Back to GetFilings.com

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

——————

FORM 10-K

ý

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

OR

¨

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                    to                   

Commission file number 0-14697

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

355 Maple Avenue, Harleysville, PA 19438-2297

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (215) 256-5000

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:  None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, $1 par value

(Title of class)

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes  ý  No  ¨.

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K  ý.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes  ý  No  ¨.

On June 30, 2004, the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value (based on the closing sales price on that date) of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was $244,693,791.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the Registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 30,293,759 shares of Common Stock outstanding on March 1, 2005

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

1.

Portions of the Registrant’s proxy statement relating to the annual meeting of stockholders to be held April 27, 2005 are incorporated by reference in Parts I and III of this report.

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

DECEMBER 31, 2004

PART I

Item 1.   Business.

General

Harleysville Group Inc. (the “Company”) is an insurance holding company headquartered in Pennsylvania which, through its subsidiaries, engages in the property and casualty insurance business on a regional basis. As used herein, “Harleysville Group” refers to Harleysville Group Inc. and its subsidiaries.

The Company is a Delaware corporation formed by Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company (the “Mutual Company”) in 1979 as a wholly-owned subsidiary. In May 1986, the Company completed an initial public offering of its common stock, reducing the percentage of outstanding shares owned by the Mutual Company to approximately 70%. In April 1992, the Mutual Company completed a secondary public offering of a portion of the Company’s common stock then owned by it, further reducing the percentage of outstanding shares owned by the Mutual Company. At December 31, 2004, the Mutual Company owned approximately 56% of the Company’s outstanding shares.

Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company operate together to pursue a strategy of underwriting a broad array of personal and commercial coverages. These insurance coverages are marketed primarily in the eastern and midwestern United States through approximately 1,600 insurance agencies. Regional offices are maintained in Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Virginia. The Company’s property and casualty insurance subsidiaries are: Harleysville-Atlantic Insurance Company (“Atlantic”), Harleysville Insurance Company (“HIC”), Harleysville Insurance Company of New Jersey (“HNJ”), Harleysville Insurance Company of New York (“HIC New York”), Harleysville Insurance Company of Ohio (“HIC Ohio”), Harleysville Lake States Insurance Company (“Lake States”), Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company (“Preferred”), Harleysville Worcester Insurance Company (“Worcester”), and Mid-America Insurance Company (“Mid-America”).

The Company operates regionally. Management believes that the Company’s regional organization permits each regional operation to benefit from economies of scale provided by centralized support while encouraging local marketing autonomy and managerial entrepreneurship. Services which directly involve the insured or the agent (i.e., underwriting, claims and marketing) generally are performed regionally in accordance with Company-wide standards to promote high quality service, while actuarial, investment, legal, data processing and similar services are performed centrally. The Company’s network of regional insurance companies has expanded significantly in the last eighteen years. In 1983, the Company acquired Worcester, a property and casualty insurer which has conducted business in New England since 1823. In 1984, HNJ was formed by the Company and began underw riting property and casualty insurance in New Jersey. In 1987, the Company acquired Atlantic, a property and casualty insurer which has conducted business in the southeastern United States since 1905. In 1991, the Company acquired Mid-America (formerly named Connecticut Union Insurance Company), which conducted business in Connecticut, and HIC New York, which primarily conducts business in upstate New York. In 1993,the Company acquired Lake States, which primarily conducts business in Michigan. In 1994, the Company formed HIC Ohio which began underwriting property and casualty insurance in Ohio. In 1997, the Company acquired HIC, which primarily conducts business in Minnesota and neighboring states.

The Company’s property and casualty subsidiaries participate in an intercompany pooling arrangement whereby these subsidiaries cede to the Mutual Company all of their net premiums written and assume from the Mutual Company a portion of the pooled business, which includes substantially all of the Mutual Company’s property and casualty insurance business. See “Business - Pooling Arrangement.”

Business Segments

Harleysville Group has three segments which consist of the personal lines of insurance, the commercial lines of insurance and the investment function. Financial information about these segments is set forth in Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Narrative Description of Business

Property and Casualty Underwriting

Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company together underwrite a broad line of personal and commercial property and casualty coverages, including automobile, homeowners, commercial multi-peril and workers compensation. The Mutual Company and the Company’s insurance subsidiaries participate in an intercompany pooling arrangement under which such subsidiaries and the Mutual Company combine their property and casualty business.

Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company have a pooled rating of “A-” (excellent) which was issued by A.M. Best Company, Inc. (“Best’s”) on February 17, 2004 based upon 2003 statutory results and operating performance. This rating is lower than the previous rating of “A” (excellent). Best’s ratings are based upon factors relevant to policyholders and are not directed toward the protection of investors. Management believes that the Best’s rating is an important factor in marketing Harleysville Group’s products to its agents and customers.

The following table sets forth ratios for the Company’s property and casualty subsidiaries, prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and with statutory accounting practices (“SAP”) prescribed or permitted by state insurance authorities. The statutory combined ratio is a standard measure of underwriting profitability. This ratio is the sum of (i) the ratio of incurred losses and loss settlement expenses to net earned premium (“loss ratio”); (ii) the ratio of expenses incurred for commissions, premium taxes, administrative and other underwriting expenses to net written premium (“expense ratio”); and (iii) the ratio of dividends to policyholders to net earned premium (“dividend ratio”). The GAAP combined ratio is calculated in the same manner except that it is based on GAAP amounts and the denominator for each component is net earned premium. When the combined ratio is under 100%, underwriting results are generally considered profitable. Conversely, when the combined ratio is over 100%, underwriting results are generally considered unprofitable. The combined ratio does not reflect investment income, federal income taxes or other non-operating income or expense. Harleysville Group’s operating income is a function of both underwriting results and investment income.

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP BUSINESS ONLY

2

The following table sets forth the net written premiums and combined ratios by line of insurance, prepared in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by state insurance authorities, for Harleysville Group for the periods indicated:

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP BUSINESS ONLY

Pooling Arrangement

The Company’s property and casualty subsidiaries participate in an intercompany pooling arrangement with the Mutual Company. The underwriting pool is intended to produce a more uniform and stable underwriting result from year to year for all companies in the pool than they would experience individually and to reduce the risk of loss of any of the pool participants by spreading the risk among all the participants. Each company participating in the pool has at its disposal the capacity of the entire pool, rather than being limited to policy exposures of a size commensurate with its own capital and surplus. The additional capacity exists because such policy exposures are spread among all the pool participants which each have their own capital and surplus. Regulation is applied to the individual companies rather than to the pool.

