects of the issuer, (c) the intent and ability of CNA to retain
its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated
recovery in value, (d) whether the debtor is current on interest and principal
payments and (e) general market conditions and industry or sector specific
factors.
The
Impairment Committee’s decision to impair a security is primarily based on
whether the security’s fair value is likely to remain significantly below its
book value in light of all of the factors considered. For securities that are
impaired, the security is adjusted to fair value and the resulting losses are
recognized in investment gains (losses) in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Investment
losses included $117.5 million, $321.0 million and $890.0 million of pretax
impairment losses for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. The 2003
and 2002 impairments recorded were primarily the result of the continued credit
deterioration on specific issuers in the bond and equity markets and the effects
on such markets due to the overall slowing of the economy. For 2004, the
impairment losses recorded related largely to an $80.5 million pretax impairment
loss related to loans made under a credit facility to a national contractor,
that are classified as fixed maturities.
Other
investment gains (losses) for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
include gains and losses related to sales of certain operations or affiliates.
See Note 14 for further details.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
2. Investments - (Continued) |
The
amortized cost and market values of securities are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
Unrealized |
|
Less
than |
|
Greater
than |
|
Fair |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Cost |
|
Gains |
|
12
Months |
|
12
Months |
|
Value |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government and obligations of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
government
agencies |
|
$ |
6,307.4 |
|
$ |
128.8 |
|
$ |
13.1 |
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
$ |
6,421.0 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
7,706.0 |
|
|
104.6 |
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
7,788.2 |
|
States,
municipalities and political |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subdivisions-tax
exempt |
|
|
8,698.5 |
|
|
189.2 |
|
|
27.7 |
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
8,856.6 |
|
Corporate |
|
|
6,092.7 |
|
|
476.9 |
|
|
51.8 |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
6,513.1 |
|
Other
debt |
|
|
2,769.1 |
|
|
294.6 |
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
3,052.6 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stocks |
|
|
141.6 |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
145.5 |
|
Options
embedded in convertible debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities |
|
|
234.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234.3 |
|
Fixed
maturities available-for-sale |
|
|
31,949.6 |
|
|
1,199.9 |
|
|
122.9 |
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
33,011.3 |
|
Fixed
maturity trading securities |
|
|
485.5 |
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
490.8 |
|
Total
fixed maturities |
|
|
32,435.1 |
|
|
1,207.5 |
|
|
124.4 |
|
|
16.1 |
|
|
33,502.1 |
|
Equity
Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities available-for-sale |
|
|
274.4 |
|
|
136.3 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
410.1 |
|
Equity
securities, trading portfolio |
|
|
227.1 |
|
|
38.4 |
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
254.0 |
|
Total
equity securities |
|
|
501.5 |
|
|
174.7 |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
664.1 |
|
Short-term
investments available-for-sale |
|
|
8,306.0 |
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,306.8 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
41,242.6 |
|
$ |
1,383.0 |
|
$ |
130.2 |
|
$ |
22.4 |
|
$ |
42,473.0 |
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
government and obligations of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
government
agencies |
|
$ |
1,827.9 |
|
$ |
90.4 |
|
$ |
9.6 |
|
$ |
4.7 |
|
$ |
1,904.0 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
8,633.7 |
|
|
146.7 |
|
|
21.9 |
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
8,757.2 |
|
States,
municipalities and political |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subdivisions-tax
exempt |
|
|
7,787.1 |
|
|
207.1 |
|
|
21.3 |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
7,970.4 |
|
Corporate |
|
|
6,156.7 |
|
|
478.9 |
|
|
40.2 |
|
|
14.7 |
|
|
6,580.7 |
|
Other
debt |
|
|
3,162.6 |
|
|
310.7 |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
3,465.3 |
|
Redeemable
preferred stocks |
|
|
96.9 |
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
103.7 |
|
Total
fixed maturities available-for-sale |
|
|
27,664.9 |
|
|
1,240.7 |
|
|
97.4 |
|
|
26.9 |
|
|
28,781.3 |
|
Equity
Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities available-for-sale |
|
|
293.2 |
|
|
237.9 |
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
527.0 |
|
Equity
securities, trading portfolio |
|
|
299.9 |
|
|
88.7 |
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
20.6 |
|
|
361.2 |
|
Total
equity securities |
|
|
593.1 |
|
|
326.6 |
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
21.3 |
|
|
888.2 |
|
Short-term
investments available-for-sale |
|
|
11,264.3 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,264.6 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
39,522.3 |
|
$ |
1,567.6 |
|
$ |
107.6 |
|
$ |
48.2 |
|
$ |
40,934.1 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
2. Investments - (Continued) |
The
following table summarizes for fixed maturity and equity securities in an
unrealized loss position at December 31, 2004 and 2003, the aggregate fair value
and gross unrealized loss by length of time those securities have been
continuously in an unrealized loss position.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Estimated |
|
Unrealized |
|
Estimated |
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair
Value |
|
Loss |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Loss |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
$ |
9,235.7 |
|
$ |
54.2 |
|
$ |
4,512.3 |
|
$ |
49.0 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
2,448.0 |
|
|
59.0 |
|
|
833.9 |
|
|
35.8 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
368.0 |
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
76.2 |
|
|
10.9 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
50.6 |
|
|
3.7 |
|
Total
investment grade |
|
|
12,053.7 |
|
|
125.2 |
|
|
5,473.0 |
|
|
99.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-investment
grade: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
|
188.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
133.5 |
|
|
5.6 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
69.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
60.3 |
|
|
6.8 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
1.1 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105.4 |
|
|
10.0 |
|
Total
non-investment grade |
|
|
277.0 |
|
|
13.0 |
|
|
315.5 |
|
|
23.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity securities |
|
|
12,330.7 |
|
|
138.2 |
|
|
5,788.5 |
|
|
122.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-6
months |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
23.1 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
7-12
months |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
|
1.3 |
|
13-24
months |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
Greater
than 24 months |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
Total
equity securities |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
41.2 |
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fixed maturity and equity securities |
|
$ |
12,339.7 |
|
$ |
138.2 |
|
$ |
5,829.7 |
|
$ |
127.0 |
|
Actual
maturities may differ from contractual maturities because certain securities may
be called or prepaid with or without call or prepayment penalties.
The
following table summarizes available-for-sale fixed maturity securities by
contract maturity at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
Estimated |
|
Amortized |
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Cost |
|
Fair
Value |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due
in one year or less |
|
$ |
1,047.9 |
|
$ |
1,053.7 |
|
$ |
284.5 |
|
$ |
284.7 |
|
Due
after one year through five years |
|
|
6,423.5 |
|
|
6,469.9 |
|
|
2,568.1 |
|
|
2,630.7 |
|
Due
after five years through ten years |
|
|
9,238.4 |
|
|
9,577.1 |
|
|
3,606.7 |
|
|
3,897.0 |
|
Due
after ten years |
|
|
7,533.8 |
|
|
8,122.4 |
|
|
12,571.9 |
|
|
13,211.7 |
|
Asset-backed
securities |
|
|
7,706.0 |
|
|
7,788.2 |
|
|
8,633.7 |
|
|
8,757.2 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
31,949.6 |
|
$ |
33,011.3 |
|
$ |
27,664.9 |
|
$ |
28,781.3 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
2. Investments - (Continued) |
The
carrying value of fixed maturity investments that did not produce income was
$5.5 million and $51.7 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. At December 31,
2004 and 2003, no investments, other than investments in U.S. government and
government agency securities, exceeded 10% of shareholders’ equity.
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company had committed approximately $104.0
million and $154.0 million to future capital calls from various third-party
limited partnership investments in exchange for an ownership interest in the
related partnerships.
In the
normal course of investing activities, Continental Casualty Company (“CCC”) had
committed approximately $51.0 million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 to future
capital calls from certain of its unconsolidated affiliates in exchange for an
ownership interest in such affiliates.
Restricted
Investments
CNA may
from time to time invest in securities that may be restricted in whole or in
part. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA did not hold any significant
positions in investments whose sale was restricted.
Cash and
securities with carrying values of approximately $2.6 billion and $2.0 billion
were deposited by CNA’s insurance subsidiaries under requirements of regulatory
authorities as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
The
Company’s investments in limited partnerships contain withdrawal provisions that
typically require advanced written notice of up to 90 days for withdrawals. The
carrying value of these investments, reported as a separate line item in the
Consolidated Balance Sheets, is $1,783.4 million and $1,335.1 million at
December 31, 2004 and 2003.
CNA
invests in multiple bank loan participations as part of its overall investment
strategy and has committed to additional future purchases and sales. The
purchase and sale of these investments are recorded on the date that the legal
agreements are finalized and cash settlement is made. As of December 31, 2004,
CNA had commitments to purchase $41.0 million and commitments to sell $2.0
million of various bank loan participations.
Cash and securities with carrying values of approximately $37.0 million and
$40.0 million were deposited with financial institutions as collateral for
letters of credit and for margin accounts as of December 31, 2004 and 2003. In
addition, cash and securities were deposited in trusts with financial
institutions to secure reinsurance obligations with various third parties. The
carrying values of these deposits were approximately $329.0 million and $254.0
million as of December 31, 2004 and 2003.
During July of 2002, CNA entered into an agreement, whereby the Phoenix
Companies, Inc. acquired the variable life and annuity business of Valley Forge
Life Insurance Co. (“VFL”) through a coinsurance arrangement, with modified
coinsurance on the VFL separate accounts. Related securities with carrying
values of approximately $492.0 million were held by CNA and reported in Separate
account assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2003. VFL was
sold in 2004. See Note 14 for further details.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
Note
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
Estimated |
|
Carrying |
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Amount |
|
Fair
Value |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
investments |
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
$ |
8.0 |
|
$ |
238.0 |
|
$ |
240.0 |
|
Separate
account business: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
maturities securities |
|
|
486.0 |
|
|
486.0 |
|
|
2,114.0 |
|
|
2,114.0 |
|
Equity
securities |
|
|
55.0 |
|
|
55.0 |
|
|
117.0 |
|
|
117.0 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
415.0 |
|
|
415.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premium
deposits and annuity contracts |
|
|
422.0 |
|
|
428.0 |
|
|
1,282.0 |
|
|
1,261.0 |
|
Short-term
debt |
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
|
295.9 |
|
|
295.9 |
|
Long-term
debt |
|
|
5,954.8 |
|
|
6,091.2 |
|
|
5,491.1 |
|
|
5,575.1 |
|
Collateralized
debt obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
14.0 |
|
Financial
guarantee contracts |
|
|
45.0 |
|
|
45.0 |
|
|
50.0 |
|
|
50.0 |
|
Separate
account business: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guaranteed
investment contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
211.0 |
|
|
229.0 |
|
Variable
separate accounts |
|
|
65.0 |
|
|
65.0 |
|
|
540.0 |
|
|
540.0 |
|
Other |
|
|
503.0 |
|
|
503.0 |
|
|
2,449.0 |
|
|
2,449.0 |
|
In cases
where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are estimated using
present value or other valuation techniques. These techniques are significantly
affected by management’s assumptions, including discount rates and estimates of
future cash flows. The estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative
of the amounts that the Company could realize in a current market exchange. The
amounts reported in the Consolidated Balance Sheets for fixed maturities
securities, equity securities, derivative instruments, short-term investments
and securities sold under agreements to repurchase are at fair value. As such,
these financial instruments are not shown in the table above. See Note 4 for the
fair value of derivative instruments. Since the disclosure excludes certain
financial instruments and non-financial instruments such as real estate, life
settlement contracts and insurance reserves, the aggregate fair value amounts
cannot be summed to determine the underlying economic value of the
Company.
The
following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating its
fair value disclosures for financial instruments:
Fixed
maturity securities and equity securities were based on quoted market prices,
where available. For securities not actively traded, fair values were estimated
using values obtained from independent pricing services or quoted market prices
of comparable instruments.
Other
investments consist of mortgage loans and notes receivable, policy loans,
investments in limited partnerships and various miscellaneous assets. Valuation
techniques to determine fair value of limited partnership investments, other
investments and other separate account assets consisted of discounting cash
flows, obtaining quoted market prices of the investments and comparing the
investments to similar instruments or to the comparable underlying assets of the
investments.
Premium
deposits and annuity contracts were valued based on cash surrender values and
the outstanding fund balances.
The fair
values of CDOs were determined largely based on management’s estimates using
default probabilities of the debt securities underlying the contract, which were
obtained from a rating agency, the term of each contract, and actual default
losses recorded on the contracts.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
3. Fair Value of Financial Instruments -
(Continued) |
The fair
value of the liability for financial guarantee contracts was estimated using
discounted cash flows utilizing interest rates currently being offered for
similar contracts.
The fair
value of guaranteed investment contracts of the separate accounts business was
estimated using discounted cash flow calculations, based on interest rates
currently being offered for similar contracts with similar maturities. The fair
value of the liabilities for variable separate account business was based on the
quoted market values of the underlying assets of each variable separate account.
The fair value of other separate account business liabilities approximates
carrying value because of their short-term nature.
Fair
value of debt was based on quoted market prices when available. When quoted
market prices were not available, the fair value for debt was based on quoted
market prices of comparable instruments adjusted for differences between the
quoted instruments and the instruments being valued or is estimated using
discounted cash flow analyses, based on current incremental borrowing rates for
similar types of borrowing arrangements.
Note
4. Derivative Financial Instruments
The
Company invests in certain derivative instruments for a number of purposes,
including: (i) asset and liability management activities, (ii) income
enhancements for its portfolio management strategy, and (iii) benefit from
anticipated future movements in the underlying markets. If such movements do not
occur as anticipated, then significant losses may occur.
Monitoring
procedures include senior management review of daily detailed reports of
existing positions and valuation fluctuations to ensure that open positions are
consistent with the Company’s portfolio strategy.
The
Company does not believe that any of the derivative instruments utilized by it
are unusually complex, nor do these instruments contain embedded leverage
features which would expose the Company to a higher degree of risk.
CNA
invests in derivative financial instruments in the normal course of business,
primarily to reduce its exposure to market risk (principally interest rate risk,
equity stock price risk and foreign currency risk) stemming from various assets
and liabilities and credit risk (the ability of an obligor to make timely
payment of principal and/or interest). CNA’s principal objective under such
market risk strategies is to achieve the desired reduction in economic risk,
even if the position will not receive hedge accounting treatment.
CNA’s use
of derivatives is limited by statutes and regulations promulgated by the various
regulatory bodies to which it is subject, and by its own derivative policy. The
derivative policy limits authorization to initiate derivative transactions to
certain personnel. The policy generally prohibits the use of derivatives with a
maturity greater than 18 months, unless the derivative is matched with assets or
liabilities having a longer maturity. The policy prohibits the use of
derivatives containing greater than one-to-one leverage with respect to changes
in the underlying price, rate or index. The policy also prohibits the use of
borrowed funds, including funds obtained through repurchase transactions, to
engage in derivative transactions.
Credit
exposure associated with non-performance by the counterparties to derivative
instruments is generally limited to the uncollateralized fair value of the asset
related to the instruments recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The Company mitigates the risk
of non-performance
by monitoring the creditworthiness of counterparties and diversifying
derivatives to multiple counterparties. The Company generally requires
collateral from its derivative investment counterparties depending on the amount
of the exposure and the credit rating of the counterparty.
The
Company has exposure to economic losses due to interest rate risk arising from
changes in the level or volatility of interest rates. The Company attempts
to mitigate its
exposure to interest rate risk through active portfolio management, which
includes rebalancing its existing portfolios of assets and liabilities, as well
as changing the characteristics of investments to be purchased or sold in the
future. In addition, various derivative financial instruments are used to modify
the interest rate risk exposures of certain assets and liabilities. These
strategies include the use of interest rate swaps, interest rate caps and
floors, options, futures, forwards, and commitments to purchase securities.
These instruments are generally used to lock interest rates or unrealized gains,
to shorten or lengthen durations of fixed maturity securities or investment
contracts, or to hedge (on an economic basis) interest rate risks associated
with investments, variable rate debt and life insurance liabilities. The Company
has used these types of instruments as hedges against specific assets or
liabilities on an infrequent basis.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
4. Derivative Financial Instruments -
(Continued) |
The
Company is exposed to equity price risk as a result of its investment in equity
securities and equity derivatives. Equity price risk results from changes in the
level or volatility of equity prices, which affect the value of equity
securities, or instruments that derive their value from such securities. The
Company attempts to mitigate its exposure to such risks by limiting its
investment in any one security or index. The Company may also manage this risk
by utilizing instruments such as options, swaps, futures and collars to protect
appreciation in securities held. CNA uses derivatives in one of its separate
accounts to mitigate equity price risk associated with its indexed group annuity
contracts by purchasing Standard & Poor’s 500 (“S&P 500”) index futures
contracts in a notional amount equal to the contract holder liability, which is
calculated using the S&P 500 rate of return.
The
Company has exposure to credit risk arising from the uncertainty associated with
a financial instrument obligor’s ability to make timely principal and/or
interest payments. The Company attempts to mitigate this risk by limiting credit
concentrations, practicing diversification, and frequently monitoring the credit
quality of issuers and counterparties. In addition, the Company may utilize
credit derivatives such as credit default swaps to modify the credit risk
inherent in certain investments. Credit default swaps involve a transfer of
credit risk from one party to another in exchange for periodic payments. The
Company infrequently designates these types of instruments as hedges against
specific assets.
Foreign
exchange rate risk arises from the possibility that changes in foreign currency
exchange rates will impact the fair value of financial instruments denominated
in a foreign currency. The Company’s foreign transactions are primarily
denominated in Canadian dollars, British pounds and the European Monetary Unit.
The Company manages this risk via asset/liability matching and through the use
of foreign currency futures and forwards. The Company has infrequently
designated these types of instruments as hedges against specific assets or
liabilities.
The
contractual or notional amounts for derivatives are used to calculate the
exchange of contractual payments under the agreements and are not representative
of the potential for gain or loss on these instruments. Interest rates, equity
prices, foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices affect the fair
value of derivatives. The fair values generally represent the estimated amounts
that the Company would expect to receive or pay upon termination of the
contracts at the reporting date. Dealer quotes are available for substantially
all of the Company’s derivatives. For derivative instruments not actively
traded, fair values are estimated using values obtained from independent pricing
services, costs to settle or quoted market prices of comparable
instruments.
|
|
Contractual/ |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Recognized |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
Asset |
|
Gain |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Value |
|
(Liability) |
|
(Loss) |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
markets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
- purchased |
|
$ |
240.2 |
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
$ |
(8.2 |
) |
-
written |
|
|
200.1 |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
10.7 |
|
Index
futures - long |
|
|
1,155.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
99.0 |
|
Equity
warrants |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
Options
embedded in convertible debt securities |
|
|
700.8 |
|
|
234.3 |
|
|
23.7 |
|
Separate
accounts - options written |
|
|
8.8 |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
0.8 |
|
Currency
forwards
- long |
|
|
497.2 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
32.9 |
|
-
short |
|
|
140.6 |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
|
(0.2 |
) |
Interest
rate risk: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
to purchase government and municipal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(7.8 |
) |
Interest
rate swaps |
|
|
989.2 |
|
|
(513.4 |
) |
|
18.4 |
|
Futures
- long |
|
|
715.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(3.8 |
) |
-
short |
|
|
887.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
(107.3 |
) |
Gold
options
- purchased |
|
|
116.0 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
-
written |
|
|
225.7 |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
5.8 |
|
Other
|
|
|
39.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,952.5 |
|
$ |
(257.5 |
) |
$ |
63.3 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
4. Derivative Financial Instruments -
(Continued) |
|
|
Contractual/ |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Recognized |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
Asset |
|
(Loss) |
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
Value |
|
(Liability) |
|
Gain |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
markets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options -
purchased |
|
$ |
175.6 |
|
$ |
22.3 |
|
$ |
(15.0 |
) |
-
written |
|
|
694.8 |
|
|
(6.0 |
) |
|
19.5 |
|
Index
futures -
long |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
-
short |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
warrants |
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
embedded in convertible debt securities |
|
|
680.7 |
|
|
201.3 |
|
|
36.0 |
|
Separate
accounts
- options purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
-
options written |
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
1.7 |
|
-
equity index futures - long |
|
|
1,106.2 |
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
208.1 |
|
-
euro dollar futures |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
forwards -
long |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46.8 |
|
-
short |
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
(10.3 |
) |
Interest
rate risk: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
to purchase government and municipal securities |
|
|
3,318.0 |
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Interest
rate swaps |
|
|
931.4 |
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
61.4 |
|
Interest
rate caps |
|
|
225.0 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
Collateralized
debt obligation liabilities |
|
|
110.0 |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
(1.0 |
) |
Synthetic
guaranteed investment contracts |
|
|
280.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
on government securities - short |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
Futures -
long |
|
|
433.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
-
short |
|
|
600.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
Separate
accounts - futures - short |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Gold
options -
purchased |
|
|
107.8 |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
(4.5 |
) |
-
written |
|
|
208.8 |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
5.0 |
|
Other
|
|
|
32.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
8,957.2 |
|
$ |
236.9 |
|
$ |
351.0 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
4. Derivative Financial Instruments -
(Continued) |
|
|
Contractual/ |
|
Fair
Value |
|
Recognized |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
Asset |
|
(Loss) |
|
December
31, 2002 |
|
Value |
|
(Liability) |
|
Gain |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
markets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options -
purchased |
|
$ |
126.8 |
|
$ |
23.9 |
|
$ |
4.1 |
|
- written |
|
|
197.8 |
|
|
(19.2 |
) |
|
1.7 |
|
Index
futures -
long |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.8 |
) |
-
short |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Equity
warrants |
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Options
embedded in convertible debt securities |
|
|
842.8 |
|
|
130.5 |
|
|
(38.2 |
) |
Separate
accounts
- options purchased |
|
|
33.3 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
-
options written |
|
|
50.6 |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
2.4 |
|
-
equity index futures - long |
|
|
614.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(187.2 |
) |
-
euro dollar futures |
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Currency
forwards
- long |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27.7 |
|
-
short |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
(22.0 |
) |
Interest
rate risk: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to
purchase government and municipal securities |
|
|
1,289.0 |
|
|
13.6 |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Interest rate
swaps |
|
|
1,148.8 |
|
|
(10.7 |
) |
|
(13.5 |
) |
Interest rate
caps |
|
|
500.0 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
Collateralized
debt obligation liabilities |
|
|
126.0 |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
(6.0 |
) |
Synthetic
guaranteed investment contracts |
|
|
481.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
on government securities - short |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Futures -
long |
|
|
898.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
25.5 |
|
- short |
|
|
652.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
(76.3 |
) |
Separate
accounts -
commitments to purchase government and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
municipal
securities |
|
|
11.0 |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
0.7 |
|
- futures - short |
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Gold
options -
purchased |
|
|
125.5 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
-
written |
|
|
243.2 |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
5.9 |
|
Other
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
7,385.0 |
|
$ |
131.9 |
|
$ |
(292.9 |
) |
Options
embedded in convertible debt securities are classified as fixed maturity
securities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, consistent with the host
instruments.
Fair
value hedges - The
Company’s hedging activities primarily involve hedging risk exposures to
interest rate and foreign currency risks. There was no gain or loss on the
ineffective portion of the fair value hedges for the years ended December 31,
2004 and 2003, because the Company did not designate derivatives as fair value
hedges in those years. The ineffective portion of the fair value hedges resulted
in a realized loss of approximately $4.0 million for the year ended December 31,
2002.
The
Company also enters into short sales as part of its portfolio management
strategy. Short sales are commitments to sell a financial instrument not owned
at the time of sale, usually done in anticipation of a price decline. These
sales resulted in proceeds of $69.3 million and $98.0 million with fair value
liabilities of $77.6 million and $118.4 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. These positions are marked to market and investment gains or
losses are included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Note
5. Earnings Per Share
Companies
with complex capital structures are required to present basic and diluted
earnings per share. Basic earnings per share excludes dilution and is computed
by dividing net income (loss) attributable to each class of common stock by the
weighted average number of common shares of each class of common stock
outstanding for
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
5. Earnings Per Share - (Continued) |
the
period. Diluted earnings per share reflects the potential dilution that could
occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or
converted into common stock. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, income (loss) per common share assuming dilution is the same as basic
income (loss) per share because the impact of securities that could potentially
dilute basic income (loss) per common share was insignificant or antidilutive
for the periods presented.
Options
to purchase 43,616 shares and 286,927 shares of Loews common stock were
outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2002, but were not included in the
computation of diluted earnings per share because the options’ exercise prices
were greater than the average market price of the common shares and, therefore,
the effect would be antidilutive. Had the Company recognized net income in 2003,
incremental shares attributable to the assumed exercise of outstanding options
would have increased diluted shares outstanding by 861,720 shares. Options to
purchase 207,963, 377,962 and 178,972 shares of Carolina Group stock were
outstanding at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, but were not included in the
computation of diluted earnings per share because the options’ exercise prices
were greater than the average market price of the common shares and, therefore,
the effect would be antidilutive.
The
attribution of income (loss) to each class of common stock for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, was as follows:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
Less
income attributable to Carolina Group stock |
|
|
184.5 |
|
|
115.2 |
|
|
140.7 |
|
Income
(loss) attributable to Loews common stock |
|
$ |
1,046.8 |
|
$ |
(725.9 |
) |
$ |
771.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group net income |
|
$ |
545.9 |
|
$ |
468.3 |
|
$ |
681.5 |
|
Less
net income prior to issuance of Carolina Group stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73.1 |
|
Income
available to Carolina Group stock |
|
|
545.9 |
|
|
468.3 |
|
|
608.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average economic interest of the Carolina Group |
|
|
33.80 |
% |
|
24.59 |
% |
|
23.12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
attributable to Carolina Group stock |
|
$ |
184.5 |
|
$ |
115.2 |
|
$ |
140.7 |
|
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial
Information
In
February of 2002, the Company sold 40,250,000 shares of a new class of its
common stock, referred to as Carolina Group stock, for net proceeds of $1.1
billion. In November of 2003 and December of 2004, the Company sold an
additional 18,055,000 and 10,000,000 shares of Carolina Group stock for net
proceeds of $399.5 million and $281.9 million, respectively. This stock is
designed to track the performance of the Carolina Group, which consists of: the
Company’s ownership interest in Lorillard; notional, intergroup debt owed by the
Carolina Group to the Loews Group ($1.9 billion outstanding at December 31,
2004), bearing interest at the annual rate of 8.0% and, subject to optional
prepayment, due December 31, 2021; any and all liabilities, costs and expenses
of the Company and Lorillard arising out of the past, present or future business
of Lorillard, and all net income or net losses from the assets and liabilities
attributed to the Carolina Group. Each outstanding share of Carolina Group stock
has 1/10 of a vote per share.
The
issuance of Carolina Group stock has resulted in a two class common stock
structure for the Company. As of December 31, 2004, the outstanding Carolina
Group stock represents a 39.19% economic interest in the economic performance of
the Carolina Group. The Loews Group consists of all of the Company’s assets and
liabilities other than the 39.19% economic interest represented by the
outstanding Carolina Group stock, and includes as an asset the notional,
intergroup debt of the Carolina Group. Holders of the Company’s common stock and
of Carolina Group
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
stock are
shareholders of Loews Corporation and are subject to the risks related to an
equity investment in Loews Corporation.
The
Company has separated, for financial reporting purposes, the Carolina Group and
Loews Group. The following schedules present the consolidating condensed
financial information for these individual groups. Neither group is a separate
company or legal entity. Rather, each group is intended to reflect a defined set
of assets and liabilities.