3

Pursuant to the terms of the pooling agreement with the Mutual Company, each of the Company’s subsidiary participants cedes premiums, losses and expenses on all of its business to the Mutual Company which, in turn, retrocedes to such subsidiaries a specified portion of premiums, losses and expenses of the Mutual Company and such subsidiaries. Under the terms of the intercompany pooling agreement which became effective January 1, 1986, Preferred and HNJ ceded to the Mutual Company all of their insurance business written on or after January 1, 1986. All of the Mutual Company’s property and casualty insurance business written or in force on or after January 1, 1986, was also included in the pooled business. The pooling agreement provides, however, that Harleysville Group is not liable for any losses occurring prior to January 1, 1986. The pooling agreement does not legally discharg e Harleysville Group from its primary liability for the full amount of the policies ceded. However, it makes the Mutual Company liable to Harleysville Group to the extent of the business ceded.

The following table sets forth a chronology of the changes that have occurred in the pooling agreement since it became effective on January 1, 1986.

Chronology of Changes in Pooling Agreement

When pool participation percentages increased as described above, cash and investments equal to the net increase in liabilities assumed less a ceding commission related to the net increase in the liability for unearned premiums, was transferred from the Mutual Company to Harleysville Group.

All premiums, losses, loss settlement expenses and other underwriting expenses are prorated among the parties to the pooling arrangement on the basis of their participation in the pool. The method of establishing reserves is set forth under “Business - Reserves.” The pooling agreement may be amended or terminated by agreement of the parties. Termination may occur only at the end of a calendar year. The Boards of Directors of the Company and the Mutual Company maintain a coordinating committee which reviews and evaluates, and when changes are warranted, approves the pooling arrangements between the Company and the Mutual Company. See “Business-Relationship with the Mutual Company.” In evaluating pool participation changes, the coordinating committee considers current and proposed acquisitions, the relative capital positions and revenue contributions of the pool participants, and growth prospects and ability to access capital markets to support that growth. Harleysville Group does not intend to terminate its participation in the pooling agreement.

4

The following table sets forth the net premiums written and combined ratios by line of insurance for the total pooled business after elimination of management fees, prepared in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by state insurance authorities, for the periods indicated.

TOTAL POOLED BUSINESS

——————

(1)

See the definition of combined ratio in “Business-Property and Casualty Underwriting.”

The combined ratio for the total pooled business differs from Harleysville Group’s combined ratio primarily because of the effect of the aggregate catastrophe reinsurance agreement with the Mutual Company. See Note 2(a) of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and Business–Reinsurance.

Reserves. Loss reserves are estimates at a given point in time of what the insurer expects to pay to claimants for claims occurring on or before such point in time, including claims which have been incurred but not yet been reported to the insurer. These are estimates, and it can be expected that the ultimate liability will exceed or be less than such estimates. During the loss settlement period, additional facts regarding individual claims may become known, and consequently it often becomes necessary to refine and adjust the estimates of liability.

5

Harleysville Group maintains reserves for estimates of the ultimate unpaid cost of all losses incurred, including losses for claims which have been incurred but have not yet been reported to Harleysville Group. Loss settlement expense reserves are intended to cover the ultimate costs of settling all claims, including investigation and litigation costs relating to such claims. The amount of loss reserves for reported claims is based primarily upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of risk involved and knowledge of the circumstances surrounding each claim and the insurance policy provisions relating to the type of loss. The amounts of loss reserves for incurred but unreported claims and loss settlement expense reserves are determined utilizing historical information by line of insurance as adjusted to current conditions. Inflation is implicitly provided for in the reserving function through analysis of costs, trends and reviews of historical reserving results. Estimates of the liabilities are reviewed and updated on a regular basis using the most recent information on reported claims and a variety of actuarial techniques. With the exception of reserves relating to some workers compensation long-term disability cases, loss reserves are not discounted.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of beginning and ending net reserves for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses for the years indicated for the total pooled business on a statutory basis.

TOTAL POOLED BUSINESS

6

The following table sets forth the development of net reserves for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses from 1994 through 2004 for the pooled business of the Mutual Company and Harleysville Group on a statutory basis. “Reserve for losses and loss settlement expenses” sets forth the estimated liability for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses recorded at the balance sheet date for each of the indicated years. This liability represents the estimated amount of losses and loss settlement expenses for claims arising in the current and all prior years that are unpaid at the balance sheet date, including losses incurred but not reported.

The “Reserves reestimated” portion of the table shows the reestimated amount of the previously recorded liability based on experience of each succeeding year. The estimate is increased or decreased as payments are made and more information becomes known about the severity of remaining unpaid claims. For example, the 1994 liability has developed a redundancy after ten years, in that reestimated losses and loss settlement expenses are expected to be lower than the initial estimated liability established in 1994 of $855.3 million by $69.3 million, or 8.1%.

The “Cumulative amount of reserves paid” portion of the table shows the cumulative losses and loss settlement expense payments made in succeeding years for losses incurred prior to the balance sheet date. For example, the 1994 column indicates that as of December 31, 2004, payments of $743.1 million of the currently reestimated ultimate liability for losses and loss settlement expenses had been made.

The “Redundancy (deficiency)” portion of the table shows the cumulative redundancy or deficiency at December 31, 2004 of the reserve estimate shown on the top line of the corresponding column. A redundancy in reserves means that reserves established in prior years exceeded actual losses and loss settlement expenses or were reevaluated at less than the original reserved amount. A deficiency in reserves means that the reserves established in prior years were less than actual losses and loss settlement expenses or were reevaluated at more than the originally reserved amounts.

7

The following table includes all 2004 pool participants as if they had participated in the pooling arrangement in all years indicated except for acquired pool participant companies, which are included from their date of acquisition. Under the terms of the pooling arrangement, Harleysville Group is not responsible for losses on the pooled business occurring prior to January 1, 1986.

TOTAL POOLED BUSINESS

—————————

(1)

Excludes years not included in pooling arrangement with Harleysville Group.

8

Harleysville Group’s reserves primarily are derived from those established for the total pooled business. The terms of the pooling agreement provide that Harleysville Group is responsible only for pooled losses incurred on or after the effective date, January 1, 1986. The GAAP loss reserve experience of Harleysville Group, as reflected in its financial statements, is shown in the following table which sets forth a reconciliation of beginning and ending net reserves for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses for the years indicated for the business of Harleysville Group only.

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP BUSINESS ONLY

See page 12 for reconciliation of net reserves to gross reserves.

9

Harleysville Group recognized net adverse development in the provision for insured events of prior years of $12,462,000 and $119,059,000 in 2004 and 2003, respectively, primarily due to greater-than-expected claims severity in commercial lines. Harleysville Group recognized favorable development in the provision for insured events of prior years of $4,648,000 million in 2002 which primarily relates to lower-than-expected claim severity in the commercial and personal lines of business.

The following table sets forth the development of net reserves for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses for Harleysville Group. The effect of changes to the pooling agreement participation is reflected in this table. For example, the January 1, 1996 increase in Harleysville Group’s pooling participation from 60% to 65% is reflected in the first line of the 1996 column. Amounts of assets equal to increases in net liabilities were transferred to Harleysville Group from the Mutual Company in conjunction with each respective pooling change. The amount of the assets transferred has been netted against and has reduced the cumulative amounts paid for years prior to the pooling changes. For example, the 1995 column of the “Cumulative amount of reserves paid” portion of the table reflects the assets transferred in conjunction with the 1996 increase in the pooling percentage from 60% to 65% as a decrease netted in the “one year later” line. The cumulative amounts paid are reflected in this manner to maintain comparability. This is because when Harleysville Group pays claims subsequent to the date of a pool participation increase, the amounts paid are greater, however, the prior year’s reserve amounts are reflective of a lower pool participation percentage. By reflecting pooling participation increases in this manner, loss development is not obscured. Loss development reflects Harleysville Group’s share of the total pooled business loss development since January 1, 1986 when Harleysville Group began participation, plus loss development of any subsidiary not participating in the pooling agreement.

Loss development information for the total pooled business is presented on pages 6 to 8 to provide greater analysis of underlying claims development.

10

HARLEYSVILLE GROUP BUSINESS

————————

Note:

The amount of cash and investments received equal to the increase in liabilities for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses was

$93,966,000, $28,318,000 and $12,392,000 for the changes in pool participation in 1996, 1997 and 1998, respectively.

11

Reinsurance. Harleysville Group follows the customary industry practice of reinsuring a portion of its exposures and paying to the reinsurers a portion of the premiums received. Insurance is ceded principally to reduce the net liability on individual risks and to protect against catastrophic losses. Reinsurance does not legally discharge an insurer from its primary liability for the full amount of the policies, although it does make the assuming reinsurer liable to the insurer to the extent of the reinsurance ceded. Therefore, a ceding company is subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers. Harleysville Group has not entered into any finite reinsurance agreements.

The reinsurance described below is maintained for the Company’s subsidiaries and the Mutual Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. Reinsurance premiums and recoveries are allocated to participants in the pooling agreement according to pooling percentages.

Reinsurance for property and auto physical damage losses is currently maintained under a per risk excess of loss treaty affording recovery to $8.5 million above a retention of $1.5 million. Harleysville Group’s 2004 pooling share of such recovery would be $6.1 million above a retention of $1.1 million. In addition, the Company’s subsidiaries and the Mutual Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries are reinsured under a catastrophe reinsurance treaty effective for one year from July 1, 2004 which provides coverage ranging from 85.0% to 95.0% of up to $155.0 million in excess of a retention of $30.0 million for any given catastrophe. Harleysville Group’s 2004 pooling share of this coverage would range from 85.0% to 95.0% of up to $111.6 million in excess of a retention of $21.6 million for any given catastrophe. Accordingly, pursuant to the terms of the treaty, the maximum recovery would be $142.2 million for any catastrophe involving an insured loss equal to or greater than $185.0 million. Harleysville Group’s pooling share of this maximum recovery would be $102.4 million for any catastrophe involving an insured loss of $133.2 million or greater. The treaty includes reinstatement provisions providing for coverage for a second catastrophe and requiring payment of an additional premium in the event of a first catastrophe occurring. Most terrorism losses would not be covered by the treaty. Harleysville Group has not purchased funded catastrophe covers. Harleysville Group and Mutual have purchased property per risk excess of loss reinsurance which covers certain terrorism losses and provides for recovery of up to $8.5 million in excess of $1.5 million of terrorism losses for any one risk under certain circumstances. The maximum recovery by Harleysville Group on a terrorism loss occurrence is $8.6 million.

Casualty reinsurance (including liability and workers compensation) is currently maintained under an excess of loss treaty affording recovery to $38.0 million above a retention of $2.0 million for each loss occurrence. Harleysville Group’s 2004 pooling share of a recovery would be up to $27.4 million above a retention of $1.4 million. In addition, there is reinsurance to protect Harleysville Group from large workers compensation losses. For umbrella liability coverages, reinsurance protection up to $14.0 million is provided over a retention of $1.0 million. Harleysville Group’s 2004 pooling share would provide for recovery of $10.1 million over a retention of $0.7 million. The casualty reinsurance programs provide coverage for a terrorist event with no reinstatement provision.

Harleysville Group has a reinsurance agreement with the Mutual Company whereby the Mutual Company reinsures accumulated catastrophe losses in a quarter up to $14.4 million in excess of $3.6 million in return for a reinsurance premium. The agreement excludes catastrophe losses resulting from earthquakes or hurricanes. This agreement was amended effective July 1, 2002 to exclude terrorism losses in order to reflect current reinsurance market conditions. The premium rate and other terms were not changed.

The terms and charges for reinsurance coverage are typically negotiated annually. The reinsurance market is subject to conditions which are similar to those in the direct property and casualty insurance market, and there can be no assurance that reinsurance will remain available to Harleysville Group to the same extent and at the same cost currently maintained.

12

Harleysville Group considers numerous factors in choosing reinsurers, the most important of which are the financial stability and credit worthiness of the reinsurer. Harleysville Group has not experienced any material uncollectible reinsurance recoverables.