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Balance Sheet Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
$ |
1,545.6 |
|
$ |
100.0 |
|
$ |
1,645.6 |
|
$ |
42,652.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
44,298.5 |
|
Cash
|
|
|
35.5 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
36.0 |
|
|
183.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
219.9 |
|
Receivables
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
18,800.3 |
|
$ |
(25.2)
|
(a) |
|
18,807.2 |
|
Property,
plant and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equipment |
|
|
231.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
231.5 |
|
|
4,609.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,840.7 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
436.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
436.5 |
|
|
188.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
624.9 |
|
Goodwill
and other intangible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
294.1 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
396.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
396.5 |
|
|
2,431.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,828.3 |
|
Investment
in combined |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
attributed
net assets of the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,566.0 |
|
|
(1,871.2)
|
(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
305.2 |
(b) |
|
|
|
Deferred
acquisition costs of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
insurance
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,268.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,268.1 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
2,677.7 |
|
$ |
100.5 |
|
$ |
2,778.2 |
|
$ |
72,562.5 |
|
$ |
(1,591.2) |
|
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders’ Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
43,649.7 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
43,649.7 |
|
Payable
for securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
595.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
595.5 |
|
Securities
sold under |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
agreements
to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
918.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
918.0 |
|
Short-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
Long-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,871.2 |
|
$ |
1,871.2 |
|
|
5,980.2 |
|
$ |
(1,871.2) |
(a) |
|
5,980.2 |
|
Reinsurance
balances payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,043.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,043.1 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
$ |
1,392.6 |
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
1,409.0 |
|
|
2,735.6 |
|
|
(25.2) |
(a) |
|
4,119.4 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
1,392.6 |
|
|
1,887.6 |
|
|
3,280.2 |
|
|
58,500.0 |
|
|
(1,896.4) |
|
|
59,883.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,682.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,682.4 |
|
Shareholders’
equity |
|
|
1,285.1 |
|
|
(1,787.1 |
) |
|
(502.0 |
) |
|
12,380.1 |
|
|
305.2
|
(b) |
|
12,183.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shareholders’
equity |
|
$ |
2,677.7 |
|
$ |
100.5 |
|
$ |
2,778.2 |
|
$ |
72,562.5 |
|
$ |
(1,591.2)
|
|
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
__________
(a) |
To
eliminate the intergroup notional debt and interest
payable/receivable. |
(b) |
To
eliminate the Loews Group’s 60.81% equity interest in the combined
attributed net assets of the Carolina
Group. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Balance Sheet Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
$ |
1,530.2 |
|
$ |
100.0 |
|
$ |
1,630.2 |
|
$ |
40,884.6 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
42,514.8 |
|
Cash
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
178.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
180.8 |
|
Receivables
|
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
20,482.9 |
|
$ |
(27.6) |
(a) |
|
20,479.2 |
|
Property,
plant and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equipment |
|
|
221.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
221.0 |
|
|
3,658.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,879.7 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
441.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
441.9 |
|
|
88.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
530.2 |
|
Goodwill
and other intangible |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
311.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
311.4 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
406.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
406.4 |
|
|
3,476.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,882.7 |
|
Investment
in combined |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
attributed
net assets of the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,546.7 |
|
|
(2,032.1) |
(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
485.4
|
(b) |
|
|
|
Deferred
acquisition costs of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
insurance
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,532.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,532.7 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
2,624.9 |
|
$ |
100.4 |
|
$ |
2,725.3 |
|
$ |
76,838.5 |
|
$ |
(1,574.3) |
|
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders’ Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
45,492.6 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
45,492.6 |
|
Payable
for securities purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,147.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,147.7 |
|
Securities
sold under |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
agreements
to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
441.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
441.8 |
|
Short-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
295.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
295.9 |
|
Long-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,032.1 |
|
$ |
2,032.1 |
|
|
5,524.3 |
|
$ |
(2,032.1) |
(a) |
|
5,524.3 |
|
Reinsurance
balances payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,432.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,432.0 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
$ |
1,405.0 |
|
|
17.4 |
|
|
1,422.4 |
|
|
2,856.5 |
|
|
(27.6) |
(a) |
|
4,251.3 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
1,405.0 |
|
|
2,049.5 |
|
|
3,454.5 |
|
|
63,868.8 |
|
|
(2,059.7)
|
|
|
65,263.6 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,671.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,671.6 |
|
Shareholders’
equity |
|
|
1,219.9 |
|
|
(1,949.1 |
) |
|
(729.2 |
) |
|
11,298.1 |
|
|
485.4 |
(b) |
|
11,054.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shareholders’
equity |
|
$ |
2,624.9 |
|
$ |
100.4 |
|
$ |
2,725.3 |
|
$ |
76,838.5 |
|
$ |
(1,574.3)
|
|
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
__________
(a) |
To
eliminate the intergroup notional debt and interest
payable/receivable. |
(b) |
To
eliminate the Loews Group’s 66.57% equity interest in the combined
attributed net assets of the Carolina
Group. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Statement of Operations Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,205.0 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,205.0 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
$ |
36.6 |
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
$ |
38.6 |
|
|
1,988.2 |
|
$ |
(157.5 |
)
(a) |
|
1,869.3 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
(257.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(256.0 |
) |
Manufactured
products |
|
|
3,347.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,347.8 |
|
|
167.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,515.2 |
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,908.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,908.8 |
|
Total
|
|
|
3,385.8 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
3,387.8 |
|
|
12,012.0 |
|
|
(157.5 |
) |
|
15,242.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
policyholders’
benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,445.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,445.6 |
|
Amortization
of deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
acquisition
costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,679.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,679.8 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sold |
|
|
1,965.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,965.6 |
|
|
79.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,045.4 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
380.6 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
381.1 |
|
|
2,544.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,925.4 |
|
Interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
157.5 |
|
|
157.5 |
|
|
324.1 |
|
|
(157.5 |
) (a) |
|
324.1 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,346.2 |
|
|
158.0 |
|
|
2,504.2 |
|
|
11,073.6 |
|
|
(157.5 |
) |
|
13,420.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,039.6 |
|
|
(156.0 |
) |
|
883.6 |
|
|
938.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,822.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
397.3 |
|
|
(59.6 |
) |
|
337.7 |
|
|
196.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
533.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
56.9 |
|
Total
|
|
|
397.3 |
|
|
(59.6 |
) |
|
337.7 |
|
|
253.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
590.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations |
|
|
642.3 |
|
|
(96.4 |
) |
|
545.9 |
|
|
685.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,231.3 |
|
Equity
in earnings of the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
361.4 |
|
|
(361.4 |
)
(b) |
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
642.3 |
|
$ |
(96.4 |
) |
$ |
545.9 |
|
$ |
1,046.8 |
|
$ |
(361.4 |
) |
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
__________
(a) |
To
eliminate interest on the intergroup notional
debt. |
(b) |
To
eliminate the Loews Group’s intergroup interest in the earnings of the
Carolina Group. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Statement of Operations Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,209.8 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,209.8 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
$ |
39.9 |
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
$ |
42.0 |
|
|
1,990.7 |
|
$ |
(182.8 |
) (a) |
|
1,849.9 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
|
473.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
464.1 |
|
Manufactured
products |
|
|
3,255.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,255.6 |
|
|
163.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,418.8 |
|
Other
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
1,518.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,518.4 |
|
Total
|
|
|
3,285.7 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
3,287.8 |
|
|
13,356.0 |
|
|
(182.8 |
) |
|
16,461.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
policyholders’
benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,286.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
10,286.5 |
|
Amortization
of deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
acquisition
costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,964.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,964.6 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sold |
|
|
1,893.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,893.1 |
|
|
79.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,972.8 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
460.0 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
460.6 |
|
|
2,846.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,307.1 |
|
Interest
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
182.8 |
|
|
182.9 |
|
|
308.3 |
|
|
(182.8 |
) (a) |
|
308.4 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,353.2 |
|
|
183.4 |
|
|
2,536.6 |
|
|
15,485.6 |
|
|
(182.8 |
) |
|
17,839.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
932.5 |
|
|
(181.3 |
) |
|
751.2 |
|
|
(2,129.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1,378.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
351.2 |
|
|
(68.3 |
) |
|
282.9 |
|
|
(817.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(534.1 |
) |
Minority
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(178.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(178.2 |
) |
Total
|
|
|
351.2 |
|
|
(68.3 |
) |
|
282.9 |
|
|
(995.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(712.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from operations |
|
|
581.3 |
|
|
(113.0 |
) |
|
468.3 |
|
|
(1,134.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(666.1 |
) |
Equity
in earnings of the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
353.1 |
|
|
(353.1 |
) (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
continuing
operations |
|
|
581.3 |
|
|
(113.0 |
) |
|
468.3 |
|
|
(781.3 |
) |
|
(353.1 |
) |
|
(666.1 |
) |
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
581.3 |
|
$ |
(113.0 |
) |
$ |
468.3 |
|
$ |
(725.9 |
) |
$ |
(353.1 |
) |
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
__________
(a) |
To
eliminate interest on the intergroup notional debt. |
(b) |
To
eliminate the Loews Group’s intergroup interest in the earnings of the
Carolina Group. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Statement of Operations Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,209.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,209.9 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
$ |
44.1 |
|
$ |
1.6 |
|
$ |
45.7 |
|
|
1,921.9 |
|
$ |
(178.4 |
)
(a) |
|
1,789.2 |
|
Investment
(losses) gains |
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
(167.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(131.0 |
) |
Manufactured
products |
|
|
3,797.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,797.7 |
|
|
165.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,963.5 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
1,623.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,624.9 |
|
Total
|
|
|
3,879.8 |
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
3,881.4 |
|
|
13,753.5 |
|
|
(178.4 |
) |
|
17,456.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
policyholders’
benefits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,420.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,420.3 |
|
Amortization
of deferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
acquisition
costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,790.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,790.2 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sold |
|
|
2,149.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,149.3 |
|
|
77.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,226.5 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
432.7 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
433.1 |
|
|
2,672.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,106.0 |
|
Restructuring
and other related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(36.8 |
) |
Interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
178.4 |
|
|
178.4 |
|
|
309.6 |
|
|
(178.4 |
)
(a) |
|
309.6 |
|
Total
|
|
|
2,582.0 |
|
|
178.8 |
|
|
2,760.8 |
|
|
13,233.4 |
|
|
(178.4 |
) |
|
15,815.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,297.8 |
|
|
(177.2 |
) |
|
1,120.6 |
|
|
520.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,640.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
508.5 |
|
|
(69.4 |
) |
|
439.1 |
|
|
140.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
579.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
82.3 |
|
Total
|
|
|
508.5 |
|
|
(69.4 |
) |
|
439.1 |
|
|
223.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
662.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations |
|
|
789.3 |
|
|
(107.8 |
) |
|
681.5 |
|
|
297.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
978.6 |
|
Equity
in earnings of the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
540.8 |
|
|
(540.8 |
)
(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from continuing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operations |
|
|
789.3 |
|
|
(107.8 |
) |
|
681.5 |
|
|
837.9 |
|
|
(540.8 |
) |
|
978.6 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
accounting
principles-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
789.3 |
|
$ |
(107.8 |
) |
$ |
681.5 |
|
$ |
771.3 |
|
$ |
(540.8 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
__________
(a) |
To
eliminate interest on the intergroup notional debt. |
(b) |
To
eliminate the Loews Group’s intergroup interest in the earnings of the
Carolina Group. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
Loews and
Carolina Group
Consolidating
Condensed Statement of Cash Flows Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
operating
activities |
|
$ |
631.9 |
|
$ |
(97.4 |
) |
$ |
534.5 |
|
$ |
2,496.7 |
|
$ |
(210.1 |
) |
$ |
2,821.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of property and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equipment |
|
|
(50.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(50.8 |
) |
|
(216.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(267.0 |
) |
Change
in short-term |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
investments |
|
|
26.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
26.3 |
|
|
3,304.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,330.8 |
|
Other
investing activities |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
(6,880.8 |
) |
|
(160.9 |
) |
|
(7,041.1 |
) |
|
|
|
(23.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(23.9 |
) |
|
(3,792.5 |
) |
|
(160.9 |
) |
|
(3,977.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
shareholders |
|
|
(574.0 |
) |
|
258.4 |
|
|
(315.6 |
) |
|
(111.3 |
) |
|
210.1 |
|
|
(216.8 |
) |
Reduction
of intergroup |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
notional
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
(160.9 |
) |
|
(160.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
160.9 |
|
|
|
|
Other
financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,412.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,412.1 |
|
|
|
|
(574.0 |
) |
|
97.5 |
|
|
(476.5 |
) |
|
1,300.8 |
|
|
371.0 |
|
|
1,195.3 |
|
Net
change in cash |
|
|
34.0 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
34.1 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
39.1 |
|
Cash,
beginning of year |
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
178.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
180.8 |
|
Cash,
end of year |
|
$ |
35.5 |
|
$ |
0.5 |
|
$ |
36.0 |
|
$ |
183.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
219.9 |
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
activities |
|
$ |
711.6 |
|
$ |
(116.1 |
) |
$ |
595.5 |
|
$ |
2,421.7 |
|
$ |
(233.4 |
) |
$ |
2,783.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of property and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equipment |
|
|
(56.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(56.4 |
) |
|
(390.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(446.4 |
) |
Change
in short-term investments |
|
|
128.2 |
|
|
50.2 |
|
|
178.4 |
|
|
(1,677.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1,499.0 |
) |
Other
investing activities |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
(522.3 |
) |
|
(406.0 |
) |
|
(926.2 |
) |
|
|
|
73.9 |
|
|
50.2 |
|
|
124.1 |
|
|
(2,589.7 |
) |
|
(406.0 |
) |
|
(2,871.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid to shareholders |
|
|
(786.0 |
) |
|
472.1 |
|
|
(313.9 |
) |
|
(111.3 |
) |
|
233.4 |
|
|
(191.8 |
) |
Reduction
of intergroup notional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
(406.0 |
) |
|
(406.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
406.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other
financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
276.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
276.5 |
|
|
|
|
(786.0 |
) |
|
66.1 |
|
|
(719.9 |
) |
|
165.2 |
|
|
639.4 |
|
|
84.7 |
|
Net
change in cash |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
0.2 |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
(2.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
Cash,
beginning of year |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
181.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
183.9 |
|
Cash,
end of year |
|
$ |
1.5 |
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
$ |
178.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
180.8 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
6. Loews and Carolina Group Consolidating Condensed Financial Information
- (Continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group |
|
Loews |
|
and |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
Lorillard |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
|
Group |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by operating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
activities |
|
$ |
852.6 |
|
$ |
(87.1 |
) |
$ |
765.5 |
|
$ |
1,300.9 |
|
$ |
(278.2 |
) |
$ |
1,788.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of property and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equipment |
|
|
(51.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(51.7 |
) |
|
(462.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(514.4 |
) |
Change
in short-term investments |
|
|
(167.6 |
) |
|
(150.3 |
) |
|
(317.9 |
) |
|
(3,064.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(3,381.9 |
) |
Other
investing activities |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
2,019.7 |
|
|
(61.9 |
) |
|
1,963.8 |
|
|
|
|
(213.3 |
) |
|
(150.3 |
) |
|
(363.6 |
) |
|
(1,507.0 |
) |
|
(61.9 |
) |
|
(1,932.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid to shareholders |
|
|
(639.0 |
) |
|
307.2 |
|
|
(331.8 |
) |
|
(112.8 |
) |
|
278.2 |
|
|
(166.4 |
) |
Purchases
of treasury shares |
|
|
|
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
|
(7.7 |
) |
|
(343.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(351.2 |
) |
Reduction
of intergroup notional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
(61.9 |
) |
|
(61.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
61.9 |
|
|
|
|
Other
financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
665.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
665.0 |
|
|
|
|
(639.0 |
) |
|
237.6 |
|
|
(401.4 |
) |
|
208.7 |
|
|
340.1 |
|
|
147.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
change in cash |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Cash,
beginning of year |
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
179.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
180.8 |
|
Cash,
end of year |
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
$ |
2.2 |
|
$ |
181.7 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
183.9 |
|
Note
7. Receivables
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
|
|
$ |
15,993.7 |
|
$ |
16,253.8 |
|
Other
insurance |
|
|
2,567.2 |
|
|
3,081.7 |
|
Security
sales |
|
|
540.3 |
|
|
890.7 |
|
Accrued
investment income |
|
|
304.9 |
|
|
343.3 |
|
Federal
income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
517.4 |
|
Other |
|
|
458.3 |
|
|
348.4 |
|
Total |
|
|
19,864.4 |
|
|
21,435.3 |
|
Less: allowance
for doubtful accounts on reinsurance receivables |
|
|
531.1 |
|
|
572.6 |
|
allowance
for other doubtful accounts and cash discounts |
|
|
526.1 |
|
|
383.5 |
|
Receivables |
|
$ |
18,807.2 |
|
$ |
20,479.2 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
Note
8. Property, Plant and Equipment
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land
|
|
$ |
77.9 |
|
$ |
65.2 |
|
Buildings
and building equipment |
|
|
629.1 |
|
|
660.3 |
|
Offshore
drilling rigs and equipment |
|
|
3,598.2 |
|
|
3,535.9 |
|
Machinery
and equipment |
|
|
1,180.9 |
|
|
1,285.8 |
|
Pipeline
equipment |
|
|
1,778.4 |
|
|
646.5 |
|
Leaseholds
and leasehold improvements |
|
|
74.9 |
|
|
147.4 |
|
Total |
|
|
7,339.4 |
|
|
6,341.1 |
|
Less
accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
2,498.7 |
|
|
2,461.4 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment |
|
$ |
4,840.7 |
|
$ |
3,879.7 |
|
Depreciation
and amortization expense, including amortization of intangibles, and capital
expenditures, are as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
Depr.
& |
|
Capital |
|
Depr.
& |
|
Capital |
|
Depr.
& |
|
Capital |
|
|
|
Amort. |
|
Expend. |
|
Amort. |
|
Expend. |
|
Amort. |
|
Expend. |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial |
|
$ |
61.1 |
|
$ |
40.9 |
|
$ |
62.5 |
|
$ |
65.7 |
|
$ |
72.2 |
|
$ |
87.6 |
|
Lorillard |
|
|
39.7 |
|
|
50.8 |
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
56.4 |
|
|
29.0 |
|
|
51.7 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
27.3 |
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
25.2 |
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
24.2 |
|
|
23.4 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
184.9 |
|
|
93.7 |
|
|
181.3 |
|
|
272.0 |
|
|
183.0 |
|
|
349.5 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
34.0 |
|
|
41.2 |
|
|
20.5 |
|
|
34.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
and other |
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
2.2 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
350.8 |
|
$ |
267.0 |
|
$ |
325.1 |
|
$ |
446.4 |
|
$ |
312.2 |
|
$ |
514.4 |
|
In July
of 2003, Loews Hotels sold a New York City property, the Metropolitan Hotel, for
approximately $109.0 million. The Company recorded a pretax gain of
approximately $90.2 million ($56.7 million after taxes).
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves
CNA’s
property and casualty insurance claim and claim adjustment expense reserves
represent the estimated amounts necessary to settle all outstanding claims,
including claims that are incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) as of the reporting
date. CNA's reserve projections are based primarily on detailed analysis of the
facts in each case, CNA's experience with similar cases and various historical
development patterns. Consideration is given to such historical patterns as
field reserving trends and claims settlement practices, loss payments, pending
levels of unpaid claims and product mix, as well as court decisions, economic
conditions and public attitudes. All of these factors can affect the estimation
of claim and claim adjustment expense reserves.
Establishing
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, including claim and claim
adjustment expense reserves for catastrophic events that have occurred, is an
estimation process. Many factors can ultimately affect the final settlement of a
claim and, therefore, the necessary reserve. Changes in the law, results of
litigation, medical costs, the cost of repair materials and labor rates can all
affect ultimate claim costs. In addition, time can be a critical part of
reserving determinations since the longer the span between the incidence of a
loss and the payment or settlement of the claim, the more variable the ultimate
settlement amount can be. Accordingly, short-tail claims, such as property
damage claims, tend to be more reasonably estimable than long-tail claims, such
as general liability and professional liability claims. Adjustments to prior
year reserve estimates, if necessary, are reflected in the results of operations
in the period that the need for such adjustments is determined.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
Catastrophes
are an inherent risk of the property and casualty insurance business and have
contributed to material period-to-period fluctuations in the Company’s results
of operations and/or equity. The level of catastrophe losses experienced in any
period cannot be predicted and can be material to the results of operations
and/or equity of the Company.
Catastrophe
losses were $278.0 million, $143.0 million and $59.0 million pretax for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. The catastrophe losses in 2004
related primarily to Hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan and Jeanne. The
catastrophe losses in 2003 related primarily to Hurricane Claudette, Hurricane
Isabel, Texas tornadoes, and Midwest rain storms. The catastrophe losses in 2002
related primarily to the European floods, Hurricane Lili and Tropical Storm
Isidore.
The table
below provides a reconciliation between beginning and ending claim and claim
adjustment expense reserves including claim and claim adjustment expense
reserves of the life and group companies.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves,
beginning of year: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
$ |
31,730.0 |
|
$ |
27,370.0 |
|
$ |
31,266.0 |
|
Ceded |
|
|
14,216.0 |
|
|
10,727.0 |
|
|
12,105.0 |
|
Net
reserves, beginning of year |
|
|
17,514.0 |
|
|
16,643.0 |
|
|
19,161.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction
of net reserves (a)
(b) (c) |
|
|
(42.0 |
) |
|
(1,309.0 |
) |
|
(1,316.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
incurred claim and claim adjustment expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision
for insured events of current year |
|
|
6,062.0 |
|
|
6,745.0 |
|
|
8,248.0 |
|
Increase
in provision for insured events of prior years |
|
|
241.0 |
|
|
2,409.0 |
|
|
35.0 |
|
Amortization
of discount |
|
|
135.0 |
|
|
115.0 |
|
|
72.0 |
|
Total
net incurred (d) |
|
|
6,438.0 |
|
|
9,269.0 |
|
|
8,355.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
payments attributable to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
year events |
|
|
1,936.0 |
|
|
2,192.0 |
|
|
3,137.0 |
|
Prior
year events |
|
|
4,479.0 |
|
|
4,936.0 |
|
|
6,553.0 |
|
Reinsurance
recoverable against net reserve transferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
under
retroactive reinsurance agreements (see Note 14) |
|
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
(39.0 |
) |
|
(133.0 |
) |
Total
net payments |
|
|
6,374.0 |
|
|
7,089.0 |
|
|
9,557.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
reserves, end of year |
|
|
17,536.0 |
|
|
17,514.0 |
|
|
16,643.0 |
|
Ceded
reserves, end of year |
|
|
13,984.0 |
|
|
14,216.0 |
|
|
10,727.0 |
|
Gross
reserves, end of year |
|
$ |
31,520.0 |
|
$ |
31,730.0 |
|
$ |
27,370.0 |
|
__________
(a) |
In
2002, net reserves were reduced by $1,316.0 as a result of the sale of CNA
Reinsurance Company Limited (“CNA Re U.K.”). See Note 14 for further
discussion of this sale. |
(b) |
In
2003, net reserves were reduced by $1,309.0 as a result of the sale of
CNAGLA. See Note 14 for further discussion of this
sale. |
(c) |
In
2004, the net reserves were reduced by $42.0 as a result of the sale
of the individual life insurance business. See Note 14 for further
discussion of this sale. |
(d) |
Total
net incurred above does not agree to insurance claims and policyholders’
benefits as reflected in the Consolidated Statements of Operations due to
expenses incurred related to uncollectible reinsurance receivables and
benefit expenses related to future policy benefits and policyholders’
funds which are not reflected in the table
above. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
The
changes in provision for insured events of prior years (net prior year claim and
claim adjustment expense reserve development) are composed of the
following:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental
pollution and mass tort |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
$ |
153.0 |
|
|
|
|
Asbestos |
|
|
54.0 |
|
|
642.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
186.0 |
|
|
1,614.0 |
|
$ |
35.0 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
241.0 |
|
$ |
2,409.0 |
|
$ |
35.0 |
|
The
following tables summarize the gross and net carried reserves as of December 31,
2004 and 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life
and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Group |
|
Other |
|
|
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Non-Core |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
6,904.0 |
|
$ |
1,659.0 |
|
$ |
2,800.0 |
|
$ |
3,803.0 |
|
$ |
15,166.0 |
|
Gross
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
7,398.0 |
|
|
3,201.0 |
|
|
880.0 |
|
|
4,875.0 |
|
|
16,354.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Gross Carried Claim and Claim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
14,302.0 |
|
$ |
4,860.0 |
|
$ |
3,680.0 |
|
$ |
8,678.0 |
|
$ |
31,520.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
4,759.0 |
|
$ |
1,191.0 |
|
$ |
1,394.0 |
|
$ |
1,485.0 |
|
$ |
8,829.0 |
|
Net
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
4,544.0 |
|
|
2,042.0 |
|
|
430.0 |
|
|
1,691.0 |
|
|
8,707.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Carried Claim and Claim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
9,303.0 |
|
$ |
3,233.0 |
|
$ |
1,824.0 |
|
$ |
3,176.0 |
|
$ |
17,536.0 |
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
6,416.0 |
|
$ |
1,605.0 |
|
$ |
2,539.0 |
|
$ |
4,342.0 |
|
$ |
14,902.0 |
|
Gross
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
7,866.0 |
|
|
2,595.0 |
|
|
1,037.0 |
|
|
5,330.0 |
|
|
16,828.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Gross Carried Claim and Claim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
14,282.0 |
|
$ |
4,200.0 |
|
$ |
3,576.0 |
|
$ |
9,672.0 |
|
$ |
31,730.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Case Reserves |
|
$ |
4,585.0 |
|
$ |
1,087.0 |
|
$ |
1,477.0 |
|
$ |
1,879.0 |
|
$ |
9,028.0 |
|
Net
IBNR Reserves |
|
|
4,382.0 |
|
|
1,832.0 |
|
|
414.0 |
|
|
1,858.0 |
|
|
8,486.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Net Carried Claim and Claim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
Expense Reserves |
|
$ |
8,967.0 |
|
$ |
2,919.0 |
|
$ |
1,891.0 |
|
$ |
3,737.0 |
|
$ |
17,514.0 |
|
The
following provides discussion of CNA’s Asbestos, Environmental Pollution and
Mass Tort (“APMT”) and core reserves.
APMT
Reserves
CNA’s
property and casualty insurance subsidiaries have actual and potential exposures
related to APMT claims.
Establishing
reserves for APMT claim and claim adjustment expenses is subject to
uncertainties that are greater than those presented by other claims. Traditional
actuarial methods and techniques employed to estimate the ultimate cost of
claims for more traditional property and casualty exposures are less precise in
estimating claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for APMT, particularly in
an environment of emerging or potential claims and
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
coverage
issues that arise from industry practices and legal, judicial, and social
conditions. Therefore, these traditional actuarial methods and techniques are
necessarily supplemented with additional estimating techniques and
methodologies, many of which involve significant judgments that are required of
management. Accordingly, a high degree of uncertainty remains for CNA’s ultimate
liability for APMT claim and claim adjustment expenses.
In
addition to the difficulties described above, estimating the ultimate cost of
both reported and unreported APMT claims is subject to a higher degree of
variability due to a number of additional factors, including among others: the
number and outcome of direct actions against CNA; coverage issues, including
whether certain costs are covered under the policies and whether policy limits
apply; allocation of liability among numerous parties, some of whom may be in
bankruptcy proceedings, and in particular the application of “joint and several”
liability to specific insurers on a risk; inconsistent court decisions and
developing legal theories; increasingly aggressive tactics of plaintiffs’
lawyers; the risks and lack of predictability inherent in major litigation;
increased filings of claims in certain states; enactment of national federal
legislation to address asbestos claims; a further increase in asbestos and
environmental pollution claims which cannot now be anticipated; increase in
number of mass tort claims relating to silica and silica-containing products,
and the outcome of ongoing disputes as to coverage in relation to these claims;
a further increase of claims and claims payment that may exhaust underlying
umbrella and excess coverage at accelerated rates; and future developments
pertaining to CNA’s ability to recover reinsurance for asbestos and
environmental pollution claims.
CNA has
regularly performed ground up reviews of all open APMT claims to evaluate the
adequacy of CNA’s APMT reserves. In performing its comprehensive ground up
analysis, CNA considers input from its professionals with direct responsibility
for the claims, inside and outside counsel with responsibility for
representation of CNA, and its actuarial staff. These professionals review,
among many factors, the policyholder’s present and predicted future exposures,
including such factors as claims volume, trial conditions, prior settlement
history, settlement demands and defense costs; the impact of asbestos defendant
bankruptcies on the policyholder; the policies issued by CNA, including such
factors as aggregate or per occurrence limits, whether the policy is primary,
umbrella or excess, and the existence of policyholder retentions and/or
deductibles; the existence of other insurance; and reinsurance
arrangements.
With
respect to other court cases and how they might affect CNA’s reserves and
reasonably possible losses, the following should be noted. State and federal
courts issue numerous decisions each year, which potentially impact losses and
reserves in both a favorable and unfavorable manner. Examples of favorable
developments include decisions to allocate defense and indemnity payments in a
manner so as to limit carriers’ obligations to damages taking place during the
effective dates of their policies; decisions holding that injuries occurring
after asbestos operations are completed are subject to the completed operations
aggregate limits of the policies; and decisions ruling that carriers’ loss
control inspections of their insured’s premises do not give rise to a duty to
warn third parties to the dangers of asbestos.
Examples
of unfavorable developments include decisions limiting the application of the
“absolute pollution” exclusion; and decisions holding carriers liable for
defense and indemnity of asbestos and pollution claims on a joint and several
basis.
CNA’s
ultimate
liability for its environmental pollution and mass tort claims is impacted by
several factors including ongoing disputes with policyholders over scope and
meaning of coverage terms and, in the area of environmental pollution, court
decisions that continue to restrict the scope and applicability of the absolute
pollution exclusion contained in policies issued by CNA after 1989. Due to the
inherent uncertainties described above, including the inconsistency of court
decisions, the number of waste sites subject to cleanup, and in the area of
environmental pollution, the standards for cleanup and liability, the ultimate
liability of CNA for environmental pollution and mass tort claims may vary
substantially from the amount currently recorded.
Due to
the inherent uncertainties in estimating claim and claim adjustment expense
reserves for APMT and due to the significant uncertainties previously described
related to APMT claims, the ultimate liability for these cases, both
individually and in aggregate, may exceed the recorded reserves. Any such
potential additional liability, or any range of potential additional amounts,
cannot be reasonably estimated currently, but could be material to CNA’s
business, insurer financial strength and debt ratings and/or the Company’s
results of operations and equity. Due to, among other things, the factors
described above, it may be necessary for CNA to record material changes in its
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
APMT
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves in the future, should new
information become available or other developments emerge.
The
following table provides data related to CNA’s APMT claim and claim adjustment
expense reserves.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
Environmental |
|
|
|
|
|
Pollution
and |
|
|
|
Pollution
and |
|
|
|
Asbestos |
|
Mass
Tort |
|
Asbestos |
|
Mass
Tort |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
reserves |
|
$ |
3,218.0 |
|
$ |
755.0 |
|
$ |
3,347.0 |
|
$ |
839.0 |
|
Ceded
reserves |
|
|
(1,532.0 |
) |
|
(258.0 |
) |
|
(1,580.0 |
) |
|
(262.0 |
) |
Net
reserves |
|
$ |
1,686.0 |
|
$ |
497.0 |
|
$ |
1,767.0 |
|
$ |
577.0 |
|
Asbestos
CNA’s
property and casualty insurance subsidiaries have exposure to asbestos-related
claims. Estimation of asbestos-related claim and claim adjustment expense
reserves involves limitations such as inconsistency of court decisions, specific
policy provisions, allocation of liability among insurers and insureds, and
additional factors such as missing policies and proof of coverage. Furthermore,
estimation of asbestos-related claims is difficult due to, among other reasons,
the proliferation of bankruptcy proceedings and attendant uncertainties, the
targeting of a broader range of businesses and entities as defendants, the
uncertainty as to which other insureds may be targeted in the future and the
uncertainties inherent in predicting the number of future claims.
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA carried approximately $1,686.0 million and
$1,767.0 million of claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, net of
reinsurance recoverables, for reported and unreported asbestos-related claims.
CNA recorded $54.0 million and $642.0 million of unfavorable asbestos-related
net claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003. CNA recorded no asbestos related net claim and claim
adjustment expense reserve development for the year ended December 31, 2002.
The 2004
unfavorable net prior year development was primarily related to a loss from the
commutation of reinsurance treaties with Trenwick. CNA paid asbestos-related
claims, net of reinsurance recoveries, of $135.0 million, $121.0 million and
$21.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
CNA recorded $1,826.0 million and $642.0 million in unfavorable gross and net
prior year development for the year ended December 31, 2003 for reported and
unreported asbestos-related claims, principally due to potential losses from
policies issued by CNA with high attachment points, which previous exposure
analysis indicated would not be reached. CNA examined the claims filing trends
to determine timeframes within which high excess policies issued by CNA could be
reached. Elevated claims volumes and increased claims values, together with
certain adverse court decisions affecting the ability of policyholders to access
excess policies, supported the conclusion that excess policies with high
attachment points previously thought not to be exposed may now potentially be
exposed. The ceded reinsurance arrangements on these excess policies are
different from the primary policies. In general, more extensive reinsurance
arrangements apply to the excess policies. As a result, the prior year
development shows a higher ratio of ceded to gross amounts than the reserves
established in prior periods, resulting in a higher percentage of reserves ceded
as of December 31, 2003 versus prior periods.
Some
asbestos-related defendants have asserted that their insurance policies are not
subject to aggregate limits on coverage. CNA has such claims from a number of
insureds. Some of these claims involve insureds facing exhaustion of products
liability aggregate limits in their policies, who have asserted that their
asbestos-related claims fall within so-called “non-products” liability coverage
contained within their policies rather than products liability coverage, and
that the claimed “non-products” coverage is not subject to any aggregate limit.
It is difficult to predict the ultimate size of any of the claims for coverage
purportedly not subject to aggregate limits or predict to what extent, if any,
the attempts to assert “non-products” claims outside the products liability
aggregate will succeed. CNA’s policies also contain other limits applicable to
these claims, and CNA has additional coverage defenses to certain claims. CNA
has attempted to manage its asbestos exposure by aggressively seeking to settle
claims on acceptable
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
terms.
There can be no assurance that any of these settlement efforts will be
successful, or that any such claims can be settled on terms acceptable to CNA.
Where CNA cannot settle a claim on acceptable terms, CNA aggressively litigates
the claim. A recent court ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit has supported certain of CNA’s positions with respect to coverage
for “non-products” claims. However, adverse developments with respect to such
matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of
operations and/or equity.
Certain
asbestos litigation in which CNA is currently engaged is described
below:
The
ultimate cost of reported claims, and in particular APMT claims, is subject to a
great many uncertainties, including future developments of various kinds that
CNA does not control and that are difficult or impossible to foresee accurately.
With respect to the litigation identified below in particular, numerous factual
and legal issues remain unresolved. Rulings on those issues by the courts are
critical to the evaluation of the ultimate cost to CNA. The outcome of the
litigation cannot be predicted with any reliability. Accordingly, the extent of
losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at
this time. On
February 13, 2003, CNA announced it had resolved asbestos related coverage
litigation and claims involving A.P. Green Industries, A.P. Green Services and
Bigelow - Liptak Corporation. Under the agreement, CNA is required to pay $74.0
million, net of reinsurance recoveries, over a ten year period commencing after
the final approval of a bankruptcy plan of reorganization. The settlement
resolves CNA’s liabilities for all pending and future asbestos claims involving
A.P. Green Industries, Bigelow - Liptak Corporation and related subsidiaries,
including alleged “non-products” exposures. The settlement received initial
bankruptcy court approval on August 18, 2003 and CNA expects to procure
confirmation of a bankruptcy plan containing an injunction to protect CNA from
any future claims.
CNA is
engaged in insurance coverage litigation, filed in 2003, with underlying
plaintiffs who have asbestos bodily injury claims against the former Robert A.
Keasbey Company (“Keasbey”) in New York state court (Continental
Casualty Co. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau et al., No.
601037/03 (N.Y. County)). Keasbey, a currently dissolved corporation, was a
seller and installer of asbestos-containing insulation products in New York and
New Jersey. Thousands of plaintiffs have filed bodily injury claims against
Keasbey; however, Keasbey’s involvement at a number of work sites is a highly
contested issue. Therefore, the defense disputes the percentage of valid claims
against Keasbey. CNA
issued Keasbey primary policies for 1970-1987 and excess policies for 1972-1978.
CNA has paid an amount substantially equal to the policies’ aggregate limits for
products and completed operations claims. Claimants against Keasbey allege,
among other things, that CNA owes coverage under sections of the policies not
subject to the aggregate limits, an allegation CNA vigorously contests in the
lawsuit. In the litigation, CNA and the claimants seek declaratory relief as to
the interpretation of various policy provisions. The court dismissed a claim
alleging bad faith and seeking unspecified damages on March 21, 2004; that
ruling is now being appealed. With respect to this litigation in particular,
numerous factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to the
final result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability.
These factors include, among others: (a) whether CNA has any further
responsibility to compensate claimants against Keasbey under its policies and,
if so, under which policies; (b) whether CNA’s responsibilities extend to a
particular claimants entire claim or only to a limited percentage of the claim;
(c) whether CNA’s responsibilities under its policies are limited by the
occurrence limits or other provisions of the policies; (d) whether certain
exclusions in some of the policies apply to exclude certain claims; (e) the
extent to which claimants can establish exposures to asbestos materials as to
which Keasbey has any responsibility; (f) the legal theories which must be
pursued by such claimants to establish the liability of Keasbey and whether such
theories can, in fact, be established; (g) the diseases and damages claimed by
such claimants; and (h) the extent that such liability would be shared with
other responsible parties. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts
that may be accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
CNA has
insurance coverage disputes related to asbestos bodily injury claims against
Burns & Roe Enterprises, Inc. (“Burns & Roe”). Originally raised in
litigation, now stayed, these disputes are currently part of In
re: Burns & Roe Enterprises, Inc.,
pending in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, No.
00-41610. Burns & Roe provided engineering and related services in
connection with construction projects. At the time of its bankruptcy filing on
December 4, 2000, Burns & Roe faced approximately 11,000 claims alleging
bodily injury resulting from exposure to asbestos as a result of construction
projects in which Burns & Roe was involved. CNA
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
allegedly
provided primary liability coverage to Burns & Roe from 1956-1969 and
1971-1974, along with certain project-specific policies from 1964-1970. The
parties in the litigation are seeking a declaration of the scope and extent of
coverage, if any, afforded to Burns & Roe for its asbestos liabilities. The
litigation has been stayed since May 14, 2003 pending resolution of the
bankruptcy proceedings. With respect to the Burns & Roe litigation and the
pending bankruptcy proceeding, numerous unresolved factual and legal issues will
impact the ultimate exposure to CNA. With respect to this litigation, numerous
factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to the final
result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These
factors include, among others: (a) whether CNA has any further responsibility to
compensate claimants against Burns & Roe under its policies and, if so,
under which; (b) whether CNA’s responsibilities under its policies extend to a
particular claimants entire claim or only to a limited percentage of the claim;
(c) whether CNA’s responsibilities under its policies are limited by the
occurrence limits or other provisions of the policies; (d) whether certain
exclusions, including professional liability exclusions, in some of CNA’s
policies apply to exclude certain claims; (e) the extent to which claimants can
establish exposures to asbestos materials as to which Burns & Roe has any
responsibility; (f) the legal theories which must be pursued by such claimants
to establish the liability of Burns & Roe and whether such theories can, in
fact, be established; (g) the diseases and damages claimed by such claimants;
(h) the extent that any liability of Burns & Roe would be shared with other
potentially responsible parties; and (i) the impact of bankruptcy proceedings on
claims and coverage issue resolution. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond
any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at this
time.
CIC
issued certain primary and excess policies to Bendix Corporation (“Bendix”), now
part of Honeywell International, Inc. (“Honeywell”). Honeywell faces
approximately 75,403 pending asbestos bodily injury claims resulting from
alleged exposure to Bendix friction products. CIC’s primary policies allegedly
covered the period from at least 1939 (when Bendix began to use asbestos in its
friction products) to 1983, although the parties disagree about whether CIC’s
policies provided product liability coverage before 1940 and from 1945 to 1956.
CIC asserts that it owes no further material obligations to Bendix under any
primary policy. Honeywell alleges that two primary policies issued by CIC
covering 1969-1975 contain occurrence limits but not product liability aggregate
limits for asbestos bodily injury claims. CIC has asserted, among other things,
even if Honeywell’s allegation is correct, which CNA denies, its liability is
limited to a single occurrence limit per policy or per year, and in the
alternative, a proper allocation of losses would substantially limit its
exposure under the 1969-1975 policies to asbestos claims. These and other issues
are being litigated in Continental
Insurance Co., et al. v. Honeywell International Inc., No.
MRS-L-1523-00 (Morris County, New Jersey) which was filed on May 15, 2000. In
the litigation, the parties are seeking declaratory relief of the scope and
extent of coverage, if any, afforded to Bendix under the policies issued by CNA.
With respect to this litigation, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be
resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be
predicted with any reliability. These factors include, among others: (a) whether
certain of the primary policies issued by CNA contain aggregate limits of
liability; (b) whether CNA’s responsibilities under its policies extend to a
particular claimants entire claim or only to a limited percentage of the claim;
(c) whether CNA’s responsibilities under its policies are limited by the
occurrence limits or other provisions of the policies; (d) whether some of the
claims against Bendix arise out of events which took place after expiration of
CNA’s policies; (e) the extent to which claimants can establish exposures to
asbestos materials as to which Bendix has any responsibility; (f) the legal
theories which must be pursued by such claimants to establish the liability of
Bendix and whether such theories can, in fact, be established; (g) the diseases
and damages claimed by such claimants; (h) the extent that any liability of
Bendix would be shared with other responsible parties; and (i) whether Bendix is
responsible for reimbursement of funds advanced by CNA for defense and indemnity
in the past. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be
accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
Suits
have also been initiated directly against CNA and other insurers in four
jurisdictions: Ohio, Texas, West Virginia and Montana. In the
two Ohio actions, plaintiffs allege the defendants negligently performed duties
undertaken to protect workers and the public from the effects of asbestos
(Varner
v. Ford Motor Co., et al.
(Cuyahoga County, Ohio, filed on June 12, 2003) and Peplowski
v. ACE American Ins. Co., et al. (U.S.
D. C. N.D. Ohio, filed on April 1, 2004)). The state trial court granted
insurers, including CNA, summary judgment against a representative group of
plaintiffs, ruling that insurers had no duty to warn plaintiffs about the
dangers of asbestos. The summary judgment ruling is on appeal. With respect to
this litigation in particular, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be
resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be
predicted with any reliability. These factors include: (a) the speculative
nature and unclear scope of any alleged duties owed to individuals exposed to
asbestos and the resulting uncertainty as to the potential pool of potential
claimants; (b) the fact that imposing such duties on all insurer and non-insurer
corporate defendants would be unprecedented and,
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
therefore,
the legal boundaries of recovery are difficult to estimate; (c) the fact that
many of the claims brought to date are barred by various Statutes of Limitation
and it is unclear whether future claims would also be barred; (d) the unclear
nature of the required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the right of
any particular claimant to recovery; and (e) the existence of hundreds of
co-defendants in some of the suits and the applicability of the legal theories
pled by the claimants to thousands of potential defendants. Accordingly, the
extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily
determinable at this time.
Similar
lawsuits have also been filed in Texas against CNA beginning in 2002, and other
insurers and non-insurer corporate defendants asserting liability for failing to
warn of the dangers of asbestos (Boson
v. Union Carbide Corp., et al.