Competition. The property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive on the basis of both price and service. There are numerous companies competing for the categories of business underwritten by Harleysville Group in the geographic areas where Harleysville Group operates, many of which are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial resources than Harleysville Group. In addition, because the insurance products of Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company are marketed exclusively through independent insurance agencies, most of which represent more than one company, Harleysville Group faces competition within each agency.

Marketing. Harleysville Group markets its insurance products through independent agencies and monitors the performance of these agencies relative to many factors including profitability, growth and retention. At December 31, 2004, there were approximately 1,600 agencies.

Investments

An important element of the financial results of Harleysville Group is the return on invested assets. An investment objective of Harleysville Group is to maintain a widely diversified fixed maturities portfolio structured to maximize after-tax investment income while minimizing credit risk through investments in high quality instruments. An objective also is to provide adequate funds to pay claims without forced sales of investments. At December 31, 2004, substantially all of Harleysville Group’s fixed maturity investment portfolio was rated at investment grade and the investment portfolio did not contain any real estate or mortgage loans. Harleysville Group also invests in equity securities with the objective of capital appreciation.

Harleysville Group has adopted and follows an investment philosophy which precludes the purchase of non-investment grade fixed income securities. However, due to uncertainties in the economic environment, it is possible that the quality of investments held in Harleysville Group’s portfolio may change.

The following table shows the composition of Harleysville Group’s fixed maturity investment portfolio at amortized cost, excluding short-term investments, by rating as of December 31, 2004:

——————

(1)

Ratings assigned by Moody’s Investors Services, Inc.

(2)

Includes GNMA pass-through obligations and collateralized mortgage obligations.

13

Harleysville Group invests in both taxable and tax-exempt fixed income securities as part of its strategy to maximize after-tax income. Such strategy considers, among other factors, the impact of the alternative minimum tax. Tax-exempt bonds made up approximately 46%, 47% and 44% of the total investment portfolio at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

The following table shows the composition of Harleysville Group’s investment portfolio at carrying value, excluding short-term investments, by type of security as of December 31, 2004:

Investment results of Harleysville Group’s fixed maturity investment portfolio are as shown in the following table:

——————

(1)

Average of the aggregate invested amounts at amortized cost at the beginning and end of the period.

(2)

Investment income does not include investment expenses, realized investment gains or losses or provision for income taxes.

The following table indicates the composition of Harleysville Group’s fixed maturity investment portfolio at carrying value, excluding short-term investments, by time to maturity as of December 31, 2004:

——————

(1)

Based on stated maturity dates with no prepayment assumptions. Actual maturities may differ because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.

14

The average expected life of Harleysville Group’s investment portfolio as of December 31, 2004 was approximately 4.6 years.

Regulation

Insurance companies are subject to supervision and regulation in the states in which they transact business. Such supervision and regulation relate to numerous aspects of an insurance company’s business and financial condition. The purpose of such supervision and regulation is the protection of policyholders. The extent of such supervision and regulation varies, but generally derives from state statutes which delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative authority to state insurance departments. Accordingly, the authority of the state insurance departments typically includes the establishment of standards of solvency which must be met and maintained by insurers, the licensing to do business of insurers and agents, the nature of and limitations on investments, the approval process for premium rates for property and casualty insurance, the provisions which ins urers must make for current losses and future liabilities, the deposit of securities for the benefit of policyholders and the approval of policy forms. Such insurance departments also conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to the financial condition of insurance companies.

All of the states in which Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company do business have guaranty fund laws under which insurers doing business in such states can be assessed up to 2% of annual premiums written by the insurer in that state in order to fund policyholder liabilities of insolvent insurance companies. Under these laws in general, an insurer is subject to assessment, depending upon its market share of a given line of business, to assist in the payment of policyholder and third party claims against insolvent insurers.

State laws also require Harleysville Group to participate in involuntary insurance programs for automobile insurance, as well as other property and casualty lines, in states in which Harleysville Group writes such lines. These programs include joint underwriting associations, assigned risk plans, fair access to insurance requirements (“FAIR”) plans, reinsurance facilities and wind storm plans. These state laws generally require all companies that write lines covered by these programs to provide coverage (either directly or through reinsurance) for insureds who cannot obtain insurance in the voluntary market. The legislation creating these programs usually allocates a pro rata portion of risks attributable to such insureds to each company on the basis of direct written premiums or the number of automobiles insured. Generally, state law requires participation i n such programs as a condition to doing business. The loss ratio on insurance written under involuntary programs generally has been greater than the loss ratio on insurance in the voluntary market.

State insurance holding company acts regulate insurance holding company systems. Each insurance company in the holding company system is required to register with the insurance supervisory agency of its state of domicile and furnish certain information concerning transactions between companies within the holding company system that may materially affect the operations, management or financial condition of the insurer within the system, including the payment of dividends from the insurance subsidiaries to the Company.

Insurance holding company acts require that all transactions involving any insurer within the holding company system, including those involving the Mutual Company and the Company’s insurance subsidiaries, must be fair and equitable to that insurer. Further, approval of the applicable insurance commissioner is required prior to the consummation of a transaction affecting the control of an insurer.

The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (“the Act”) established a program that will run through 2005 that provides a backstop for insurance-related losses resulting from any “act of terrorism” as defined. Under the program, the federal government will pay 90% of covered losses after an insurer’s losses exceed a deductible determined by a statutorily prescribed formula, up to a combined annual aggregate limit for the federal government and all insurers of $100 billion. If an act of terrorism or acts of terrorism result in covered losses exceeding the $100 billion annual limit, insurers with losses exceeding their deductibles will not be responsible for additional losses.

15

The statutory formula for determining a company’s deductible for each year is based on the company’s direct commercial earned premiums for the prior calendar year multiplied by a specified percentage. The specified percentages are 10% for 2004 and 15% for 2005.

The Act requires all property and casualty insurers to make terrorism insurance coverage available in all of their covered commercial property and casualty insurance policies (as defined in the Act).

In the event the Act is not renewed, or is renewed in a materially different form, the Company may have to attempt to obtain appropriate reinsurance for the related terrorism risk, seek exclusions from coverage related to terrorism exposure from the appropriate regulatory authorities, limit certain of its writings, or pursue a solution encompassing aspects of one or all of the foregoing.

The insurance industry has recently received adverse publicity about alleged anti-competitive activities by certain insurance brokers and insurers.  Harleysville Group primarily distributes its products through its agents and writes less than 1% of its premiums through brokers. There are no contingent commission arrangements with such brokers.

The property and casualty insurance industry has been subject to significant public scrutiny and comment primarily due to concerns regarding solvency issues, rising insurance costs, and the industry’s methods of operations. Accordingly, regulations and legislation may be adopted or enacted: to provide a greater role for the federal government in regulation of insurance companies; to strengthen state oversight, particularly in the field of solvency and investments; to further restrict an insurer’s flexibility in underwriting and pricing risks; and to impose new taxes and assessments. It is not possible to predict whether, in what form or in what jurisdictions any of these measures might be adopted or the effect, if any, on Harleysville Group.

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries generally are restricted by the insurance laws of their respective states of domicile as to the amount of dividends they may pay to the Company without the prior approval of the respective state regulatory authorities. Generally, the maximum dividend that may be paid by an insurance subsidiary during any year without prior regulatory approval is limited to a stated percentage of that subsidiary’s statutory surplus as of a certain date, or adjusted net income of the subsidiary, for the preceding year. Applying the current regulatory restrictions as of December 31, 2004, $51.0 million would be available for distribution to Harleysville Group Inc. during 2005 without prior approval. The Company’s insurance subsidiaries paid dividends of $26.6 million in 2004, none in 2003 and $12.0 million in 2002 to Harleysville Group Inc. Of the divi dends paid in 2004, $11.6 million were declared by the Company’s insurance subsidiaries in 2002.

Various states have adopted the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) risk-based capital (RBC) standards that require insurance companies to calculate and report statutory capital and surplus needs based on a formula measuring underwriting, investment and other business risks inherent in an individual company’s operations. These RBC standards have not affected the operations of Harleysville Group since each of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries has statutory capital and surplus in excess of RBC requirements.

16

Harleysville Group is required to file financial statements for its subsidiaries, prepared by using statutory accounting practices, with state regulatory authorities. The adjustments necessary to reconcile net income (loss) and shareholders’ equity determined by using SAP to net income (loss) and shareholders’ equity determined in accordance with GAAP are as follows:

——————

(1)

Represents the GAAP loss and equity amounts for Harleysville Group Inc., excluding the earnings of and investment in subsidiaries.

Relationship with the Mutual Company

Harleysville Group’s operations are interrelated with the operations of the Mutual Company due to the pooling arrangement and other factors. The Mutual Company owned approximately 56% of the issued and outstanding common stock of Harleysville Group Inc. at December 31, 2004. Harleysville Group employees provide a variety of services to the Mutual Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. The cost of facilities and employees required to conduct the business of both companies is charged on a cost-allocated basis. Harleysville Group also manages the operations of the Mutual Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries pursuant to a management agreement which commenced January 1, 1993 under which Harleysville Group receives a management fee. Harleysville Group received $6.8 million, $7.2 million, and $6.8 million for the years ended December 31, 200 4, 2003 and 2002, respectively, for all such management services.

All of the Company’s officers are officers of the Mutual Company, and six of the Company’s nine directors are directors of the Mutual Company. A coordinating committee exists to review and evaluate the pooling agreement and other material transactions between Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company and is responsible for matters involving actual or potential conflicts of interest between the two companies. The coordinating committee currently consists of five non-employee directors, two from Harleysville Group Inc. and two from the Mutual Company all of whom are not members of both Boards and one, a non-voting Chairman, who is a member of both Boards. The decisions of the coordinating committee are binding on the two companies. No intercompany transaction can be authorized by the coordinating committee unless both of the Company’s committee members co nclude that such transaction is fair and equitable to Harleysville Group. For information concerning the members of the coordinating committee, see “Board and Committee Meetings” section on pages 8 to 10 of the Company’s proxy statement relating to the annual meeting of the shareholders to be held April 27, 2005 which is incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K Report.

The Mutual Company leases the home office from Harleysville Group with which it shares most of the facility. Rental income under the lease was $3.7 million for 2004, $3.6 million for 2003 and $3.5 million for 2002. Harleysville Group believes that the lease terms are no less favorable to it than if the property were leased to a non-affiliate.

17

In connection with the acquisition of Mid-America and HIC New York, the Company borrowed approximately $18.5 million from the Mutual Company. See Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. For additional information with respect to transactions with the Mutual Company, see Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Employees

All employees are paid by Harleysville Group Inc. and, accordingly, are considered to be employees of Harleysville Group Inc. As of December 31, 2004, there were 2,191 employees. They provide a variety of services to the Mutual Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. See “Business-Relationship with the Mutual Company” and Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Available Information

The Company maintains a website at www.harleysvillegroup.com. Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and 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, are available free of charge on our website as soon as practicable after electronic filing of such material with, or furnishing it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Item 2.   Properties.

The buildings which house the headquarters of Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company are leased to the Mutual Company by a subsidiary of Harleysville Group. See “Business-Relationship with the Mutual Company.” The Mutual Company charges Harleysville Group for an appropriate portion of the rent under an intercompany allocation agreement. The buildings containing the headquarters of Harleysville Group and the Mutual Company have approximately 220,000 square feet of office space. Harleysville Group also rents office facilities in certain of the states in which it does business.

Item 3.   Legal Proceedings.

Harleysville Group is a party to numerous lawsuits arising in the ordinary course of its insurance business. Harleysville Group believes that the resolution of these lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition.

Item 4.   Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

 No matter was submitted to a vote of the security holders during the fourth quarter of 2004.

18

PART II

Item 5.   Market for the Registrant’s Common Stock, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

The stock of Harleysville Group Inc. is quoted on the Nasdaq National Market System, and assigned the symbol HGIC. At the close of business on March 1, 2005, the approximate number of holders of record of Harleysville Group Inc.’s common stock was 2,372 (counting all shares held in single nominee registration as one shareholder).