(District Court of Nueces County, Texas)). During 2003, many of the Texas claims
have been dismissed as time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations. In
other claims, the Texas courts have ruled that the carriers did not owe any duty
to the plaintiffs or the general public to advise on the effects of asbestos
thereby dismissing these claims. Certain of the Texas courts’ rulings have been
appealed. With respect to this litigation in particular, numerous factual and
legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to the final result, the
outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These factors
include: (a) the speculative nature and unclear scope of any alleged duties owed
to individuals exposed to asbestos and the resulting uncertainty as to the
potential pool of potential claimants; (b) the fact that imposing such duties on
all insurer and non-insurer corporate defendants would be unprecedented and,
therefore, the legal boundaries of recovery are difficult to estimate; (c) the
fact that many of the claims brought to date are barred by various Statutes of
Limitation and it is unclear whether future claims would also be barred; (d) the
unclear nature of the required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the
right of any particular claimant to recovery; and (e) the existence of
hundreds of co-defendants in some of the suits and the applicability of the
legal theories pled by the claimants to thousands of potential defendants.
Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not
readily determinable at this time.
CNA was
named in Adams
v. Aetna, Inc., et al. (Circuit
Court of Kanawha County, West Virginia, filed June 23, 2002), a purported class
action against CNA and other insurers, alleging that the defendants violated
West Virginia’s Unfair Trade Practices Act in handling and resolving asbestos
claims against their policyholders. The Adams litigation had been stayed pending
disposition
of two cases in the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. Those cases were
decided in June, 2004. The Adams case also involves
proceedings and mediation in the Bankruptcy Court in New York with jurisdiction
over the Manville Bankruptcy. In those proceedings issues have been raised
concerning the preclusive effect of the Manville Bankruptcy settlements with
insurers and resulting injunctions against claims. Those issues are now on
appeal to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
With respect to this litigation in particular, numerous factual and legal issues
remain to be resolved that are critical to the final result, the outcome of
which cannot be predicted with any reliability. These factors include: (a) the
legal sufficiency of the novel statutory and common law claims pled by the
claimants; (b) the applicability of claimants’ legal theories to insurers who
neither defended nor controlled the defense of certain policyholders; (c) the
possibility that certain of the claims are barred by various Statutes of
Limitation; (d) the fact that the imposition of duties would interfere with the
attorney client privilege and the contractual rights and responsibilities of the
parties to CNA’s insurance policies; and (e) the potential and relative
magnitude of liabilities of co-defendants. Accordingly, the extent of losses
beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not readily determinable at this
time.
On March
22, 2002, a direct action was filed in Montana (Pennock,
et al. v. Maryland Casualty, et al. First
Judicial District Court of Lewis & Clark County, Montana) by eight
individual plaintiffs (all employees of W.R. Grace & Co. (“W.R. Grace”)) and
their spouses against CNA, Maryland Casualty and the State of Montana. This
action alleges that the carriers failed to warn of or otherwise protect W.R.
Grace employees from the dangers of asbestos at a W.R. Grace vermiculite mining
facility in Libby, Montana. The Montana direct action is currently stayed
because of W.R. Grace’s pending bankruptcy. With respect to this litigation in
particular, numerous factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are
critical to the final result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any
reliability. These factors include: (a) the unclear nature and scope of any
alleged duties owed to people exposed to asbestos and the resulting uncertainty
as to the potential pool of potential claimants; (b) the potential application
of Statutes of Limitation to many of the claims which may be made depending on
the nature and scope of the alleged duties; (c) the unclear nature of the
required nexus between the acts of the defendants and the right of any
particular claimant to recovery; (d) the diseases and damages claimed by such
claimants; and (e) and the extent that such liability would be shared with other
potentially responsible parties; and, (f) the impact of bankruptcy proceedings
on claims resolution. Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that
may be accrued are not readily determinable at this time.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
CNA is
vigorously defending these and other cases and believes that it has meritorious
defenses to the claims asserted. However, there are numerous factual and legal
issues to be resolved in connection with these claims, and it is extremely
difficult to predict the outcome or ultimate financial exposure represented by
these matters. Adverse developments with respect to any of these matters could
have a material adverse effect on CNA’s business, insurer financial strength and
debt ratings, and the Company’s results of operations and/or
equity.
As a
result of the uncertainties and complexities involved, reserves for asbestos
claims cannot be estimated with traditional actuarial techniques that rely on
historical accident year loss development factors. In establishing asbestos
reserves, CNA evaluates the exposure presented by each insured. As part of this
evaluation, CNA considers the available insurance coverage; limits and
deductibles; the potential role of other insurance, particularly underlying
coverage below any CNA excess liability policies; and applicable coverage
defenses, including asbestos exclusions. Estimation of asbestos-related claim
and claim adjustment expense reserves involves a high degree of judgment on the
part of CNA management and consideration of many complex factors, including:
inconsistency of court decisions, jury attitudes and future court decisions;
specific policy provisions; allocation of liability among insurers and insureds;
missing policies and proof of coverage; the proliferation of bankruptcy
proceedings and attendant uncertainties; novel theories asserted by
policyholders and their counsel; the targeting of a broader range of businesses
and entities as defendants; the uncertainty as to which other insureds may be
targeted in the future and the uncertainties inherent in predicting the number
of future claims; volatility in claim numbers and settlement demands; increases
in the number of non-impaired claimants and the extent to which they can be
precluded from making claims; the efforts by insureds to obtain coverage not
subject to aggregate limits; the long latency period between asbestos exposure
and disease manifestation and the resulting potential for involvement of
multiple policy periods for individual claims; medical inflation trends; the mix
of asbestos-related diseases presented and the ability to recover
reinsurance.
Environmental
Pollution and Mass Tort
Environmental
pollution cleanup is the subject of both federal and state regulation. By some
estimates, there are thousands of potential waste sites subject to cleanup. The
insurance industry is involved in extensive litigation regarding coverage
issues. Judicial interpretations in many cases have expanded the scope of
coverage and liability beyond the original intent of the policies. The
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980
(“Superfund”) and comparable state statutes (“mini-Superfunds”) govern the
cleanup and restoration of toxic waste sites and formalize the concept of legal
liability for cleanup and restoration by “Potentially Responsible Parties”
(“PRPs”). Superfund and the mini-Superfunds establish mechanisms to pay for
cleanup of waste sites if PRPs fail to do so and assign liability to PRPs. The
extent of liability to be allocated to a PRP is dependent upon a variety of
factors. Further, the number of waste sites subject to cleanup is unknown. To
date, approximately 1,500 cleanup sites have been identified by the
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and included on its National Priorities
List (“NPL”). State authorities have designated many cleanup sites as
well.
Many
policyholders have made claims against various CNA insurance subsidiaries for
defense costs and indemnification in connection with environmental pollution
matters. The vast majority of these claims relate to accident years 1989 and
prior, which coincides with CNA’s adoption of the Simplified Commercial General
Liability coverage form, which includes what is referred to in the industry as
an absolute pollution exclusion. CNA and the insurance industry are disputing
coverage for many such claims. Key coverage issues include whether cleanup costs
are considered damages under the policies, trigger of coverage, allocation of
liability among triggered policies, applicability of pollution exclusions and
owned property exclusions, the potential for joint and several liability and the
definition of an occurrence. To date, courts have been inconsistent in their
rulings on these issues.
A number
of proposals to modify Superfund have been made by various parties. However, no
modifications were enacted by Congress during 2004 or 2003, and it is unclear
what positions Congress or the Administration will take and what legislation, if
any, will result in the future. If there is legislation, and in some
circumstances even if there is no legislation, the federal role in environmental
cleanup may be significantly reduced in favor of state action. Substantial
changes in the federal statute or the activity of the EPA may cause states to
reconsider their environmental cleanup statutes and regulations. There can be no
meaningful prediction of the pattern of regulation that would result or the
possible effect upon the Company’s results of operations or
equity.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, CNA carried approximately $497.0 million and $577.0
million of claim and claim adjustment expense reserves, net of reinsurance
recoverables, for reported and unreported environmental pollution and mass tort
claims. There was $1.0 million and $153.0 million of unfavorable environmental
pollution and mass tort net claim and claim adjustment expense reserve
development recorded for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003. There was
no environmental pollution and mass tort net claim and claim adjustment expense
reserve development recorded for the year ended December 31, 2002. Additionally,
CNA recorded $15.0 million of current accident year losses related to mass tort
in 2004. CNA paid environmental pollution-related claims and mass tort-related
claims, net of reinsurance recoveries, of $96.0 million, $93.0 million and
$116.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002.
CNA has
made resolution of large environmental pollution exposures a management
priority. CNA has resolved a number of its large environmental accounts by
negotiating settlement agreements. In its settlements, CNA sought to resolve
those exposures and obtain the broadest release language to avoid future claims
from the same policyholders seeking coverage for sites or claims that had not
emerged at the time CNA settled with its policyholder. While the terms of each
settlement agreement vary, CNA sought to obtain broad environmental releases
that include known and unknown sites, claims and policies. The broad scope of
the release provisions contained in those settlement agreements should, in many
cases, prevent future exposure from settled policyholders. It remains uncertain,
however, whether a court interpreting the language of the settlement agreements
will adhere to the intent of the parties and uphold the broad scope of language
of the agreements.
In 2003,
CNA observed a marked increase in silica claims frequency in Mississippi, where
plaintiff attorneys appear to have filed claims to avoid the effect of tort
reform. In 2004, silica claims frequency in Mississippi has moderated notably
due to implementation of tort reform measures and favorable court decisions. To
date, the most significant silica exposures identified included a relatively
small number of accounts with significant numbers of new claims reported in 2003
and that continued at a far lesser rate in 2004. Establishing claim and claim
adjustment expense reserves for silica claims is subject to uncertainties
because of disputes concerning medical causation with respect to certain
diseases, including lung cancer, geographical concentration of the lawsuits
asserting the claims, and the large rise in the total number of claims without
underlying epidemiological developments suggesting an increase in disease rates
or plaintiffs. Moreover, judicial interpretations regarding application of
various tort defenses, including application of various theories of joint and
several liabilities, impede CNA’s ability to estimate its ultimate liability for
such claims.
Net
Prior Year Development
2004
Net Prior Year Development
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $125.0 million, including $241.0 million of
unfavorable claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development and $116.0
million of favorable premium development, was recorded in 2004. The development
discussed below includes premium development due to its direct relationship to
claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development. The development
discussed below is the amount prior to consideration of any related reinsurance
allowance impacts.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the pretax 2004 net prior year development for the
Standard Lines, Specialty Lines and Other Insurance segments.
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
allocated
claim adjustment expense development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
the impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
105.0 |
|
$ |
75.0 |
|
$ |
23.0 |
|
$ |
203.0 |
|
APMT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55.0 |
|
|
55.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
75.0 |
|
|
78.0 |
|
|
258.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
before
impact of premium development |
|
|
113.0 |
|
|
58.0 |
|
|
87.0 |
|
|
258.0 |
|
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development,
excluding impact of corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aggregate
reinsurance treaties |
|
|
(96.0 |
) |
|
(33.0 |
) |
|
12.0 |
|
|
(117.0 |
) |
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
5.0 |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
1.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development |
|
|
(97.0 |
) |
|
(28.0 |
) |
|
9.0 |
|
|
(116.0 |
) |
Total
2004 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pretax) |
|
$ |
16.0 |
|
$ |
30.0 |
|
$ |
96.0 |
|
$ |
142.0 |
|
Also
included in the 2004 net prior year development is Life and Group Non-Core and
unallocated loss adjustment expense reserve development.
Standard
Lines
The gross
and net carried claim and claim adjustment expense reserves were $14,302.0
million and $9,303.0 million at December 31, 2004. The gross and net carried
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for Standard Lines were $14,282.0
million and $8,967.0 million at December 31, 2003. Unfavorable net prior year
development of $16.0 million, including $113.0 million of unfavorable claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and $97.0 million of
favorable premium development, was recorded in 2004 for Standard
Lines.
Approximately
$190.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense development recorded during 2004 resulted from increased
severity trends for workers compensation on large account policies primarily in
accident years 2002 and prior. Favorable premium development on retrospectively
rated large account policies of $50.0 million was recorded in relation to this
unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claims adjustment expense
development.
Approximately
$60.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development was recorded in involuntary pools in which CNA’s
participation is mandatory and primarily based on premium writings.
Approximately $15.0 million of this unfavorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense development was related to CNA’s share of the
National Workers Compensation Reinsurance Pool (“NWCRP”). During 2004, the NWCRP
reached an agreement with a former pool member to settle their pool liabilities
at an amount less than their established share. The result of this settlement
will be a higher allocation to the remaining pool members, including CNA. The
remainder of this unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense development was primarily due to increased severity trends
for workers compensation exposures in older years.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
Approximately
$60.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development resulted from the change in estimates due to increased
severity trends for excess and surplus business driven by excess liability,
liquor liability and coverages provided to apartment and condominium complexes.
Approximately $105.0 million of favorable net prior year claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense development resulted from reserve studies of commercial
auto liability policies and the liability portion of package policies. The
change was due to improvement in the severity and number of claims for this
business. Approximately $85.0 million of favorable net prior year claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense development was due to improvement in the
severity and number of claims for property coverages primarily in accident year
2003.
Other
favorable net prior year premium development of approximately $50.0 million
resulted primarily from higher audit and endorsement premiums on workers
compensation policies.
During
2004, CNA executed commutation agreements with several members of the Trenwick
Group. These commutations resulted in unfavorable claim and claim adjustment
expense reserve development which was more than offset by a release of a
previously established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance.
Specialty
Lines
The gross
and net carried claim and claim adjustment expense reserves were $4,860.0
million and $3,233.0 million at December 31, 2004. The gross and net carried
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for Specialty Lines were $4,200.0
million and $2,919.0 million at December 31, 2003. Unfavorable net prior year
development of $30.0 million, including $58.0 million of unfavorable net claim
and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and $28.0 million of
favorable premium development, was recorded in 2004 for Specialty Lines. CNA
executed commutation agreements with several members of the Trenwick Group
during 2004. These commutations resulted in unfavorable claim and claim
adjustment expense reserve development which was more than offset by a release
of a previously established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance.
Additionally, unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development resulted from the increased emergence of several
large directors and officers (“D&O”) claims, primarily in recent accident
years.
Other
Insurance
The gross
and net carried claim and claim adjustment expense reserves were $8,678.0
million and $3,176.0 million at December 31, 2004. The gross and net carried
claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for Other Insurance were $9,672.0
million and $3,737.0 million at December 31, 2003. Unfavorable net prior year
development of $96.0 million, including $87.0 million of net unfavorable claim
and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and $9.0 million of
unfavorable premium development was recorded in 2004 for Other
Insurance.
In 2004,
CNA executed commutation agreements with several members of the Trenwick Group.
These commutations resulted in unfavorable net prior claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense reserve development partially offset by a release of a
previously established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance. The remainder of
the unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development resulted from several other small commutations and increases
to net reserves due to reducing ceded losses, partially offset by a release of a
previously established allowance for uncollectible reinsurance.
2003
Net Prior Year Development
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $2,952.0 million, including $2,409.0 million of
unfavorable claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development and $543.0
million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2003. The
development discussed below includes premium development due to its direct
relationship to claim and claim adjustment expense reserved development. The
development discussed below is the amount prior to consideration of any related
reinsurance allowance impacts.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the pretax 2003 net prior year development for the
Standard Lines, Specialty Lines and Other Insurance segments.
|
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
claim
adjustment expense development excluding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the
impact of corporate aggregate reinsurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
1,424.0 |
|
$ |
313.0 |
|
$ |
355.0 |
|
$ |
2,092.0 |
|
APMT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
795.0 |
|
|
795.0 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,424.0 |
|
|
313.0 |
|
|
1,150.0 |
|
|
2,887.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(485.0 |
) |
|
(56.0 |
) |
|
(102.0 |
) |
|
(643.0 |
) |
Pretax
unfavorable net prior year development before |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
impact
of premium development |
|
|
939.0 |
|
|
257.0 |
|
|
1,048.0 |
|
|
2,244.0 |
|
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium development, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
211.0 |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
(32.0 |
) |
|
185.0 |
|
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
269.0 |
|
|
31.0 |
|
|
58.0 |
|
|
358.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable premium development |
|
|
480.0 |
|
|
37.0 |
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
543.0 |
|
Total
2003 unfavorable net prior year development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(pretax) |
|
$ |
1,419.0 |
|
$ |
294.0 |
|
$ |
1,074.0 |
|
$ |
2,787.0 |
|
Also
included in the 2003 net prior year development is Life and Group Non-Core and
unallocated loss adjustment expense reserve development.
Standard
Lines
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $1,419.0 million, including $939.0 million of
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$480.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2003 for
Standard Lines.
Approximately
$495.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense reserve development was recorded related to construction
defect claims in 2003. Based on analyses completed during 2003, it became
apparent that the assumptions regarding the number of claims, which were used to
estimate the expected losses, were no longer appropriate. The analyses indicated
that the actual number of claims reported during 2003 was higher than expected
primarily in states other than California. States where this activity is most
evident include Texas, Arizona, Nevada, Washington and Colorado. The number of
claims reported in states other than California during the first six months of
2003 was almost 35.0% higher than the last six months of 2002. The number of
claims reported during the last six months of 2002 increased by less than 10.0%
from the first six months of 2002. In California, claims resulting from
additional insured endorsements increased throughout 2003. Additional insured
endorsements are regularly included on policies provided to subcontractors. The
additional insured endorsement names general contractors and developers as
additional insureds covered by the policy. Current California case law
(Presley
Homes, Inc. v. American States Insurance Company, (June
11, 2001) 90 Cal App. 4th 571, 108
Cal. Rptr. 2d 686) specifies that an individual subcontractor with an additional
insured obligation has a duty to defend the additional insured in the entire
action, subject to contribution or recovery later. In addition, the additional
insured is allowed to choose one specific carrier to defend the entire action.
These additional insured claims can remain open for a longer period of time than
other construction defect claims because the additional insured defense
obligation can continue until the entire case is resolved. The adverse reserve
development recorded related to construction defect claims was primarily related
to accident years 1999 and prior.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
Unfavorable
net prior year development of approximately $595.0 million, including $518.0
million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve
development and $77.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded
for large account business including workers compensation coverages in 2003.
Many of the policies issued to these large accounts include provisions tailored
specifically to the individual accounts. Such provisions effectively result in
the insured being responsible for a portion of the loss. An example of such a
provision is a deductible arrangement where the insured reimburses CNA for all
amounts less than a specified dollar amount. These arrangements often limit the
aggregate amount the insured is required to reimburse CNA. Analyses indicated
that the provisions that result in the insured being responsible for a portion
would have less of an impact due to the larger size of claims as well as the
increased number of claims. The unfavorable net prior year development recorded
was primarily related to accident years 2000 and prior.
Approximately
$98.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003, resulted from a program covering
facilities that provide services to developmentally disabled individuals. This
net prior year development was due to an increase in the size of known claims
and increases in policyholder defense costs. With regard to average claim size,
updated data showed the average claim increasing at an annual rate of
approximately 20.0%. Prior data had shown average claim size to be level.
Similar to the average claim size, updated data showed the average policyholder
defense cost increasing at an annual rate of approximately 20.0%. Prior data had
shown average policyholder defense cost to be level. The net prior year
development recorded was primarily for accident years 2001 and
prior.
Approximately
$40.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was for excess workers compensation
coverages due to increasing severity. The increase in severity means that a
higher percentage of the total loss dollars will be CNA’s responsibility since
more claims will exceed the point at which CNA’s coverage begins. The net prior
year development recorded was primarily for accident year 2000.
Approximately
$73.0 million of unfavorable development recorded in 2003 was the result of a
commutation of all ceded reinsurance treaties with Gerling Global Group of
companies (“Gerling”), related to accident years 1999 through 2001, including
$41.0 million of unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
development and $32.0 million of unfavorable premium development. Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $40.0 million recorded in 2003 was related to a program
covering tow truck and ambulance operators, primarily impacting the 2001
accident year. CNA had previously expected that loss ratios for this business
would be similar to its middle market commercial automobile liability business.
During 2002, CNA ceased writing business under this program.
Approximately
$25.0 million of unfavorable net prior year premium development recorded in 2003
was related to 2003 reevaluation of losses ceded to a reinsurance contract
covering middle market workers compensation exposures. The reevaluation of
losses led to a new estimate of the number and dollar amount of claims that
would be ceded under the reinsurance contract. As a result of the reevaluation
of losses, CNA recorded approximately $36.0 million of unfavorable claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development, which was ceded under
the contract. The net prior year development was recorded for accident year
2000.
Approximately
$11.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded for the year ended December 31, 2003 was
related to directors and officers exposures in Global Lines. The unfavorable net
prior year reserve development was primarily due to securities class action
cases related to certain known corporate malfeasance cases and investment
banking firms. This net prior year development recorded was primarily for
accident years 2000 through 2002.
The
following premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment expense development
was recorded in the third quarter of 2003 as a result of the elimination of
deficiencies and redundancies in reserve positions within the segment.
Unfavorable net prior year development of approximately $210.0 million related
to small and middle market workers compensation exposures and approximately
$110.0 million related to excess and surplus (“E&S”) lines was recorded in
2003. Offsetting these increases was $210.0 million of favorable net prior year
development in the property line of business, including $79.0 million related to
the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center Disaster and related events (“WTC
event”).
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
Also,
offsetting the unfavorable premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development was a $216.0 million underwriting benefit from cessions to
corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties recorded in 2003. The benefit is
comprised of $485.0 million of ceded losses and $269.0 million of ceded premiums
for accident years 2000 and 2001.
Specialty
Lines
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $294.0 million, including $257.0 million of
unfavorable net claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
and $37.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2003 for
Specialty Lines.
Approximately
$50.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was related to increased severity
in excess coverages provided to facilities providing health care services. The
increase in reserves is based on reviews of individual accounts where claims had
been expected to be less than the point at which CNA’s coverage applies. The
current claim trends indicated that the layers of coverage provided by CNA would
be impacted. The net prior year development recorded was primarily for accident
years 2001 and prior.
Approximately
$68.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was for surety coverages primarily
related to workers compensation bond exposure from accident years 1990 and prior
and large losses for accident years 1999 and 2002. Approximately $21.0 million
of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense
reserve development was recorded in the surety line of business in 2003 as the
result of recent developments on one large claim.
Approximately
$75.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense reserve development recorded in 2003 was related to directors and
officers exposures in CNA Pro. The unfavorable net prior year reserve
development was primarily due to securities class action cases related to
certain known corporate malfeasance cases and investment banking firms. This net
prior year development recorded was primarily for accident years 2000 through
2002.
Approximately
$84.0 million of losses was recorded for during 2003 as the result of a
commutation of ceded reinsurance treaties with Gerling covering CNA Health Pro,
relating to accident years 1999 through 2002.
The
following development was recorded in 2003 as a result of the elimination of
deficiencies and redundancies in reserve positions within the segment. An
additional $50.0 million of unfavorable net prior year claim and allocated claim
adjustment expense reserve development was recorded related to medical
malpractice and long term care facilities. Partially offsetting this unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
was a $25.0 million underwriting benefit from cessions to corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties. The benefit was comprised of $56.0 million of ceded losses
and $31.0 million of ceded premiums for accident years 2000 and 2001. See Note
19 for further discussion of CNA’s aggregate reinsurance treaties.
Other
Insurance
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $1,074.0 million, including $1,048.0 million of
net unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
and $26.0 million of unfavorable premium development was recorded in 2003 for
Other Insurance.
This
development was primarily driven by $795.0 million of unfavorable net prior year
claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development related to
APMT.
In
addition to APMT development, there was unfavorable net prior year development
recorded in 2003 related to CNA Re of $149.0 million and $75.0 million related
to voluntary pools.
Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $25.0 million was recorded in CNA Re primarily for directors
and officers exposures. The unfavorable net prior year development was a result
of a claims review that was completed during the second quarter of 2003. The
unfavorable net prior year development was primarily due to securities class
action cases related to certain known corporate
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
malfeasance
cases and investment banking firms. The unfavorable net prior year development
recorded was for accident years 2000 and 2001.
The CNA
Re unfavorable net prior year development for 2003 was also due to a general
change in the pattern of how losses emerged over time as reported by the
companies that purchased reinsurance from CNA Re. Losses have continued to show
large increases for accident years in the late 1990s and into 2000 and 2001.
These increases are greater than the increases indicated by patterns from older
accident years and had a similar effect on several lines of business.
Approximately $67.0 million unfavorable net prior year development recorded in
2003 was related to proportional liability exposures, primarily from multi-line
and umbrella treaties in accident years 1997 through 2001. Approximately $32.0
million of unfavorable net prior year development recorded in 2003 was related
to assumed financial reinsurance for accident years 2001 and prior and
approximately $24.0 million of unfavorable net prior year development was
related to professional liability exposures in accident years 2001 and prior.
Additionally,
CNA Re recorded $15.0 million of unfavorable net prior year development for
construction defect related exposures. Because of the unique nature of this
exposure, losses have not followed expected development patterns. The continued
reporting of claims in California, the increase in the number of claims from
states other than California and a review of individual ceding companies’
exposure to this type of claim resulted in an increase in the estimated
reserve.
The
following premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment expense development,
was recorded in 2003 as a result of the elimination of deficiencies and
redundancies in the reserve positions of individual products within CNA Re.
Unfavorable net prior year premium and claim and allocated claim adjustment
expense development of approximately $42.0 million related to Surety exposures,
$32.0 million related to excess of loss liability exposures and $12.0 million
related to facultative liability exposures were recorded in the third quarter of
2003.
Offsetting
this unfavorable net prior year development was approximately $55.0 million of
favorable net prior year development related to the WTC event as well as a $45.0
million underwriting benefit from cessions to corporate aggregate reinsurance
treaties recorded in 2003. The benefit from cessions to the corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties was comprised of $102.0 million of ceded losses and $57.0
million of ceded premiums for accident years 2000 and 2001.
Unfavorable
net prior year claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development
of approximately $75.0 million was recorded during the third quarter of 2003
related to an adverse arbitration decision involving a single large property and
business interruption loss on a voluntary insurance pool. The decision was
rendered against a voluntary insurance pool in which CNA was a participant. The
loss was caused by a fire which occurred in 1995. CNA no longer participates in
this pool.
2002
Net Prior Year Development
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $126.0 million, including $35.0 million of
unfavorable claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development and $91.0
million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2002. The
development discussed below includes premium development due to its direct
relationship to claim and claim adjustment expense reserve development. The
development discussed below is the amount prior to consideration of any related
reinsurance allowance impacts.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
The
following table summarizes the pretax 2002 net prior year development for the
Standard Lines, Specialty Lines and Other Insurance segments.
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
Standard |
|
Specialty |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Lines |
|
Lines |
|
Insurance |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) net prior year claim and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
allocated
claim adjustment expense development |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
the impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty, excluding APMT |
|
$ |
(191.0 |
) |
$ |
55.0 |
|
$ |
248.0 |
|
$ |
112.0 |
|
Ceded
losses related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
(93.0 |
) |
|
(148.0 |
) |
Pretax
(favorable) unfavorable net prior year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development
before impact of premium |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development |
|
|
(205.0 |
) |
|
14.0 |
|
|
155.0 |
|
|
(36.0 |
) |
Unfavorable
(favorable) premium development, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
excluding
impact of corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
76.0 |
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
(103.0 |
) |
|
(10.0 |
) |
Ceded
premiums related to corporate aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reinsurance
treaties |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
29.0 |
|
|
62.0 |
|
|
101.0 |
|
Pretax
unfavorable (favorable) premium development |
|
|
86.0 |
|
|
46.0 |
|
|
(41.0 |
) |
|
91.0 |
|
Total
2002 unfavorable (favorable) net prior year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
development
(pretax) |
|
$ |
(119.0 |
) |
$ |
60.0 |
|
$ |
114.0 |
|
$ |
55.0 |
|
Also
included in the 2002 net prior year development is Life and Group Non-Core and
unallocated loss adjustment expense reserve development.
Standard
Lines
Favorable
net prior year development of $119.0 million, including $205.0 million of
favorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$86.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2002 for
Standard Lines. Approximately $140.0 million of favorable net prior year
development was attributable to participation in the Workers Compensation
Reinsurance Bureau (“WCRB”), a reinsurance pool, and residual markets. The
favorable net prior year development for WCRB was the result of information
received from the WCRB that reported the results of a recent actuarial review.
This information indicated that CNA’s net required reserves for accident years
1970 through 1996 were $60.0 million less than the carried reserves. In
addition, during 2002, CNA commuted accident years 1965 through 1969 for a
payment of approximately $5.0 million to cover carried reserves of approximately
$13.0 million, resulting in further favorable net prior year development of $8.0
million. The favorable residual market net prior year development was the result
of lower than expected paid loss activity during recent periods for accident
years dating back to 1984. The paid losses during 2002 on prior accident years
were approximately 60.0% of the previously expected amount.
In
addition, Standard Lines had favorable net prior year development, primarily in
the package liability and auto liability lines of business due to new claims
initiatives. These new claims initiatives, which included specialized training
on specific areas of the claims adjudication process, enhanced claims litigation
management, enhanced adjuster-level metrics to monitor performance and more
focused metric-based claim file review and oversight, are expected to produce
significant reductions in ultimate claim costs. Based on management’s best
estimate of the reduction in ultimate claim costs, approximately $100.0 million
of favorable prior year reserve development was recorded in 2002. Approximately
one-half of this favorable net prior year development was recorded in accident
years prior to 1999, with the remainder of the favorable net prior year
development recorded in accident years 1999 to 2001.
Approximately
$50.0 million of favorable net prior year development during 2002 was recorded
in commercial automobile liability. Most of the favorable net prior year
development was from accident year 2000. An actuarial
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
review
completed during 2002 showed that underwriting actions had resulted in reducing
the number of commercial automobile liability claims for recent accident years,
especially the number of large losses.
Approximately
$45.0 million of favorable net prior year development was recorded in property
lines during 2002. The favorable net prior year development was principally from
accident years 1999 through 2001, and was the result of the low number of large
losses in recent years. Although property claims are generally reported
relatively quickly, determining the ultimate cost of the claim can involve a
significant amount of time between the occurrence of the claim and
settlement.
Offsetting
these favorable net prior year reserve development was approximately $100.0
million of unfavorable premium development in middle market workers
compensation, approximately $70.0 million of unfavorable net prior year
development in programs written in CNA E&S, approximately $30.0 million of
unfavorable net prior year development on a contractors account package policy
program and approximately $20.0 million of unfavorable net prior year
development on middle market general liability coverages. The unfavorable net
prior year development on workers compensation was principally due to additional
reinsurance premiums for accident years 1999 through 2001.
A CNA
E&S program, covering facilities that provide services to developmentally
disabled individuals, accounts for approximately $50.0 million of the
unfavorable net prior year development. The unfavorable net prior year
development was due to an increase in the size of known claims and increases in
policyholder defense costs. These increases became apparent as the result of an
actuarial review completed during 2002, with most of the development recorded in
accident years 1999 and 2000. The other program which contributed to the CNA
E&S unfavorable net prior year development covers tow truck and ambulance
operators in the 2000 and 2001 accident years. This program was started in 1999.
CNA expected that loss ratios for this business would be similar to its middle
market commercial automobile liability business. Reviews completed during the
year resulted in estimated loss ratios on the tow truck and ambulance business
that were 25 points higher than the middle market commercial automobile
liability loss ratios.
The
marine business recorded unfavorable net prior year development of approximately
$15.0 million during 2002. The remaining unfavorable net prior year development
for the marine business was due principally to unfavorable net prior year
development on hull and liability coverages from accident years 1999 and 2000
offset by favorable reserve development on cargo coverages recorded for accident
year 2001. Reviews completed during 2002 showed additional reported losses on
individual large accounts and other bluewater business that drove the
unfavorable hull and liability reserve development.
The
unfavorable net prior year development on contractors account package policies
was the result of an actuarial review completed during 2002. Since this program
is no longer being written, CNA expected that the change in reported losses
would decrease each quarterly period. However, in then recent quarterly periods,
the change in reported losses was higher than prior quarters, resulting in the
unfavorable net prior year development.
Specialty
Lines
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $60.0 million, including $14.0 million of
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$46.0 million of unfavorable premium development, was recorded in 2002 for
Specialty Lines. Unfavorable net prior year development of approximately $180.0
million was recorded for CNA HealthPro in 2002 and was driven principally by
medical malpractice excess products provided to hospitals and physicians and
coverages provided to long term care facilities, principally national for-profit
nursing homes. Approximately $100.0 million of the unfavorable net prior year
development was related to assumed excess products and loss portfolio transfers,
and was primarily driven by unexpected increases in the number of excess claims
in accident years 1999 and 2000. The percentage of total claims greater than
$1.0 million has increased by 33.0%, from less than 3.0% of all claims to more
than 4.0% of all claims. CNA HealthPro no longer writes assumed excess products
and loss portfolio transfers.
Approximately
$50.0 million of the unfavorable net prior year unfavorable development was
related to long term care facilities. The unfavorable net prior year development
principally impacted accident years 1997 through 2000. The average value of
claims closed during the first several months of 2002 increased by more than
50.0% when compared to claims closed during 2001. In response to those trends,
CNA HealthPro has reduced its writings of
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
national
for-profit nursing home chains. Excess products provided to healthcare
institutions and physician coverages in a limited number of states were
responsible for the remaining development in CNA HealthPro. The unfavorable net
prior year development on excess products provided to institutions for accident
years 1996 through 1999 resulted from increases in the size of claims
experienced by these institutions. Due to the increase in the size of claims,
more claims were exceeding the point at which these excess products apply. The
unfavorable net prior year development on physician coverages was recorded for
accident years 1999 through 2001 in Oregon, California, Arizona and Nevada. The
average claim size in these states has increased by 20.0%, driving the change in
losses.
Offsetting
this unfavorable net prior year development was favorable net prior year
development in CNA Pro and for Enron-related exposures. Programs providing
professional liability coverage to accountants, lawyers and realtors primarily
drove favorable net prior year development of approximately $110.0 million in
CNA Pro. Reviews of this business completed during 2002 indicated little
activity for older accident years (principally prior to 1999), which reduced the
need for reserves on these years. The reported losses on these programs for
accident years prior to 1999 increased by approximately $5.0 million during
2002. This increase compared to the total reserve at the beginning of 2002 of
approximately $180.0 million, net of reinsurance. Additionally, favorable net
prior year development of $20.0 million was associated with a settlement with
Enron. CNA had established a $20.0 million reserve for accident year 2001 for an
excess layer associated with Enron related surety losses; however the case was
settled for less than the attachment point of this excess layer.
A $12.0
million underwriting benefit was recorded for the corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties in 2002, comprised of $41.0 million of ceded losses and
$29.0 million of ceded premiums for accident year 2001.
Other
Insurance
Unfavorable
net prior year development of $114.0 million, including $155.0 million of
unfavorable claim and allocated claim adjustment expense reserve development and
$41.0 million of favorable premium development, was recorded in 2002 for Other
Insurance. The development recorded in 2002 consisted primarily of CNA Re
development.
The
unfavorable net prior year development recorded in 2002 related primarily to CNA
Re and was the result of an actuarial review completed during 2002 and was
primarily recorded in the directors and officers, professional liability errors
and omissions, and surety lines of business. Several large losses, as well as
continued increases in the overall average size of claims for these lines, have
resulted in higher than expected loss ratios.
Additionally,
during 2002, CNA Re revised its estimate of premiums and losses related to the
WTC event. In estimating CNA Re’s WTC event losses, CNA performed a
treaty-by-treaty analysis of exposure. CNA’s original loss estimate was based on
a number of assumptions including the loss to the industry, the loss to
individual lines of business and the market share of CNA Re’s cedants.
Information that became available in the first quarter of 2002 resulted in CNA
Re increasing its estimate of WTC event related premiums and losses on its
property facultative and property catastrophe business. The impact of increasing
the estimate of gross WTC event losses by $144.0 million was fully offset on a
net of reinsurance basis (before the impact of the CCC Cover) by higher
reinstatement premiums and a reduction of return premiums. Approximately $95.0
million of CNA Re’s net WTC event loss estimate was attributable to CNA Re U.K.,
which was sold in 2002.