The payment of dividends is subject to the discretion of Harleysville Group Inc.’s Board of Directors which each quarter considers, among other factors, Harleysville Group’s operating results, overall financial condition, capital requirements and general business conditions. The present quarterly dividend of $0.17 per share paid in each of the quarters of 2004 is expected to continue during 2005. As a holding company, one of Harleysville Group Inc.’s sources of cash with which to pay dividends is dividends from its subsidiaries. Harleysville Group Inc.’s insurance company subsidiaries are subject to state laws that restrict their ability to pay dividends. See Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The following table sets forth the amount of cash dividends declared per share, and the high and low bid quotations as reported by Nasdaq for Harleysville Group Inc.’s common stock for each quarter during the past two years.

19

Item 6.   Selected Financial Data.

At December 31, 2004, Harleysville Group Inc. (Company) was approximately 56% owned by Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company (Mutual). Harleysville Group Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively, Harleysville Group) are engaged in property and casualty insurance. These subsidiaries are: Harleysville-Atlantic Insurance Company, Harleysville Insurance Company, Harleysville Insurance Company of New Jersey, Harleysville Insurance Company of New York, Harleysville Insurance Company of Ohio, Harleysville Lake States Insurance Company, Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company, Harleysville Worcester Insurance Company, Mid-America Insurance Company, and Harleysville Ltd., a real estate partnership that owns the home office.

——————

(1)

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries participate in an underwriting pooling arrangement with Mutual. Harleysville Group’s participation was 72% for all years presented. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition” and Note 2(a) of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

20

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

Certain of the statements contained herein (other than statements of historical facts) are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and include estimates and assumptions related to the Company’s growth and economic, competitive and legislative developments. These forward-looking statements are subject to change and uncertainty which are, in many instances, beyond the Company’s control and have been made based upon management’s expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effect on Harleysville Group. There can be no assurance that future developments will be in accordance with management’s expectations so that the effect of future developments on Harleysville Group will be those anticipated by man agement. Actual financial results including premium growth and underwriting results could differ materially from those anticipated by Harleysville Group depending on the outcome of certain factors, which may include changes in property and casualty loss trends and reserves; catastrophe losses; competition in insurance product pricing; government regulation and changes therein which may impede the ability to charge adequate rates; performance of the financial markets; fluctuations in interest rates; availability and price of reinsurance; the Best’s rating of Harleysville Group; and the status of labor markets in which the Company operates.

Overview

The Company’s net income is primarily determined by three elements:

Ÿ

net premium income

Ÿ

investment income

Ÿ

amounts paid or reserved to settle insured claims

Positive variations in premium income are subject to a number of factors, including

Ÿ

limitations on rates arising from the competitive market place or regulation

Ÿ

limitation on available business arising from a need to maintain the quality of underwritten risks

Ÿ

the Company’s ability to maintain its A- (“excellent”) rating by A.M. Best

Ÿ

the ability of the Company to maintain a reputation for efficiency and fairness in claims administration

Positive variations on investment income are subject to a number of factors, including

Ÿ

general interest rate levels

Ÿ

specific adverse events affecting the issuers of debt obligations held by the Company

Ÿ

changes in the prices of equity securities generally and those held by the Company specifically

Loss and loss settlement expenses are affected by a number of factors, including

Ÿ

the quality of the risks underwritten by the Company

Ÿ

the nature and severity of catastrophic losses

Ÿ

the availability, cost and terms of reinsurance

Ÿ

underlying settlement costs, including medical and legal costs

The Company seeks to manage each of the foregoing to the extent within its control. Many of the foregoing factors are partially, or entirely, outside of the control of the Company.

21

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which require Harleysville Group to make estimates and assumptions (see Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements). Harleysville Group believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and estimation. The judgments, or the methodology on which the judgments are made, are reviewed quarterly with the Audit Committee.

Liabilities for Losses and Loss Settlement Expenses. The liability for losses and loss settlement expenses represents estimates of the ultimate unpaid cost of all losses incurred, including losses for claims which have not yet been reported to Harleysville Group. The amount of loss reserves for reported claims is based primarily upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of risk involved, knowledge of the circumstances surrounding each claim and the insurance policy provisions relating to the type of loss. The amounts of loss reserves for unreported claims and loss settlement expense reserves are determined utilizing historical information by line of insurance as adjusted to current conditions. Inflation is implicitly provided for in the reserving function through analysis of costs, trends and reviews of historical reserving results. Estimates of the liabilities are reviewed and updated on a r egular basis using the most recent information on reported claims and a variety of statistical techniques. It is expected that such estimates will be more or less than the amounts ultimately paid when the claims are settled. Changes in these estimates are reflected in current operations.

Investments. Generally, unrealized investment gains or losses on investments carried at fair value, net of applicable income taxes, are reflected directly in shareholders’ equity as a component of comprehensive income and, accordingly, have no effect on net income. However, if the fair value of an investment declines below its cost and that decline is deemed other than temporary, the amount of the decline below cost is charged to earnings. Harleysville Group monitors its investment portfolio and reviews investments that have experienced a decline in fair value below cost each quarter to evaluate whether the decline is other than temporary. Such evaluations consider, among other things, the magnitude and reasons for a decline, the prospects for the fair value to recover in the near term and Harleysville Group’s ability and intent to retain the investment for a period of time sufficien t to allow for a recovery in value. Future adverse investment market conditions, or poor operating results of underlying investments, could result in an impairment charge in the future.

Harleysville Group has written down to fair value, without exception, any equity security that has declined below cost by more than 20% and maintained such decline for six months, or by 50% or more, in the quarter in which either such decline occurred. In some cases, securities that have declined by a lesser amount or for a shorter period of time are written down if the evaluation indicates the decline is other than temporary. For example, one equity security had declined for a short period of time but was written down in the fourth quarter of 2002 when the sale of the company at a value less than our cost was announced. Fair value of equity securities is based on the closing market value as reported by a national stock exchange or Nasdaq. The fair value of fixed maturities is based upon data supplied by an independent pricing service. It can be difficult to determine the fair value of non-tra ded securities but Harleysville Group does not own a material amount of non-traded securities.

Policy Acquisition Costs. Policy acquisition costs, such as commissions, premium taxes and certain other underwriting and agency expenses that vary with and are primarily related to the production of business, are deferred and amortized over the effective period of the related insurance policies and in proportion to the premiums earned. The method followed in computing deferred policy acquisition costs limits the amount of such deferred costs to their estimated realizable value. The estimation of net realizable value takes into account the premium to be earned, related investment income over the claim

22

paying period, expected losses and loss settlement expenses, and certain other costs expected to be incurred as the premium is earned. Future changes in estimates, the most significant of which is expected losses and loss settlement expenses, may require adjustments to deferred policy acquisition costs. If the estimation of net realizable value indicates that the acquisition costs are unrecoverable, further analyses are completed to determine if a reserve is required to provide for losses that may exceed the related unearned premiums.

Contingencies. Besides claims related to its insurance products, Harleysville Group is subject to proceedings, lawsuits and claims in the normal course of business. Harleysville Group assesses the likelihood of any adverse outcomes to these matters as well as potential ranges of probable losses. There can be no assurance that actual outcomes will be consistent with those assessments.

The application of certain of these critical accounting policies to the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 is discussed in greater detail below.

Results of Operations

Harleysville Group underwrites property and casualty insurance in both the personal and commercial lines of insurance. The personal lines of insurance include both auto and homeowners, and the commercial lines include auto, commercial multi-peril and workers compensation. The business is marketed primarily in the eastern and midwestern United States through independent agents.

Historically, Harleysville Group’s results of operations have been influenced by factors affecting the property and casualty insurance industry in general. The operating results of the United States property and casualty insurance industry have been subject to significant variations due to competition, weather, catastrophic events, regulation, the availability and cost of satisfactory reinsurance, general economic conditions, judicial trends, fluctuations in interest rates and other changes in the investment environment.

Harleysville Group’s premium growth and underwriting results have been, and continue to be, influenced by market conditions. Insurance industry price competition has often made it difficult both to obtain and to retain properly priced personal and commercial lines business. It is management’s policy to maintain its underwriting standards, even at the expense of premium growth.

The key elements of Harleysville Group’s business model are the sales of properly priced and underwritten personal and commercial property and casualty insurance through independent agents and the investment of the premiums in a manner that assures claims and expenses can be paid while providing a return on the capital employed. Loss trends and investment performance are critical factors in influencing the success of the business model. These factors are affected by the factors impacting the insurance industry in general as described above and factors unique to Harleysville Group as described in the following discussion.

Transactions with Affiliates

The Company’s property and casualty subsidiaries participate in a pooling agreement with Mutual. The pooling agreement provides for the allocation of premiums, losses, loss settlement expenses and underwriting expenses between Harleysville Group and Mutual. Harleysville Group is not liable for any pooled losses occurring prior to January 1, 1986, the date the pooling agreement became effective. Harleysville Group’s participation in the pool has been 72% since January 1, 1998.

23

Because the pooling agreement does not relieve Harleysville Group of primary liability as the originating insurer, there is a concentration of credit risk arising from business ceded to Mutual. However, the pooling agreement provides for the right of offset and the amount of credit risk with Mutual was not material at December 31, 2004 and 2003. Mutual has an A. M. Best rating of “A-” (Excellent).

Harleysville Group has off-balance-sheet credit risk related to approximately $71.0 million of premium balances due to Mutual from agents and insureds at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Mutual bills and collects such receivables on behalf of Harleysville Group for efficiency reasons. Harleysville Group recognizes any associated bad debts, which have not been material.

Harleysville Group has attempted to reduce the potential impact of future catastrophes by achieving greater geographic distribution of risks, reducing exposure in catastrophe-prone areas and through reinsurance, including an agreement with Mutual. Effective January 1, 1997, Harleysville Group entered into a reinsurance agreement with Mutual whereby Mutual, in return for a reinsurance premium, reinsured accumulated catastrophe losses up to $14.4 million in a quarter for 2004, 2003 and 2002. This reinsurance coverage was in excess of a retention of $3.6 million in a quarter for 2004, 2003 and 2002. The agreement excludes catastrophe losses resulting from earthquakes, terrorism or hurricanes, and supplements the existing external catastrophe reinsurance program. Under this agreement, Harleysville Group ceded to Mutual premiums earned of $8.6 million, $8.4 million and $7.8  ;million, and losses incurred of $0.7 million, $4.2 million and $0.3 million for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The premiums for this reinsurance were established in consultation with an independent actuarial firm.

Harleysville Ltd. is a subsidiary of the Company and leases the home office to Mutual, which shares the facility with Harleysville Group. Rental income under the lease was $3.7 million, $3.6 million and $3.5 million for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, and is included in other income after elimination of intercompany amounts of $2.3 million in 2004 and $2.2 million in 2003 and 2002. The lease has been renewed for a five-year term expiring December 31, 2009 and includes a formula for additional rent for any additions, improvements or renovations. Mutual is responsible for the building operating expenses including maintenance and repairs. The pricing of the lease was based upon an appraisal obtained from an independent real estate appraiser.

Harleysville Group provides certain management services to Mutual and other affiliates. Harleysville Group received a fee of $6.8 million, $7.2 million and $6.8 million in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, for its services under these management agreements. Under related agreements, Harleysville Group serves as the paymaster for Harleysville companies, with each company being charged for its proportionate share of salary and employee benefits expense based upon time allocation. The level of fees has been approved by each state insurance department having jurisdiction.

Intercompany balances are created primarily from the pooling arrangement (settled quarterly), allocation of common expenses, collection of premium balances and payment of claims (settled monthly). No interest is charged or received on intercompany balances due to the timely settlement terms and nature of the items.

Harleysville Group borrowed $18.5 million from Mutual in connection with the acquisition of Mid-America and HIC New York in 1991. It was a demand loan with a stated maturity in March 1998. In February 2005, the maturity was extended to March 2012 and the interest rate became LIBOR plus 0.45%, which was a commercially reasonable market rate in 2005. Interest expense on this loan was $0.4 million, $0.3 million and $0.5 million in 2004, 2003, and 2002, respectively.

Harleysville Group has no material relationships with current or former members of management other than compensatory plans and arrangements disclosed or described in the Company’s public filings.