A $32.0
million underwriting benefit was recorded for CNA Re for the corporate aggregate
reinsurance treaties in 2002. The benefit was comprised of $93.0 million of
ceded losses and $62.0 million of ceded premiums for accident year
2001.
Concerns
about reinsurance security, prompted in part by rating agency downgrades of
several reinsurers’ financial strength ratings, have impacted the reinsurance
marketplace. Many ceding companies have sought provisions for the
collateralization of assumed reserves in the event of a financial strength
ratings downgrade or other triggers. Before exiting the reinsurance market, CNA
Re had been impacted by this trend and had entered into several contracts with
rating or other triggers. Additionally, personal insurance unfavorable net prior
year development of $35.0 million was recorded in 2002 on accident years 1997
through 1999. The unfavorable net prior year development was principally due to
the then continuing policyholder defense costs associated with remaining open
personal insurance claims. The unfavorable net prior year development was
partially offset by favorable reserve development on other
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
9. Claim and Claim Adjustment Expense Reserves -
(Continued) |
run-off
business driven principally by financial and mortgage guarantee coverages from
accident years 1997 and prior. The favorable net prior year development on
financial and mortgage guarantee coverages resulted from a review of the
underlying exposures and the outstanding losses, which showed that salvage and
subrogation continues to be collected on these types of claims, thereby reducing
estimated future losses net of anticipated reinsurance recoveries.
Note
10. Leases
The
Company’s hotels in some instances are constructed on leased land. Other leases
cover office facilities, computer and transportation equipment. Rent expense
amounted to $101.4 million, $94.9 million and $110.2 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The table below presents the
future minimum lease payments to be made under non-cancelable operating leases
along with lease and sublease minimum receipts to be received on owned and
leased properties.
|
|
Future
Minimum Lease |
|
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
Payments |
|
Receipts |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
$ |
75.2 |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
2006 |
|
|
65.0 |
|
|
2.7 |
|
2007 |
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
1.5 |
|
2008 |
|
|
42.9 |
|
|
0.9 |
|
2009 |
|
|
33.4 |
|
|
0.9 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
135.0 |
|
|
3.9 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
407.4 |
|
$ |
13.9 |
|
CNA has
provided parent company guarantees, which expire in 2015, related to lease
obligations of certain subsidiaries. Certain of those subsidiaries have been
sold; however, the lease obligation guarantees remain in effect. CNA would be
required to remit prompt payment on leases in question if the primary obligor
fails to observe and perform its covenants under the lease agreements. The
maximum potential amount of future payments that CNA could be required to pay
under these guarantees is approximately $8.0 million at December 31,
2004.
Note
11. Income Taxes
The
Company and its eligible subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax
return. The Company has entered into a separate tax allocation agreement with
CNA, a majority-owned subsidiary in which its ownership exceeds 80%. The
agreement provides that the Company will (i) pay to CNA the amount, if any, by
which the Company’s consolidated federal income tax is reduced by virtue of
inclusion of CNA in the Company’s return, or (ii) be paid by CNA an amount, if
any, equal to the federal income tax that would have been payable by CNA if it
had filed a separate consolidated return. The agreement may be canceled by
either of the parties upon thirty days’ written notice.
The
Company’s consolidated federal income tax returns have been settled with the
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) through the 1997 tax year. The federal income
tax returns for 1998 through 2001, including related carryback claims and prior
claims for refund, have been examined and are currently under review by the
Joint Committee on Taxation. Although the Company’s ultimate tax obligation for
these years is subject to review and final determination, in the opinion of
management, the outcome of the review and final determination of the Company’s
ultimate tax obligation will not have a material effect on the financial
condition or results of operations of the Company. Pending the outcome of the
review and final determination of the Company’s tax obligations for these years,
interest on any tax refunds net of any tax deficiencies is subject to
computation, review and final determination. The amount of any net refund
interest ultimately due to the Company may have a material impact on the results
of operations in the period in which the review is finalized. The federal income
tax returns for 2002 and 2003 are currently under examination by the IRS. The
Company believes the outcome of the 2002 and 2003 examinations will not have a
material effect on its financial condition or results of
operations.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
11. Income Taxes - (Continued) |
Total
income tax expense (benefit) for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, was different than the amounts of $637.7 million, $(482.4) million and
$574.2 million, computed by applying the statutory U.S. federal income tax rate
of 35% to income before income taxes and minority interest for each of the
years.
A
reconciliation between the statutory federal income tax rate and the Company’s
effective income tax rate as a percentage of income (loss) before income tax
expense (benefit) and minority interest is as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statutory
rate |
|
|
35 |
% |
|
(35 |
)% |
|
35 |
% |
Increase
(decrease) in income tax rate resulting from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exempt
interest and dividends received deduction |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
(7 |
) |
|
(3 |
) |
State
and city income taxes |
|
|
3 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
3 |
|
Other |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
Effective
income tax rate |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
(39 |
)% |
|
35 |
% |
Provision
has been made for the expected U.S. federal income tax liabilities applicable to
undistributed earnings of subsidiaries, except for certain subsidiaries for
which the Company intends to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely, or
recover such undistributed earnings tax-free.
The
current and deferred components of income tax expense (benefit), excluding taxes
on discontinued operations and the cumulative effect of the changes in
accounting principles, are as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
$ |
425.8 |
|
$ |
(747.0 |
) |
$ |
483.1 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
40.9 |
|
|
167.7 |
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
State
and city: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
54.7 |
|
|
59.1 |
|
|
86.3 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
(21.2 |
) |
|
(0.6 |
) |
Foreign |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
16.0 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
533.8 |
|
$ |
(534.1 |
) |
$ |
579.8 |
|
Deferred
tax assets (liabilities) are as follows:
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty claim and claim adjustment expense reserves |
|
$ |
701.0 |
|
$ |
669.0 |
|
Unearned
premium reserves |
|
|
233.0 |
|
|
288.0 |
|
Life
reserve differences |
|
|
192.0 |
|
|
183.0 |
|
Other
insurance reserves |
|
|
28.0 |
|
|
30.0 |
|
Receivables
|
|
|
309.0 |
|
|
288.0 |
|
Tobacco
settlements |
|
|
414.8 |
|
|
410.6 |
|
Employee
benefits |
|
|
294.5 |
|
|
240.1 |
|
Life
settlement contracts |
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
109.0 |
|
Investment
valuation differences |
|
|
149.0 |
|
|
56.0 |
|
Net
operating loss and tax credit carried forward |
|
|
166.1 |
|
|
260.4 |
|
Other |
|
|
429.3 |
|
|
366.2 |
|
Gross
deferred tax assets |
|
|
3,016.7 |
|
|
2,900.3 |
|
Valuation
allowance |
|
|
(43.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Deferred
tax assets after valuation allowance |
|
|
2,973.4 |
|
|
2,900.3 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
11. Income Taxes - (Continued) |
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
acquisition costs |
|
$ |
(691.0 |
) |
$ |
(769.0 |
) |
Net
unrealized gains |
|
|
(580.1 |
) |
|
(676.0 |
) |
Property
plant and equipment |
|
|
(515.7 |
) |
|
(474.1 |
) |
Foreign
and other affiliates |
|
|
(231.3 |
) |
|
(236.4 |
) |
Other
liabilities |
|
|
(330.4 |
) |
|
(214.6 |
) |
Gross
deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
(2,348.5 |
) |
|
(2,370.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
deferred tax asset |
|
$ |
624.9 |
|
$ |
530.2 |
|
Although
realization of deferred tax assets is not assured, management believes it is
more likely than not that net deferred tax assets, with the exception of the CNA
and Diamond Offshore valuation allowances noted below, will be realized through
future earnings, including but not limited to the generation of future income
from continuing operations and reversal of existing temporary differences and
available tax planning strategies. In 2004, CNA established a valuation
allowance of $33.0 million relating to foreign net operating losses due to the
uncertainty in the ability of its foreign subsidiaries to generate future
income. Diamond Offshore, which is not included in the Company’s consolidated
federal income tax return, maintained a valuation allowance of $10.3 million and
$10.2 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, on foreign tax credit
carryforwards that begin expiring in 2011.
At
December 31, 2004, Diamond Offshore has a net operating loss carryforward of
approximately $213.9 million which will expire by 2024. It is expected that the
net operating loss carryforward will be fully utilized by Diamond Offshore
primarily from the future reversal of existing taxable temporary
differences.
On
October 22, 2004, the American Jobs Creation Act (“AJCA”) was signed into law.
The AJCA includes a provision allowing a deduction of 85% for certain foreign
earnings that are repatriated. The AJCA provides the Company the opportunity to
elect to apply this provision to qualifying earnings repatriations in 2005.
Based on the existing language in the AJCA and current guidance, the Company
does not expect to repatriate undistributed earnings. To the extent Congress or
the Treasury Department provides additional clarifying language on key elements
of the provision, the Company will consider the effects, if any, of such
information and will re-evaluate, as necessary, its intentions with respect to
the repatriation of certain foreign earnings. Should the Company, upon
consideration of any such potential clarifying language, ultimately elect to
apply the repatriation provision of the AJCA, the Company does not expect that
the impact of such an election would be material to its results of
operations.
Note
12. Debt
|
|
|
|
Unamortized |
|
|
|
Short-Term |
|
Long-Term |
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Principal |
|
Discount |
|
Net |
|
Debt |
|
Debt |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation |
|
$ |
2,325.0 |
|
$ |
19.7 |
|
$ |
2,305.3 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,305.3 |
|
CNA
Financial |
|
|
2,267.4 |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
2,257.4 |
|
$ |
530.9 |
|
|
1,726.5 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
1,194.0 |
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
1,177.1 |
|
|
477.1 |
|
|
700.0 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
1,110.0 |
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
1,106.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,106.1 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
144.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
144.4 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
142.3 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,040.8 |
|
$ |
50.5 |
|
$ |
6,990.3 |
|
$ |
1,010.1 |
|
$ |
5,980.2 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
12. Debt - (Continued) |
December
31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation (Parent Company): |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
6.8%
notes due 2006 (effective interest rate of 6.8%) (authorized,
$300) |
|
$ |
300.0 |
|
$ |
300.0 |
|
8.9%
debentures due 2011 (effective interest rate of 9.0%) (authorized,
$175) |
|
|
175.0 |
|
|
175.0 |
|
5.3%
notes due 2016 (effective interest rate of 5.4%) (authorized, $300)
(a) |
|
|
300.0 |
|
|
|
|
7.6%
notes due 2023 (effective interest rate of 7.8%) (authorized, $300)
|
|
|
|
|
|
300.0 |
|
7.0%
notes due 2023 (effective interest rate of 7.2%) (authorized, $400)
(b) |
|
|
400.0 |
|
|
400.0 |
|
Subordinated: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1%
exchangeable subordinated notes due 2007 (effective interest
rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
3.4%) (authorized, $1,150) (c) |
|
|
1,150.0 |
|
|
1,150.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5%
notes due 2005 (effective interest rate of 6.6%) (authorized,
$500) |
|
|
492.8 |
|
|
492.8 |
|
6.8%
notes due 2006 (effective interest rate of 6.8%) (authorized,
$250) |
|
|
250.0 |
|
|
250.0 |
|
6.5%
notes due 2008 (effective interest rate of 6.6%) (authorized,
$150) |
|
|
150.0 |
|
|
150.0 |
|
6.6%
notes due 2008 (effective interest rate of 6.7%) (authorized,
$200) |
|
|
200.0 |
|
|
200.0 |
|
8.4%
notes due 2012 (effective interest rate of 8.6%) (authorized,
$100) |
|
|
69.6 |
|
|
69.6 |
|
5.9%
notes due 2014 (effective interest rate of 6.0%) (authorized
$549) |
|
|
549.0 |
|
|
|
|
7.0%
notes due 2018 (effective interest rate of 7.1%) (authorized,
$150) |
|
|
150.0 |
|
|
150.0 |
|
7.3%
debentures due 2023 (effective interest rate of 7.3%) (authorized,
$250) |
|
|
243.0 |
|
|
243.0 |
|
5.1%
debentures due 2034 (effective interest rate of 5.1%) (authorized,
$31) |
|
|
30.5 |
|
|
|
|
Revolving
credit facility due 2004 (effective interest rate of 2.3%) |
|
|
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
Term
loan due 2005 (effective interest rate of 2.8% and 2.8%) |
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
20.0 |
|
Revolving
credit facility due 2005 (effective interest rate of 3.5% and
2.6%) |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
30.0 |
|
2.5%
Corporate note due 2006 (effective interest rate of 2.5%) |
|
|
50.0 |
|
|
|
|
Other
senior debt (effective interest rates approximate 7.5% and
7.8%) |
|
|
47.5 |
|
|
56.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diamond
Offshore: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2%
notes, due 2014 (effective interest rate of 5.2%) (authorized, $250)
(d) |
|
|
250.0 |
|
|
|
|
Zero
coupon convertible debentures due 2020, net of discount of
$333.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
$349.8 (effective interest rate of 3.6%) (e) |
|
|
471.2 |
|
|
455.2 |
|
1.5%
convertible senior debentures due 2031 (effective interest rate of
1.6%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(authorized
$460) (f) |
|
|
460.0 |
|
|
460.0 |
|
Subordinated
debt due 2005 (effective interest rate of 7.1%) |
|
|
12.8 |
|
|
24.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term loan due 2005 (effective interest rate of 3.3%) |
|
|
575.0 |
|
|
|
|
4.6%
notes due 2015 (effective interest rate of 5.1%) (authorized,
$250) |
|
|
250.0 |
|
|
250.0 |
|
7.3%
debentures due 2027 (effective interest rate of 8.1%) (authorized,
$100) |
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
100.0 |
|
Other
(effective interest rate of 9.0%) |
|
|
|
|
|
17.3 |
|
Texas
Gas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.2%
notes due 2018 (effective interest rate of 5.4%) (authorized,
$185) |
|
|
185.0 |
|
|
185.0 |
|
Loews
Hotels: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
debt, principally mortgages (effective interest rates
approximate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1%
and 4.1%) |
|
|
144.4 |
|
|
146.5 |
|
|
|
|
7,040.8 |
|
|
5,875.3 |
|
Less
unamortized discount |
|
|
50.5 |
|
|
55.1 |
|
Debt |
|
$ |
6,990.3 |
|
$ |
5,820.2 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
12. Debt - (Continued) |
__________
(a) |
Redeemable
in whole or in part at the greater of the principal amount or the net
present value of scheduled payments discounted at the specified treasury
rate plus 25 basis points. |
(b) |
The
Company announced its intention to redeem these notes on February 28, 2005
at 102.1%. |
(c) |
The
notes are exchangeable into 15.376 shares of Diamond Offshore’s common
stock per one thousand dollars principal amount of notes, at a price of
$65.04 per share. Redeemable in whole or in part at 100.9%, and decreasing
percentages annually. |
(d) |
Redeemable
in whole or in part at the greater of the principal amount or the net
present value of scheduled payments discounted at the specified treasury
rate plus 20 basis points. |
(e) |
The
debentures are convertible into Diamond Offshore’s common stock at the
rate of 8.6075 shares per one thousand dollars principal amount, subject
to adjustment. Each debenture will be purchased by Diamond Offshore at the
option of the holder on the fifth, tenth and fifteenth anniversaries of
issuance at the accreted value through the date of repurchase. The
debentures were issued on June 6, 2000. Diamond Offshore, at its option,
may elect to pay the purchase price in cash or shares of common stock, or
in certain combinations thereof. The debentures are redeemable at the
option of Diamond Offshore at any time after June 6, 2005, at prices which
reflect a yield of 3.5% to the holder. |
(f) |
The
debentures are convertible into Diamond Offshore’s common stock at an
initial conversion rate of 20.3978 shares per one thousand dollars
principal amount, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances. Upon
conversion, Diamond Offshore has the right to deliver cash in lieu of
shares of its common stock. Diamond Offshore may redeem all or a portion
of the debentures at any time on or after April 15, 2008 at a price equal
to 100% of the principal amount. Holders may require Diamond Offshore to
purchase all or a portion of the debentures on April 15, 2008, at a price
equal to 100% of the principal amount. Diamond Offshore, at its option,
may elect to pay the purchase price in cash or shares of common stock, or
in certain combinations thereof. |
On March
11, 2004 the Company issued $300.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.3%
notes due March 15, 2016. These notes were issued at 99.805% of principal amount
and resulted in net proceeds to the Company of $297.1 million.
On April
12, 2004, the Company redeemed $300.0 million principal amount of its 7.6% notes
due 2023.
On August
27, 2004, Diamond Offshore issued $250.0 million aggregate principal amount of
5.2% senior notes due September 1, 2014. These notes were issued at 99.759% of
the principal amount and resulted in net proceeds to Diamond Offshore of $247.8
million.
Diamond
Offshore will pay contingent interest to holders of the $460.0 million principal
amount of 1.5% convertible senior debentures (the “1.5% Debentures”) during any
six-month period commencing after April 15, 2008 if the average market price of
the 1.5% Debentures for a measurement period preceding that six-month period
equals 120% or more of the principal amount of such 1.5% Debentures and Diamond
Offshore pays a regular cash dividend during the six-month period. The
contingent interest payable per $1,000 principal amount of 1.5% Debentures in
respect of any quarterly period will equal 50% of regular cash dividends paid by
Diamond Offshore per share on its common stock during that quarterly period
multiplied by the conversion rate.
The
$575.0 million interim term loan due 2005 was made in connection with Boardwalk
Pipelines’ acquisition of Gulf South. On January 18, 2005, Boardwalk Pipelines
issued $300.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.5% notes due 2017 and Gulf
South issued $275.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.1% notes due 2015.
The proceeds from these notes were used to repay the $575.0 interim
loan.
As of
December 31, 2004, the aggregate accreted value of Diamond Offshore’s Zero
Coupon Debentures was $471.2 million. Since the holders of the debentures have
the right to require Diamond Offshore to repurchase the debentures within the
current operating cycle, the debentures are classified as short-term
debt.
On
January 27, 2005, the Company completed the sale of $100.0 million aggregate
principal amount of 5.3% senior notes due 2016 and $300.0 million aggregate
principal amount of 6.0% notes due 2035. The 2016 notes constituted a further
issuance of the Company’s outstanding 5.3% notes due 2016 issued on March 11,
2004 in the aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million. Upon completion of the
sale, the aggregate principal amount of outstanding notes was $400.0 million.
The 2035 notes constituted a new series of securities. The net proceeds from the
sale will be used to redeem the $400.0 million aggregate principal amount of
7.0% senior notes due 2023 in the first quarter of 2005.
In
December of 2004, CNA acquired three buildings which previously were leased
under capital leases. As part of that transaction, CNA directly assumed the
underlying debt obligation which the lessor of the three buildings
owed.
Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements |
Note
12. Debt - (Continued) |
On
December 15, 2004 CNA completed its sale of $549.0 million of 5.9% ten-year
senior notes in a public offering. During 2004, Encompass Insurance Company of
America (“EICA”), a wholly owned subsidiary of CNA, sold a $50.0 million surplus
note to Allstate Insurance Company. The EICA note bears interest semi-annually
at 2.5% per annum and is due on March 31, 2006. CNA plans to seek approval from
the insurance regulatory authority for repayment of the surplus note at
maturity.
In May of
2004, CNA Surety, a 64.0% owned and consolidated subsidiary of CNA, issued
privately, through a wholly-owned trust, $30.0 million of preferred securities
through two pooled transactions. These securities bear interest at a rate of
LIBOR plus 337.5 basis points with a thirty-year term and are redeemable after
five years. The securities were issued by CNA Surety Capital Trust I (“Issuer
Trust”). The sole asset of the Issuer Trust consists of a $31.0 million junior
subordinated debenture issued by CNA Surety to the Issuer Trust. The
subordinated debenture bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus 337.5 basis points
and matures in April of 2034. As of December 31, 2004, the interest rate on the
junior subordinated debenture was 5.7%.
On
September 30, 2003, CNA Surety entered into a $50.0 million credit agreement,
which consisted of a $30.0 million two-year revolving credit facility and a
$20.0 million two-year term loan, with semi-annual principal payments of $5.0
million. The credit agreement is an amendment to a $65.0 million credit
agreement, extending the revolving loan termination date from September 30, 2003
to September 30, 2005. The new revolving credit facility was fully utilized at
inception. In June of 2004, CNA Surety reduced the outstanding borrowings under
the credit facility by $10.0 million, and in September of 2004, CNA Surety
increased the outstanding borrowings under the credit facility by $5.0 million
to fund the semi-annual term loan payment.
Under the
amended credit facility agreement, CNA Surety pays a facility fee of 35.0 basis
points on the revolving credit portion of the facility, interest at LIBOR plus
90.0 basis points, and for utilization greater than 50.0% of the amount
available to borrow an additional fee of 5.0 basis points. On the term loan, CNA
Surety pays interest at LIBOR plus 62.5 basis points. At December 31, 2004, the
weighted-average interest rate on the $35.0 million of outstanding borrowings
under the credit agreement, including facility fees and utilization fees, was
3.3%. Effective January 30, 2003, CNA Surety entered into a swap agreement on
the term loan portion of the agreement which uses the 3-month LIBOR to determine
the swap increment. As a result, the effective interest rate on the $10.0
million in outstanding borrowings on the term loan was 2.8% at December 31,
2004. On the $25.0 million revolving credit agreement, the effective interest
rate at December 31, 2004 was 3.5%.
The
aggregate of long-term debt maturing in each of the next five years is
approximately as follows: $1,010.1 million in 2005, $656.6 million in 2006,
$1,177.9 million in 2007, $356.0 million in 2008 and $59.8 million in
2009.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
Note
13. Comprehensive Income (Loss)
The
components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Minimum |
|
Other |
|
|
|
Gains
(Losses) |
|
Foreign |
|
Pension |
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
on
Investments |
|
Currency |
|
Liability |
|
Income
(Loss) |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
January 1, 2002 |
|
$ |
213.2 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
$ |
(23.5 |
) |
$ |
194.7 |
|
Unrealized
holding gains, net of tax of $109.8 |
|
|
234.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234.3 |
|
Adjustment
for items included in net income, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
tax of $81.5 |
|
|
120.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120.1 |
|
Foreign
currency translation adjustment, net of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax
of $0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
(16.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(16.6 |
) |
Minimum
pension liability adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
$1.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
5.8 |
|
Balance,
December 31, 2002 |
|
|
567.6 |
|
|
(11.6 |
) |
|
(17.7 |
) |
|
538.3 |
|
Unrealized
holding gains, net of tax of $88.4 |
|
|
173.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
173.1 |
|
Adjustment
for items included in net loss, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
tax of $65.5 |
|
|
105.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105.3 |
|
Foreign
currency translation adjustment, net of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax
of $1.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
48.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
48.3 |
|
Minimum
pension liability adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
$61.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(104.8 |
) |
|
(104.8 |
) |
Balance,
December 31, 2003 |
|
|
846.0 |
|
|
36.7 |
|
|
(122.5 |
) |
|
760.2 |
|
Unrealized
holding gains, net of tax of $169.0 |
|
|
244.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
244.0 |
|
Adjustment
for items included in net income, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
tax of $222.6 |
|
|
(377.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(377.2 |
) |
Foreign
currency translation adjustment, net of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax of $1.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
22.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
22.1 |
|
Minimum
pension liability adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of $37.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(62.2 |
) |
|
(62.2 |
) |
Balance,
December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
712.8 |
|
$ |
58.8 |
|
$ |
(184.7 |
) |
$ |
586.9 |
|
Note
14. Significant Transactions
Acquisitions
The
Company, through a wholly owned subsidiary, Boardwalk Pipelines, acquired Gulf
South Pipeline, LP (“Gulf South”) from Entergy-Koch, LP, a venture between
Entergy Corporation and Koch Energy, Inc., a subsidiary of privately-owned Koch
Industries, Inc., in December of 2004. The Company funded the $1.14 billion
purchase price, including transaction costs and closing adjustments, with $575.0
million of proceeds from an interim loan and the remaining approximately $561.0
million from its available cash. In January of 2005, Boardwalk Pipelines and
Gulf South issued long-term debt and used the proceeds to repay the $575.0
million interim loan. See Note 12.
Gulf
South owns and operates an 8,000-mile interstate natural gas pipeline, gathering
and storage system located in the states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Alabama and northern Florida. The Gulf South pipeline system is comprised of
approximately 6,800 miles of interstate transmission pipeline, 1,200 miles of
gathering pipeline and 68.5 billion cubic feet (“Bcf”) of working gas storage
capacity.
In May of
2003, Boardwalk Pipelines acquired Texas Gas from The Williams Companies, Inc.
(“Williams”). The transaction value was approximately $1.05 billion, which
included $250.0 million of existing Texas Gas debt. The results of Texas Gas
have been included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of
acquisition. The Company funded the approximately $803.3 million balance of the
purchase price, including transaction costs and
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
14. Significant Transactions -
(Continued) |
closing
adjustments, with $528.3 million of its available cash and $275.0 million of
proceeds from an interim loan incurred by Texas Gas immediately after the
acquisition.
Upon
completion of the acquisition, Boardwalk Pipelines, the immediate parent of
Texas Gas, issued $185.0 million of 5.2% Notes due 2018 and Texas Gas issued
$250.0 million of 4.6% Notes due 2015. The net offering proceeds of
approximately $431.0 million were used to repay the $275.0 million interim loan
and to retire approximately $132.7 million principal amount of Texas Gas’s
existing $150.0 million of 8.625% Notes due 2004 and to pay related tender
premiums. In March of 2004, Texas Gas retired the remaining $17.3 million
principal amount of its 8.625% Notes upon final maturity. Texas Gas used its
existing cash balances to fund this maturity.
Texas Gas
owns and operates a 5,900-mile natural gas pipeline system that transports
natural gas originating in the Louisiana Gulf Coast and East Texas and running
north and east through Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky,
Indiana and into Ohio, with smaller diameter lines extending into Illinois.
Texas Gas currently has a delivery capacity of 2.8 Bcf per day and a working
storage capacity of 55 Bcf.
The
allocation of purchase price to the assets and liabilities acquired is as
follows:
|
|
Gulf
South |
|
Texas
Gas |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets |
|
$ |
77.0 |
|
$ |
81.6 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment |
|
|
1,128.6 |
|
|
691.4 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
|
|
|
169.3 |
|
Other
non-current assets |
|
|
38.6 |
|
|
243.9 |
|
Current
liabilities |
|
|
(106.3 |
) |
|
(58.9 |
) |
Short-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
(149.8 |
) |
Long-term
debt |
|
|
|
|
|
(99.2 |
) |
Other
liabilities and deferred credits |
|
|
(21.4 |
) |
|
(74.6 |
) |
|
|
$ |
1,116.5 |
|
$ |
803.7 |
|
The
following unaudited pro forma financial information assumes that Texas Gas and
Gulf South had been acquired as of January 1, 2002. The pro forma amounts
include certain adjustments, including an adjustment to depreciation expense
based on the preliminary allocation of purchase price to property, plant and
equipment; adjustment of interest expense to reflect the issuance of debt in the
acquisitions, redemption of $132.7 million principal amount of Texas Gas’s
existing notes; and the related tax effect of these items. The pro forma amounts
do not reflect any adjustments related to the separation of Texas Gas from
Williams for certain services provided by Williams under a transition services
agreement.
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
revenues |
|
$ |
15,473.6 |
|
$ |
16,787.9 |
|
$ |
17,932.6 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
1,256.4 |
|
|
(643.1 |
) |
|
1,060.3 |
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
|
1,256.4 |
|
|
(587.7 |
) |
|
993.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) per share of Loews common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
5.78 |
|
|
(4.09 |
) |
|
4.90 |
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
|
5.78 |
|
|
(3.79 |
) |
|
4.55 |
|
The pro
forma information does not necessarily reflect the actual results that would
have occurred had the companies been combined during the periods presented, nor
is it necessarily indicative of future results of operations.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
14. Significant Transactions -
(Continued) |
Sale
of Oil Tankers
Hellespont
Shipping Corporation (“Hellespont”), in which the Company, through Majestic
Shipping Corporation (“Majestic”), a wholly owned subsidiary, has a 49% common
stock interest, sold all of its ultra-large crude oil tankers in July of 2004.
Majestic received cash distributions from Hellespont and recognized income of
$179.3 million ($116.5 million after taxes) for the year ended December 31,
2004.
Sale
of CNA Trust
On August
1, 2004, CNA completed the sale of the retirement plan trust and recordkeeping
business portfolio of CNA Trust to Union Bank of California, N.A. (“Union Bank”)
for approximately $12.0 million. As a result of the sale, CNA recorded an
investment gain of approximately $9.0 million pretax ($4.6 million after-tax and
minority interest) for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Union
Bank assumed assets and liabilities of $172.0 million and $172.0 million at
August 1, 2004. The assets and liabilities of CNA Trust were $216.0 million and
$184.0 million at December 31, 2003. The revenues of the business sold through
the sale date were $11.0 million, $27.0 million and $28.0 million for the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. Net results of operations of this
business through the sale date were a net loss of $1.8 million, and net income
of $0.0 million and $1.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002.
On
November 19, 2004, the charter of CNA Trust was sold to Nevada Security Bank for
a nominal fee. As part of the sale, CNA Trust was merged into Nevada Security
Bank, and is no longer a subsidiary of CNA.
Individual
Life Sale
On April
30, 2004, CNA completed the sale of its individual life insurance business to
Swiss Re. The business sold included term, universal and permanent life
insurance policies and individual annuity products. CNA’s individual long term
care and structured settlement businesses were excluded from the sale. Swiss Re
acquired VFL and CNA’s Nashville, Tennessee insurance servicing and
administration building as part of the sale. In connection with the sale, CNA
entered into a reinsurance agreement in which CAC ceded its individual life
insurance business to Swiss Re on a 100% indemnity reinsurance basis. Subject to
certain exceptions, Swiss Re assumed the credit risk of business that was
previously reinsured to other carriers. As a result of this reinsurance
agreement with Swiss Re, approximately $1.0 billion of future policy benefit
reserves were ceded. CNA received consideration of approximately $700.0 million
and recorded an investment loss of $618.6 million pretax ($352.9 million
after-tax and minority interest).
Swiss Re
assumed assets and liabilities of $6.6 billion and $5.2 billion at April 30,
2004. The assets and liabilities of the individual life business sold were $6.6
billion and $5.4 billion at December 31, 2003. The revenues of the individual
life business through the sale date were $151.0 million, $625.0 million and
$652.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002. The net
results after tax and minority interest for this business through the sale date
were a loss of $5.5 million, and income of $38.8 million and $49.2 million for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
Group
Benefits Sale
On
December 31, 2003, the Company completed the sale of the majority of its Group
Benefits business through the sale of CNAGLA to Hartford Financial Services
Group, Inc. (“Hartford”). The business sold included group life and accident,
short and long term disability and certain other products. CNA’s group long term
care and specialty medical businesses were excluded from the sale. In connection
with the sale, CNA received consideration of approximately $530.0 million and
recorded an investment loss on the sale of $163.0 million pretax ($109.1 million
after-tax and minority interest), including an after-tax and minority interest
investment gain of $7.3 million ($13.0 million pretax) recorded in the second
quarter of 2004.
As a
result of this agreement, Hartford assumed assets and liabilities of $2.4
billion and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2003. The assets and liabilities of the
CNA Group Benefits business sold were $2.2 billion and $1.6 billion at December
31, 2002. The revenues of the Group Benefits business were $1,204.0 million and
$1,137.0 million for
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
14. Significant Transactions -
(Continued) |
the years
ended December 31, 2003 and 2002. Net income, after tax and minority interest,
was $46.9 million and $34.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2003 and
2002.
Assumed
Reinsurance Renewal Rights Sale
In
October of 2003, CNA entered into an agreement to sell the renewal rights for
most of the treaty business of CNA Re to Folksamerica Reinsurance Company
(“Folksamerica”). Under the
terms of the transaction, Folksamerica will compensate CNA based upon the amount
of premiums renewed by Folksamerica over the next two contract renewals.
The
renewal rights transaction did not have a material effect on results of
operations. Concurrent with the sale, CNA withdrew from the assumed reinsurance
business (the CNA Re segment) and is managing the run-off of its retained
liabilities.
National
Postal Mail Handlers Union Contract Termination
In 2002, CNA sold Claims Administration Corporation and transferred the National
Postal Handlers Union group benefits plan (the “Mail Handlers Plan”) to First
Health Group Corporation. As a result of this transaction, CNA recognized a $7.0
million pretax investment loss on the sale of Claims Administration Corporation
and $15.0 million of pretax non-recurring fee income, related to the transfer of
the Mail Handlers Plan. The revenues of Claims Administration Corporation and
the Mail Handlers Plan were $1,151.0 million for the year ended December 31,
2002. Net income, after-tax and minority interest, from Claims Administration
Corporation and Mail Handlers Plan was $4.5 million, including the non-recurring
fee income for the year ended December 31, 2002.
CNA
Re U.K. and Other Dispositions of Certain Businesses
On October 31, 2002, CNA completed the sale of CNA Re U.K. to Tawa UK Limited
(“Tawa”), a subsidiary of Artemis Group, a diversified French-based holding
company. The sale includes business underwritten since inception by CNA Re U.K.,
except for certain risks retained by CCC as discussed below.
The
purchase price was $1, subject to adjustments based primarily upon the results
of operations and realized foreign currency losses of CNA Re U.K. The purchase
price adjustment recorded in 2003 related to foreign currency losses and
resulted in CNA contributing additional capital to CNA Re U.K. of $11.0 million.
Also in 2003, CNA finalized its impairment analysis based upon the terms of the
completed transactions and reduced a previously recorded impairment loss by
approximately $35.1 million after-tax and minority interest. The reduction of
the impairment was included in net investment gains.
Under the terms of the purchase price adjustment, CCC was entitled to receive
$5.0 million from Tawa after Tawa was able to legally withdraw funds from the
former CNA Re U.K. entities; at December 31, 2004, CCC had received all amounts
owed to it, totaling approximately $5.0 million. CNA has also committed to
contribute up to $5.0 million to the former CNA Re U.K. entities over a
four-year period beginning in 2010 should the Financial Services Authority
(“FSA”) deem those entities to be undercapitalized.
Concurrent
with the sale, several reinsurance agreements under which CCC had provided
retrocessional protection to CNA Re U.K. were terminated. As part of the sale,
CNA Re U.K.’s net exposure to all IGI Program liabilities was assumed by CCC.
Further, CCC provided a $100.0 million stop loss cover attaching at carried
reserves on CNA Re U.K.’s 2001 underwriting year exposures for which CCC
received premiums of $25.0 million.
Personal
Insurance Transaction
As part of the sale of CNA’s personal insurance business to The Allstate
Corporation on October 1, 1999, CNA shared in payments of claim and allocated
claim adjustment expenses related to losses incurred prior to October 1, 1999 on
the CNA policies transferred to Allstate when they exceeded the claim and
allocated claim adjustment expense reserves of approximately $1.0 billion at the
date of sale. CNA’s remaining obligation with respect to claim and allocated
claim adjustment expense reserves, valued as of October 1, 2003, was settled in
March of 2004 and the sharing agreement was terminated. This settlement did not
have a material impact on the 2004 results of operations of CNA.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
Note
15. Restructuring and Other Related Charges
In 2001,
CNA finalized and approved two separate restructuring plans. The first plan
related to CNA’s Information Technology operations. The remaining accrual of
$3.0 million was released during 2004. The second plan related to restructuring
the property and casualty segments and Life and Group Non-Core segment,
discontinuation of the variable life and annuity business and consolidation of
real estate locations (the “2001 Plan”).
2001
Plan
The
overall goal of the 2001 Plan was to create a simplified and leaner organization
for customers and business partners. The major components of the plan included a
reduction in the number of strategic business units (“SBUs”) in the property and
casualty operations, changes in the strategic focus of the Life and Group
Non-Core segment (formerly Life Operations and Group Operations) and
consolidation of real estate locations. The reduction in the number of property
and casualty SBUs resulted in consolidation of SBU functions, including
underwriting, claims, marketing and finance. The strategic changes in Group
Operations included a decision to discontinue the variable life and annuity
business.
The
following table summarizes the 2001 Plan accrual and the activity in that
accrual since inception.
|
|
Employee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination |
|
Lease |
|
Impaired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
Related |
|
Termination |
|
Asset |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
Costs |
|
Costs |
|
Charges |
|
Costs |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001
Plan Initial Accrual |
|
$ |
68.0 |
|
$ |
56.0 |
|
$ |
30.0 |
|
$ |
35.0 |
|
$ |
189.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35.0 |
) |
|
(35.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2001 |
|
|
66.0 |
|
|
56.0 |
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
152.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
(9.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(13.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(53.0 |
) |
|
(12.0 |
) |
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(69.0 |
) |
Reduction
of accrual |
|
|
(10.0 |
) |
|
(7.0 |
) |
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(32.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2002 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
34.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
38.0 |
|
Costs
that did not require cash |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
(15.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
19.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
Payments
charged against liability |
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
Accrued
costs at December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
14.0 |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
15.0 |
|
During
2002, $32.0 million pretax, or $18.4 million after-tax and minority interest, of
this accrual was reduced. No restructuring and other related charges related to
the 2001 Plan were incurred in 2003 or 2004.
Note
16. Discontinued Operations
Sale
of Hotel
In July
of 2003, Loews Hotels sold a New York City property, the Metropolitan Hotel, for
approximately $109.0 million. The Company recorded a pretax gain of
approximately $90.2 million ($56.7 million after taxes) in the third quarter of
2003. The operating results and gain on sale of the Metropolitan Hotel have been
reported in the Consolidated Statements of Operations as discontinued
operations.
CNA
Vida Disposition
In the
first quarter of 2002, the Company completed the sale of the common stock of CNA
Holdings Limited and its subsidiaries (“CNA Vida”), CNA’s life operations in
Chile, to Consorcio Financiero S.A. (“Consorcio”). In connection with the sale,
CNA received proceeds of $73.0 million and recorded an after-tax and minority
interest
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
16. Discontinued Operations -
(Continued) |
loss from
discontinued operations of $31.0 million. This loss is composed of $32.8
million, net of tax and minority interest, realized loss on the sale of CNA Vida
and income of $1.8 million, net of tax and minority interest, from CNA Vida’s
operations for 2002.
Other
The
Company reports CNA’s net assets of discontinued operations,
which primarily consist
of run-off operations
discontinued
in the mid-1990’s, in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The
following table provides information regarding those net assets.
December
31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
investments |
|
$ |
410.0 |
|
$ |
458.0 |
|
Other
assets |
|
|
341.0 |
|
|
358.0 |
|
Insurance
reserves |
|
|
(439.0 |
) |
|
(480.0 |
) |
Other
liabilities |
|
|
(12.0 |
) |
|
(28.0 |
) |
Net
assets of discontinued operations |
|
$ |
300.0 |
|
$ |
308.0 |
|
Note
17. Statutory Accounting Practices (Unaudited)
CNA’s
insurance subsidiaries maintain their accounts in conformity with accounting
practices prescribed or permitted by state insurance regulatory authorities
which vary in certain respects from GAAP. In converting from statutory to GAAP,
typical adjustments include deferral of policy acquisition costs and the
inclusion of net realized holding gains or losses in shareholders’ equity
relating to fixed maturity securities. The National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (“NAIC”) developed a codified version of statutory accounting
principles, designed to foster more consistency among the states for accounting
guidelines and reporting.
CNA’s
insurance subsidiaries are domiciled in various jurisdictions. These
subsidiaries prepare statutory financial statements in accordance with
accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the respective jurisdictions’
insurance regulators. Prescribed statutory accounting practices are set forth in
a variety of publications of the NAIC as well as state laws, regulations and
general administrative rules.
During
2003 and 2004, CCC received approval from its domiciliary state insurance
department for a permitted practice related to the statutory provision for
reinsurance, or the uncollectible reinsurance reserve. This permitted practice
allows CCC to record an additional uncollectible reinsurance reserve amount
through a different financial statement line item than the prescribed statutory
convention. This permitted practice had no effect on CCC’s statutory surplus in
2003 or 2004.
During
2003, two of CNA’s insurance subsidiaries received approval from their
respective domiciliary state insurance departments for two permitted practices
related to the statutory provision for reinsurance, or the uncollectible
reinsurance reserve. The two permitted practices allowed CCC to reflect in its
financial statements the statutory provision for reinsurance attributable to The
Continental Insurance Company (“CIC”) as a result of a reinsurance agreement
implemented in the fourth quarter of 2003 between these two companies. During
2004, CNA’s subsidiaries continued to utilize this accounting treatment with the
approval of the respective domiciliary state insurance departments. However, in
2004 it was determined by the domiciliary state insurance departments that this
accounting treatment is no longer considered a permitted practice. This
accounting treatment had no effect on the combined statutory surplus for these
two subsidiaries in 2004 or 2003.
During 2004, CIC received approval from its domiciliary state insurance
department for a permitted practice that allows CIC to classify voluntary pools
as authorized, that are unauthorized in South Carolina but were classified as
authorized in New Hampshire, CIC’s former state of domicile, in order to allow
credit for the related reinsurance balances. Due to CIC’s redomestication to
South Carolina effective January 1, 2004, this permitted practice was requested
and has been granted for the reporting periods March 31, 2004 through December
31, 2004. This permitted practice was intended to allow CIC time to work with
its domiciliary state insurance department to better understand the appropriate
treatment of voluntary pools for Schedule F purposes on a South Carolina basis.
CNA
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
17. Statutory Accounting Practices (Unaudited) -
(Continued) |
has now
determined that pool members representing approximately 80.0% of the
participation in the underlying pools are either currently licensed or
authorized in the State of South Carolina. As of December 31, 2004, the ceded
reserve credit for the entire reinsurance recoverable from voluntary pools
classified as authorized is $306.0 million. The impact of this permitted
practice on CIC’s statutory surplus has not been fully quantified as CNA’s
review with its domiciliary state insurance department is still in
process.
CNA’s
ability to pay dividends and other credit obligations is significantly dependent
on receipt of dividends from its subsidiaries. The payment of dividends to CNA
by its insurance subsidiaries without prior approval of the insurance department
of each subsidiary’s domiciliary jurisdiction is limited by formula. Dividends
in excess of these amounts are subject to prior approval by the respective state
insurance departments.
Dividends
from CCC are subject to the insurance holding company laws of the State of
Illinois, the domiciliary state of CCC. Under these laws, ordinary dividends, or
dividends that do not require prior approval of the Illinois Department of
Financial and Professional Regulation - Division of Insurance (the
“Department”), may be paid only from earned surplus, which is calculated by
removing unrealized gains from unassigned surplus. As of December 31, 2004, CCC
is in a negative earned surplus position. In December of 2004, the Department
approved extraordinary dividend capacity of $125.0 million to be used to fund
CNA’s 2005 debt service requirements. It is anticipated that CCC will be in a
positive earned surplus position at the end of the first quarter of 2005 and be
able to begin paying ordinary dividends in the second quarter of 2005 as a
result of a $500.0 million dividend received from its subsidiary, CAC, on
February 11, 2005.
CNA’s
domestic insurance subsidiaries are subject to risk-based capital requirements.
Risk-based capital is a method developed by the NAIC to determine the minimum
amount of statutory capital appropriate for an insurance company to support its
overall business operations in consideration of its size and risk profile. The
formula for determining the amount of risk-based capital specifies various
factors, weighted based on the perceived degree of risk, which are applied to
certain financial balances and financial activity. The adequacy of a company’s
actual capital is evaluated by a comparison to the risk-based capital results,
as determined by the formula. Companies below minimum risk-based capital
requirements are classified within certain levels, each of which requires
specified corrective action. As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, all of CNA’s
domestic insurance subsidiaries exceeded the minimum risk-based capital
requirements.
As a
result of the adverse charges taken in 2003, a capital plan was developed which
involved, among other actions, the issuance of CCC surplus notes to Loews.
Surplus notes are financial instruments with a stated maturity date and
scheduled interest payments, issued by insurance enterprises with the approval
of the insurer’s domiciliary state. All payments of interest and principal on
these notes are subject to the prior approval of the Illinois Insurance
Department. Surplus notes are included as surplus for statutory accounting
purposes, but are classified as debt instruments under GAAP. The CCC surplus
notes issued in February of 2004 were repaid to Loews as of December 31,
2004.
Combined
statutory capital and surplus and net income (loss), determined in accordance
with accounting practices prescribed or permitted by insurance regulatory
authorities, for the property and casualty and the life and group insurance
subsidiaries, were as follows:
|
|
Statutory
Capital and Surplus |
|
Statutory
Net Income (Loss) |
|
|
|
December
31 (a) |
|
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
Unaudited |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty companies |
|
$ |
6,998.0 |
|
$ |
6,170.0 |
|
$ |
661.0 |
|
$ |
(1,484.0 |
) |
$ |
731.0 |
|
Life
insurance companies |
|
|
1,178.0 |
|
|
707.0 |
|
|
334.0 |
|
|
115.0 |
|
|
37.0 |
|
__________
(a) |
Surplus
includes the property and casualty companies’ equity ownership of the life
and group companies’ capital and surplus. |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
Note
18. Benefit Plans
Pension
Plans - The Company has several non-contributory defined benefit plans for
eligible employees. The benefits for certain plans which cover salaried
employees and certain union employees are based on formulas which include, among
others, years of service and average pay. The benefits for one plan which covers
union workers under various union contracts and certain salaried employees are
based on years of service multiplied by a stated amount. Benefits for another
plan are determined annually based on a specified percentage of annual earnings
(based on the participant’s age) and a specified interest rate (which is
established annually for all participants) applied to accrued
balances.
The
Company’s funding policy is to make contributions in accordance with applicable
governmental regulatory requirements. The assets of the plans are invested
primarily in interest-bearing obligations and for one plan with an insurance
subsidiary of CNA, in its separate account business.
Other
Postretirement Benefit Plans - The Company has several postretirement benefit
plans covering eligible employees and retirees. Participants generally become
eligible after reaching age 55 with required years of service. Actual
requirements for coverage vary by plan. Benefits for retirees who were covered
by bargaining units vary by each unit and contract. Benefits for certain
retirees are in the form of a Company health care account.
Benefits
for retirees reaching age 65 are generally integrated with Medicare. Other
retirees, based on plan provisions, must use Medicare as their primary coverage,
with the Company reimbursing a portion of the unpaid amount; or are reimbursed
for the Medicare Part B premium or have no Company coverage. The benefits
provided by the Company are basically health and, for certain retirees, life
insurance type benefits.
The
Company funds certain of these benefit plans and accrues postretirement benefits
during the active service of those employees who would become eligible for such
benefits when they retire.
The
Company uses December 31 as the measurement date for the majority of its
plans.
Weighted-average
assumptions used to determine benefit obligations:
|
|
Pension
Benefits |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002
|
|
2004 |
|
2003
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
6.3 |
% |
|
6.8 |
% |
|
5.9 |
% |
|
6.3 |
% |
|
6.8 |
% |
Rate
of compensation increase |
|
|
4.0%
to 7.0 |
% |
|
4.0%
to 7.0 |
% |
|
5.3%
to 5.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average
assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost:
|
|
Pension
Benefits |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003 |
|
2002
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate |
|
|
6.2%
to 6.3 |
% |
|
6.8 |
% |
|
7.3 |
% |
|
5.9%
to 6.2 |
% |
|
6.8 |
% |
|
7.3 |
% |
Expected
long-term rate of return on |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
plan
assets |
|
|
7.5%
to 8.0 |
% |
|
7.5%
to 8.0 |
% |
|
7.5%
to 8.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate
of compensation increase |
|
|
4.0%
to 7.0 |
% |
|
5.3%
to 5.8 |
% |
|
5.3%
to 5.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
long-term rate of return for plan assets is determined based on widely-accepted
capital market principles, long-term return analysis for global fixed income and
equity markets as well as the active total return oriented portfolio management
style. Long-term trends are evaluated relative to market factors such as
inflation, interest rates and fiscal and monetary polices, in order to assess
the capital market assumptions as applied to the plan. Consideration of
diversification needs and rebalancing is maintained.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
18. Benefit Plans - (Continued) |
Assumed
health care cost trend rates:
December
31 |
2004
|
2003
|
2002
|
|
|
|
|
Health
care cost trend rate assumed for next year |
4%
to 11.5% |
4%
to 12% |
4%
to 11% |
Rate
to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline (the ultimate
|
|
|
|
trend
rate) |
4%
to 5% |
4%
to 5% |
4%
to 5% |
Year
that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate |
2005-2018 |
2004-2018 |
2014 |
Assumed
health care cost trend rates have a significant effect on the amounts reported
for the health care plans. A one-percentage-point change in assumed health care
cost trend rates would have the following effects:
|
|
One
Percentage Point |
|
|
|
Increase |
|
Decrease |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect
on total of service and interest cost |
|
$ |
4.5 |
|
$ |
(3.8 |
) |
Effect
on postretirement benefit obligation |
|
|
44.3
|
|
|
(38.2 |
) |
Net
periodic benefit cost components:
|
|
Pension
Benefits |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost |
|
$ |
58.2 |
|
$ |
55.4 |
|
$ |
50.9 |
|
$ |
11.3 |
|
$ |
12.8 |
|
$ |
9.3 |
|
Interest
cost |
|
|
211.7 |
|
|
209.1 |
|
|
200.3 |
|
|
35.7 |
|
|
37.8 |
|
|
35.5 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets |
|
|
(230.7 |
) |
|
(218.5 |
) |
|
(206.1 |
) |
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
|
Amortization
of unrecognized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
net
loss |
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
Amortization
of unrecognized prior |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
service
cost |
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
(21.6 |
) |
|
(17.9 |
) |
|
(17.5 |
) |
Curtailment
loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Special
termination benefit |
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Settlement
loss |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
67.5 |
|
$ |
71.6 |
|
$ |
60.6 |
|
$ |
22.2 |
|
$ |
30.4 |
|
$ |
27.2 |
|
Additional
Information:
|
|
Pension
Benefits |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
|
|
2004 |
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase
in minimum liability included in Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comprehensive
income |
|
$ |
108.8 |
|
$ |
174.9 |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
N/A |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
18. Benefit Plans - (Continued) |
The
following provides a reconciliation of benefit obligations:
|
|
Pension
Benefits |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in benefit obligation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligation at January 1 |
|
$ |
3,492.7 |
|
$ |
3,163.7 |
|
$ |
664.9 |
|
$ |
561.2 |
|
Addition
of Texas Gas projected benefit obligation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May
16, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
88.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
106.0 |
|
Service
cost |
|
|
58.2 |
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
12.8 |
|
Interest
cost |
|
|
211.7 |
|
|
209.1 |
|
|
35.7 |
|
|
37.8 |
|
Plan
participants’ contributions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
13.9 |
|
Amendments |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
11.9 |
|
|
(143.2 |
) |
|
(30.7 |
) |
Actuarial
loss |
|
|
157.2 |
|
|
203.2 |
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
15.6 |
|
Benefits
paid from plan assets |
|
|
(227.3 |
) |
|
(221.1 |
) |
|
(57.1 |
) |
|
(51.8 |
) |
Curtailment |
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
(25.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Special
termination benefits |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
Exchange |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligation at December 31 |
|
|
3,700.8 |
|
|
3,492.7 |
|
|
535.9 |
|
|
664.9 |
|
Change
in plan assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of plan assets at January 1 |
|
|
3,063.0 |
|
|
2,869.1 |
|
|
71.7 |
|
|
|
|
Addition
of Texas Gas assets as of May 16, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
91.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
70.2 |
|
Actual
return on plan assets |
|
|
248.2 |
|
|
307.0 |
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
1.1 |
|
Company
contributions |
|
|
45.0 |
|
|
40.5 |
|
|
40.7 |
|
|
38.3 |
|
Plan
participants’ contributions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
13.9 |
|
Curtailment |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
(28.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits
paid from plan assets |
|
|
(227.4 |
) |
|
(221.1 |
) |
|
(57.1 |
) |
|
(51.8 |
) |
Foreign
exchange |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of plan assets at December 31 |
|
|
3,132.6 |
|
|
3,063.0 |
|
|
76.5 |
|
|
71.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligation over plan assets |
|
|
(568.2 |
) |
|
(429.7 |
) |
|
(459.4 |
) |
|
(593.2 |
) |
Unrecognized
net actuarial loss |
|
|
658.4 |
|
|
535.5 |
|
|
94.5 |
|
|
89.4 |
|
Unrecognized
prior service cost (benefit) |
|
|
42.9 |
|
|
50.1 |
|
|
(209.1 |
) |
|
(88.7 |
) |
Accrued
benefit cost |
|
$ |
133.1 |
|
$ |
155.9 |
|
$ |
(574.0 |
) |
$ |
(592.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts
recognized in the Consolidated Balance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sheets
consist of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid
benefit cost |
|
$ |
205.8 |
|
$ |
204.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
benefit liability |
|
|
(400.6 |
) |
|
(265.4 |
) |
$ |
(574.0 |
) |
$ |
(592.5 |
) |
Intangible
asset |
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income |
|
|
312.8 |
|
|
204.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
amount recognized |
|
$ |
133.1 |
|
$ |
155.9 |
|
$ |
(574.0 |
) |
$ |
(592.5 |
) |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
18. Benefit Plans - (Continued) |
Information
for pension plans with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of plan
assets:
December
31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected
benefit obligation |
|
$ |
3,135.5 |
|
$ |
2,538.1 |
|
Accumulated
benefit obligation |
|
|
2,843.9 |
|
|
2,331.4 |
|
Fair
value of plan assets |
|
|
2,507.7 |
|
|
2,075.1 |
|
The
Company employs a total return approach whereby a mix of equities and fixed
income investments are used to maximize the long-term return of plan assets for
a prudent level of risk. The intent of this strategy is to minimize plan
expenses by outperforming plan liabilities over the long run. Risk tolerance is
established through careful consideration of the plan liabilities, plan funded
status and corporate financial conditions. The investment portfolio contains a
diversified blend of U.S. and non-U.S. fixed income and equity investments.
Alternative investments, including hedge funds, are used judiciously to enhance
risk adjusted long-term returns while improving portfolio diversification.
Derivatives may be used to gain market exposure in an efficient and timely
manner. Investment risk is measured and monitored on an ongoing basis through
annual liability measurements, periodic asset/liability studies and quarterly
investment portfolio reviews.
The
Company’s pension plan and other postretirement benefit weighted-average asset
allocation at December 31, 2004 and 2003, by asset category are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
Percentage
of |
|
|
|
Percentage
of |
|
Other
Postretirement Benefits |
|
|
|
Pension
Plan Assets |
|
Plan
Assets |
|
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset
Category: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities |
|
|
19.0 |
% |
|
15.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
securities |
|
|
55.5 |
|
|
63.2 |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
Limited
Partnerships |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
13.7 |
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
100.0 |
% |
The table
below presents the estimated future minimum benefit payments at December 31,
2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less |
|
|
|
|
|
Pension |
|
Postretirement |
|
Medicare |
|
|
|
Expected
future benefit payments |
|
Benefits |
|
Benefits |
|
Subsidy |
|
Net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
$ |
206.8 |
|
$ |
34.4 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
34.4 |
|
2006 |
|
|
206.7 |
|
|
35.1 |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
34.2 |
|
2007 |
|
|
210.1 |
|
|
35.7 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
34.7 |
|
2008 |
|
|
215.2 |
|
|
36.3 |
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
35.2 |
|
2009 |
|
|
222.6 |
|
|
37.3 |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
36.1 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
1,225.9 |
|
|
212.7 |
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
205.9 |
|
|
|
$ |
2,287.3 |
|
$ |
391.5 |
|
$ |
11.0 |
|
$ |
380.5 |
|
In 2005
the Company expects to contribute $11.3 million to the pension plan and $33.2
million to its postretirement healthcare and life insurance benefit
plans.
Savings
Plans - The Company and its subsidiaries have several contributory savings plans
which allow employees to make regular contributions based upon a percentage of
their salaries. Matching contributions are made up to specified percentages of
employees’ contributions. The contributions by the Company and its subsidiaries
to these
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
18. Benefit Plans - (Continued) |
plans
amounted to $64.4 million, $72.4 million and $64.4 million for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Stock
Option Plans - In 2000, shareholders approved the Loews Corporation 2000 Stock
Option Plan (the “Loews Plan”). The aggregate number of shares of Loews Common
stock for which options may be granted under the Loews Plan is 2,000,000 shares,
and the maximum number of shares of Loews Common stock with respect to which
options may be granted to any individual in any calendar year is 400,000 shares.
The exercise price per share may not be less than the fair market value of the
Common stock on the date of grant. Generally, options vest ratably over a
four-year period and expire in ten years.
A summary
of the stock option transactions for the Loews Plan follows:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
outstanding, January 1 |
|
|
1,127,450 |
|
$ |
46.678 |
|
|
827,000 |
|
$ |
46.535 |
|
|
535,700 |
|
$ |
39.002 |
|
Granted |
|
|
306,625 |
|
|
57.523 |
|
|
306,300 |
|
|
46.748 |
|
|
315,300 |
|
|
58.723 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(137,525 |
) |
|
36.358 |
|
|
(5,850 |
) |
|
30.140 |
|
|
(13,500 |
) |
|
37.318 |
|
Canceled |
|
|
(38,775 |
) |
|
51.495 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10,500 |
) |
|
40.079 |
|
Options
outstanding, December 31 |
|
|
1,257,775 |
|
|
50.302 |
|
|
1,127,450 |
|
|
46.678 |
|
|
827,000 |
|
|
46.535 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
exercisable, December 31 |
|
|
557,025 |
|
$ |
46.251 |
|
|
430,625 |
|
$ |
42.657 |
|
|
195,300 |
|
$ |
37.594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
available for grant, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31 |
|
|
573,450 |
|
|
|
|
|
841,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,147,600 |
|
|
|
|
The
following table summarizes information about the Company’s stock options
outstanding in connection with the Loews Plan at December 31, 2004:
|
|
Options
Outstanding |
|
Options
Exercisable |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Contractual |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Range
of exercise prices |
|
Shares |
|
Life |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
30.140 - 35.175 |
|
|
138,300 |
|
|
4.9 |
|
$ |
30.140 |
|
|
138,300 |
|
$ |
30.140 |
|
35.176
- 42.210 |
|
|
10,900 |
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
41.298 |
|
|
9,650 |
|
|
41.314 |
|
42.211
- 49.245 |
|
|
518,225 |
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
46.776 |
|
|
242,825 |
|
|
46.740 |
|
49.246
- 56.280 |
|
|
77,125 |
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
52.280 |
|
|
5,600 |
|
|
54.835 |
|
56.281
- 63.315 |
|
|
508,125 |
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
59.099 |
|
|
155,550 |
|
|
59.093 |
|
63.316
- 70.350 |
|
|
5,100 |
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
68.176 |
|
|
5,100 |
|
|
68.176 |
|
In
February of 2002, shareholders approved the Carolina Group 2002 Stock Option
Plan (the “Carolina Group Plan”) in connection with the issuance of Carolina
Group stock. The aggregate number of shares of Carolina Group stock for which
options may be granted under the Carolina Group Plan is 1,500,000 shares; and
the maximum number of shares of Carolina Group stock with respect to which
options may be granted to any individual in any calendar year is 200,000 shares.
The exercise price per share may not be less than the fair market value of the
stock on the date of the grant. Generally, options vest ratably over a four-year
period and expire in ten years.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
18. Benefit Plans - (Continued) |
A summary
of the stock option transactions for the Carolina Group Plan
follows:
|
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
outstanding, January 1 |
|
|
389,250 |
|
$ |
25.216 |
|
|
195,000 |
|
$ |
28.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
209,500 |
|
|
25.181 |
|
|
209,000 |
|
|
22.740 |
|
|
202,000 |
|
$ |
28.000 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
22.740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canceled |
|
|
(36,500 |
) |
|
24.947 |
|
|
(14,750 |
) |
|
26.930 |
|
|
(7,000 |
) |
|
28.000 |
|
Options
outstanding, December 31 |
|
|
560,000 |
|
|
25.230 |
|
|
389,250 |
|
|
25.216 |
|
|
195,000 |
|
|
28.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
exercisable, December 31 |
|
|
135,750 |
|
$ |
26.276 |
|
|
52,750 |
|
$ |
28.000 |
|
|
3,000 |
|
$ |
28.000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
available for grant, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31 |
|
|
937,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,110,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,305,000 |
|
|
|
|
The
following table summarizes information about the Company’s stock options
outstanding in connection with the Carolina Group Plan at December 31,
2004:
|
|
Options
Outstanding |
|
Options
Exercisable |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
Average |
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number
of |
|
Contractual |
|
Exercise |
|
Number
of |
|
Exercise |
|
Range
of exercise prices |
|
Shares |
|
Life |
|
Price |
|
Shares |
|
Price |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$22.740
- 25.200 |
|
|
287,250 |
|
|
8.6 |
|
$ |
23.274 |
|
|
44,500 |
|
$ |
22.740 |
|
25.201
- 28.000 |
|
|
272,750 |
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
27.291 |
|
|
91,250 |
|
|
28.000 |
|
The fair
value of granted options for the Loews Plan and Carolina Group Plan were
estimated at the grant date using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with
the following assumptions and results:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
Plan: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
dividend yield |
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
1.3 |
% |
|
1.0 |
% |
Expected
volatility |
|
|
23.1 |
% |
|
35.3 |
% |
|
29.2 |
% |
Weighted
average risk-free interest rate |
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
4.5 |
% |
|
5.4 |
% |
Expected
holding period (in years) |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
Weighted
average fair value of options |
|
$ |
14.19 |
|
$ |
15.92 |
|
$ |
18.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group Plan: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
dividend yield |
|
|
7.1 |
% |
|
8.1 |
% |
|
6.4 |
% |
Expected
volatility |
|
|
30.1 |
% |
|
36.4 |
% |
|
44.0 |
% |
Weighted
average risk-free interest rate |
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
4.5 |
% |
|
5.5 |
% |
Expected
holding period (in years) |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
5.0 |
|
Weighted
average fair value of options |
|
$ |
3.75 |
|
$ |
3.89 |
|
$ |
7.40 |
|
Note
19. Reinsurance
CNA assumes and cedes reinsurance to other insurers, reinsurers and members of
various reinsurance pools and associations. CNA utilizes reinsurance
arrangements to limit its maximum loss, provide greater diversification of
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
19. Reinsurance - (Continued) |
risk,
minimize exposures on larger risks and to exit certain lines of business. The
ceding of insurance does not discharge the primary liability of CNA. Therefore,
a credit exposure exists with respect to property and casualty and life
reinsurance ceded to the extent that any reinsurer is unable to meet their
obligations or to the extent that the reinsurer disputes the liabilities assumed
under reinsurance agreements.
Property
and casualty reinsurance coverages are tailored to the specific risk
characteristics of each product line and CNA’s retained amount varies by type of
coverage. Treaty reinsurance is purchased to protect specific lines of business
such as property, workers compensation, and professional liability. Corporate
catastrophe reinsurance is also purchased for property and workers compensation
exposure. Most treaty reinsurance is purchased on an excess of loss basis. CNA
also utilizes facultative reinsurance in certain lines.
CNA’s
overall reinsurance program includes certain property and casualty contracts,
such as the corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties discussed in more detail
below, that are entered into and accounted for on a “funds withheld” basis.
Under the funds withheld basis, CNA records the cash remitted to the reinsurer
for the reinsurer’s margin, or cost of the reinsurance contract, as ceded
premiums. The remainder of the premiums ceded under the reinsurance contract not
remitted in cash is recorded as funds withheld liabilities. CNA is required to
increase the funds withheld balance at stated interest crediting rates applied
to the funds withheld balance or as otherwise specified under the terms of the
contract. The funds withheld liability is reduced by any cumulative claim
payments made by CNA in excess of CNA’s retention under the reinsurance
contract. If the funds withheld liability is exhausted, interest crediting will
cease and additional claim payments are recoverable from the reinsurer. The
funds withheld liability is recorded in reinsurance balances payable in the
Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Interest
cost on funds withheld and other deposits is credited during all periods in
which a funds withheld liability exists. Pretax interest cost, which is included
in net investment income, was $267.0 million, $344.0 million and $239.0 million
in 2004, 2003 and 2002. The amount subject to interest crediting rates on such
contracts was $2,570.0 million and $2,789.0 million at December 31, 2004 and
2003. Certain funds withheld reinsurance contracts, including the corporate
aggregate reinsurance treaties, require interest on additional premiums arising
from ceded losses as if those premiums were payable at the inception of the
contract. Additionally, on the corporate aggregate reinsurance treaties
discussed below, if CNA exceeds certain aggregate loss ratio thresholds, the
rate on which interest charges are accrued would increase and be retroactively
applied to the inception of the contract or to a specified date. Any such
retroactive interest is accrued in the period the additional premiums arise or
the loss ratio thresholds are met. The amount of retroactive interest, included
in the totals above, was $46.0 million, $147.0 million and $10.0 million in
2004, 2003 and 2002.
The
amount subject to interest crediting on these funds withheld contracts will vary
over time based on a number of factors, including the timing of loss payments
and ultimate gross losses incurred. CNA expects that it will continue to incur
significant interest costs on these contracts for several years.
The
following table summarizes the amounts receivable from reinsurers at December
31, 2004 and 2003.
December
31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
receivables related to insurance reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expense |
|
$ |
13,984.1 |
|
$ |
14,215.9 |
|
Ceded
future policy benefits |
|
|
1,259.6
|
|
|
1,218.2 |
|
Ceded
policyholders’ funds |
|
|
64.8 |
|
|
6.6 |
|
Billed
reinsurance receivables |
|
|
685.2 |
|
|
813.1 |
|
Reinsurance
receivables |
|
|
15,993.7 |
|
|
16,253.8 |
|
Allowance
for uncollectible reinsurance |
|
|
(531.1 |
) |
|
(572.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
receivables-net of allowance for uncollectible reinsurance |
|
$ |
15,462.6 |
|
$ |
15,681.2 |
|
CNA has
established an allowance for uncollectible reinsurance receivables. The
allowance for uncollectible reinsurance receivables was $531.1 million and
$572.6 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003. The net decrease in the allowance
was primarily due to a release of a previously established allowance related to
The Trenwick Group resulting from the execution of commutation agreements,
partially offset by a net increase in the allowance for other
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
19. Reinsurance - (Continued) |
reinsurance
receivables. The provision for uncollectible reinsurance receivables is
presented as a component of “Insurance claims and policyholders’ benefits” on
the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Prior to
the sale in April of 2004 of its individual life and annuity business to Swiss
Re, CNA had reinsured a portion of this business through coinsurance, yearly
renewable term and facultative programs to various reinsurers. As a result of
the sale of the individual life and annuity business, 100% of the net reserves
were reinsured to Swiss Re. Subject to certain exceptions, Swiss Re assumed the
credit risk of the business that was previously reinsured to other carriers. As
of December 31, 2004, CNA ceded $1,012.0 million of future policy benefits to
Swiss Re. In connection with the sale of the group benefits business, CNA ceded
insurance reserves to Hartford Financial Services, Inc. (“Hartford”). As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, these ceded reserves were $1,726.0 million and
$1,473.0 million.
CNA attempts to mitigate its credit risk related to reinsurance by entering into
reinsurance arrangements only with reinsurers that have credit ratings above
certain levels and by obtaining substantial amounts of collateral. The primary
methods of obtaining collateral are through reinsurance trusts, letters of
credit and funds withheld balances. Such collateral was approximately $4,561.0
million and $5,255.0 million at December 31, 2004 and 2003.
In 2003,
CNA commuted all remaining ceded and assumed reinsurance contracts with four
Gerling entities. The commutations resulted in a pretax loss of $109.0 million,
which was net of a previously established allowance for doubtful accounts of
$47.0 million. CNA has no further exposure to the Gerling companies that are in
run-off.
CNA’s
largest recoverables from a single reinsurer at December 31, 2004, including
prepaid reinsurance premiums, were approximately $2,236.0 million from
subsidiaries of The Allstate Corporation (“Allstate”), $2,163.0 million from
subsidiaries of Swiss Reinsurance Group, $1,843.0 million from subsidiaries of
Hannover Reinsurance (Ireland), Ltd., $1,726.0 million from Hartford Life Group
Insurance Company, $944.0 million from American Reinsurance Company, and $603.0
million from subsidiaries of the Berkshire Hathaway Group.
Insurance
claims and policyholders’ benefits reported in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations are net of reinsurance recoveries of $5,789.0 million, $6,325.0
million and $4,164.0 million for 2004, 2003 and 2002.
The
effects of reinsurance on earned premiums are shown in the following
table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed/ |
|
|
|
Direct |
|
Assumed |
|
Ceded |
|
Net |
|
Net
% |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty |
|
$ |
10,739.0 |
|
$ |
199.0 |
|
$ |
3,634.0 |
|
$ |
7,304.0 |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
Accident
and health |
|
|
1,224.0 |
|
|
63.0 |
|
|
507.0 |
|
|
780.0 |
|
|
8.1 |
% |
Life |
|
|
419.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
298.0 |
|
|
121.0 |
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
12,382.0 |
|
$ |
262.0 |
|
$ |
4,439.0 |
|
$ |
8,205.0 |
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty |
|
$ |
10,661.0 |
|
$ |
726.0 |
|
$ |
4,452.0 |
|
$ |
6,935.0 |
|
|
10.5 |
% |
Accident
and health |
|
|
1,598.0 |
|
|
92.0 |
|
|
59.0 |
|
|
1,631.0 |
|
|
5.6 |
|
Life |
|
|
1,102.0 |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
465.0 |
|
|
644.0 |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
13,361.0 |
|
$ |
825.0 |
|
$ |
4,976.0 |
|
$ |
9,210.0 |
|
|
9.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and casualty |
|
$ |
9,694.0 |
|
$ |
946.0 |
|
$ |
3,812.0 |
|
$ |
6,828.0 |
|
|
13.9 |
% |
Accident
and health |
|
|
2,609.0 |
|
|
153.0 |
|
|
15.0 |
|
|
2,747.0 |
|
|
5.6 |
|
Life
|
|
|
1,089.0 |
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
|
449.0 |
|
|
635.0 |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
13,392.0 |
|
$ |
1,094.0 |
|
$ |
4,276.0 |
|
$ |
10,210.0 |
|
|
10.7 |
% |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
19. Reinsurance - (Continued) |
Included
in the direct and ceded earned premiums for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002 are $3,293.0 million, $2,652.0 million and $2,305.0 million
related to business that is 100% reinsured as a result of business dispositions
and a significant captive program.
The
impact of reinsurance on life insurance inforce is shown in the following
table:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
Direct |
|
Assumed |
|
Ceded |
|
Net |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
(a) |
|
$ |
56,610.0 |
|
$ |
35.0 |
|
$ |
54,486.0 |
|
$ |
2,159.0 |
|
2003 |
|
|
388,380.0 |
|
|
588.0 |
|
|
295,659.0 |
|
|
93,309.0 |
|
2002 |
|
|
423,151.0 |
|
|
14,600.0 |
|
|
340,520.0 |
|
|
97,231.0 |
|
(a) |
The
decline in gross inforce is attributable to the sales of the group
benefits and the individual life
businesses. |
For 2002,
CNA entered into a corporate aggregate reinsurance treaty covering substantially
all of CNA’s property and casualty lines of business (the “2002 Cover”). Ceded
premium related to the reinsurer’s margin of $10.0 million was recorded in 2002.
No losses were ceded under this contract, and the 2002 Cover was commuted as of
December 31, 2002.
CNA has
an aggregate reinsurance treaty related to the 1999 through 2001 accident years
that covers substantially all of CNA’s property and casualty lines of business
(the “Aggregate Cover”). The Aggregate Cover provides for two sections of
coverage. These coverages attach at defined loss ratios for each accident year.
Coverage under the first section of the Aggregate Cover, which is available for
all accident years covered by the treaty, has a $500.0 million limit per
accident year of ceded losses and an aggregate limit of $1.0 billion of ceded
losses for the three accident years. The ceded premiums associated with the
first section are a percentage of ceded losses and for each $500.0 million of
limit the ceded premium is $230.0 million. The second section of the Aggregate
Cover, which only relates to accident year 2001, provides additional coverage of
up to $510.0 million of ceded losses for a maximum ceded premium of $310.0
million. Under the Aggregate Cover, interest charges on the funds withheld
liability accrue at 8.0% per annum. The aggregate loss ratio for the three-year
period has exceeded certain thresholds which requires additional premiums to be
paid and an increase in the rate at which interest charges are accrued. This
rate will increase to 8.25% per annum commencing in 2006. Also, if an additional
aggregate loss ratio threshold is exceeded, additional premiums of 10.0% of
amounts in excess of the aggregate loss ratio threshold are to be paid
retroactively with interest.
In 2001,
as a result of reserve additions including those related to accident year 1999,
the remaining $500.0 million limit related to the 1999 accident year under the
first section was fully utilized and losses of $510.0 million were ceded under
the second section as a result of losses related to the WTC event. During 2003,
as a result of the unfavorable net prior year development recorded related to
accident years 2000 and 2001, the $500.0 million limit related to the 2000 and
2001 accident years under the first section was fully utilized and losses of
$500.0 million were ceded under the first section of the Aggregate Cover. The
aggregate limits for the Aggregate Cover have been fully utilized.
The
impact of the Aggregate Cover was as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
earned premium |
|
$ |
(1.0 |
) |
$ |
(258.0 |
) |
|
|
|
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
|
|
|
Interest
charges |
|
|
(82.0 |
) |
|
(147.0 |
) |
$ |
(51.0 |
) |
Pretax
(expense) benefit |
|
$ |
(83.0 |
) |
$ |
95.0 |
|
$ |
(51.0 |
) |
In 2001,
CNA entered into a one-year aggregate reinsurance treaty related to the 2001
accident year covering substantially all property and casualty lines of business
in the Continental Casualty Company pool (the “CCC Cover”). The loss protection
provided by the CCC Cover has an aggregate limit of approximately $761.0 million
of
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
19. Reinsurance - (Continued) |
ceded
losses. The ceded premiums are a percentage of ceded losses. The ceded premium
related to full utilization of the $761.0 million of limit is $456.0 million.
The CCC Cover provides continuous coverage in excess of the second section of
the Aggregate Cover discussed above. Under the CCC Cover, interest charges on
the funds withheld are accrued at 8.0% per annum. The interest rate increases to
10.0% per annum if the aggregate loss ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The
aggregate loss ratio exceeded that threshold in 2004 which required retroactive
interest charges on funds withheld of $46.0 million. During 2003, as a result of
unfavorable development related to accident year 2001, the CCC Cover was fully
utilized.
At CNA’s
discretion, the contract can be commuted annually on the anniversary date of the
contract. The CCC Cover requires mandatory commutation on December 31, 2010, if
the agreement has not been commuted on or before such date. Upon mandatory
commutation of the CCC Cover, the reinsurer is required to release to CNA the
existing balance of the funds withheld account if the unpaid ultimate ceded
losses at the time of commutation are less than or equal to the funds withheld
account balance. If the unpaid ultimate ceded losses at the time of commutation
are greater than the funds withheld account balance, the reinsurer will release
the existing balance of the funds withheld account and pay CNA the present value
of the projected amount the reinsurer would have had to pay from its own funds
absent a commutation. The present value is calculated using 1-year LIBOR as of
the date of the commutation.
The
impact of the CCC Cover was as follows:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded
earned premium |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(100.0 |
) |
$ |
(101.0 |
) |
Ceded
claim and claim adjustment expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
143.0 |
|
|
148.0 |
|
Interest
charges |
|
$ |
(91.0 |
) |
|
(59.0 |
) |
|
(37.0 |
) |
Pretax
(expense) benefit |
|
$ |
(91.0 |
) |
$ |
(16.0 |
) |
$ |
10.0 |
|
Note
20. Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
2004
Quarter Ended |
|
Dec.
31 |
|
Sept.
30 |
|
June
30 |
|
March
31 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
revenues |
|
$ |
4,051.2 |
|
$ |
3,785.4 |
|
$ |
3,914.5 |
|
$ |
3,491.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income attributable to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income |
|
|
446.7 |
|
|
224.2 |
|
|
366.7 |
|
|
9.2 |
|
Per
share |
|
|
2.41 |
|
|
1.21 |
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
0.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income |
|
|
56.1 |
|
|
53.4 |
|
|
40.6 |
|
|
34.4 |
|
Per
share |
|
|
0.93 |
|
|
0.92 |
|
|
0.70 |
|
|
0.59 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
20. Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited) -
(Continued) |
2003
Quarter Ended |
|
Dec.
31 |
|
Sept.
30 |
|
June
30 |
|
March
31 |
|
(In
millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
revenues |
|
$ |
4,335.7 |
|
$ |
3,940.0 |
|
$ |
4,239.5 |
|
$ |
3,945.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) attributable to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations |
|
|
332.6 |
|
|
(1,465.5 |
) |
|
189.9 |
|
|
161.7 |
|
Per
share |
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
(7.90 |
) |
|
1.02 |
|
|
0.87 |
|
Discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
55.8 |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
(0.3 |
) |
Per
share |
|
|
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
|
332.6 |
|
|
(1,409.7 |
) |
|
189.8 |
|
|
161.4 |
|
Per
share |
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
(7.60 |
) |
|
1.02 |
|
|
0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income |
|
|
34.8 |
|
|
26.8 |
|
|
25.0 |
|
|
28.6 |
|
Per
share |
|
|
0.74 |
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
0.72 |
|
Note
21. Legal Proceedings
INSURANCE
RELATED
IGI
Contingency
In 1997,
CNA Reinsurance Company Limited (“CNA Re Ltd.”) entered into an arrangement with
IOA Global, Ltd. (“IOA”), an independent managing general agent based in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to develop and manage a book of accident and health
coverages. Pursuant to this arrangement, IGI Underwriting Agencies, Ltd.
(“IGI”), a personal accident reinsurance managing general underwriter, was
appointed to underwrite and market the book under the supervision of IOA.
Between April 1, 1997 and December 1, 1999, IGI underwrote a number of
reinsurance arrangements with respect to personal accident insurance worldwide
(the “IGI Program”). Under various arrangements, CNA Re Ltd. both assumed risks
as a reinsurer and also ceded a substantial portion of those risks to other
companies, including other CNA insurance subsidiaries and ultimately to a group
of reinsurers participating in a reinsurance pool known as the Associated
Accident and Health Reinsurance Underwriters (“AAHRU”) Facility. CNA’s Group
Operations business unit participated as a pool member in the AAHRU Facility in
varying percentages between 1997 and 1999.
A portion of the premiums assumed under the IGI Program related to United States
workers compensation “carve-out” business. Some of these premiums were received
from John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company (“John Hancock”) under four
excess of loss reinsurance treaties (the “Treaties”) issued by CNA Re Ltd. While
John Hancock has indicated that it is not able to accurately quantify its
potential exposure to its cedents on business which is retroceded to CNA, John
Hancock has reported $172.0 million of paid and unpaid losses, under these
Treaties. John Hancock is disputing portions of its assumed obligations
resulting in these reported losses, and has advised CNA that it is, or has been,
involved in multiple arbitrations with its own cedents, in which proceedings
John Hancock is seeking to avoid and/or reduce risks that would otherwise
arguably be ceded to CNA through the Treaties. John Hancock has further informed
CNA that it has settled several of these disputes, but has not provided CNA with
details of the settlements. To the extent that John Hancock is successful in
reducing its liabilities in these disputes, that development may have an impact
on the recoveries it is seeking under the Treaties from CNA.
As indicated, CNA arranged substantial reinsurance protection to manage its
exposures under the IGI Program, including the United States workers
compensation carve-out business ceded from John Hancock and other reinsurers.
While certain reinsurers of CNA, including participants in the AAHRU Facility,
disputed their liabilities under the reinsurance contracts with respect to the
IGI Program, those disputes have been resolved and substantial reinsurance
coverage exists for those exposures.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Insurance Related -
(Continued) |
In addition, CNA has instituted arbitration proceedings against John Hancock in
which CNA is seeking rescission of the Treaties as well as access to and the
right to inspect the books and records relating to the Treaties. Based on
information known at this time, CNA believes it has strong grounds to
successfully challenge its alleged exposure derived from John Hancock through
the ongoing arbitration proceedings. CNA has also undertaken legal action
seeking to avoid portions of the remaining exposure arising out of the IGI
Program.
CNA has established reserves for its estimated exposure under the IGI Program,
other than that derived from John Hancock, and an estimate for recoverables from
retrocessionaires. CNA has not established any reserve for any exposure derived
from John Hancock because, as indicated, CNA believes the contract will be
rescinded. Although the results of CNA’s various loss mitigation strategies with
respect to the entire IGI Program to date support the recorded reserves, the
estimate of ultimate losses is subject to considerable uncertainty due to the
complexities described above. As a result of these uncertainties, the results of
operations in future periods may be adversely affected by potentially
significant reserve additions. However, the extent of losses beyond any amounts
that may be accrued are not readily determinable at this time. Management does
not believe that any such reserve additions would be material to the equity of
the Company, although results of operations may be adversely affected. CNA’s
position in relation to the IGI Program was unaffected by the sale of CNA Re
Ltd. in 2002.
California
Wage and Hour Litigation
Ernestine
Samora, et al. v. CCC, Case
No. BC 242487, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, California
and Brian
Wenzel v. Galway Insurance Company,
Superior Court of California, County of Orange No. BC01CC08868 are purported
class actions on behalf of present and former CNA employees asserting they
worked hours for which they should have been compensated at a rate of one and
one-half times their base hourly wage over a four-year period. Plaintiffs seek
“overtime compensation,” “penalty wages,” and “other statutory penalties”
without specifying any particular amounts. CNA has denied the material
allegations of the amended complaint and intends to vigorously contest the
claims.
Numerous
unresolved factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to
the final result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability.
Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not
readily determinable at this time. However, based on facts and circumstances
presently known in the opinion of management, an unfavorable outcome would not
materially adversely affect the equity of the Company, although results of
operations may be adversely affected.
Voluntary
Market Premium Litigation
CNA,
along with dozens of other insurance companies, is currently a defendant in nine
cases, including eight purported class actions, brought by large policyholders.
The complaints differ in some respects, but generally allege that the
defendants, as part of an industry-wide conspiracy, included improper charges in
their retrospectively rated and other loss-sensitive insurance programs. Among
the claims asserted are violations of state antitrust laws, breach of contract,
fraud and unjust enrichment. In one federal court case, Sandwich
Chef of Texas, Inc. v. Reliance National Indemnity Insurance
Co., 202
F.R.D. 480 (S.D. Tex. 2001), rev’d, 319 F.3d 205 (5th Cir. 2003), cert. denied,
72 USLW 3235 (U.S. Oct 6, 2003), the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit reversed a decision by the District Court for the Southern
District of Texas certifying a multi-state class. CNA intends to vigorously
contest these claims.
Numerous
unresolved factual and legal issues remain to be resolved that are critical to
the final result, the outcome of which cannot be predicted with any reliability.
Accordingly, the extent of losses beyond any amounts that may be accrued are not
readily determinable at this time. However, based on facts and circumstances
presently known in the opinion of management an unfavorable outcome will not
materially affect the equity of the Company, although results of operations may
be adversely affected.
See Note
9 for information with respect to claims and litigation involving CNA related to
environmental pollution, asbestos and mass torts.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
TOBACCO
RELATED
Tobacco
Related Product Liability Litigation
Approximately
4,075 product liability cases are pending against cigarette manufacturers in the
United States. Lorillard is a defendant in approximately 3,750 of these cases.
Unless otherwise noted, all case totals and litigation references are as of
February 18, 2005.
The
pending product liability cases are comprised of the following types of
cases:
“Conventional
product liability cases” are brought by individuals who allege cancer or other
health effects caused by smoking cigarettes, by using smokeless tobacco
products, by addiction to tobacco, or by exposure to environmental tobacco
smoke. Approximately 1,350 cases are pending, including approximately 1,065
cases against Lorillard. The 1,350 cases include approximately 1,020 cases
pending in a single West Virginia court that have been consolidated for trial.
Lorillard is a defendant in nearly 940 of the approximately 1,020 consolidated
West Virginia cases.
“Flight
Attendant cases” are brought by non-smoking flight attendants alleging injury
from exposure to environmental smoke in the cabins of aircraft. Plaintiffs in
these cases may not seek punitive damages for injuries that arose prior to
January 15, 1997. Lorillard is a defendant in each of the approximately 2,665
pending Flight Attendant cases.
“Class
action cases” are purported to be brought on behalf of large numbers of
individuals for damages allegedly caused by smoking. Eleven of these cases are
pending against Lorillard. One of these cases, Schwab
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., is on
behalf of a purported nationwide class composed of purchasers of “light”
cigarettes. Lorillard is not a defendant in approximately 30 additional “lights”
class actions that are pending against other cigarette
manufacturers.
“Reimbursement
cases” are brought by or on behalf of entities who seek reimbursement of
expenses incurred in providing health care to individuals who allegedly were
injured by smoking. Plaintiffs in these cases have included the U.S. federal
government, U.S. state and local governments, foreign governmental entities,
hospitals or hospital districts, American Indian tribes, labor unions, private
companies and private citizens. Lorillard is a defendant in four of the seven
Reimbursement cases pending against cigarette manufacturers in the United
States. Lorillard and the Company also are named as defendants in an additional
case pending in Israel.
Included
in this category is the suit filed by the federal government, United
States of America v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., that
sought disgorgement and injunctive relief. Trial of this matter began during
September of 2004 and is proceeding. During February of 2005, an appellate court
ruled that the government may not seek disgorgement of profits, although this
order is not final because the government has advised the court that it will
seek rehearing of this decision.
“Contribution
cases” are brought by private companies, such as asbestos manufacturers or their
insurers, who are seeking contribution or indemnity for court claims they
incurred on behalf of individuals injured by their products but who also
allegedly were injured by smoking cigarettes. One such case is pending against
Lorillard and other cigarette manufacturers.
Excluding
the flight attendant and the consolidated West Virginia suits, approximately 400
product liability cases are pending against cigarette manufacturers in U.S.
courts. Lorillard is a defendant in approximately 150 of the 400 cases. The
Company, which is not a defendant in any of the flight attendant or the
consolidated West Virginia matters, is a defendant in five of the
actions.
Plaintiffs
assert a broad range of legal theories in these cases, including, among others,
theories of negligence, fraud, misrepresentation, strict liability, breach of
warranty, enterprise liability (including claims asserted under the federal
Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”)), civil
conspiracy, intentional infliction of harm, violation of consumer protection
statutes, violation of antitrust statutes, injunctive relief, indemnity,
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
restitution,
unjust enrichment, public nuisance, claims based on antitrust laws and state
consumer protection acts, and claims based on failure to warn of the harmful or
addictive nature of tobacco products.
Plaintiffs
in most of the cases seek unspecified amounts of compensatory damages and
punitive damages, although some seek damages ranging into the billions of
dollars. Plaintiffs in some of the cases seek treble damages, statutory damages,
disgorgement of profits, equitable and injunctive relief, and medical
monitoring, among other damages.
CONVENTIONAL
PRODUCT LIABILITY CASES
- - Approximately
1,350 cases are pending against cigarette manufacturers in the United States.
Lorillard is a defendant in approximately 1,065 of these cases. The Company is a
defendant in two of the pending cases.
Approximately
1,020 of the 1,350 cases are pending in a single West Virginia court in a
consolidated proceeding. The West Virginia court had scheduled a single trial
for these consolidated cases, but it has certified a question to the Supreme
Court of Appeals of West Virginia that seeks a determination of the scope of any
forthcoming consolidated trial. The Supreme Court of Appeals has not determined
whether it will review the certified question so the manner in which these cases
will be tried is not known. Lorillard is a defendant in approximately 940 of the
1,020 consolidated West Virginia cases. The Company is not a defendant in any of
the consolidated West Virginia cases.
One of
the states in which cases are pending against Lorillard is Mississippi. During
2003, the Mississippi Supreme Court ruled that the Mississippi Product Liability
Act “precludes all tobacco cases that are based on products liability.” Based on
this ruling, Lorillard is seeking, or intends to seek, dismissal of each of the
approximately 40 cases pending against it in Mississippi.
Since
January 1, 2003, verdicts have been returned in 18 matters. Lorillard was not a
defendant in any of these cases. Defense verdicts were returned in eleven of the
cases.
Listed
below are those cases in which verdicts were returned in favor of the plaintiffs
since January 1, 2003, as well as those cases in which appeals are pending from
plaintiffs’ verdicts returned prior to 2003. Neither the Company nor Lorillard
were defendants in any of these cases. These cases, and the verdict amounts, are
below:
Smith
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (Circuit
Court, Jackson County, Missouri). During February of 2005, the jury returned two
separate verdicts in favor of the plaintiff. In its first verdict, the jury
awarded plaintiff $2.0 million in actual damages but determined that the
defendant was only 25% responsible for the decedent’s injuries, which reduced
the jury’s award of actual damages to $500,000. In its second verdict, plaintiff
was awarded $20.0 million in punitive damages. Post-verdict activity has not
been completed.
Arnitz
v. Philip Morris USA (Circuit
Court, Hillsborough County, Florida). During October of 2004, the jury returned
a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and awarded him $600,000 in actual damages.
The jury also determined that plaintiff was 60% responsible for his injuries.
The court did not permit plaintiff to seek punitive damages. The court’s final
judgment reflected the jury’s findings and awarded plaintiff $240,000 in
damages. The court denied Philip Morris’ post-trial motions. Philip Morris has
appealed.
Davis
v. Liggett Group, Inc. (Circuit
Court, Palm Beach County, Florida). During May of 2004, the jury returned a
verdict in favor of the plaintiff and awarded her a total of $550,000 in actual
damages. The jury did not award punitive damages. Liggett Group has
appealed.
Frankson
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. (Supreme
Court, New York County, New York). During December of 2003, plaintiff was
awarded $350,000 in actual damages. The jury also determined that the decedent
was 50% contributorily negligent. During January of 2004, plaintiff was awarded
$20.0 million in punitive damages. During June of 2004, the court granted in
part the plaintiff’s motion for a larger actual damages award and increased the
award to $500,000. The court also granted in part defendants’ motion to reduce
the amount of punitive damages awarded by the jury and reduced the award to $5.0
million. Defendants have appealed.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
Thompson
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. (Circuit
Court, Jackson County, Missouri). During November of 2003, the jury awarded
actual damages and damages for loss of consortium to the plaintiffs and did not
award punitive damages. The final judgment entered by the court reflects the
jury’s findings that the smoker was 50% contributorily negligent and, as a
result, awarded the plaintiffs $1.1 million in damages. Defendants have
appealed.
Boerner
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District, Arkansas). During May of 2003, plaintiffs were
awarded $4.0 million in actual damages and $15.0 million in punitive damages.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reduced the punitive damages
award to $5.0 million but otherwise affirmed the judgment in a ruling issued
during January of 2005. The opportunity for Brown & Williamson to seek
further appellate review has not expired.
Eastman
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. (Circuit
Court, Pinellas County, Florida). During April of 2003, plaintiff was awarded
$6.5 million in actual damages. The jury also determined that plaintiff was 50%
responsible for his injuries, which had the effect of reducing his award to
approximately $655,000 from Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation and $2.6
million from Philip Morris USA. During May of 2004, the Florida Court of Appeal
affirmed the judgment. The court denied defendants’ petition for rehearing
during October of 2004. Defendants did not seek further appellate review of this
matter.
Bullock
v. Philip Morris USA
(Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California). During September and October
of 2002, plaintiff was awarded $5.5 million in actual damages and $28.0 billion
in punitive damages. The court reduced the punitive damages award to $28.0
million. Philip Morris and plaintiff have appealed.
Schwarz
v. Philip Morris Incorporated (Circuit
Court, Multnomah County, Oregon). During March of 2002, plaintiff was awarded
approximately $120,000 in economic damages, $50,000 in noneconomic damages and
$150.0 million in punitive damages, although the court subsequently reduced the
punitive damages award to $100.0 million. Many of plaintiff’s claims were
directed to allegations that the defendant had made false representations
regarding the low tar cigarettes smoked by the decedent. Philip Morris has
appealed.
Burton
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. (U.S.
District Court, Kansas). During February of 2002, plaintiff was awarded
approximately $200,000 in actual damages and the jury determined that plaintiff
was entitled to punitive damages. During June of 2002, the court awarded
plaintiff $15.0 million in punitive damages from R.J. Reynolds. During February
of 2005, a federal court of appeals affirmed the jury’s award of actual damages,
but it reversed the punitive damages verdict and instructed the trial court to
find in favor of R.J. Reynolds on that portion of plaintiff’s claims. The
opportunity for either party to seek further appellate review has not
expired.
Boeken
v. Philip Morris Incorporated
(Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California). During June of 2001, plaintiff
was awarded $5.5 million in actual damages and $3.0 billion in punitive damages.
The court reduced the punitive damages award to $100.0 million. During September
of 2004, the California Court of Appeal further reduced the punitive damages
award to $50.0 million but otherwise affirmed the judgment entered in favor of
the plaintiff. During October of 2004, the Court of Appeal granted the parties’
separate petitions that sought rehearing of its decision and it has vacated the
order it entered during September of 2004.
Jones
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (Circuit
Court, Hillsborough County, Florida). During October of 2000, plaintiff was
awarded $200,000 in actual damages. The court granted the defendant’s motion for
new trial. The Florida Court of Appeal affirmed this ruling. Plaintiff has filed
for permission to appeal to the Florida Supreme Court.
Williams
v. Philip Morris USA Inc. (Circuit
Court, Multnomah County, Oregon). During March of 1999, plaintiff was awarded
$21,000 in economic damages, $800,000 in actual damages and $79.5 million in
punitive damages. Although the circuit court reduced the punitive damages award
to $32.0 million following trial, the Oregon Court of Appeals reinstated the
full amount of the punitive damages verdict in its 2002 order that otherwise
affirmed the judgment in its entirety. During October of 2003, the U.S. Supreme
Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case to the Oregon Court of Appeals
for further consideration. During June of 2004, the Oregon Court of Appeals
reaffirmed its 2002 ruling and reinstated the full amount of the jury’s punitive
damages award. The Oregon Supreme Court has agreed to review the case.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
Henley
v. Philip Morris Incorporated
(Superior Court, San Francisco County, California). During February of 1999,
plaintiff was awarded $1.5 million in actual damages and $50.0 million in
punitive damages, although the court reduced the latter award to $25.0 million.
During September of 2003, the California Court of Appeals reduced the punitive
damages award to $9.0 million. During September of 2004, the California Supreme
Court dismissed the appeal filed by Philip Morris. Philip Morris has filed a
petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. The Court has not
ruled whether it will grant review.
Defense
verdicts have been returned in eleven matters since January 1, 2003. Neither
Lorillard nor the Company are defendants in any of these cases. Either appeals
are pending or all post-verdict activity has not been concluded in three of
these cases.
Martinez
v. Liggett Group, Inc. (Circuit
Court, Miami-Dade County, Florida). During February of 2005, a jury returned a
verdict in favor of the defendant. The opportunity for plaintiff to seek review
of the verdict has not expired.
Eiser
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. (Court
of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania). During August of 2003, the
jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. Plaintiff has
appealed.
Reller
v. Philip Morris USA
(Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California). During July of 2003, the jury
found that a smoker’s lung cancer was caused by smoking but declined to award
damages. The jury did not reach a verdict as to one of the claims that was
submitted to it. Trial of that claim began during January of 2005 and is
proceeding. A judgment reflecting the July of 2003 verdict will not be entered
until the remaining claim is resolved.
In eight
cases in which defendants prevailed at trial after January 1, 2003, plaintiffs
either chose not to appeal or have withdrawn their appeals and the cases are
concluded. These eight matters and the dates of the verdicts are Mash
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District, Missouri, September of 2004); Hall
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. (Circuit
Court, Hillsborough County, Florida, December of 2003); Longden
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
(Hillsborough Superior Court, Northern District, New Hampshire, November of
2003); Welch
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. (Circuit
Court, Jackson County, Missouri, June of 2003); Allen
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. (U.S.
District Court, Southern District, Florida, February of 2003); Inzerilla
v. The American Tobacco Company, et al. (Supreme
Court, Queens County, New York, February of 2003); Lucier
v. Philip Morris USA, et al.
(Superior Court, Sacramento County, California, February of 2003); and
Carter
v. Philip Morris USA (Court
of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, January of 2003). Lorillard
was not a defendant in any of these eight matters.
In
addition to these cases, trial has been held against Lorillard in one case in
which plaintiffs asserted both Conventional Product Liability claims and Filter
claims, the case of Gadaleta
v. AC&S, Inc., et al. (Supreme
Court, New York County, New York). During October of 2004, the jury returned a
verdict in favor of Lorillard, which was the only defendant in the case at
trial. Plaintiffs did not seek review of the judgment and the matter is
concluded. Also see Filter Cases below.
Trial is
proceeding in three Conventional Product Liability cases in the United States,
Coolidge
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
(Superior Court, Riverside County, California), Reller
v. Philip Morris USA
(Superior Court, Los Angeles County, California) and Rose
v. The American Tobacco Company, et al. (Supreme
Court, New York County, New York). Lorillard is not a defendant in these
matters. Some cases against U.S. cigarette manufacturers and manufacturers of
smokeless tobacco products are scheduled for trial during the remainder of 2005
and beyond. Lorillard is a defendant in two cases scheduled for trial during the
remainder of 2005. The Company is not a defendant in any of the cases scheduled
for trial. The trial dates are subject to change.
FLIGHT
ATTENDANT CASES - Approximately 2,665 Flight Attendant cases are pending.
Lorillard and three other cigarette manufacturers are the defendants in each of
these matters. The Company is not a defendant in any of these cases. These suits
were filed as a result of a settlement agreement by the parties, including
Lorillard, in Broin
v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc., et al. (Circuit
Court, Miami-Dade County, Florida, filed October 31, 1991), a class action
brought on behalf of flight attendants claiming injury as a result of exposure
to environmental tobacco smoke. The settlement agreement, among other things,
permitted the plaintiff class members to file these individual suits. These
individuals may not seek punitive damages for injuries that arose prior to
January 15, 1997.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
The
judges that have presided over the cases that have been tried have relied upon
an order entered during October of 2000 by the Circuit Court of Miami-Dade
County, Florida. The October 2000 order has been construed by these judges as
holding that the flight attendants are not required to prove the substantive
liability elements of their claims for negligence, strict liability and breach
of implied warranty in order to recover damages. The court further ruled that
the trials of these suits are to address whether the plaintiffs’ alleged
injuries were caused by their exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and, if
so, the amount of damages to be awarded. Defendants are continuing to seek
review of the October 2000 order by the appellate court.
Lorillard
has been a defendant in each of the six flight attendant cases in which verdicts
have been returned. In one of the six trials, the plaintiff was awarded $5.5
million in actual damages, although the court reduced the award to $500,000.
Defendants have noticed an appeal from this verdict and plaintiff has noticed a
cross-appeal. A Florida court of appeal has affirmed the judgment, although the
defendants are continuing their appeal. Defendants have prevailed in the five
other trials. In one of them, the court granted plaintiff’s motion for new
trial. A Florida court of appeal has affirmed this ruling, although the
defendants are continuing to appeal.
One of
the flight attendant cases is scheduled for trial. Trial dates are subject to
change.
CLASS
ACTION CASES - Lorillard is a defendant in eleven pending cases. The Company is
a defendant in two of these cases. In most of the pending cases, plaintiffs
purport to seek class certification on behalf of groups of cigarette smokers, or
the estates of deceased cigarette smokers, who reside in the state in which the
case was filed. One of the cases in which Lorillard is a defendant, Schwab
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., is a
purported national class action on behalf of purchasers of “light” cigarettes in
which plaintiffs’ claims are based on defendants’ alleged RICO violations. Trial
in Schwab is
scheduled for November of 2005. Neither Lorillard nor the Company are defendants
in approximately 30 additional class action cases pending against other
cigarette manufacturers in various courts throughout the nation. All of these 30
additional cases assert claims on behalf of smokers or purchasers of “light”
cigarettes.
Cigarette
manufacturers, including Lorillard, have defeated motions for class
certification in a total of 34 cases, 13 of which were in state court and 21 of
which were in federal court. These 34 cases were filed in 17 states, the
District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. In addition, a Nevada
court granted motions to deny class certification in 20 separate cases in which
the class definition asserted by the plaintiffs was identical to those in which
the court had previously ruled in defendants’ favor. Motions for class
certification have also been ruled upon in some of the “lights” cases or in
other class actions to which Lorillard was not a party. In some of these cases,
courts have denied class certification to the plaintiffs, while classes have
been certified in other matters.
The Engle
Case - One of the class actions pending against Lorillard is Engle
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., et al. (Circuit
Court, Miami-Dade County, Florida, filed May 5, 1994). Engle was
certified as a class action on behalf of Florida residents, and survivors of
Florida residents, who were injured or died from medical conditions allegedly
caused by addiction to cigarettes. During 2000, a jury awarded approximately
$16.3 billion in punitive damages against Lorillard as part of a $145.0 billion
verdict against all of the defendants. During May of 2003, a Florida appellate
court reversed the judgment and decertified the class. The court also held that
the claims for punitive damages asserted by Florida smokers were barred as these
claims are based on the same misconduct alleged in the case filed by the State
of Florida against cigarette manufacturers, including Lorillard, which was
concluded by a 1997 settlement agreement and judgment (see “Settlement of State
Reimbursement Litigation” below). The court subsequently denied plaintiffs’
motion for rehearing. The Florida Supreme Court agreed to hear plaintiffs’
appeal and it heard argument on November 3, 2004. Even if the Florida Supreme
Court were to rule in favor of the defendants, plaintiffs will not have
exhausted all of the appellate options available to them as they could seek
review of the case by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Company and Lorillard believe
that the appeals court’s decision should be upheld upon further
appeals.
The case
was tried between 1998-2000, and the same jury heard all phases of the trial.
The first phase, which involved certain issues deemed common to the certified
class, ended on July 7, 1999 with findings against the defendants, including
Lorillard. Among other things, the jury found that cigarette smoking is
addictive and causes lung cancer and a variety of other diseases, that the
defendants concealed information about the health risks of smoking, and that
defendants’ conduct rose to a level that would permit a potential award or
entitlement to punitive damages.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
The first
portion of Phase Two of the trial ended on April 7, 2000 when the jury awarded
three plaintiffs $12.5 million in damages for their individual claims. The jury
did not consider any class-wide issues during this first portion of Phase
Two.
The
second part of Phase Two considered evidence as to the punitive damages to be
awarded to the class. On July 14, 2000, the jury awarded approximately $145.0
billion in punitive damages against all defendants, including $16.3 billion
against Lorillard. The judgment provided that the jury’s awards would bear
interest at the rate of 10.0% per year.
During
May of 2000, while the trial was proceeding, legislation was enacted in Florida
that limited the amount of an appellate bond required to be posted in order to
stay execution of a judgment for punitive damages in a certified class action.
While Lorillard believes this legislation is valid and that any challenges to
the possible application or constitutionality of this legislation would fail,
Lorillard entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs during May of 2001 in
which it contributed $200.0 million to a fund held for the benefit of the
Engle
plaintiffs (the “Engle
Agreement”). The $200.0 million contribution included the $100.0 million that
Lorillard posted as collateral for the appellate bond. Accordingly, Lorillard
recorded a pretax charge of $200.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2001.
Two other defendants executed agreements with the plaintiffs that were similar
to Lorillard’s. As a result, the class agreed to a stay of execution, with
respect to Lorillard and the two other defendants on its punitive damages
judgment until appellate review is completed, including any review by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
The
Engle
Agreement provides that in the event that Lorillard, Inc.’s balance sheet net
worth falls below $921.2 million (as determined in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles in effect as of July 14, 2000), the stay granted
in favor of Lorillard in the Engle
Agreement would terminate and the class would be free to challenge the Florida
legislation. As of December 31, 2004, Lorillard, Inc. had a balance sheet net
worth of approximately $1.3 billion.
In
addition, the Engle
Agreement requires Lorillard to obtain the written consent of class counsel or
the court prior to selling any trademark of or formula comprising a cigarette
brand having a U.S. market share of 0.5% or more during the preceding calendar
year. The Engle
Agreement also requires Lorillard to obtain the written consent of the Engle
class counsel or the court to license to a third party the right to manufacture
or sell such a cigarette brand unless the cigarettes to be manufactured under
the license will be sold by Lorillard. It is not clear how the Engle
Agreement is affected by the decertification of the class and by the order
vacating the judgment. Lorillard is a defendant in eleven separate cases pending
in the Florida courts in which the plaintiffs claim that they are members of the
Engle class,
that all liability issues associated with their claims were resolved in the
earlier phases of the Engle
proceedings, and that trials on their claims should proceed immediately. Prior
to the May 2003 appellate ruling that vacated the Engle judgment
and decertified the class, Lorillard opposed trials of these actions on the
grounds that they should be considered during Phase Three of the Engle case and
should be stayed while the Engle appeal is proceeding. Additional cases with
similar contentions are pending against other cigarette manufacturers. In one of
the matters in which Lorillard was not a party, a jury in the Circuit Court of
Miami-Dade County, Florida returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs during
June of 2002 in the case of Lukacs
v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation, et al. and
awarded them $500,000 in economic damages, $24.5 million in noneconomic damages
and $12.5 million in damages for loss of consortium. The court has reduced the
loss of consortium award to $125,000. No post-trial motions are scheduled to be
filed in Lukacs as a
final judgment reflecting the verdict will not be entered until the Engle appeal
is resolved. None of the cases in which plaintiffs contend they are members of
the Engle class
are now expected to proceed until all appellate activity in Engle is
concluded.
The Scott
case - Another class action pending against Lorillard is Scott
v. The American Tobacco Company, et al.
(District Court, Orleans Parish, Louisiana, filed May 24, 1996). During 1997,
the court certified a class comprised of certain cigarette smokers resident in
the State of Louisiana who desire to participate in medical monitoring or
smoking cessation programs and who began smoking prior to September 1, 1988, or
who began smoking prior to May 24, 1996 and allege that defendants undermined
compliance with the warnings on cigarette packages.
Trial in
Scott was
heard in two phases. While the jury in its July 2003 Phase I verdict rejected
medical monitoring, the primary relief requested by plaintiffs, it returned
sufficient findings in favor of the class to proceed to a Phase II trial on
plaintiffs’ request for a state-wide smoking cessation program. The second phase
of the trial began in March of 2004.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
During
May of 2004, the jury returned its verdict in the trial’s second phase and
awarded approximately $591.0 million to fund cessation programs for Louisiana
smokers. The court’s final judgment, entered during June of 2004, reflects the
jury’s award of damages and also awarded judicial interest. The judicial
interest award will continue to accrue until the judgment is paid. As of
December 31, 2004 judicial interest totaled an additional amount of
approximately $355.0 million. Lorillard’s share of the judgment and the judicial
interest has not been determined. The court denied defendants’ motion for
judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, for new trial.
Lorillard and the other defendants have initiated an appeal from the judgment to
the Louisiana Court of Appeals. The parties filed a stipulation in the trial
court agreeing that an article of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, and a
Louisiana statute governing the amount of appellate bonds in civil cases
involving a signatory to the Master Settlement Agreement, required that the
amount of the bond for the appeal be set at $50.0 million for all defendants
collectively. The parties further agreed that the plaintiffs have full
reservations of rights to contest in the trial court, at a later date, the
sufficiency or amount of the bond on any grounds. The trial court entered an
order setting the amount of the bond at $50.0 million for all defendants.
Defendants collectively posted a surety bond in that amount, of which Lorillard
secured 25%, or $12.5 million. While Lorillard believes the limitation on the
appeal bond amount is valid and required by Louisiana law, and that any
challenges to the amount of the bond would fail, in the event of a successful
challenge the amount of the appeal bond could be set as high as 150% of the
judgment and judicial interest combined. If such an event occurred, it has not
been determined what would be Lorillard’s share of the appeal bond.
Other
Class Action Cases - In five additional class actions in which Lorillard has
been a defendant, courts have granted plaintiffs’ motions for class
certification. Two of these matters have been resolved in favor of the
defendants and plaintiffs’ claims in a third case were resolved through a
settlement agreement. In another of the cases, the court has entered a tentative
ruling decertifying the class action but that order is not final. These five
matters are listed below in alphabetical order:
Blankenship
v. American Tobacco Company, et al. (Circuit
Court, Ohio County, West Virginia, filed January 31, 1997). During 2000, the
court certified a class comprised of certain West Virginia cigarette smokers who
sought, among other things, medical monitoring. During November of 2001, the
jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants, including Lorillard. During
May of 2004, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment
entered in favor of the defendants, and it denied plaintiffs’ petition for
rehearing during July of 2004. Plaintiffs did not seek further appellate review
of this matter and the case has been concluded in favor of the defendants.
Broin
v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc., et al. (Circuit
Court, Miami-Dade County, Florida, filed October 31, 1991). This is the matter
concluded by a settlement agreement and discussed under “Flight Attendant Cases”
above.
Brown
v. The American Tobacco Company, Inc., et al.
(Superior Court, San Diego County, California, filed June 10, 1997). During
2001, the court certified a class comprised of residents of California who
smoked at least one of defendants’ cigarettes between June 10, 1993 and April
23, 2001 and who were exposed to defendants’ marketing and advertising
activities in California. During January of 2005, the court issued a preliminary
order that granted defendants’ motion to decertify the class. The court has not
entered a final order.
Daniels
v. Philip Morris, Incorporated, et al.
(Superior Court, San Diego County, California, filed August 2, 1998). During
2000, the court certified a class comprised of California residents who, while
minors, smoked at least one cigarette between April of 1994 and December 31,
1999 and were exposed to defendants’ marketing and advertising activities in
California. During 2002, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary
judgment and entered final judgment in their favor. During October of 2004, the
California Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of the case. The Court of
Appeal subsequently denied plaintiffs’ motion for rehearing. The California
Supreme Court has granted review of the case.
In
re: Simon II Litigation v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et
al. (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District, New York, filed September 6, 2000). During
2002, the case was certified as a nationwide non-opt out class comprised of the
punitive damages claims asserted by individuals who allege certain injuries or
medical conditions allegedly caused by smoking. Certain individuals, including
those who allege membership in the class certified in Engle
v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al., were
excluded from the class. Defendants are appealing the ruling.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
As
discussed above, motions for class certification have been granted in some cases
in which Lorillard is not a defendant. One of these is the case of Price
v. Philip Morris USA (Circuit
Court, Madison County, Illinois, filed February 10, 2000). Plaintiffs in
Price
contended they were defrauded by Philip Morris’ marketing of its cigarettes
labeled as “light” or “ultra light.” Price was certified as a class comprised of
Illinois residents who purchased certain of Philip Morris’ “light” brands.
During March of 2003, the court returned a verdict in favor of the class and
awarded it $7.1 billion in actual damages. The court also awarded $3.0 billion
in punitive damages to the State of Illinois, which was not a party to the suit,
and awarded plaintiffs’ counsel approximately $1.8 billion in fees and costs.
Pursuant to Illinois law and according to the final judgment that reflected
these awards, Philip Morris USA would have been required to post a bond of
approximately $12.0 billion in order to pursue an appeal from the judgment. The
Illinois Supreme Court permitted Philip Morris USA to post a bond in the amount
of approximately $6.0 billion and accepted direct appellate review of the
appeal. The Illinois Supreme Court heard argument in Philip Morris USA’s appeal
during November of 2004. Philip Morris USA has initiated a separate action in
the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, in which it seeks a declaration that
the state has released any right or interest in the punitive damages award.
While approximately 30 purported “lights” class actions are pending against U.S.
cigarette manufacturers, Lorillard is a defendant in one such case, Schwab
v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al. (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District, New York), a purported national class action
in which plaintiffs’ claims are based on defendants’ alleged RICO violations.
The court has advised the parties that it will announce its decision on class
certification during August of 2005. Trial of Schwab is
scheduled to begin during November of 2005.
REIMBURSEMENT
CASES - Although the cases settled by the State Settlement Agreements, as
described below, are concluded, certain matters are pending against cigarette
manufacturers. The pending cases include Reimbursement cases on file in U.S.
courts, a Reimbursement case on file in Israel, and cases challenging the State
Settlement Agreements. Lorillard is a defendant in four pending Reimbursement
cases in the U.S. and has been named as a party to the case in Israel. The
Company is a defendant in two of the pending U.S. cases and also has been named
as a party to the case in Israel. Additional cases are pending against other
cigarette manufacturers. The plaintiffs in these cases have included the U.S.
federal government, U.S. state, county or city governments, foreign governments
that have filed suits in U.S. courts, American Indian tribes, labor union health
and welfare funds, hospitals or hospital districts, private companies and
private citizens. Plaintiffs in some of these cases sought certification as
class actions.
More than
75 cases filed by labor union health and welfare funds as well as more than 35
cases filed by foreign governments in U.S. courts have been dismissed, either
due to orders that granted defendants’ dispositive motions or as the result of
plaintiffs’ voluntary dismissal of their claims. Each of the courts of appeal
that reviewed these dismissals have affirmed the trial courts’
orders.
U.S.
Federal Government Action - A bench trial of the U.S. federal government’s
reimbursement and racketeering case began during September of 2004 and is
proceeding (United
States of America v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., et al., U.S.
District Court, District of Columbia, filed September 22, 1999). Lorillard is a
defendant in this case. Other defendants include other cigarette manufacturers,
two parent companies and two trade associations. The Company is not a defendant
in this action. The trial involves issues as to whether the defendants,
including Lorillard, violated RICO, and conspired to do so. At the time trial
began during September of 2004, the government sought an aggregate of
approximately $280.0 billion in disgorgement of profits from the defendants,
including Lorillard, as well as injunctive relief. During February of 2005, a
federal court of appeals ruled that the government is not permitted to recover
disgorgement of profits under RICO, although this order is not final because the
government has advised the court that it will seek rehearing of this decision.
In addition, the trial court has not fully assessed the impact of this decision
on the conduct of the trial. Prior to trial, the court dismissed plaintiff’s two
other claims, which alleged the defendants violated the Medical Care Recovery
Act and Medicare as Secondary Payer provisions of the Social Security Act.
Neither claim is being considered by the court during the trial.
Trial is
scheduled to begin during June of 2005 in City
of St. Louis, et al. v. American Tobacco Company, Inc., et al. (Circuit
Court, City of St. Louis, Missouri), a Reimbursement case filed on behalf of the
City of St. Louis and numerous Missouri hospitals. Lorillard is a defendant in
this action.
In the
most recent verdict in a Reimbursement case, which was returned in June of 2001
in Blue
Cross and Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc., et al. v. Philip Morris,
Incorporated, et al. (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District, New York), a jury awarded damages against the
defendants in the amount of approximately $17.8 million in actual
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
damages,
including approximately $1.5 million attributable to Lorillard. The jury’s
findings in favor of the defendants precluded any award of punitive damages. As
a result of the defendants’ successful appeal, the court entered judgment in
favor of the defendants during February of 2005. The claims asserted by all of
the plaintiffs in the action, including those of the additional Blue Cross
entities and self-insured parties that were not heard during the trial of
Empire’s claims, were dismissed with prejudice by the court’s
judgment.
In
addition to the above, the District Court of Jerusalem, Israel, has permitted a
private insurer in Israel, Clalit Health Services, to make service outside the
jurisdiction on the Company and Lorillard in a suit in which Clalit Health
Services seeks damages for providing treatment to individuals allegedly injured
by cigarette smoking. The Company and Lorillard have separately moved to set
aside the order that permitted service outside the jurisdiction. The court has
not ruled on the motions to set aside the attempted service.
SETTLEMENT
OF STATE REIMBURSEMENT LITIGATION - On November 23, 1998, Lorillard, Philip
Morris Incorporated, Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation and R.J.
Reynolds Tobacco Company, the “Original Participating Manufacturers,” entered
into a Master Settlement Agreement (“MSA”) with 46 states, the District of
Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands,
American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to settle
the asserted and unasserted health care cost recovery and certain other claims
of those states. These settling entities are generally referred to as the
“Settling States.” The Original Participating Manufacturers had previously
settled similar claims brought by Mississippi, Florida, Texas and Minnesota,
which together with the Master Settlement Agreement are generally referred to as
the “State Settlement Agreements.”
The State
Settlement Agreements provide that the agreements are not admissions,
concessions or evidence of any liability or wrongdoing on the part of any party,
and were entered into by the Original Participating Manufacturers to avoid the
further expense, inconvenience, burden and uncertainty of
litigation.
Lorillard
recorded pretax charges of $845.9 million, $785.2 million, and $1,062.2 million
($522.6 million, $489.5 million, and $646.1 million after taxes), for the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, to accrue its obligations
under the State Settlement Agreements. Lorillard’s portion of ongoing adjusted
payments and legal fees is based on its share of domestic cigarette shipments in
the year preceding that in which the payment is due. Accordingly, Lorillard
records its portions of ongoing settlement payments as part of cost of
manufactured products sold as the related sales occur.
The State
Settlement Agreements require that the domestic tobacco industry make annual
payments in the following amounts, subject to adjustment for several factors,
including inflation, market share and industry volume: $8.4 billion through 2007
and $9.4 billion thereafter. In addition, the domestic tobacco industry is
required to pay settling plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, subject to an annual cap
of $500.0 million, as well as an additional amount of up to $125.0 million in
each year beginning 2004 through 2008. These payment obligations are the several
and not joint obligations of each settling defendant.
The State
Settlement Agreements also include provisions relating to significant
advertising and marketing restrictions, public disclosure of certain industry
documents, limitations on challenges to tobacco control and underage use laws,
and other provisions.
From time
to time, lawsuits have been brought against Lorillard and other participating
manufacturers to the MSA, or against one or more of the states, challenging the
validity of that agreement on certain grounds, including as a violation of the
antitrust laws. Lorillard is a defendant in one such case. Lorillard understands
that additional such cases are proceeding against other defendants.
In
addition, in connection with the MSA, the Original Participating Manufacturers
entered into an agreement to establish a $5.2 billion trust fund payable between
1999 and 2010 to compensate the tobacco growing communities in 14 states.
Payments to the trust fund are allocated among the Original Participating
Manufacturers generally according to their relative domestic market share. Of
the total $5.2 billion, a total of $2.1 billion has been paid since 1999 through
December 31, 2004, $200.0 million of which has been paid by Lorillard. Lorillard
estimates its remaining payments under the agreement will total approximately
$300.0 - $350.0 million. All payments will be adjusted for inflation, changes in
the unit volume of domestic cigarette shipments, and the effect of increases in
state or federal excise taxes on tobacco products that benefit the tobacco
growing community. Lorillard believes that its payment obligations to tobacco
growers in 2004 and subsequent years under the trust fund will be wholly offset
by
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
payments
required under a federal law enacted in 2004 repealing the federal supply
management program for tobacco growers.
The
Company believes that the State Settlement Agreements will materially adversely
affect its cash flows and operating income in future years. The degree of the
adverse impact will depend, among other things, on the rates of decline in U.S.
cigarette sales in the premium price and discount price segments, Lorillard’s
share of the domestic premium price and discount price cigarette segments, and
the effect of any resulting cost advantage of manufacturers not subject to
significant payment obligations under the State Settlement Agreements.
CONTRIBUTION
CLAIMS - Plaintiffs seek recovery of funds paid by them to individuals whose
asbestos disease or illness was alleged to have been caused in whole or in part
by smoking-related illnesses. One such case is pending against Lorillard and
other cigarette manufacturers. The Company is not a defendant in this matter.
FILTER
CASES - In addition to the above, claims have been brought against Lorillard by
smokers as well as former employees of Lorillard seeking damages resulting from
alleged exposure to asbestos fibers that were incorporated into filter material
used in one brand of cigarettes manufactured by Lorillard for a limited period
of time, ending almost 50 years ago. Approximately 60 such matters are pending
against Lorillard. The Company is not a defendant in any of these matters. Since
January 1, 2003, Lorillard has paid, or has reached agreement to pay, a total of
approximately $13.2 million in payments of judgments and settlements to finally
resolve approximately 65 claims. Juries have returned verdicts in favor of
Lorillard in both of the cases that have been tried since January 1, 2003 in
which plaintiffs have asserted Filter claims, Sachs
v. Lorillard Tobacco Co. (U.S.
District Court, Maryland) and Gadaleta
v. AC&S, Inc., et al. (Supreme
Court of New York, New York County). Plaintiffs in Gadaleta asserted
both Filter claims and Conventional Product Liability claims. Trial dates are
scheduled in some of the pending cases. Trial dates are subject to
change.
Other
Tobacco - Related
TOBACCO -
RELATED ANTITRUST CASES - Indirect
Purchaser Suits -
Approximately 30 antitrust suits were filed on behalf of putative classes of
consumers in various state courts against Lorillard and its major competitors.
The suits allege that the defendants entered into agreements to fix the
wholesale prices of cigarettes in violation of state antitrust laws which permit
indirect purchasers, such as retailers and consumers, to sue under price fixing
or consumer fraud statutes. Approximately 20 states permit such suits. Lorillard
is a defendant in all but one of these indirect purchaser cases. Three indirect
purchaser suits in New York, Florida and Michigan, were dismissed in their
entirety and plaintiffs have withdrawn their appeals. Since November 30, 2003,
the state court indirect purchaser price-fixing actions in the following states
have been voluntarily dismissed: Nevada, Minnesota, District of Columbia, South
Dakota, Michigan, Maine, West Virginia, North Dakota and Arizona. Motions to
approve stipulated orders of dismissal in all of the remaining actions, except
for New Mexico and Kansas, are pending. A decision granting class certification
in New Mexico was affirmed by the New Mexico Court of Appeals on February 8,
2005. The defendants will seek permission to appeal the decision from the New
Mexico Supreme Court. Discovery is proceeding in the Kansas case, and the
parties are in the process of litigating certain privilege issues with no date
having yet been set by the Court for dispositive motions and trial. The Company
was also named as a defendant in most of these indirect purchaser cases but has
been voluntarily dismissed without prejudice from all of them.
Tobacco
Growers Suit - DeLoach
v. Philip Morris Inc., et al. (U.S.
District Court, Middle District of North Carolina, filed February 16, 2000). On
October 1, 2003, the Court approved a settlement by Lorillard with a class
consisting of all persons holding a quota (the licenses that a farmer must
either own or rent to sell the crop) to grow, and all domestic producers who
sold flue-cured or burley tobacco at anytime from February 1996 to present. In
addition to payments previously made, Lorillard has committed to buy 20 million
pounds of domestic tobacco for each year through 2012. Lorillard has also
committed to purchase at least 35% of its annual total requirements for
flue-cured and burley tobacco domestically for the same period. The other major
domestic tobacco companies and the major leaf buyers are also defendants, and
all of the defendants with the exception of R.J. Reynolds were parties to the
settlement agreement entered on October 1, 2003. R.J. Reynolds signed a
settlement agreement with the class on April 22, 2004. That agreement has been
approved by the court but no proceeds have been distributed. Lorillard contends
that the R.J. Reynolds settlement agreement triggers a clause in Lorillard’s
settlement agreement that
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Tobacco Related -
(Continued) |
would
substantially reduce Lorillard’s commitments to buy domestic tobacco. The court
has ruled against Lorillard on that issue and the matter is currently under
appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit.
MSA
Federal Antitrust Suit - Sanders
v. Lockyer, et al. (U.S.
District Court, Northern District of California, filed June 9, 2004). Lorillard
and the other major cigarette manufacturers, along with the Attorney General of
the State of California, have been sued by a consumer purchaser of cigarettes in
a putative class action alleging violations of the Sherman Act and California
state antitrust and unfair competition laws. The plaintiff seeks treble damages
of an unstated amount for the putative class as well as declaratory and
injunctive relief. All claims are based on the assertion that the Master
Settlement Agreement that Lorillard and the other cigarette manufacturer
defendants entered into with the State of California and more than forty other
states, together with certain implementing legislation enacted by California,
constitute unlawful restraints of trade. The defendants filed a motion to
dismiss the complaint on August 19, 2004, which was heard in December 2004. No
decision has been reached on that motion.
Vending
Machine Operators Antitrust Suit - Genesee
Vending, Inc., et al. v. Lorillard Tobacco Co. (U.S.
District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, filed May 14, 2004). More than 220
cigarette vending machine operators have instituted a suit against Lorillard
individually and on behalf of a putative class of all domestic cigarette vending
machine operators, claiming that Lorillard has violated the federal
Robinson-Patman Act by allegedly discriminating against them in price and with
respect to advertising and promotional payments and services provided in
connection with the sale of cigarettes to competing convenience stores, gasoline
stations, mini-marts, kiosks and discount stores. On November 2, 2004, The Court
granted Lorillard’s motion to dismiss the action. Plaintiffs then filed a first
amended complaint on December 10, 2004. Lorillard also has moved to dismiss this
Complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. A hearing
on that motion is scheduled for April 6, 2005.
REPARATION
CASES - During 2002, the Company was named as a defendant in three cases in
which plaintiffs seek reparations for the alleged financial benefits derived
from the uncompensated use of slave labor. These three cases are pending in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois as a result of a
multi-district litigation proceeding. The Company was named as a defendant in
these matters as a result of conduct purportedly engaged in by predecessors to
Lorillard and various other entities. Plaintiffs in these suits seek various
types of damages including disgorgement of profits, restitution and punitive
damages. Plaintiffs seek class certification on behalf of the descendants of
enslaved African Americans.
Defenses
Lorillard
believes that it has valid defenses to the cases pending against it. Lorillard
also believes it has valid bases for appeal of the adverse verdicts against it.
To the extent the Company is a defendant in any of the lawsuits described in
this section, the Company believes that it is not a proper defendant in these
matters and has moved or plans to move for dismissal of all such claims against
it. While Lorillard intends to defend vigorously all tobacco products liability
litigation, it is not possible to predict the outcome of any of this litigation.
Litigation is subject to many uncertainties. Plaintiffs have prevailed in
several cases, as noted above. It is possible that one or more of the pending
actions could be decided unfavorably as to Lorillard or the other defendants.
Lorillard may enter into discussions in an attempt to settle particular cases if
it believes it is appropriate to do so.
Lorillard
cannot predict the outcome of pending litigation. Jury awards in the billions of
dollars have been returned against cigarette manufacturers in recent years. In
addition, health issues related to tobacco products continue to receive media
attention. These events could have an adverse affect on the ability of Lorillard
to prevail in smoking and health litigation. Lorillard also cannot predict the
type or extent of litigation that could be brought against it and other
cigarette manufacturers in the future.
Except
for the impact of the State Settlement Agreements as described above, management
is unable to make a meaningful estimate of the amount or range of loss that
could result from an unfavorable outcome of pending litigation and, therefore,
no provision has been made in the Consolidated Financial Statements for any
unfavorable outcome. It is possible that the Company’s results of operations or
cash flows in a particular quarterly or annual period or its financial position
could be materially adversely affected by an unfavorable outcome or settlement
of certain pending litigation.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
21. Legal Proceedings - Other Litigation - (Continued)
|
OTHER
LITIGATION
The
Company and its subsidiaries are also parties to other litigation arising in the
ordinary course of business. The outcome of this other litigation will not, in
the opinion of management, materially affect the Company’s results of operations
or equity.
Note
22. Commitments and Contingencies
Guarantees
CNA holds
an investment in a real estate joint venture that is accounted for on the equity
basis of accounting. CNA on a joint and several basis with other unrelated
insurance company shareholders have committed to continue funding the operating
deficits of this joint venture. Additionally, CNA and the other unrelated
shareholders, on a joint and several basis, have guaranteed an operating lease
for an office building which expires in 2016.
The
guarantee of the operating lease is a parallel guarantee to the commitment to
fund operating deficits; consequently, the separate guarantee to the lessor is
not expected to be triggered as long as the joint venture continues to be funded
by its shareholders and continues to make its annual lease
payments.
In the
event that the other parties to the joint venture are unable to meet their
commitments in funding the operations of this joint venture, CNA would be
required to assume the obligation for the entire office building operating
lease. The maximum potential future lease payments at December 31, 2004 that CNA
could be required to pay under this guarantee is approximately $312.0 million.
If CNA was required to assume the entire lease obligation, CNA would have the
right to pursue reimbursement from the other shareholders and would have the
right to all sublease revenues.
CNA has
provided guarantees related to irrevocable standby letters of credit for certain
of its subsidiaries. Certain of these subsidiaries have been sold; however, the
irrevocable standby letter of credit guarantees remain in effect. CNA would be
required to make payment on the letters of credit in question if the primary
obligor drew down on these letters of credit and failed to repay such loans in
accordance with the terms of the letters of credit. The maximum potential amount
of future payments that CNA could be required to pay under these guarantees is
approximately $30.0 million at December 31, 2004.
In the
course of selling business entities and assets to third parties, CNA has agreed
to indemnify purchasers for losses arising out of breaches of representation and
warranties with respect to the business entities or assets being sold,
including, in certain cases, losses arising from undisclosed liabilities or
certain named litigation. Such indemnification provisions generally survive for
periods ranging from nine months following the applicable closing date to the
expiration of the relevant statutes of limitation. As of December 31, 2004, the
aggregate amount of quantifiable indemnification agreements in effect for sales
of business entities and assets was $950.0 million.
In
addition, CNA has agreed to provide indemnification to third party purchasers
for certain losses associated with sold business entities or assets that are not
limited by a contractual monetary amount. As of December 31, 2004, CNA had
outstanding unlimited indemnifications in connection with the sales of certain
of its business entities or assets for tax liabilities arising prior to a
purchaser’s ownership of an entity or asset, defects in title at the time of
sale, employee claims arising prior to closing and in some cases losses arising
from certain litigation and undisclosed liabilities. These indemnification
agreements survive until the applicable statutes of limitation expire, or until
the agreed upon contract terms expire. As of December 31, 2004, CNA has recorded
approximately $21.0 million of liabilities related to these indemnification
agreements.
In
connection with the issuance of preferred securities by CNA Surety Capital Trust
I, CNA Surety issued a guarantee of $75.0 million to guarantee the payment by
CNA Surety Capital Trust I of annual dividends of $1.5 million over 30 years and
redemption of $30.0 million of preferred securities. See Note 12 for further
description of debentures issued by CNA Surety, which are the sole assets of CNA
Surety Capital Trust I.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
22. Commitments and Contingencies -
(Continued) |
CNA
Surety
CNA
Surety has provided significant surety bond protection for a large national
contractor that undertakes projects for the construction of government and
private facilities, a substantial portion of which have been reinsured by CCC.
In order to help this contractor meet its liquidity needs and complete projects
which had been bonded by CNA Surety, commencing in 2003 CNA has provided loans
to the contractor through a credit facility. In December of 2004, the credit
facility was amended to increase the maximum available loans to $106.0 million
from $86.0 million. The amendment also provides that CNA may in its sole
discretion further increase the amounts available for loans under the credit
facility, up to an aggregate maximum of $126.0 million. As of December 31, 2004
and 2003, there were $99.0 million and $80.0 million of total debt outstanding
under the credit facility. Additional loans in January and February of 2005
brought the total debt outstanding under the credit facility, less accrued
interest, to $104.0 million as of February 24, 2005. The Company, through a
participation agreement with CNA, provided funds for and owned a participation
of $29.0 million and $25.0 million of the loans outstanding as of December 31,
2004 and 2003 and has agreed to participation of one-third of any additional
loans which may be made above the original $86.0 million credit facility limit
up to the $126.0 million maximum available line.
In
connection with the amendment to increase the maximum available line under the
credit facility in December of 2004, the term of the loan under the credit
facility was extended to mature in March of 2009 and the interest rate was
reduced prospectively from 6.0% over prime rate to 5.0% per annum, effective as
of December 27, 2004, with an additional 3.0% interest accrual when borrowings
under the facility are at or below the original $86.0 million
limit.
Loans
under the credit facility are secured by a pledge of substantially all of the
assets of the contractor and certain of its affiliates. In connection with the
credit facility, CNA has also guaranteed or provided collateral for letters of
credit which are charged against the maximum available line and, if drawn upon,
would be treated as loans under the credit facility. As of December 31, 2004 and
2003, these guarantees and collateral obligations aggregated $13.0 million and
$7.0 million.
The
contractor implemented a restructuring plan intended to reduce costs and improve
cash flow, and appointed a chief restructuring officer to manage execution of
the plan. In the course of addressing various expense, operational and strategic
issues, however, the contractor has decided to substantially reduce the scope of
its original business and to concentrate on those segments determined to be
potentially profitable. As a consequence, operating cash flow, and in turn the
capacity to service debt, has been reduced below previous levels. Restructuring
plans have also been extended to accommodate these circumstances. In light of
these developments, the Company has taken an impairment charge of $80.5 million
pretax for the fourth quarter of 2004, with respect to amounts loaned under the
facility. Any draws under the credit facility beyond $106.0 million or further
changes in the national contractor’s business plan or projections may
necessitate further impairment charges.
As a
result of the impairment taken in the fourth quarter of 2004, the Company plans
to recognize income using the effective interest rate method starting in the
first quarter of 2005. Under this method, interest income recognized will be
accrued on the net carrying amount of the loan at the effective interest rate
used to discount the impaired loan’s estimated future cash flows. The excess of
the cash received over the interest income recognized will reduce the carrying
amount of the loan. The change in present value, if any, of the loan that is
attributable to changes in the amount or timing of future cash flows will be
recorded similar to the impairment charges previously recorded.
CNA
Surety has advised that it intends to continue to provide surety bonds on behalf
of the contractor during this extended restructuring period, subject to the
contractor’s initial and ongoing compliance with CNA Surety’s underwriting
standards and ongoing management of CNA Surety’s exposure to the contractor. All
bonds written for the national contractor are issued by CCC and its affiliates,
other than CNA Surety, and are subject to underlying reinsurance treaties
pursuant to which all bonds on behalf of CNA Surety are 100% reinsured to one of
CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries. This arrangement underlies the more limited
reinsurance coverages discussed below.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
22. Commitments and Contingencies -
(Continued) |
Through facultative reinsurance contracts with CCC, CNA Surety’s exposure on
bonds written from October 1, 2002 through October 31, 2003 has been limited to
$20.0 million per bond, with CCC to incur 100% of losses above that level. For
bonds written on or subsequent to November 1, 2003, CNA Surety’s exposure is
limited to $14.5 million per bond subject to a per principal retention of $60.0
million and an aggregate limit of $150.0 million under all facultative
reinsurance coverage and two excess of loss treaties between CNA Surety and CCC.
The first excess of loss contract, $40.0 million excess of $60.0 million,
provides CNA Surety coverage exclusively for the national contractor, while the
second excess of loss contract, $50.0 million excess of $100.0 million, provides
CNA Surety with coverage for the national contractor as well as other CNA Surety
risks. For bonds written prior to September 30, 2002 there is no facultative
reinsurance and CCC retains 100% of the losses above the per principal retention
of $60.0 million.
Renewals
of both excess of loss contracts were effective January 1, 2005. CCC and CNA
Surety are presently discussing a possible restructuring of the reinsurance
arrangements discussed in the paragraph above, under which all bonds written for
the national contractor would be reinsured by CCC under an excess of $60.0
million treaty and other CNA Surety accounts would be covered by a separate
$50.0 million excess of $100.0 million treaty.
CCC and
CNA Surety continue to engage in periodic discussions with insurance regulatory
authorities regarding the level of bonds provided for this principal and will
continue to apprise those authorities regarding their ongoing exposure to this
account.
Indemnification
and subrogation rights, including rights to contract proceeds on construction
projects in the event of default, exist that reduce CNA Surety’s and ultimately
the Company’s exposure to loss. While CNA believes that the contractor’s
continuing restructuring efforts may be successful and provide sufficient cash
flow for its operations, the contractor’s failure to ultimately achieve its
extended restructuring plan or perform its contractual obligations under the
credit facility or under CNA’s surety bonds could have a material adverse effect
on the Company’s results of operations and/ or equity. If such failures occur,
CNA estimates the surety loss, net of indemnification and subrogation
recoveries, but before the effects of minority interest, to be approximately
$200.0 million pretax. In addition, such failures could cause the remaining
unimpaired amount due under the credit facility to be
uncollectible.
CCC
provided an excess of loss reinsurance contract to the insurance subsidiaries of
CNA Surety over a period that expired on December 31, 2000 (the “stop loss
contract”). The stop loss contract limits the net loss ratios for CNA Surety
with respect to certain accounts and lines of insurance business. In the event
that CNA Surety’s accident year net loss ratio exceeds 24.0% for 1997 through
2000 (the “contractual loss ratio”), the stop loss contract requires CCC to pay
amounts equal to the amount, if any, by which CNA Surety’s actual accident year
net loss ratio exceeds the contractual loss ratio multiplied by the applicable
net earned premiums. The minority shareholders of CNA Surety do not share in any
losses that apply to this contract. There
were no reinsurance balances payable under this stop loss contract as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003.
Effective
October 1, 2002, CCC provided an excess of loss protection for new and renewal
bonds for CNA Surety for each principal exposure that exceeds $60.0 million
since October 1, 2002 in two parts - a) $40.0 million excess of $60.0 million
and b) $50.0 million excess of $100.0 million for CNA Surety. Effective January
1, 2004, this contract was commuted and CCC paid CNA Surety $11.0 million in
return premium in the first quarter of 2004 based on experience under the
contract. Effective October 1, 2003, CCC entered into a $3.0 million excess of
$12.0 million excess of loss contract with CNA Surety. The reinsurance premium
for the coverage provided by the $3.0 million excess of $12.0 million contract
was $0.3 million plus, if applicable, additional premiums based on paid losses.
The contract provided for aggregate coverage of $12.0 million. This contract
expired on December 31, 2004. Effective January 1, 2004, CNA obtained
replacement coverage from third party reinsurers as part of the 2004 Excess of
Loss Treaty.
Regulatory
and Rate Matters
The FERC
regulatory processes and procedures govern the maximum tariff rates that Texas
Gas and Gulf South are permitted to charge for interstate transportation and
storage of natural gas. Texas Gas is required to file a new rate case with the
FERC in 2005 to obtain approval of its rates. Key determinants in the ratemaking
process are costs
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
22. Commitments and Contingencies -
(Continued) |
of
providing service, including depreciation rates; allowed rate of return,
including the equity component of Texas Gas’s capital structure; and volume
throughput assumptions.
Certain
revenues may be subject to refund upon final orders in pending rate cases with
the FERC. Accordingly, Texas Gas records a liability for its estimate of
potential refunds to customers in future periods. At December 31, 2004, Texas
Gas had no pending rate case proceedings and no associated rate refunds. Texas
Gas is required to file a rate case with the FERC to be effective no later than
November 1, 2005. Gulf South is not currently obligated to file a new rate
case.
Other
In the
normal course of business, CNA has obtained letters of credit in favor of
various unaffiliated insurance companies, regulatory authorities and other
entities. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, there were approximately $47.0 million
and $58.0 million of outstanding letters of credit.
CNA has
entered into a limited number of guaranteed payment contracts, primarily
relating to telecommunication and software services, amounting to approximately
$36.0 million. Estimated future minimum payments under these contracts are as
follows: $19.0 million in 2005, $11.0 million in 2006 and $6.0 million in
2007.
Note
23. Business Segments
The
Company’s reportable segments are primarily based on its individual operating
subsidiaries. Each of the principal operating subsidiaries are headed by a chief
executive officer who is responsible for the operation of its business and has
the duties and authority commensurate with that position. Investment gains
(losses) and the related income taxes, excluding those of CNA Financial, are
included in the Corporate and other segment.
As a
result of CNA’s decisions to focus on property and casualty operations and to
exit certain businesses, the Company revised its reportable segment structure to
reflect changes in CNA’s core operations and how it makes business decisions.
CNA now manages its property and casualty operations in two operating segments
which represent CNA’s core operations: Standard Lines and Specialty Lines. The
non-core operations are now managed in Life and Group Non-Core Segment and Other
Insurance Segment. Standard Lines includes standard property and casualty
coverages sold to small and middle market commercial businesses primarily
through an independent agency distribution system, and excess and surplus lines,
as well as insurance and risk management products sold to large corporations in
the U.S. and globally. Specialty Lines provides professional, financial and
specialty property and casualty products and services. Life and Group Non-Core
primarily includes the results of the life and group lines of business sold or
placed in run-off. Other Insurance primarily includes the results of certain
property and casualty lines of business placed in run-off, including CNA Re.
This segment also includes the results related to the centralized adjusting and
settlement of APMT claims as well as the results of CNA’s participation in
voluntary insurance pools, which are primarily in run-off and various other
non-insurance operations. Prior period segment disclosures have been conformed
to the current year presentation.
The
changes made to the Company’s reportable segments were as follows: (1) Standard
Lines and Specialty Lines (formerly included in the Property and Casualty
segment) are now reported as separate individual segments; (2) CNA Global
(formerly included in Specialty Lines) which consists of marine and global
standard lines is now included in Standard Lines; (3) CNA Guaranty and Credit
(formerly included in Specialty Lines) is currently in run-off and is now
included in the Other Insurance segment; (4) CNA Re (formerly included in the
Property and Casualty segment) is currently in run-off and is also now included
in the Other Insurance segment; (5) Group Operations and Life Operations
(formerly separate reportable segments) have now been combined into one
reportable segment where the run-off of the retained group and life products
will be managed; and (6) certain run-off life and group operations (formerly
included in the Other Insurance segment) are now included in the Life and Group
Non-Core segment.
In
addition, the operations of Bulova were formerly reported in its own operating
segment and are now included in the Corporate and other
segment.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
23. Business Segments - (Continued) |
Lorillard
is engaged in the production and sale of cigarettes with its principal products
marketed under the brand names of Newport, Kent, True, Maverick and Old Gold
with substantially all of its sales in the United States.
Loews
Hotels owns and/or operates 20 hotels, 18 of which are in the United States and
two are in Canada.
Diamond
Offshore’s business primarily consists of operating 45 offshore drilling rigs
that are chartered on a contract basis for fixed terms by companies engaged in
exploration and production of hydrocarbons. Offshore rigs are mobile units that
can be relocated based on market demand. As of December 31, 2004, 24 of these
rigs were located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, 4 were located in Brazil, 4 were
located in Mexico and the remaining 13 were located in various foreign
markets.
Boardwalk
Pipelines is engaged, through its Texas Gas and Gulf South subsidiaries, in the
operation of interstate natural gas pipeline systems. Texas Gas owns and
operates a 5,900-mile natural gas pipeline system that transports natural gas
originating in the Louisiana Gulf Coast and East Texas and running north and
east through Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and
into Ohio, with smaller diameter lines extending into Illinois. Texas Gas has a
delivery capacity of 2.8 billion cubic feet (“Bcf”) per day and a working
storage capacity of 55 Bcf. Gulf South owns and operates an 8,000-mile
interstate natural gas pipeline, gathering and storage system located in the
states of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and northern Florida. The Gulf
South pipeline system is comprised of approximately 6,800 miles of interstate
transmission pipeline, 1,200 miles of gathering pipeline and 68.5 billion cubic
feet of working gas storage capacity.
The
Corporate and other segment consists primarily of corporate investment income,
including investment gains (losses) from non-insurance subsidiaries, the
operations of Bulova Corporation which distributes and sells watches and clocks,
equity earnings from shipping operations, as well as corporate interest expenses
and other corporate administrative costs.
The
accounting policies of the segments are the same as those described in the
summary of significant accounting policies. In addition, CNA does not maintain a
distinct investment portfolio for each of its insurance segments, and
accordingly, allocation of assets to each segment is not performed. Therefore,
net investment income and investment gains (losses) are allocated based on each
segment’s carried insurance reserves, as adjusted.
The
following tables set forth the Company’s consolidated revenues, income and
assets by business segment:
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
(a): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
5,760.1 |
|
$ |
5,496.8 |
|
$ |
5,389.0 |
|
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
2,727.8 |
|
|
2,270.7 |
|
|
1,691.7 |
|
Life
and Group Non-Core (b) |
|
|
1,093.0 |
|
|
3,218.9 |
|
|
4,252.7 |
|
Other
Insurance |
|
|
352.7 |
|
|
743.0 |
|
|
953.2 |
|
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
9,933.6 |
|
|
11,729.4 |
|
|
12,286.6 |
|
Lorillard |
|
|
3,384.4 |
|
|
3,295.4 |
|
|
3,843.7 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
315.2 |
|
|
286.0 |
|
|
266.4 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
835.6 |
|
|
694.9 |
|
|
783.9 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
265.1 |
|
|
143.2 |
|
|
|
|
Corporate
and other |
|
|
508.4 |
|
|
312.1 |
|
|
275.9 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
15,242.3 |
|
$ |
16,461.0 |
|
$ |
17,456.5 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
23. Business Segments - (Continued) |
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax
income (loss) (a)(d): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
476.8 |
|
$ |
(1,177.7 |
) |
$ |
119.5 |
|
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
574.9 |
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
104.1 |
|
Life
and Group Non-Core |
|
|
(678.9 |
) |
|
5.1 |
|
|
138.4 |
|
Other
Insurance |
|
|
141.9 |
|
|
(1,154.9 |
) |
|
(6.6 |
) |
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
514.7 |
|
|
(2,316.2 |
) |
|
355.4 |
|
Lorillard
(c) |
|
|
1,038.2 |
|
|
942.2 |
|
|
1,261.7 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
14.2 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
(9.8 |
) |
|
(53.2 |
) |
|
54.2 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
81.1 |
|
|
37.6 |
|
|
|
|
Corporate
and other |
|
|
166.6 |
|
|
(7.4 |
) |
|
(44.8 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
1,822.0 |
|
$ |
(1,378.4 |
) |
$ |
1,640.7 |
|
Net
income (loss) (a)(d): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
328.2 |
|
$ |
(644.8 |
) |
$ |
80.6 |
|
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
344.9 |
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
58.0 |
|
Life
and Group Non-Core |
|
|
(375.2 |
) |
|
4.4 |
|
|
80.9 |
|
Other
Insurance |
|
|
123.1 |
|
|
(653.9 |
) |
|
10.9 |
|
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
421.0 |
|
|
(1,258.2 |
) |
|
230.4 |
|
Lorillard
(c) |
|
|
641.4 |
|
|
587.6 |
|
|
765.8 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
21.4 |
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
8.7 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
(9.3 |
) |
|
(27.2 |
) |
|
14.1 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
48.8 |
|
|
22.5 |
|
|
|
|
Corporate
and other |
|
|
108.0 |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
(40.4 |
) |
|
|
|
1,231.3 |
|
|
(666.1 |
) |
|
978.6 |
|
Discontinued
operations |
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
23. Business Segments - (Continued) |
__________
(a) |
Investment
gains (losses) included in Revenues, Pretax income (loss) and Net income
(loss) are as follows: |
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
and pretax income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
218.7 |
|
$ |
361.0 |
|
$ |
(118.6 |
) |
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
83.9 |
|
|
114.0 |
|
|
(38.7 |
) |
Life
and Group Non-Core |
|
|
(611.0 |
) |
|
(141.0 |
) |
|
(175.2 |
) |
Other
Insurance |
|
|
63.9 |
|
|
139.4 |
|
|
80.3 |
|
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
(244.5 |
) |
|
473.4 |
|
|
(252.2 |
) |
Corporate
and other |
|
|
(11.5 |
) |
|
(9.3 |
) |
|
121.2 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
(256.0 |
) |
$ |
464.1 |
|
$ |
(131.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
126.2 |
|
$ |
211.1 |
|
$ |
(71.1 |
) |
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
49.6 |
|
|
66.7 |
|
|
(22.1 |
) |
Life
and Group Non-Core |
|
|
(349.0 |
) |
|
(97.6 |
) |
|
(103.6 |
) |
Other
Insurance |
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
85.5 |
|
|
63.8 |
|
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
(137.1 |
) |
|
265.7 |
|
|
(133.0 |
) |
Corporate
and other |
|
|
(7.5 |
) |
|
(3.9 |
) |
|
66.8 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
(144.6 |
) |
$ |
261.8 |
|
$ |
(66.2 |
) |
(b) |
Includes
$1,151.0 under contracts covering U.S. government employees and
their
dependents
for the year ended December 31, 2002. |
(c) |
Includes pretax charges related to the settlement of tobacco litigation of
$845.9, $785.2 and $1,062.2 ($522.6, $489.5 and $646.1 after taxes) for
the respective periods. |
(d) |
Income taxes and interest expense are as
follows: |
Year
Ended December 31 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
|
|
Income |
|
Interest |
|
Income |
|
Interest |
|
Income |
|
Interest |
|
|
|
Taxes |
|
Expense |
|
Taxes |
|
Expense |
|
Taxes |
|
Expense |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard
Lines |
|
$ |
107.4 |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
$ |
(464.3 |
) |
$ |
0.9 |
|
$ |
16.3 |
|
$ |
1.4 |
|
Specialty
Lines |
|
|
180.0 |
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
(18.6 |
) |
|
1.6 |
|
|
25.8 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
Life
and Group Non-Core |
|
|
(267.7 |
) |
|
24.9 |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
13.4 |
|
|
47.6 |
|
|
25.1 |
|
Other
Insurance |
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
90.7 |
|
|
(418.7 |
) |
|
113.9 |
|
|
(17.4 |
) |
|
120.9 |
|
Total
CNA Financial |
|
|
33.8 |
|
|
123.9 |
|
|
(901.8 |
) |
|
129.8 |
|
|
72.3 |
|
|
149.5 |
|
Lorillard |
|
|
396.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
354.5 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
495.8 |
|
|
|
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
9.5 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
30.2 |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
|
23.9 |
|
|
21.9 |
|
|
23.6 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
32.3 |
|
|
30.1 |
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
19.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
and other |
|
|
58.1 |
|
|
134.2 |
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
126.2 |
|
|
(15.6 |
) |
|
127.0 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
533.8 |
|
$ |
324.1 |
|
$ |
(534.1 |
) |
$ |
308.4 |
|
$ |
579.8 |
|
$ |
309.6 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
23. Business Segments - (Continued) |
|
|
Investments |
|
Receivables |
|
Total
Assets |
|
December
31 |
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
2004
|
|
2003
|
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CNA
Financial |
|
$ |
39,227.3 |
|
$ |
38,121.5 |
|
$ |
18,306.0 |
|
$ |
20,154.5 |
|
$ |
62,434.7 |
|
$ |
68,560.5 |
|
Lorillard |
|
|
1,545.6 |
|
|
1,530.2 |
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
2,677.7 |
|
|
2,624.9 |
|
Loews
Hotels |
|
|
63.8 |
|
|
81.4 |
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
562.2 |
|
|
571.9 |
|
Diamond
Offshore |
|
|
876.9 |
|
|
591.2 |
|
|
187.6 |
|
|
154.1 |
|
|
3,406.2 |
|
|
3,158.6 |
|
Boardwalk
Pipelines |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
15.2 |
|
|
136.9 |
|
|
57.4 |
|
|
2,477.5 |
|
|
1,238.0 |
|
Corporate
and eliminations |
|
|
2,575.9 |
|
|
2,175.3 |
|
|
125.5 |
|
|
69.2 |
|
|
2,191.2 |
|
|
1,835.6 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
44,298.5 |
|
$ |
42,514.8 |
|
$ |
18,807.2 |
|
$ |
20,479.2 |
|
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information
The
following schedules present the Company’s consolidating balance sheet
information at December 31, 2004 and 2003, and consolidating statements of
operations information for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.
These schedules present the individual subsidiaries of the Company and their
contribution to the consolidated financial statements. Amounts presented will
not necessarily be the same as those in the individual financial statements of
the Company’s subsidiaries due to adjustments for purchase accounting, income
taxes and minority interests. In addition, many of the Company’s subsidiaries
use a classified balance sheet which also leads to differences in amounts
reported for certain line items. This information also does not reflect the
impact of the Company’s issuance of Carolina Group stock. Lorillard is reported
as a 100% owned subsidiary and does not include any adjustments relating to the
tracking stock structure. See Note 6 for consolidating information of the
Carolina Group and Loews Group.
The
Corporate and Other column primarily reflects the parent company’s investment in
its subsidiaries, invested cash portfolio, corporate long-term debt and Bulova
Corporation, a 97% owned subsidiary. The elimination adjustments are for
intercompany assets and liabilities, interest and dividends, the parent
company’s investment in capital stocks of subsidiaries, and various reclasses of
debit or credit balances to the amounts in consolidation. Purchase accounting
adjustments have been pushed down to the appropriate subsidiary.
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information -
(Continued) |
Loews
Corporation
Consolidating
Balance Sheet Information
|
|
CNA |
|
|
|
Loews |
|
Diamond |
|
Boardwalk |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2004 |
|
Financial |
|
Lorillard |
|
Hotels |
|
Offshore |
|
Pipelines |
|
and
Other |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments |
|
$ |
39,227.3 |
|
$ |
1,545.6 |
|
$ |
63.8 |
|
$ |
876.9 |
|
$ |
9.0 |
|
$ |
2,575.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
44,298.5 |
|
Cash |
|
|
95.3 |
|
|
35.5 |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
51.0 |
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
219.9 |
|
Receivables |
|
|
18,306.0 |
|
|
32.1 |
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
187.6 |
|
|
136.9 |
|
|
144.3 |
|
$ |
(18.8 |
) |
|
18,807.2 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment |
|
|
175.6 |
|
|
231.5 |
|
|
376.9 |
|
|
2,192.8 |
|
|
1,842.1 |
|
|
21.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,840.7 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
732.8 |
|
|
436.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48.9 |
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
(625.2 |
) |
|
624.9 |
|
Goodwill
and other intangible assets |
|
|
118.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
163.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294.1 |
|
Investments
in capital stocks of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,088.3 |
|
|
(12,088.3 |
) |
|
|
|
Other
assets |
|
|
1,943.5 |
|
|
396.5 |
|
|
95.2 |
|
|
88.2 |
|
|
269.6 |
|
|
240.5 |
|
|
(205.2 |
) |
|
2,828.3 |
|
Deferred
acquisition costs of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
insurance
subsidiaries |
|
|
1,268.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,268.1 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
62,434.7 |
|
$ |
2,677.7 |
|
$ |
562.2 |
|
$ |
3,406.2 |
|
$ |
2,477.5 |
|
$ |
15,128.7 |
|
$ |
(12,937.5 |
) |
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders’ Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves |
|
$ |
43,649.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
43,649.7 |
|
Payable
for securities purchased |
|
|
494.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
101.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
595.5 |
|
Securities
sold under agreements to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
repurchase |
|
|
918.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
918.0 |
|
Short-term
debt |
|
|
530.9 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
$ |
477.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,010.1 |
|
Long-term
debt |
|
|
1,726.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
142.3 |
|
|
700.0 |
|
$ |
1,106.1 |
|
|
2,305.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,980.2 |
|
Reinsurance
balances payable |
|
|
3,043.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,043.1 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38.0 |
|
|
361.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
225.7 |
|
$ |
(625.2 |
) |
|
|
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
2,091.2 |
|
$ |
1,392.6 |
|
|
166.3 |
|
|
193.2 |
|
|
278.4 |
|
|
208.1 |
|
|
(210.4 |
) |
|
4,119.4 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
567.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
567.8 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
53,021.3 |
|
|
1,392.6 |
|
|
348.7 |
|
|
1,731.8 |
|
|
1,384.5 |
|
|
2,840.5 |
|
|
(835.6 |
) |
|
59,883.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
937.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
739.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,682.4 |
|
Shareholders’
equity |
|
|
8,475.9 |
|
|
1,285.1 |
|
|
213.5 |
|
|
935.1 |
|
|
1,093.0 |
|
|
12,282.6 |
|
|
(12,101.9 |
) |
|
12,183.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
equity |
|
$ |
62,434.7 |
|
$ |
2,677.7 |
|
$ |
562.2 |
|
$ |
3,406.2 |
|
$ |
2,477.5 |
|
$ |
15,128.7 |
|
$ |
(12,937.5 |
) |
$ |
73,749.5 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information -
(Continued) |
Loews
Corporation
Consolidating
Balance Sheet Information
|
|
CNA |
|
|
|
Loews |
|
Diamond |
|
Boardwalk |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2003 |
|
Financial |
|
Lorillard |
|
Hotels |
|
Offshore |
|
Pipelines |
|
and
Other |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments |
|
$ |
38,121.5 |
|
$ |
1,530.2 |
|
$ |
81.4 |
|
$ |
591.2 |
|
$ |
15.2 |
|
$ |
2,175.3 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
42,514.8 |
|
Cash |
|
|
139.0 |
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
19.1 |
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
180.8 |
|
Receivables |
|
|
20,154.5 |
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
154.1 |
|
|
57.4 |
|
|
168.2 |
|
$ |
(99.0 |
) |
|
20,479.2 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment |
|
|
239.6 |
|
|
221.0 |
|
|
369.6 |
|
|
2,297.7 |
|
|
703.5 |
|
|
48.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,879.7 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
646.5 |
|
|
441.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88.1 |
|
|
21.5 |
|
|
(667.8 |
) |
|
530.2 |
|
Goodwill
and other intangible assets |
|
|
118.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
20.8 |
|
|
169.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
311.4 |
|
Investments
in capital stocks of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,402.5 |
|
|
(11,402.5 |
) |
|
|
|
Other
assets |
|
|
2,930.0 |
|
|
406.4 |
|
|
96.2 |
|
|
75.7 |
|
|
200.6 |
|
|
360.9 |
|
|
(187.1 |
) |
|
3,882.7 |
|
Deferred
acquisition costs of insurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
subsidiaries |
|
|
2,532.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,532.7 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
Total
assets |
|
$ |
68,560.5 |
|
$ |
2,624.9 |
|
$ |
571.9 |
|
$ |
3,158.6 |
|
$ |
1,238.0 |
|
$ |
14,192.0 |
|
$ |
(12,356.4 |
) |
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and Shareholders’ Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
reserves |
|
$ |
45,492.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
45,492.6 |
|
Payable
for securities purchased |
|
|
2,022.1 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
1.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
124.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,147.7 |
|
Securities
sold under agreements to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
repurchase |
|
|
441.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
441.8 |
|
Short-term
debt |
|
|
263.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
$ |
17.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
295.9 |
|
Long-term
debt |
|
|
1,640.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
143.3 |
|
|
910.9 |
|
|
530.8 |
|
|
2,299.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,524.3 |
|
Reinsurance
balances payable |
|
|
3,432.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,432.0 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75.9 |
|
|
370.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
221.8 |
|
$ |
(667.8 |
) |
|
|
|
Other
liabilities |
|
|
2,438.7 |
|
$ |
1,405.0 |
|
|
172.0 |
|
|
134.5 |
|
|
166.5 |
|
|
142.5 |
|
|
(207.9 |
) |
|
4,251.3 |
|
Separate
account business |
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,678.0 |
|
Total
liabilities |
|
|
59,408.8 |
|
|
1,405.0 |
|
|
395.5 |
|
|
1,427.5 |
|
|
714.6 |
|
|
2,787.9 |
|
|
(875.7 |
) |
|
65,263.6 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
896.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
769.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,671.6 |
|
Shareholders’
equity |
|
|
8,254.8 |
|
|
1,219.9 |
|
|
176.4 |
|
|
961.6 |
|
|
523.4 |
|
|
11,398.9 |
|
|
(11,480.7 |
) |
|
11,054.3 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity |
|
$ |
68,560.5 |
|
$ |
2,624.9 |
|
$ |
571.9 |
|
$ |
3,158.6 |
|
$ |
1,238.0 |
|
$ |
14,192.0 |
|
$ |
(12,356.4 |
) |
$ |
77,989.5 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information -
(Continued) |
Loews
Corporation
Consolidating
Statement of Operations Information
|
|
CNA |
|
|
|
Loews |
|
Diamond |
|
Boardwalk |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 |
|
Financial |
|
Lorillard |
|
Hotels |
|
Offshore |
|
Pipelines |
|
and
Other |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
$ |
8,208.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3.8 |
) |
$ |
8,205.0 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
1,673.5 |
|
$ |
36.6 |
|
$ |
2.3 |
|
$ |
12.2 |
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
$ |
144.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,869.3 |
|
Intercompany
interest and dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
919.9 |
|
|
(919.9 |
) |
|
|
|
Investment
gains (losses) |
|
|
(244.5 |
) |
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
(13.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(256.0 |
) |
Manufactured
products |
|
|
|
|
|
3,347.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
167.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,515.2 |
|
Other |
|
|
295.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
312.9 |
|
|
823.4 |
|
|
264.4 |
|
|
212.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,908.8 |
|
Total |
|
|
9,933.6 |
|
|
3,385.8 |
|
|
315.2 |
|
|
835.9 |
|
|
265.1 |
|
|
1,430.4 |
|
|
(923.7 |
) |
|
15,242.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and policyholders’ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
benefits |
|
|
6,445.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,445.6 |
|
Amortization
of deferred acquisition costs |
|
|
1,679.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,679.8 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products sold |
|
|
|
|
|
1,965.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,045.4 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
1,169.6 |
|
|
380.6 |
|
|
278.3 |
|
|
815.2 |
|
|
153.9 |
|
|
131.6 |
|
|
(3.8 |
) |
|
2,925.4 |
|
Interest |
|
|
123.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
30.2 |
|
|
30.1 |
|
|
140.5 |
|
|
(6.3 |
) |
|
324.1 |
|
Total |
|
|
9,418.9 |
|
|
2,346.2 |
|
|
284.0 |
|
|
845.4 |
|
|
184.0 |
|
|
351.9 |
|
|
(10.1 |
) |
|
13,420.3 |
|
|
|
|
514.7 |
|
|
1,039.6 |
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
(9.5 |
) |
|
81.1 |
|
|
1,078.5 |
|
|
(913.6 |
) |
|
1,822.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense |
|
|
33.8 |
|
|
397.3 |
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
32.3 |
|
|
57.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
533.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
59.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
56.9 |
|
Total |
|
|
93.7 |
|
|
397.3 |
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
32.3 |
|
|
57.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
590.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) |
|
$ |
421.0 |
|
$ |
642.3 |
|
$ |
21.4 |
|
$ |
(9.2 |
) |
$ |
48.8 |
|
$ |
1,020.6 |
|
$ |
(913.6 |
) |
$ |
1,231.3 |
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information -
(Continued) |
Loews
Corporation
Consolidating
Statement of Operations Information
|
|
CNA |
|
|
|
Loews |
|
Diamond |
|
Boardwalk |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Financial |
|
Lorillard |
|
Hotels |
|
Offshore |
|
Pipelines |
|
and
Other |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
$ |
9,213.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3.7 |
) |
$ |
9,209.8 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
1,646.7 |
|
$ |
39.9 |
|
$ |
2.4 |
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
$ |
148.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,849.9 |
|
Intercompany
interest and dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
876.6 |
|
|
(876.6 |
) |
|
|
|
Investment
gains (losses) |
|
|
473.4 |
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(6.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
464.1 |
|
Manufactured
products |
|
|
|
|
|
3,255.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,418.8 |
|
Other |
|
|
395.8 |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
283.6 |
|
|
682.9 |
|
|
143.0 |
|
|
13.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,518.4 |
|
Total |
|
|
11,729.4 |
|
|
3,285.7 |
|
|
286.0 |
|
|
688.0 |
|
|
143.2 |
|
|
1,209.0 |
|
|
(880.3 |
) |
|
16,461.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and policyholders’ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
benefits |
|
|
10,286.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,286.5 |
|
Amortization
of deferred acquisition costs |
|
|
1,964.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,964.6 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products sold |
|
|
|
|
|
1,893.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,972.8 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
1,664.7 |
|
|
460.0 |
|
|
258.4 |
|
|
724.2 |
|
|
86.2 |
|
|
117.3 |
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
3,307.1 |
|
Interest |
|
|
129.8 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
19.4 |
|
|
126.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
308.4 |
|
Total |
|
|
14,045.6 |
|
|
2,353.2 |
|
|
267.4 |
|
|
748.1 |
|
|
105.6 |
|
|
323.2 |
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
17,839.4 |
|
|
|
|
(2,316.2 |
) |
|
932.5 |
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
(60.1 |
) |
|
37.6 |
|
|
885.8 |
|
|
(876.6 |
) |
|
(1,378.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
(901.8 |
) |
|
351.2 |
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
(8.1 |
) |
|
15.1 |
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(534.1 |
) |
Minority
interest |
|
|
(156.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(22.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
(178.2 |
) |
Total |
|
|
(1,058.0 |
) |
|
351.2 |
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
(30.5 |
) |
|
15.1 |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
(712.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss)
income from continuing operations |
|
|
(1,258.2 |
) |
|
581.3 |
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
(29.6 |
) |
|
22.5 |
|
|
883.3 |
|
|
(876.6 |
) |
|
(666.1 |
) |
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55.4 |
|
Net
(loss) income |
|
$ |
(1,258.2 |
) |
$ |
581.3 |
|
$ |
66.6 |
|
$ |
(29.6 |
) |
$ |
22.5 |
|
$ |
883.3 |
|
$ |
(876.6 |
) |
$ |
(610.7 |
) |
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements |
Note
24. Consolidating Financial Information -
(Continued) |
Loews
Corporation
Consolidating
Statement of Operations Information
|
|
CNA |
|
|
|
Loews |
|
Diamond |
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2002 |
|
Financial |
|
Lorillard |
|
Hotels |
|
Offshore |
|
and
Other |
|
Eliminations |
|
Total |
|
(In
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
premiums |
|
$ |
10,213.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3.5 |
) |
$ |
10,209.9 |
|
Net
investment income |
|
|
1,729.9 |
|
$ |
44.1 |
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
$ |
29.8 |
|
$ |
(16.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
1,789.2 |
|
Intercompany
interest and dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
695.6 |
|
|
(695.6 |
) |
|
|
|
Investment
gains (losses) |
|
|
(252.2 |
) |
|
36.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
36.5 |
|
|
48.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
(131.0 |
) |
Manufactured
products |
|
|
|
|
|
3,797.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
165.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,963.5 |
|
Other |
|
|
595.5 |
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
264.3 |
|
|
754.1 |
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,624.9 |
|
Total |
|
|
12,286.6 |
|
|
3,879.8 |
|
|
266.4 |
|
|
820.4 |
|
|
902.4 |
|
|
(699.1 |
) |
|
17,456.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
claims and policyholders’ benefits |
|
|
8,420.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,420.3 |
|
Amortization
of deferred acquisition costs |
|
|
1,790.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,790.2 |
|
Cost
of manufactured products sold |
|
|
|
|
|
2,149.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,226.5 |
|
Other
operating expenses |
|
|
1,608.0 |
|
|
432.7 |
|
|
242.7 |
|
|
706.1 |
|
|
120.0 |
|
|
(3.5 |
) |
|
3,106.0 |
|
Restructuring
and other related charges |
|
|
(36.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(36.8 |
) |
Interest |
|
|
149.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
23.6 |
|
|
127.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
309.6 |
|
Total |
|
|
11,931.2 |
|
|
2,582.0 |
|
|
252.2 |
|
|
729.7 |
|
|
324.2 |
|
|
(3.5 |
) |
|
15,815.8 |
|
|
|
|
355.4 |
|
|
1,297.8 |
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
90.7 |
|
|
578.2 |
|
|
(695.6 |
) |
|
1,640.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
72.3 |
|
|
508.5 |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
35.7 |
|
|
(42.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
579.8 |
|
Minority
interest |
|
|
52.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29.2 |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
82.3 |
|
Total |
|
|
125.0 |
|
|
508.5 |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
64.9 |
|
|
(41.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
662.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from continuing operations |
|
|
230.4 |
|
|
789.3 |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
25.8 |
|
|
620.0 |
|
|
(695.6 |
) |
|
978.6 |
|
Discontinued
operations-net |
|
|
(31.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Cumulative
effect of change in accounting principles-net |
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39.6 |
) |
Net
income |
|
$ |
159.8 |
|
$ |
789.3 |
|
$ |
12.7 |
|
$ |
25.8 |
|
$ |
620.0 |
|
$ |
(695.6 |
) |
$ |
912.0 |
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of Loews Corporation
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Loews Corporation and
its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2004. Our audits also included the
financial statements schedules listed in the Index at item 15(a)2. These
financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of
the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our
opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of Loews Corporation and its subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004 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.
We have
also audited, in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB, the effectiveness
of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2004 based on the criteria established in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our
report dated February 28, 2005 expressed an unqualified opinion on management’s
assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting and an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s
internal control over financial reporting.
As
discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company
changed its method of accounting for goodwill and other intangibles in 2002 to
conform to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142.
DELOITTE
& TOUCHE LLP
New York,
New York
February
28, 2005
Item
9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure.
None.
Item
9A. Controls and Procedures.
Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
The
Company maintains a system of disclosure controls and procedures which are
designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in
reports that it files or submits under the federal securities laws, including
this report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis.
These disclosure controls and procedures include controls and procedures
designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company
under the federal securities laws is accumulated and communicated to the
Company's management on a timely basis to allow decisions regarding required
disclosure.
The
Company's principal executive officer and principal financial officer evaluated
the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) as of December 31, 2004 and concluded that the
Company's controls and procedures were effective.
Internal
Control Over Financial Reporting
There
were no changes in the Company's internal control over financial reporting
identified in connection with the foregoing evaluation that occurred during the
Company's last fiscal quarter that materially affected, or would be reasonably
likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial
reporting.
See
Management's Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
appearing on page 29 of this Report.
Item
9B. Other Information.
None.
PART
III
Except as
set forth below and under Executive Officers of the Registrant in Part I of this
Report, the information
called for by Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) has been omitted as
Registrant intends to include such information in its definitive Proxy Statement
to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days
after the close of its fiscal year.
PART
IV
Item
15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
(a) 1.
Financial Statements:
The
financial statements appear above under Item 8. The following additional
financial data should be read in conjunction with those financial statements.
Schedules not included with these additional financial data have been omitted
because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the
consolidated financial statements or notes to consolidated financial
statements.
|
Page |
|
Number |
2.
Financial Statement Schedules: |
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation and Subsidiaries: |
|
Schedule
I-Condensed financial information of Registrant for the years ended
December 31, |
|
2004,
2003 and 2002 |
L-1 |
Schedule
II-Valuation and qualifying accounts for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and |
|
2002 |
L-3 |
Schedule
V-Supplemental information concerning property-casualty insurance
operations for the |
|
years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 |
L-4 |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
Number |
|
|
|
|
3.
Exhibits: |
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
Articles
of Incorporation and By-Laws |
|
|
|
|
|
Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant, dated April 16, 2002,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3 to registrant's Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2002 |
3.01 |
|
|
|
|
By-Laws
of the Registrant as amended through May 14, 2002, incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 3 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended June 30, 2002 |
3.02 |
|
|
|
(4)
|
Instruments
Defining the Rights of Security Holders, Including
Indentures |
|
|
|
|
|
The
Registrant hereby agrees to furnish to the Commission upon request copies
of instruments with respect to long-term debt, pursuant to Item
601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K. |
|
(10)
|
Material
Contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan as amended and restated as of
December 31, 1995, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.05 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996
|
10.01 |
|
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation Incentive Compensation Plan for Executive Officers,
incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit B to Registrant's Definitive
Proxy Statement filed on March 29, 2001 |
10.02 |
|
|
|
|
Loews
Corporation 2000 Stock Option Plan, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit A to Registrant's Definitive Proxy Statement filed on March 29,
2000 |
10.03 |
|
|
|
|
Carolina
Group 2002 Stock Option Plan, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.29 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001 |
10.04 |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
Settlement Agreement and Release with the State of Florida to settle and
resolve with finality all present and future economic claims by the State
and its subdivisions relating to the use of or exposure to tobacco
products, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10 to Registrant's
Report on Form 8-K filed September 5, 1997 |
10.05 |
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
Settlement Agreement and Release with the State of Texas to settle and
resolve with finality all present and future economic claims by the State
and its subdivisions relating to the use of or exposure to tobacco
products, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10 to Registrant's
Report on Form 8-K filed February 3, 1998 |
10.06 |
|
|
|
|
State
of Minnesota Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Entry of Consent
Judgment to settle and resolve with finality all claims of the State of
Minnesota relating to the subject matter of this action which have been or
could have been asserted by the State, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 1998 |
10.07 |
|
|
|
|
State
of Minnesota Consent Judgment relating to the settlement of tobacco
litigation, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998
|
10.08 |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
Number |
|
|
|
|
State
of Minnesota Settlement Agreement and Release relating to the settlement
of tobacco litigation, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998
|
10.09 |
|
|
|
|
State
of Minnesota State Escrow Agreement relating to the settlement of tobacco
litigation, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 1998
|
10.10 |
|
|
|
|
Stipulation
of Amendment to Settlement Agreement and For Entry of Agreed Order, dated
July 2, 1998, regarding the settlement of the State of Mississippi health
care cost recovery action, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.1 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
1998 |
10.11 |
|
|
|
|
Mississippi
Fee Payment Agreement, dated July 2, 1998, regarding the payment of
attorneys' fees, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Registrant's Report on Form10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1998
|
10.12 |
|
|
|
|
Stipulation
of Amendment to Settlement Agreement and For Entry of Consent Decree,
dated July 24, 1998, regarding the settlement of the Texas health care
cost recovery action, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1998
|
10.13 |
|
|
|
|
Texas
Fee Payment Agreement, dated July 24, 1998, regarding the payment of
attorneys' fees, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1998
|
10.14 |
|
|
|
|
Stipulation
of Amendment to Settlement Agreement and For Entry of Consent Decree,
dated September 11, 1998, regarding the settlement of the Florida health
care cost recovery action, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.1 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September
30, 1998 |
10.15 |
|
|
|
|
Florida
Fee Payment Agreement, dated September 11, 1998, regarding the payment of
attorneys' fees, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1998
|
10.16 |
|
|
|
|
Master
Settlement Agreement with 46 states, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa
and the Northern Marianas to settle the asserted and unasserted health
care cost recovery and certain other claims of those states, incorporated
herein by reference to Exhibit 10 to Registrant's Report on Form 8-K filed
November 25, 1998 |
10.17 |
|
|
|
|
Employment
Agreement between Registrant and Preston R. Tisch dated as of March 1,
1988 as amended through January 1, 2001, incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2000 |
10.18 |
|
|
|
|
Amendments
dated January 1, 2003, January 1, 2004 and February 11, 2005, to
Employment Agreement between Registrant and Preston R.
Tisch |
10.19* |
|
|
|
|
Employment
Agreement dated as of January 1, 1999 between Registrant and Andrew H.
Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to Registrant's
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 |
10.20 |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
Number |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2002, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.23
to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001 |
10.21 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2003 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Andrew H. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 |
10.22 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2004 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Andrew H. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2003 |
10.23 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated February 11, 2005, to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Andrew H. Tisch |
10.24* |
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Retirement Agreement dated January 1, 2002 between Registrant and Andrew
H. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.30 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001
|
10.25 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 1 dated January 1, 2003 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and Andrew H. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.33 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 |
10.26 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 2 dated January 1, 2004 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and Andrew H. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.27 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 |
10.27 |
|
|
|
|
Employment
Agreement dated as of January 1, 1999 between Registrant and James S.
Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to Registrant's
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 |
10.28 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2002, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.23
to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001 |
10.29 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2003 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and James
S. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 |
10.30 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2004 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and James
S. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.31 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2003 |
10.31 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated February 11, 2005, to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
James S. Tisch |
10.32* |
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Retirement Agreement dated January 1, 2002 between Registrant and James S.
Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.31 to Registrant's
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001 |
10.33 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 1 dated January 1, 2003 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and James S. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.35 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 |
10.34 |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
Number |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 2 dated January 1, 2004 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and James S. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit
10.34 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2003 |
10.35 |
|
|
|
|
Employment
Agreement dated as of January 1, 1999 between Registrant and Jonathan M.
Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.33 to Registrant's
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1998 |
10.36 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2002, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.24
to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2001 |
10.37 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2003 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Jonathan M. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002 |
10.38 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated January 1, 2004 to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Jonathan M. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.38 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2003 |
10.39 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
dated February 11, 2005, to Employment Agreement between Registrant and
Jonathan M. Tisch |
10.40* |
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Retirement Agreement dated January 1, 2002 between Registrant and Jonathan
M. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001
|
10.41 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 1 dated January 1, 2003 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and Jonathan M. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.37 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2002 |
10.42 |
|
|
|
|
Amendment
No. 2 dated January 1, 2004 to Supplemental Retirement Agreement between
Registrant and Jonathan M. Tisch, incorporated herein by reference to
Exhibit 10.41 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 |
10.43 |
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Retirement Agreement dated March 24, 2000 between Registrant and Peter W.
Keegan, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.01 to Registrant's
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2000 |
10.44 |
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Retirement Agreement dated September 21, 1999 between Registrant and
Arthur L. Rebell, incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to
Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999
|
10.45 |
|
|
|
|
First
Amendment to Supplemental Retirement Agreement dated March 24, 2000
between Registrant and Arthur L. Rebell, incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2000 |
10.46 |
|
|
|
|
Second
Amendment to Supplemental Retirement Agreement dated March 28, 2001
between Registrant and Arthur L. Rebell, incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.28 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001 |
10.47 |
|
|
|
|
Third
Amendment to Supplemental Retirement Agreement dated February 28, 2002
between Registrant and Arthur L. Rebell, incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.33 to Registrant's Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001 |
10.48 |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Description |
Number |
(21)
|
Subsidiaries
of the Registrant |
|
|
|
|
|
List
of subsidiaries of Registrant |
21.01* |
|
|
|
(23)
|
Consents
of Experts and Counsel |
|
|
|
|
|
Consent
of Deloitte & Touche LLP |
23.01* |
|
|
|
(31)
|
Rule
13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
Certifications |
|
|
|
|
|
Certification
by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
and Rule 15d-14(a) |
31.01* |
|
|
|
|
Certification
by the Chief Financial Officer of the Company pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)
and Rule 15d-14(a) |
31.02* |
|
|
|
(32)
|
Section
1350 Certifications |
|
|
|
|
|
Certification
by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 (as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002) |
32.01* |
|
|
|
|
Certification
by the Chief Financial Officer of the Company pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350 (as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002) |
32.02* |
|
|
|
(99)
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Pending
Tobacco Litigation |
99.01* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Filed
herewith. |
|