24

2004 Compared to 2003

Premiums earned increased $14.3 million, or 1.7% for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase was primarily due to an increase in premiums earned for commercial lines of $35.5 million, or 5.6%, partially offset by a decrease of $21.2 million, or 10.9%, in personal lines premiums earned. The increase in premiums earned for commercial lines primarily was due to higher rates partially offset by fewer policy counts. The decline in policy counts was primarily in the workers compensation line of business. The decrease in premiums earned for personal lines primarily was due to fewer policy counts. The reduction in personal lines volume was driven primarily by a reduction in personal automobile business from the continued implementation of more stringent underwriting processes.

Investment income increased $0.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, resulting from an increase in invested assets, partially offset by a lower yield on the fixed maturity investment portfolio.

Realized investment gains (losses) improved $13.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, primarily resulting from gains on the sale of equity securities.

There were impairment charges of $0.3 million and $0.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Harleysville Group had gross realized losses of $2.0 million in 2004 which were from the sales of securities which had not declined by more than 20% below their cost for more than six months at the time of their sale.

Harleysville Group holds securities with unrealized losses at December 31, 2004 as follows:

There are eight positions that comprise the unrealized loss in equity investments at December 31, 2004. All have had volatile price movements and have not been significantly below cost for significant continuous amounts of time. Harleysville Group has been monitoring these securities and it is possible that some may be written down in the future.

Of the total fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss at December 31, 2004, securities with a fair value of $207.8 million and an unrealized loss of $3.5 million are classified as available for sale and are carried at fair value on the balance sheet while securities with a fair value of $79.8 million and an unrealized loss of $1.2 million are classified as held to maturity on the balance sheet and are carried at amortized cost.

25

The fixed maturity investments with continuous unrealized losses for less than twelve months were primarily due to the impact of higher market interest rates rather than a decline in credit quality. There are $55.9 million in fixed maturity securities, at fair value, that at December 31, 2004, had been below amortized cost for over twelve months. Of the $2.3 million of unrealized losses on such securities, $0.7 million relates to securities which carry A or higher debt ratings and have declined in fair value roughly in line with market interest rate changes. The remaining $1.6 million of unrealized losses are comprised of airline enhanced equipment trust certificates (EETC) as follows:

After the events of September 11, 2001, air travel and the value of these airlines’ EETC securities declined. The EETCs are all “A tranche” holdings, which means they are in a senior credit position to the underlying airplane collateral value as compared to B and C tranche holders. At the time of issuance, the collateral was appraised at approximately twice the value of the A tranche EETCs. Recent estimates indicate that in a distressed sale scenario, the value of the collateral would be approximately the same as the EETCs’ cost. The American Airline EETC’s currently carry an investment grade debt rating and the market value of both issues has improved over the past year. Harleysville Group is participating in certain EETC creditor committees and is monitoring developments. It is possible that these EETCs may be written down in the income statement in the future, depen ding upon developments involving both the issuers and world events which impact the level of air travel.

Income (loss) before income taxes increased $145.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 compared to the same prior year period. The increase was primarily due to a lesser underwriting loss and greater realized investment gains.

The lesser underwriting loss was primarily due to lesser loss frequency, a decrease in the provision for insured events in prior years and lower catastrophe losses. The 2004 provision for insured events in prior years was $12.5 million of net adverse development compared to $119.1 million of net adverse development in 2003.

An insurance company’s statutory combined ratio is a standard measure of underwriting profitability. This ratio is the sum of (1) the ratio of incurred losses and loss settlement expenses to net earned premium; (2) the ratio of expenses incurred for commissions, premium taxes, administrative and other underwriting expenses to net written premium; and (3) the ratio of dividends to policyholders to net earned premium. The combined ratio does not reflect investment income, federal income taxes or other non-operating income or expense. A ratio of less than 100 percent generally indicates underwriting profitability. Harleysville Group’s statutory combined ratio decreased to 105.9% for the year ended December 31, 2004, from 123.2% for the year ended December 31, 2003. Such decrease was due to improved underwriting results in both commercial lines and personal lines, pri marily resulting from the lower loss development and lower catastrophe losses.

26

The statutory combined ratios by line of business for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2003, were as follows:

Statutory pension expense totaled $6.7 million in 2004 and $18.2 million in 2003, and added 0.8 points and 2.2 points to the combined ratios for 2004 and 2003, respectively. However, GAAP pension expense totaled $6.2 million in 2004 and $4.7 million in 2003 and thus had a lesser impact on GAAP earnings comparisons.

The following table presents the liability for unpaid losses and loss settlement expenses by major line of business:

The commercial lines statutory combined ratio decreased to 106.7% for the year ended December 31, 2004 from 123.6% for the year ended December 31, 2003. The decrease is primarily due to the lesser adverse development in the provision for insured events in prior years, lesser loss frequency and lesser catastrophe losses.

27

The net $12.5 million of 2004 adverse development in the provision for insured events in prior years was primarily in the following lines: commercial multi-peril ($7.1 million), commercial automobile ($8.4 million), and other commercial liability lines ($3.9 million), partially offset by favorable development in workers compensation ($3.0 million) and homeowners ($4.3 million). The adverse development reflects loss severity that was higher than expected and was primarily from accident years 1998 to 2001, partially offset by favorable development in the 2003 accident year.

The $119.1 million of 2003 adverse development in the provision for insured events in prior years was primarily in the following lines: commercial automobile ($29.3 million), workers compensation ($48.8 million), commercial multi-peril ($31.8 million) and personal automobile ($11.5 million). Of the adverse development, $100.8 million was attributable to the 1998 to 2002 accident years and the balance was attributable to earlier accident years.

Harleysville Group had publicly noted adverse loss trends in its workers compensation line for several quarters during 2002 and 2003. These trends are consistent with the experience of other companies writing this coverage, many of which have, during this time, made substantial additions to their reserves for insured events in prior years in this line of insurance. The change in loss development patterns in 2003 was influenced by a number of factors. A reorganization of Harleysville Group’s claims operations resulted in more proactive claims management which, in turn, provided more contemporaneous loss estimates. In addition, weak economic conditions have hampered the ability to return injured workers to employment thus extending the estimated length of disabilities and medical loss cost trends have increased. The favorable development in workers compensation in 2004 reflects a moderation in severity.

The following table presents workers compensation claim count information for the total pooled business in which Harleysville Group participates and payment amounts which are Harleysville Group’s pooling share of the total pooled amounts: