UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10 - Q
x |
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 | ||
|
| ||
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2003 | |||
|
| ||
OR | |||
|
| ||
o |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 | ||
|
| ||
For the transition period from __________ to__________ | |||
|
| ||
Commission file number 1-13664 | |||
| |||
THE PMI GROUP, INC. | |||
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) | |||
| |||
Delaware |
|
94-3199675 | |
(State of Incorporation) |
|
(IRS Employer Identification No.) | |
|
|
| |
3003 Oak Road, Walnut Creek, California |
|
94597 | |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) | |
|
|
| |
(925) 658-7878 | |||
(Registrants telephone number, including area code) | |||
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 x |
No o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes x |
No o |
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Class of Stock |
|
Par Value |
|
Date |
|
Number of Shares |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
April 30, 2003 |
|
|
88,931,610 |
|
THE PMI GROUP, INC.
Index to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
March 31, 2003
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
THE PMI GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
236,578 |
|
$ |
212,962 |
|
Interest and dividend income |
|
|
33,792 |
|
|
32,819 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
8,816 |
|
|
10,680 |
|
Net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
(2,248 |
) |
Other |
|
|
13,684 |
|
|
9,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
294,179 |
|
|
263,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSSES AND EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
51,737 |
|
|
39,048 |
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
22,005 |
|
|
20,351 |
|
Other underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
91,527 |
|
|
77,508 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
3,801 |
|
|
3,826 |
|
Distributions on mandatorily redeemable preferred securities |
|
|
654 |
|
|
1,007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses and expenses |
|
|
169,724 |
|
|
141,740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes and cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
124,455 |
|
|
121,690 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
34,847 |
|
|
37,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
89,608 |
|
|
84,320 |
|
Cumulative effect of a change of accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
7,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
89,608 |
|
$ |
91,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PER SHARE DATA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
$ |
0.94 |
|
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income |
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
$ |
1.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
$ |
0.92 |
|
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
1
THE PMI GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data) |
|
March 31, |
|
December 31, |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited) |
|
|
|
| |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments - available for sale at fair value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed income securities |
|
$ |
2,395,524 |
|
$ |
2,317,645 |
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
81,622 |
|
|
79,575 |
|
Preferred |
|
|
89,105 |
|
|
86,073 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
106,096 |
|
|
36,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
|
2,672,347 |
|
|
2,519,719 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
182,800 |
|
|
217,763 |
|
Investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
303,623 |
|
|
289,795 |
|
Accrued investment income |
|
|
39,146 |
|
|
35,921 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
87,855 |
|
|
85,210 |
|
Premiums receivable |
|
|
55,686 |
|
|
58,660 |
|
Reinsurance receivable and prepaid premiums |
|
|
47,206 |
|
|
60,078 |
|
Reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
3,664 |
|
|
3,846 |
|
Property and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation |
|
|
181,470 |
|
|
177,418 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
63,708 |
|
|
68,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
3,637,505 |
|
$ |
3,517,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve for losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
$ |
358,685 |
|
$ |
350,841 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
242,467 |
|
|
232,877 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
422,950 |
|
|
422,950 |
|
Reinsurance payable |
|
|
32,463 |
|
|
40,506 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
104,065 |
|
|
83,034 |
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
138,335 |
|
|
144,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,298,965 |
|
|
1,274,716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 9, 11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
Company-obligated mandatorily redeemable preferred capital securities of subsidiary trust holding solely junior subordinated deferrable interest debenture of the Company |
|
|
48,500 |
|
|
48,500 |
|
|
|
|
| ||||
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock $.01 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; none issued or outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock $.01 par value; 250,000,000 shares authorized; 105,587,554 issued |
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
1,056 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
267,234 |
|
|
267,234 |
|
Treasury stock, at cost (16,661,778 and 15,644,148 shares) |
|
|
(358,058 |
) |
|
(342,093 |
) |
Retained earnings |
|
|
2,236,895 |
|
|
2,149,877 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of deferred taxes |
|
|
142,913 |
|
|
117,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
2,290,040 |
|
|
2,193,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities, mandatorily redeemable preferred securities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
3,637,505 |
|
$ |
3,517,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
2
THE PMI GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
89,608 |
|
$ |
91,492 |
|
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
(7,172 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
89,608 |
|
|
84,320 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized investment (gains) losses |
|
|
(1,309 |
) |
|
2,248 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(8,816 |
) |
|
(10,680 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
7,023 |
|
|
3,904 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
20,815 |
|
|
(793 |
) |
Changes in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued investment income |
|
|
(3,225 |
) |
|
4,087 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
(2,645 |
) |
|
(5,225 |
) |
Premiums receivable |
|
|
2,974 |
|
|
703 |
|
Reinsurance receivable, net of payable |
|
|
4,829 |
|
|
3,288 |
|
Reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
182 |
|
|
967 |
|
Reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
7,844 |
|
|
10,356 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
9,590 |
|
|
12,294 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
11,110 |
|
|
31,685 |
|
Other |
|
|
(11,417 |
) |
|
21,620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
126,563 |
|
|
158,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of fixed income securities |
|
|
178,007 |
|
|
105,960 |
|
Proceeds from sales of equity securities |
|
|
15,129 |
|
|
9,106 |
|
Investment purchases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed income securities |
|
|
(259,638 |
) |
|
(208,163 |
) |
Equity securities |
|
|
(19,635 |
) |
|
(14,301 |
) |
Net increase in short-term investments |
|
|
(69,677 |
) |
|
(52,136 |
) |
Investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, net of distributions |
|
|
(1,574 |
) |
|
3,491 |
|
Capital expenditures and capitalized software, net of dispositions |
|
|
(10,320 |
) |
|
(10,849 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(167,708 |
) |
|
(166,892 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOW FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of treasury stock |
|
|
3,754 |
|
|
11,731 |
|
Repurchases of common stock |
|
|
(19,719 |
) |
|
|
|
Dividends paid to shareholders |
|
|
(2,204 |
) |
|
(1,786 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(18,169 |
) |
|
9,945 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of the change in currency translations on cash |
|
|
24,351 |
|
|
4,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(34,963 |
) |
|
6,770 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
217,763 |
|
|
129,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
182,800 |
|
$ |
136,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW DISCLOSURES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid and preferred securities distributions |
|
$ |
7,262 |
|
$ |
7,368 |
|
Income taxes paid, net of refunds |
|
$ |
2,688 |
|
$ |
3,315 |
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital lease obligations incurred for equipment |
|
$ |
295 |
|
$ |
204 |
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
3
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
BASIS OF PRESENTATION |
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of The PMI Group, Inc. (The PMI Group), a Delaware corporation; its direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries, PMI Mortgage Insurance Co. (PMI), an Arizona corporation; American Pioneer Title Insurance Company (APTIC), a Florida corporation; PMI Mortgage Insurance Ltd and PMI Indemnity Limited (collectively, PMI Australia), Australian mortgage insurance companies; PMI Mortgage Insurance Company Limited (PMI Europe), an Irish insurance corporation; and other insurance, reinsurance and non-insurance subsidiaries. The PMI Group and its subsidiaries are collectively referred to as the Company.
The Company has equity interests in CMG Mortgage Insurance Company (CMG), which conducts residential mortgage insurance business; Fairbanks Capital Holding Corp. (Fairbanks), a servicer of single-family residential mortgages; Truman Capital Founders, LLC (Truman), the general partner and majority-owner of an investment vehicle that focuses on the residential whole loan purchase market; and RAM Holdings Ltd. and RAM Holdings II Ltd. (collectively, RAM Re), financial guaranty reinsurance companies based in Bermuda. The Companys percentage ownership of equity securities of Fairbanks, CMG, RAM Re and Truman as of March 31, 2003 was 56.8%, 50.0%, 24.9% and 19.6%, respectively. Because the Company has significant but not controlling interests in these entities, they are accounted for on the equity method of accounting in the Companys consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The results of Fairbanks and Truman are reported on a one-month lag basis, and RAM Re is reported on a quarter lag basis. All material intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
The Companys unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP for interim financial information and the requirements of Form 10-Q and Article 7 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, considered necessary for a fair presentation, have been included. Interim results for the three months ended March 31, 2003 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2003. The financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in The PMI Group, Inc.s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.
NOTE 2. |
SUMMARY OF CERTAIN SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES |
Cash and Cash Equivalents The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents. As of December 31, 2002, the Company reclassified such investments previously reflected as short-term investments to cash equivalents. Accordingly, the amounts of these investments classified as cash equivalents were approximately $121 million as of March 31, 2003 and $108 million as of March 31, 2002.
Investments The Company has designated its entire portfolio of fixed income and equity securities as available-for-sale. These securities are recorded at fair value, based on quoted market prices, with unrealized gains and losses, net of deferred income taxes, accounted for as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income in shareholders equity. The Companys short-term investments have maturities of greater than three and less than 12 months when purchased and are classified as available-for-sale. The Company evaluates its investments regularly to determine whether there are declines in value and if such declines meet the definition of other-than-temporary impairment in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities. The market value of a security below cost or amortized cost for two consecutive quarters is a potential indicator of an other-than-temporary impairment. If the Company determines that a security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment, the impairment loss is recognized, to the extent of the decline, as a realized investment loss in the current periods earnings.
4
Realized gains and losses on sales of investments are determined on a specific-identification basis. Investment income consists primarily of interest and dividends. Interest income is recognized on an accrual basis and dividend income is recorded on the date of declaration.
Investments in Unconsolidated Subsidiaries Investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries with ownership interests of 20-50% are accounted for on the equity method of accounting, and investments of less than 20% ownership interest are generally accounted for on the cost method of accounting if the Company does not have significant influence over the entity. The Company generally reports the equity earnings of its unconsolidated subsidiaries on either a one-month or one-quarter lag basis. Fairbanks is accounted for on a one-month lag. The Companys ownership interest in Fairbanks was 56.8% as of March 31, 2003. The investment in Fairbanks was approximately $140 million at March 31, 2003, which included a goodwill component of approximately $35 million. As a result of an agreement among the shareholders of Fairbanks limiting the Companys ability to control the operations of Fairbanks, the Company reports its investment in Fairbanks using the equity method of accounting in accordance with EITF Issue No. 96-16, Investors Accounting for an Investee When the Investor Has a Majority of the Voting Interest but the Minority Shareholder or Shareholders Have Certain Approval or Veto Rights. The cost basis of the investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries reflects the Companys share of net unrealized gains and losses in the unconsolidated subsidiaries investment portfolio.
The Securities and Exchange Commission requires public companies to disclose condensed financial statement information in the footnotes for significant unconsolidated subsidiaries, individually or in the aggregate, if income before income taxes, extraordinary items and the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle of the unconsolidated subsidiaries is in excess of 10% of such income of the Company, or if the Companys proportionate share of unconsolidated subsidiaries total assets is in excess of 10% of total assets of the Company. As of March 31, 2003, the income test and balance sheet test were exceeded for the unconsolidated subsidiaries in the aggregate. Accordingly, a footnote has been provided for the Companys proportionate share of balance sheet and statement of operations line items. The condensed financial statements have been presented on a combined basis in the footnotes.
Special Purpose Entities Certain insurance transactions entered into by PMI Europe require the use of foreign special purpose entities (SPEs). These SPEs are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Company, and accordingly, are consolidated in the Companys financial statements. The Company is not affiliated with any SPEs that qualify for off-balance sheet treatment.
Property and Equipment Property and equipment, including software, are carried at cost and are depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, ranging from three to 39 years. Leasehold improvements are recorded at cost and amortized over the lesser of the useful life of the assets or the remaining term of the related lease.
Under the provisions of Statement of Position (SOP) No. 98-1, Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use, the Company capitalizes costs incurred during the application development stage related to software developed for internal use purposes and for which it has no substantive plan to market externally. Capitalized costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset at such time as the software is ready for its intended use, generally three to five years. As a result, the Company capitalized costs associated with software developed for internal use of $5.3 million and $6.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Policy Acquisition Costs The Company defers certain costs in its mortgage insurance operations relating to the acquisition of new insurance and amortizes these costs against related premium revenue in order to match costs and revenues. These costs are primarily associated with the acquisition, underwriting and processing of new business, including contract underwriting and sales related activities. To the extent the Company is compensated by customers for contract underwriting, those underwriting costs are not deferred. Costs related to the issuance of mortgage insurance business are initially deferred and reported as deferred policy acquisition costs. SFAS No. 60, Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises (SFAS No. 60), specifically excludes mortgage guaranty insurance from its guidance
5
relating to the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs. Amortization of these costs for each underwriting year book of business is charged against revenue in proportion to estimated gross profits. The estimates for each underwriting year are updated regularly to reflect actual experience and any changes to key assumptions such as persistency or loss development.
Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses The reserves for mortgage guaranty insurance losses and loss adjustment expenses are the estimated claim settlement costs on notices of default that have been received by the Company, as well as loan defaults that have been incurred but have not been reported by the lenders. SFAS No. 60 specifically excludes mortgage guaranty insurance from its guidance relating to reserves for losses. Consistent with industry accounting practices, the Company does not establish loss reserves for future claims on insured loans that are not currently in default. The Company establishes loss reserves on a case-by-case basis when insured loans are identified as currently in default using estimated claim rates and average claim sizes for each report year, net of salvage recoverable. The Company also reserves for defaults that have been incurred but have not been reported to the Company prior to the close of an accounting period, using estimated claim rates and claim sizes for the estimated number of defaults not reported.
Title policy claims reserves are established based on estimated amounts required to settle claims, including expenses for defending claims, for which notice has been received and an amount estimated to satisfy claims incurred but not reported. Management believes that the title policy claim reserves are appropriately established in the aggregate and are adequate to cover the ultimate net cost of reported and unreported claims arising from losses which had occurred as of the balance sheet dates.
Revenue Recognition Primary and pool insurance policies are contracts that are generally non-cancelable by the insurer, are renewable at a fixed price, and provide payment of premiums on a monthly, annual or single basis. Upon renewal, the Company is not able to re-underwrite or re-price its policies. SFAS No. 60 specifically excludes mortgage guaranty insurance from its guidance relating to the earning of insurance premiums. Premiums written on a monthly basis are earned as coverage is provided. Monthly premiums accounted for approximately 71% of gross premiums written from our mortgage insurance operations in the first quarter of 2003 compared with 76% in the first quarter of 2002. Premiums written on an annual basis are amortized on a monthly pro rata basis over the year of coverage. Primary mortgage insurance premiums written on policies covering more than one year are referred to as single premiums. A portion of single premiums is recognized in earnings in the current period, and the remaining portion is deferred as unearned premiums and earned over the expected life of the policy, which ranges from seven to fifteen years. Rates used to determine the earning of single premiums are estimates based on the expiration of risk. Accordingly, the unearned premium reserve represents the portion of premiums written that is applicable to the estimated unexpired risk of insured policies.
Title insurance premiums are recognized as revenue when an issued policy is received by APTIC. Fee income of the non-insurance subsidiaries is earned as the services are provided including contract underwriting. Contract underwriting revenue is recorded in other income.
Business Segments The Companys reportable operating segments include U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations, International Mortgage Insurance Operations, Title Insurance and Other. The Other segment includes the income, equity earnings and expenses of The PMI Group, contract underwriting services and an inactive broker-dealer.
Stock-Based Compensation The Company accounts for stock-based compensation to employees and directors using the intrinsic value method prescribed in Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB No. 25), and its related interpretations. Under APB No. 25, compensation cost for stock-based awards is measured as the excess, if any, of the market price of the underlying stock on the grant date over the employees exercise price for the stock options.
6
As all options have been granted with an exercise price equal to the fair value at the grant date, no compensation expense has been recognized for the Companys stock option program. SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123), requires pro forma disclosure of net income and earnings per share using the fair value method, and provides that employers may continue to account for stock-based compensation under APB No. 25.
In December 2002, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation Transition and Disclosure (SFAS No. 148). SFAS No. 148 amends SFAS No. 123 to provide alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. In addition, SFAS No. 148 amends the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123 to require prominent disclosures in both annual and interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. The transition guidance and annual disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 148 are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2002. The interim disclosure provisions are effective for financial reports containing financial statements for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2002. Although the Company has not currently elected to expense the fair value of stock options granted, it continues to evaluate this alternative. If the Company elects to expense the fair value of stock options under the guidelines of SFAS No. 148, the impact on its financial position and results of operations are expected to be consistent with SFAS No. 123 pro forma disclosure included in the financial statements. The Company adopted the disclosure provisions of SFAS No. 148 effective in the first quarter of 2003.
The fair value of stock-based compensation to employees is calculated using the option pricing models that are developed to estimate the fair value of freely tradable and fully transferable options without vesting restrictions, which differ from the Companys stock option program. These models also require considerable judgment, including assumptions regarding future stock price volatility and expected time to exercise, which greatly affect the calculated value.
The fair value of each stock option grant is estimated on the date of the grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend yield |
|
|
0.42 |
|
|
0.23 |
|
Expected volatility |
|
|
38.66 |
% |
|
36.70 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.03 |
% |
|
5.02 |
% |
Expected life (years) |
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
4.0 |
|
SFAS No. 123 requires pro forma disclosure of net income and earnings per share using the fair value method. If the computed fair values of the awards had been amortized to expense over the vesting period of the awards, the Companys net income, basic net income per share and diluted net income per share would have been reduced to the pro forma amounts indicated below:
7
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
89,608 |
|
$ |
91,492 |
|
Deduct: stock based employee compensation expense determined under fair value based method for all awards, net of related tax effects |
|
|
(2,811 |
) |
|
(2,756 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
86,797 |
|
$ |
88,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
1.01 |
|
$ |
1.02 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
0.98 |
|
$ |
0.99 |
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
0.97 |
|
$ |
0.97 |
|
Income Tax The Company accounts for income taxes using the liability method in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. The liability method measures the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences at the enacted tax rates applicable for the period in which the deferred asset or liability is expected to be realized or settled. Temporary differences are differences between the tax basis of an asset or liability and its reported amount in the financial statements that will result in taxable or deductible amounts in future years.
Earnings Per Share Basic earnings per share, or EPS, excludes dilution and is based on net income available to common shareholders and the actual weighted-average of the common stock shares that are outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is based on net income available to common shareholders and the weighted-average of common stock shares outstanding on a fully diluted basis during the period. The weighted-average of the common stock shares on a fully diluted basis reflects the potential increase of common stock shares if outstanding securities were converted into common stock, or if contracts to issue common stock, including stock options issued by the Company that have a dilutive impact, were exercised. Net income available to common shareholders is the same for computing basic and diluted EPS. The convertible debt outstanding has not been included in the calculation of diluted shares outstanding as it is anti-dilutive for the periods presented.
The following is a reconciliation of the weighted-average of the common stock shares used to calculate basic EPS to the weighted-average of the common stock shares used to calculate diluted EPS for the quarters ended March 31, 2003 and 2002.
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Shares in thousands) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average of common stock shares for basic EPS |
|
|
89,001 |
|
|
89,496 |
|
Weighted-average of stock options and other dilutive components |
|
|
827 |
|
|
1,950 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average of common stock shares for diluted EPS |
|
|
89,828 |
|
|
91,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Split In June 2002, the Company effected a two-for-one stock split in the form of a stock dividend. All common share and per share data have been adjusted to reflect the stock split.
Reclassifications Certain items in the prior corresponding periods consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current periods presentation.
8
NOTE 3. |
NEW ACCOUNTING STANDANRDS |
In January 2003, FASB issued Financial Interpretation Number (FIN) 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, which provides guidance on identifying and assessing interests in variable interest entities to determine if consolidation of that entity is required. FIN 46 requires consolidation of existing unconsolidated variable interest entities if the entities do not effectively disperse risk among the parties involved. The Company will be required to adopt this interpretation for existing entities in the third quarter of 2003. The Company is currently evaluating the impact, if any, of the adoption of this pronouncement.
NOTE 4. |
INVESTMENTS |
Fair Values and Gross Unrealized Gains and Losses on Investments The cost or amortized cost, estimated fair value, and gross unrealized gains and losses on investments are shown in the table below:
|
|
Cost or |
|
Gross Unrealized |
|
Fair |
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
Gains |
|
(Losses) |
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2003: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed income securities |
|
$ |
2,257,900 |
|
$ |
147,078 |
|
$ |
(9,454 |
) |
$ |
2,395,524 |
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stocks |
|
|
77,713 |
|
|
7,514 |
|
|
(3,605 |
) |
|
81,622 |
|
Preferred stocks |
|
|
88,475 |
|
|
3,839 |
|
|
(3,209 |
) |
|
89,105 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
102,799 |
|
|
3,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
106,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
$ |
2,526,887 |
|
$ |
161,728 |
|
$ |
(16,268 |
) |
$ |
2,672,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost or |
|
Gross Unrealized |
|
Fair |
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
Gains |
|
(Losses) |
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2002: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed income securities |
|
$ |
2,170,151 |
|
$ |
151,968 |
|
$ |
(4,474 |
) |
$ |
2,317,645 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stocks |
|
|
75,162 |
|
|
6,972 |
|
|
(2,559 |
) |
|
79,575 |
|
Preferred stocks |
|
|
88,434 |
|
|
2,319 |
|
|
(4,680 |
) |
|
86,073 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
33,006 |
|
|
3,427 |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
36,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
$ |
2,366,753 |
|
$ |
164,686 |
|
$ |
(11,720 |
) |
$ |
2,519,719 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the first quarter of 2003, the Company determined that the decline in the market value of certain equity securities met the definition of other-than-temporary impairment and recognized a realized loss of $0.1 million in the first quarter of 2003 compared to $3.2 million in the first quarter of 2002.
NOTE 5. |
RESTRICTED CASH |
In March 2002, the Company entered into an agreement with a customer to provide mortgage insurance coverage for a three-year period on a pool of loans; the Company received funds to cover future claim payments on these loans. The transaction does not transfer insurance risk. Accordingly, the contract is being accounted for under the guidelines of SOP No. 98-7, Deposit Accounting: Accounting for Insurance and Reinsurance Contracts That Do Not Transfer Insurance Risk. As of March 31, 2003, $12.4 million of deposits received under this agreement were included in cash and cash equivalents, and can only be utilized to pay claims related thereto.
9
NOTE 6. |
DEFERRED POLICY ACQUISITION COSTS |
The following table summarizes deferred policy acquisition cost activity for the first three months of 2003 and 2002.
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
85,210 |
|
$ |
77,903 |
|
Policy acquisition costs incurred and deferred |
|
|
24,650 |
|
|
25,576 |
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
(22,005 |
) |
|
(20,351 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
87,855 |
|
$ |
83,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs are affected by qualifying costs incurred and deferred, and amortization of previously deferred costs in the applicable period. In periods where there is growth in new business, the asset will generally increase because the amount of acquisition costs being deferred exceeds amortization expenses.
NOTE 7. |
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |
The reconciliation of net income to comprehensive income for the first three months of 2003 and 2002 are shown in the table below:
|
|
Three Months Ended |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
89,608 |
|
$ |
91,492 |
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains (losses) on investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized holding gains (losses) arising during period |
|
|
1,653 |
|
|
(4,704 |
) |
Reclassification for realized (gains) losses included in net income, net of tax |
|
|
(851 |
) |
|
1,461 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized holding gains (losses) |
|
|
802 |
|
|
(3,243 |
) |
Currency translation adjustment |
|
|
24,351 |
|
|
4,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax |
|
|
25,153 |
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
$ |
114,761 |
|
$ |
93,192 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 8. |
BUSINESS SEGMENTS |
Transactions between segments are not significant. The following tables present information for reported segment income or loss and segment assets as of and for the periods indicated.
10
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2003 |
| |||||||||||||
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
U.S. |
|
International |
|
Title |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
156,604 |
|
$ |
19,366 |
|
$ |
60,608 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
236,578 |
|
Interest and dividend income |
|
|
23,302 |
|
|
5,863 |
|
|
737 |
|
|
3,890 |
|
|
33,792 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
2,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,951 |
|
|
8,816 |
|
Net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
(479 |
) |
|
341 |
|
|
18 |
|
|
1,429 |
|
|
1,309 |
|
Other income |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,968 |
|
|
10,547 |
|
|
13,684 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
182,461 |
|
|
25,570 |
|
|
64,331 |
|
|
21,817 |
|
|
294,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
47,536 |
|
|
(661 |
) |
|
4,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
51,737 |
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
19,475 |
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,005 |
|
Other underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
14,825 |
|
|
3,844 |
|
|
54,917 |
|
|
17,941 |
|
|
91,527 |
|
Interest expense and distribution on capital securities |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,430 |
|
|
4,455 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses and expenses |
|
|
81,861 |
|
|
5,713 |
|
|
59,779 |
|
|
22,371 |
|
|
169,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
100,600 |
|
|
19,857 |
|
|
4,552 |
|
|
(554 |
) |
|
124,455 |
|
Income tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
28,676 |
|
|
5,672 |
|
|
1,560 |
|
|
(1,061 |
) |
|
34,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
71,924 |
|
$ |
14,185 |
|
$ |
2,992 |
|
$ |
507 |
|
$ |
89,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
2,308,619 |
|
$ |
595,845 |
|
$ |
91,788 |
|
$ |
641,253 |
|
$ |
3,637,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2002 |
| |||||||||||||
|
|
|
| |||||||||||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
U.S. |
|
International |
|
Title |
|
Other |
|
Consolidated |
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
152,630 |
|
$ |
12,196 |
|
$ |
48,136 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
212,962 |
|
Interest and dividend income |
|
|
21,483 |
|
|
5,763 |
|
|
550 |
|
|
5,023 |
|
|
32,819 |
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
3,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,562 |
|
|
10,680 |
|
Net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
(2,478 |
) |
|
465 |
|
|
|
|
|
(235 |
) |
|
(2,248 |
) |
Other income |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,046 |
|
|
7,048 |
|
|
9,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
174,876 |
|
|
18,424 |
|
|
50,732 |
|
|
19,398 |
|
|
263,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
36,061 |
|
|
593 |
|
|
2,394 |
|
|
|
|
|
39,048 |
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
19,152 |
|
|
1,199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,351 |
|
Other underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
15,123 |
|
|
2,371 |
|
|
44,448 |
|
|
15,566 |
|
|
77,508 |
|
Interest expense and distribution on capital securities |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,815 |
|
|
4,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses and expenses |
|
|
70,354 |
|
|
4,163 |
|
|
46,842 |
|
|
20,381 |
|
|
141,740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
104,522 |
|
|
14,261 |
|
|
3,890 |
|
|
(983 |
) |
|
121,690 |
|
Income tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
33,176 |
|
|
4,210 |
|
|
1,383 |
|
|
(1,399 |
) |
|
37,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
71,346 |
|
|
10,051 |
|
|
2,507 |
|
|
416 |
|
|
84,320 |
|
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
7,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
71,346 |
|
$ |
17,223 |
|
$ |
2,507 |
|
$ |
416 |
|
$ |
91,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
2,182,594 |
|
$ |
451,399 |
|
$ |
69,259 |
|
$ |
470,987 |
|
$ |
3,174,239 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
NOTE 9. |
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
During the fourth quarter of 2002, the Company received a notice of assessment from the California Franchise Tax Board, or FTB, for the tax year ended December 31, 1997 in the amount of $2.8 million, not including the federal tax benefits from the payment of such assessment or interest that might be included on amounts, if any, ultimately paid to the FTB. During the first quarter of 2003, the Company received a notice of assessment from the FTB for the tax years ended December 31, 1998 through 2000 in the amount of $11.1 million, not including federal tax benefits or interest. The assessments are the result of a memorandum issued by the FTB in April 2002. The memorandum, which is based partly on the California Court of Appeals decision in Ceridian v. Franchise Tax Board, challenges the exclusion from California income tax of dividends received by holding companies from their insurance company subsidiaries during the tax years ending on or after December 1, 1997. While the Company intends to protest the current and any future assessments, the Company cannot assure the ultimate outcome of these protests.
Various legal actions and regulatory reviews are currently pending that involve the Company and specific aspects of its conduct of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate liability in one or more of these actions is not expected to have a material effect on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company.
12
NOTE 10. |
CONDENSED COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANT UNCONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARIES |
The following condensed financial statement information has been presented on a combined basis for all unconsolidated subsidiaries accounted for under the equity method of accounting as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2003.
|
|
As of and for the quarter ended March 31, 2003 |
| ||||
|
|
|
| ||||
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Total |
|
PMIs Proportionate Share |
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Combined Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
108,997 |
|
$ |
54,550 |
|
Investments |
|
|
724,737 |
|
|
187,157 |
|
Real estate investments |
|
|
19,040 |
|
|
9,956 |
|
Receivables |
|
|
279,076 |
|
|
154,287 |
|
Servicing assets |
|
|
149,451 |
|
|
84,858 |
|
Real Estate Owned |
|
|
41,276 |
|
|
8,094 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
44,534 |
|
|
12,550 |
|
Premiums receivable |
|
|
10,736 |
|
|
3,594 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
81,259 |
|
|
37,570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,459,106 |
|
$ |
552,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
78,060 |
|
$ |
41,840 |
|
Reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
17,783 |
|
|
6,283 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
88,449 |
|
|
24,685 |
|
Notes payable |
|
|
466,913 |
|
|
204,454 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
26,755 |
|
|
12,293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
677,960 |
|
|
289,555 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
781,146 |
|
|
263,061 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,459,106 |
|
$ |
552,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Combined Statement of Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross revenues |
|
$ |
132,671 |
|
$ |
42,766 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
21,730 |
|
|
28,599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
110,941 |
|
|
14,167 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
9,733 |
|
|
5,351 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
101,208 |
|
$ |
8,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 11. |
SUBSEQUENT EVENTS |
In April 2003, RAM Re raised $92 million of additional capital, and the Company invested an additional $24.4 million in that offering and maintained its 24.9% ownership interest in RAM Re.
On April 25, 2003, the Company entered into a repurchase transaction with a major financial institution. Under the agreement, the Company borrowed an aggregate of $100.2 million at a blended rate of 1.365% for 32 days. On May 5, 2003, the Company completed a second repurchase transaction in which the Company borrowed an aggregate of $98.9 million at a blended rate of 1.453% for ten days, and renewed this transaction on May 15, 2003 for an additional 13 days. These transactions are collateralized by certain agency securities and corporate bonds and will be treated as secured borrowings. The transactions may be renewed at the end of their terms.
On May 1, 2003, Standard & Poors Ratings Service announced a downgrade in its residential subprime and residential special service ranking for Fairbanks subsidiary Fairbanks Capital Corp. (Fairbanks Capital) from strong to below average as of April 30, 2003, with a stable outlook. On May 5, 2003, Moodys Investors Service downgraded Fairbanks Capitals ratings for Primary Servicer of residential subprime mortgage
13
loans and for Special Servicer from SQ1 (Strong) to SQ4 (Below Average). On May 13, 2003, Fitch Ratings downgraded Fairbanks Capitals residential primary servicer rating for subprime, Alt-A and Home Equity from RPS1 to RPS2 and its special servicer rating from RSS1 to RSS2, which ratings are on rating watch negative. Fairbanks Capitals ability to continue to service new and existing servicing portfolios is uncertain. Fairbanks is highly leveraged and dependent upon debt facilities with lenders to make servicing and delinquency advances, finance the acquisition of mortgage servicing rights and for other business purposes. If Fairbanks were to lose access to debt facilities for any reason, Fairbanks will be unable to continue funding its operations or pay its debts as they become due. Due to these current and potential future adverse events the Companys investment balance of $140 million as of March 31, 2003 could become impaired. In addition, future income from Fairbanks operations may also be negatively impacted.
14
ITEM 2. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT
Statements made or incorporated by reference from time to time in this document, other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, press releases, conferences or otherwise that are not historical facts, or are preceded by, followed by or that include the words believes, expects, anticipates, estimates or similar expressions, and that relate to future plans, events or performance are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements in this document include: (i) PMIs belief that the structure of its modified pool insurance products mitigates the risk of loss to PMI from the less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans insured by those products; and (ii) our belief that we have sufficient cash to meet all of our short- and medium-term obligations.
When a forward-looking statement includes an underlying assumption, we caution that, while we believe the assumption to be reasonable and make it in good faith, assumed facts almost always vary from actual results, and the difference between assumed facts and actual results can be material. Where, in any forward-looking statement, we express an expectation or belief as to future results, there can be no assurance that the expectation or belief will result. Our actual results may differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statement made by us. Forward-looking statements involve a number of risks of uncertainties including, but not limited to, the risks described under the heading Investment Considerations. All forward-looking statements are qualified by and should be read in conjunction with those risk factors. Except as may be required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
15
OVERVIEW
The PMI Group, Inc. is an international provider of credit enhancement products and lender services that promote homeownership and facilitate mortgage transactions in the capital markets. Through our wholly-owned subsidiaries and other investments, we offer residential mortgage insurance and credit enhancement products domestically and internationally, title insurance, financial guaranty reinsurance, mortgage servicing and other residential lender services.
Our consolidated and segment financial results are discussed below.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Consolidated Results
The following table presents highlights of our consolidated financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2003 and 2002.
(In millions, except per share data and percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premium earned |
|
$ |
236.6 |
|
$ |
213.0 |
|
|
11 |
% |
Interest and dividend income |
|
|
33.8 |
|
|
32.8 |
|
|
3 |
% |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated strategic investments |
|
|
8.8 |
|
|
10.6 |
|
|
(17 |
)% |
Net realized investment gains (losses) |
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
13.7 |
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
294.2 |
|
|
263.4 |
|
|
12 |
% |
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
51.7 |
|
|
39.0 |
|
|
33 |
% |
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
22.0 |
|
|
20.4 |
|
|
8 |
% |
Other underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
91.5 |
|
|
77.5 |
|
|
18 |
% |
Interest expense and distributions on mandatorily preferred securities |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes and cumulative effect |
|
|
124.5 |
|
|
121.7 |
|
|
2 |
% |
Income taxes |
|
|
34.9 |
|
|
37.4 |
|
|
(7 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
89.6 |
|
|
84.3 |
|
|
6 |
% |
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
89.6 |
|
$ |
91.5 |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Earnings per share calculations are based on the number of common stock shares outstanding on a fully-diluted basis. Per share data has been adjusted to reflect the two-for-one stock split effective in June 2002.
Consolidated net income for the first quarter of 2003 decreased 2% from the corresponding period in 2002. Income before the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle increased by 6% over the first quarter of 2002 due primarily to the results of our Australian subsidiaries, PMI Mortgage Insurance Ltd and PMI Indemnity Limited, which represent the majority of the activity in our International Mortgage Insurance Operations segment. The cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle resulted in the write-off of negative goodwill of $7.2 million in the first quarter of 2002. Further discussion is provided in the business segments sections below.
Premiums earned represent the amount of premiums recognized as revenue for accounting purposes. The increase in premiums earned in the first three months of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was
16
attributable largely to growth in premiums from title insurance and modified pool mortgage insurance written in the U.S. Additional revenue discussion is also included in the business segment sections below.
The increase in interest and dividend income in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due to growth in the investment portfolio, partially offset by a slight decrease in our book yield. Our pre-tax book yield was 5.5% at March 31, 2003 compared with 5.7% at March 31, 2002.
We account for our unconsolidated strategic investments and limited partnerships on the equity method of accounting. The decrease in equity earnings from our unconsolidated strategic investments and limited partnerships was due primarily to a $2.6 million loss from certain private equity limited partnership investments. Equity earnings, net of tax, from our unconsolidated strategic investment Fairbanks Capital Holding Corp., or Fairbanks, accounted for approximately 7% of our consolidated net income for the three months ended March 31, 2003, approximately 3% for the three months ended March 31, 2002, and approximately 6% for the year ended December 31, 2002. As a result of developments at Fairbanks, the contribution of Fairbanks to our consolidated net income may decrease substantially going forward. See page 42, below, for a discussion of those developments.
Included in our net realized investment gains and losses were impairment losses recognized for financial reporting purposes on certain impaired securities in our investment portfolio. Impairment losses were $0.1 million for the first quarter of 2003 compared to $3.2 million for the first quarter of 2002.
The increase in other income in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was largely attributable to increased activity in our contract underwriting services, which are included in our Other business segment.
The increase in losses and loss adjustment expenses in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was the result of increases in defaults and claims for our U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations. The increase in other underwriting and operating expenses including amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs in the first three months of 2003 over the first three months of 2002 was due primarily to an increase in expenses related to increased business activity for our Title Insurance operations.
Segment Results
The following table presents highlights of our segment results for the quarters ended March 31, 2003 and 2002.
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations |
|
$ |
71.9 |
|
$ |
71.3 |
|
|
1 |
% |
International Mortgage Insurance Operations |
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
17.2 |
|
|
(17 |
)% |
Title Insurance |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
20 |
% |
Other |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated net income |
|
$ |
89.6 |
|
$ |
91.5 |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US Mortgage Insurance Operations
Our US mortgage insurance subsidiary PMI Mortgage Insurance Co., or PMI, provides primary mortgage insurance, or primary insurance, and pool mortgage insurance, or pool insurance, against losses in the event of borrower default. Primary insurance provides mortgage default protection on individual loans at specified coverage percentages. PMIs primary new insurance written includes insurance that
17
PMI underwrites on a loan-by-loan basis (flow channel) and insurance that PMI acquires in bulk transactions (bulk channel), primarily in the capital mortgage markets. Prior to 2002, PMI offered pool insurance products that covered the entire loss on a defaulted mortgage loan that exceeds the claim payment under any primary insurance coverage, up to an agreed aggregate amount, or stop loss limit, for all of the loans in a pool. PMI currently offers modified pool insurance products that, in addition to having a stated stop loss limit and other risk reduction features, have exposure limits on each individual loan in the pool. Our mortgage insurance products are purchased by lenders and investors, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or the GSEs, seeking protection against default risk, capital relief or credit enhancement for mortgage transactions in the capital markets.
The results of our U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations include the operating results of PMI and affiliated U.S. mortgage insurance and reinsurance companies. CMG Mortgage Insurance Company, or CMG, which offers mortgage insurance for loans originated by credit unions, and its affiliates are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations results are summarized as follows:
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
156.6 |
|
$ |
152.6 |
|
|
3 |
% |
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated strategic investments |
|
$ |
2.9 |
|
$ |
3.1 |
|
|
(6 |
)% |
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
$ |
47.5 |
|
$ |
36.1 |
|
|
32 |
% |
Underwriting and operating expenses |
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
71.9 |
|
$ |
71.3 |
|
|
1 |
% |
Premiums written and earned PMIs net premiums written refers to the amount of premiums recorded based on effective coverage during a given period, net of refunds and premiums ceded primarily but, not exclusively, under captive reinsurance agreements. In captive reinsurance agreements, PMI transfers portions of its risk written on loans originated by certain lenders to captive reinsurance companies affiliated with such lenders. In return, a proportionate amount of PMIs gross premiums written is ceded to captive reinsurance companies. The components of PMIs net premiums written and premiums earned are as follows:
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross premiums written |
|
$ |
187.2 |
|
$ |
181.7 |
|
|
3 |
% |
Ceded premiums |
|
|
30.9 |
|
|
21.1 |
|
|
46 |
% |
Refunded premiums |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums written |
|
$ |
151.7 |
|
$ |
156.4 |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
156.6 |
|
$ |
152.6 |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The decrease in net premiums written for the first three months of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due primarily to higher ceded premiums related to captive reinsurance agreements and lower primary insurance in force, offset by higher modified pool risk in force (see Pool insurance below). Primary insurance in force refers to the current principal balance of all insured mortgage loans as of a given date. The increase in ceded premiums was driven by the increasing percentage of insurance in force subject to captive reinsurance agreements, combined with higher average ceding percentages for such agreements. Heavy refinance volume and a higher percentage of new insurance written by lenders with captive reinsurance programs resulted in an increasing penetration of loans subject to captive reinsurance agreements in PMIs portfolio. During the first quarter of 2003, 57% of primary new
18
insurance written was subject to captive reinsurance agreements compared to 44% during the first quarter of 2002. As of March 31, 2003, 46% of primary insurance in force and 47% of primary risk in force was subject to captive reinsurance agreements, compared to 35% of primary insurance in force and 36% of primary risk in force subject to captive reinsurance agreements as of March 31, 2002. Primary risk in force is the aggregate dollar amount equal to the sum of each insured mortgage loans current principal balance multiplied by the percentage of the insurance coverage specified in the policy. We anticipate that higher levels of captive reinsurance cessions will continue to reduce PMIs premiums earned, and that the percentage of PMIs primary risk in force subject to captive reinsurance agreements will continue to increase as a percentage of total risk in force.
PMIs premiums earned increased in the first three months of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 due largely to a change in estimate as a result of an actuarial evaluation of our unearned premium reserve. During the first quarter of 2003, PMI completed a review of the unearned premium reserve and loss reserves for our pool insurance business and determined that the actual loss development is outperforming underwriting expectations. Accordingly, we reduced the unearned premium reserve to match actual loss experience, which resulted in $7.1 million of additional premiums earned for the first quarter of 2003.
Losses and loss adjustments expenses PMIs total losses and loss adjustment expenses represent total claims paid, certain expenses related to default notification and claims processing, and changes in net loss reserves during the applicable period. We establish loss reserves based upon estimated claim rates and claim sizes for reported mortgage loans in default, as well as estimated defaults incurred but not reported. PMIs losses and loss adjustment expenses and related claims data are illustrated as follows:
|
|
Three Months |
|
Three Months |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Claims paid including loss adjustment expenses (in millions) |
|
$ |
42.6 |
|
$ |
27.0 |
|
|
58 |
%* |
Change in net loss reserves (in millions) |
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
(47 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses and loss adjustment expenses (in millions) |
|
$ |
47.5 |
|
$ |
36.2 |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of primary claims paid |
|
|
1,624 |
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
54 |
%* |
Average primary claim size (in thousands) |
|
$ |
22.6 |
|
$ |
21.0 |
|
|
8 |
% |
* During the first quarter of 2003, PMI began reporting primary claims as paid at the time of disbursement to more appropriately reflect the effects of PMIs loss mitigation efforts that take place after the perfection of a claim and prior to disbursement of such claim. Previously, claims were reported as paid upon perfection of the claim filing. At March 31, 2003, approximately 257 loans were affected as a result of this modification. Accordingly, we estimate that the reduction of primary claims paid was approximately $5.1 million to $5.7 million.
The increase in claims paid and loss adjustment expenses in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due to increases in the number of primary claims paid and average primary claim size. Those increases were due to higher default and claim rates associated with the maturation of PMIs 2001 book of primary insurance business, increases in less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans (see Credit characteristics below) in PMIs insurance portfolio, and generally weaker economic conditions and higher unemployment rates throughout the U.S. The 2001 insurance book of business accounted for 23% of PMIs total primary policies in force and primary insurance in force as of March 31, 2003. PMIs gross loss reserves were $320.4 million at March 31, 2003, which represents an increase of $22.7 million over the March 31, 2002 reserve balance.
19
PMIs primary default data are presented in the following table.
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary insured loans in force |
|
|
854,506 |
|
|
892,353 |
|
|
(4 |
)% |
Primary loans in default |
|
|
35,803 |
|
|
26,909 |
|
|
33 |
% |
Primary default rate |
|
|
4.19 |
% |
|
3.02 |
% |
|
1.17 |
pps |
Primary default rate excluding bulk transactions |
|
|
3.52 |
% |
|
2.51 |
% |
|
1.01 |
pps |
Primary default rate for bulk transactions |
|
|
10.59 |
% |
|
7.17 |
% |
|
3.42 |
pps |
The increases in primary loans in default and default rates as of March 31, 2003 compared to March 31, 2002 were related to the seasoning of our 2001 book and composition of PMIs portfolios as discussed above, a decline in our persistency rate and the weaker U.S. economy. Persistency rate refers to the percentage of insurance policies at the beginning of a 12-month period that remain in force at the end of that period. The default rates for bulk channel transactions at March 31, 2003 and 2002 were higher than the overall primary default rates due primarily to the higher concentration of less-than-A quality and non-traditional loans (see Credit characteristics below) in PMIs bulk portfolio.
As of March 31, 2003, PMIs modified pool insurance default rate was 6.39% with 10,506 modified pool loans in default. PMIs modified pool insurance products have risk reduction features, including a stated stop loss limit and exposure limits on each individual loan in the pool, which reduce PMIs potential for loss exposure. PMIs default rate for GSE Pool (see Pool insurance below) was 2.40% with 5,842 GSE Pool loans in default.
Total underwriting and operating expenses Total underwriting and operating expenses reported in the current period are comprised of (i) amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and (ii) other underwriting and operating expenses. PMIs total underwriting and operating expenses are shown below.
(In million, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
$ |
19.5 |
|
$ |
19.2 |
|
|
2 |
% |
Other underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
14.8 |
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total underwriting and operating expenses |
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
$ |
34.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policy acquisition costs incurred and deferred |
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
$ |
19.7 |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs consist of direct costs related to PMIs acquisition, underwriting and processing of new insurance including contract underwriting and sales related activities. These costs are initially recorded as assets and amortized against related premium revenue for each policy year book of business. Policy acquisition costs incurred and deferred are variable and fluctuate in line with the volume of new insurance written, and are offset by increased efficiency resulting from the use of PMIs electronic origination and delivery methods. Electronic delivery accounted for approximately 78% of PMIs insurance commitments from its flow channel primary insurance in the first quarter of 2003 compared to 65% in the first quarter of 2002.
Other underwriting and operating expenses consist of all other costs that are not attributable to the acquisition of new policies and that are recorded as expenses when incurred. The decrease in other underwriting and operating expenses in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due largely to higher underwriting expenses related to contract underwriting services for mortgage loans without mortgage insurance coverage, and are attributable to PMIs affiliate, PMI Mortgage Services Co., or
20
MSC. These higher levels of costs were allocated to MSC which is reported in our Other segment, thereby reducing U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations underwriting and operating expenses. Higher ceding commissions related to captive reinsurance agreements also drove the decrease in underwriting and operating expenses in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002. Contract underwriting allocations were $12.1 million in the first quarter of 2003 compared with $8.6 million in the first quarter of 2002, reflecting increased contract underwriting services on loans without mortgage insurance coverage as a result of higher mortgage origination volume.
Ratios PMIs loss, expense and combined ratios are shown in the following table.
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Variance |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss ratio |
|
|
30.4 |
% |
|
23.6 |
% |
|
6.8 |
pps |
Expense ratio |
|
|
22.6 |
% |
|
21.9 |
% |
|
0.7 |
pps |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined ratio |
|
|
53.0 |
% |
|
45.5 |
% |
|
7.5 |
pps |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PMIs loss ratio is the ratio of total losses and loss adjustment expenses to premiums earned. The increase in the loss ratio in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due largely to an increase in claim payments. PMIs expense ratio is the ratio of amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and other underwriting and operating expenses to the net premiums written. The increase in the expense ratio in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was primarily attributable to the decrease in net premiums written. The combined ratio is the sum of the loss ratio and the expense ratio.
Primary new insurance written The components of PMIs primary new insurance written are as follows:
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary new insurance written : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary new insurance written (flow channel) |
$ |
11,461 |
|
$ |
10,370 |
|
|
11 |
% | |
Primary new insurance written (bulk channel) |
|
|
780 |
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
(30 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Total primary new insurance written |
|
$ |
12,241 |
|
$ |
11,486 |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
* PMIs new insurance written does not include primary insurance placed upon loans more than 12 months after loan origination.
PMIs increase in primary new insurance written in the first quarter of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was driven by the higher volume of residential mortgage originations, due to the historically low interest rate environment and the pronounced refinance market. As estimated by Mortgage Bankers Association of America, total US residential mortgage originations during the first quarter of 2003 increased by 49% over the first quarter of 2002 to $757 billion.
Pool insurance PMI provides pool insurance coverage to lenders and investors for risk reduction, capital relief or credit enhancement for capital market mortgage transactions. Pool insurance is typically issued in negotiated GSE and capital market transactions. Prior to 2002, PMI offered pool insurance to two different customer segments: lenders and the GSEs (GSE Pool), and the capital markets (Old Pool). Both of these products insure all losses on individual loans held within a pool of insured loans up to the stop loss limit for the entire pool. PMIs pool risk in force is the aggregate of the stop loss limit of all pools less the sum of claims paid and deductibles when applicable. GSE Pool risk in force was $792.2 million as of March 31, 2003 compared with $799.9 million as of March 31, 2002. Old Pool is a capital
21
markets pool product issued prior to 1994. Old Pool risk in force at March 31, 2003 was $787.6 million compared to $1,073.3 million at March 31, 2002.
Modified pool insurance PMI currently offers modified pool insurance products that, in addition to having a stated stop loss limit and other risk reduction features, have exposure limits on each individual loan in the pool. Modified pool insurance may be attractive to investors and lenders seeking capital relief or a reduction of default risk beyond the protection provided by existing primary insurance or to cover loans that do not require primary insurance. To date, PMI has issued modified pool insurance principally to the GSEs as supplemental coverage. During the first quarter of 2003, PMI wrote $73.6 million of modified pool risk compared to $173.0 million during the first quarter of 2002. Modified pool risk in force was $1,225.5 million as of March 31, 2003 compared with $526.8 million as of March 31, 2002.
Credit characteristics PMI insures less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans through all of its acquisition channels. PMI defines less-than-A quality loans to include loans with FICO scores (a credit score provided by Fair, Isaac and Company) generally less than 620. PMI considers a loan non-traditional if it does not conform to GSE requirements, including loan size limits, or if it includes certain other characteristics such as reduced documentation verifying the borrowers income, deposit information and/or employment. PMI expects higher default and delinquency rates and generally faster prepayment speeds for less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans than for PMIs A quality loans.
The following table presents PMIs less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans as percentages of its bulk channel and flow channel primary new insurance written and modified pool insurance written.
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months |
|
Three Months |
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
Less-than-A quality loan amounts and as a percentage of : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary new insurance written (flow channel) |
|
$ |
870 |
|
|
8 |
% |
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
10 |
% |
Primary new insurance written (bulk channel) |
|
|
161 |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
108 |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total primary new insurance written |
|
|
1,031 |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
1,169 |
|
|
10 |
% |
All modified pool insurance written |
|
|
145 |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
1,039 |
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total primary and modified pool insurance written |
|
$ |
1,176 |
|
|
8 |
% |
$ |
2,208 |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-traditional loan amounts and as a percentage of : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary new insurance written (flow channel) |
|
$ |
1,508 |
|
|
13 |
% |
$ |
938 |
|
|
9 |
% |
Primary new insurance written (bulk channel) |
|
|
161 |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
435 |
|
|
39 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total primary new insurance written |
|
|
1,669 |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
1,373 |
|
|
12 |
% |
All modified pool insurance written |
|
|
530 |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
792 |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total primary and modified pool insurance written |
|
$ |
2,199 |
|
|
15 |
% |
$ |
2,165 |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PMI believes that the structure of its modified pool insurance products mitigates the risk of loss to PMI from the less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans insured by those products. Since 2001, a majority of PMIs modified pool risk written was through a market outreach program offered by Fannie Mae and targeted to low-income and underserved borrowers.
22
Primary insurance and risk in force Primary insurance in force and total risk in force for PMI are shown in the table below.
|
|
As of March 31, |
|
Percentage |
| |||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
2003 |
|
2002 |
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary insurance in force |
|
$ |
105,518 |
|
$ |
108,107 |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk in force: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary risk in force |
|
$ |
24,676 |
|
$ |
25,299 |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
Pool risk in force |
|
|
3,110 |
|
|
2,615 |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total risk in force |
|
$ |
27,786 |
|
$ |
27,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The decreases in primary insurance in force and risk in force as of March 31, 2003 compared to March 31, 2002 were driven by an increase in policy cancellations. Policy cancellations increased by 47% over the first quarter of 2002 to $14.3 billion in the first quarter of 2003. Downward movements in mortgage interest rates during 2002 resulted in heavy mortgage refinancing activity, which caused PMIs policy cancellations to increase and PMIs policy persistency to decrease. PMIs persistency rate was 52.7% at March 31, 2003 compared with 59.1% at March 31, 2002. The growth in pool risk in force was largely driven by the amount of modified pool insurance written during the past 12 months.
Less-than-A quality loans accounted for approximately 12% of PMIs primary risk in force at March 31, 2003 and March 31, 2002. Approximately 3% of PMIs primary risk in force was comprised of loans with FICO scores below 575 as of March 31, 2003 and March 31, 2002.
International Mortgage Insurance Operations
International Mortgage Insurance Operations include the results of our Australian subsidiaries, PMI Mortgage Insurance Ltd and PMI Indemnity Limited, or PMI Australia, our Irish subsidiary PMI Mortgage Insurance Company Limited, or PMI Europe, and PMIs Hong Kong reinsurance operations. The reporting of financial and statistical information for international operations are subject to currency rate fluctuations in translation to U.S. dollar reporting. International Mortgage Insurance Operations results are summarized as follows:
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premium earned |
|
$ |
19.4 |
|
$ |
12.2 |
|
|
59 |
% |
Losses, expenses and interest |
|
$ |
5.7 |
|
$ |
4.2 |
|
|
36 |
% |
Net income |
|
$ |
14.2 |
|
$ |
17.2 |
|
|
(17 |
)% |
23
PMI Australia
The following table sets forth the results of PMI Australia.
(USD in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage Change |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums written |
|
$ |
21.3 |
|
$ |
16.6 |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
17.3 |
|
$ |
11.1 |
|
|
56 |
% |
Net investment income |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
(9 |
)% |
Loss and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
Underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
66 |
% |
Income taxes |
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
44 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
12.1 |
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
(22 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss ratio |
|
|
(5.2 |
)% |
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
|
Expense ratio * |
|
|
27.2 |
% |
|
20.9 |
% |
|
6.3 |
pps |
* Expense ratio for the first quarter of 2002 excluded the write-off of negative goodwill discussed below.
The increase in PMI Australias income before the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle for the first quarter of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was due primarily to an increase in premiums earned and a decrease in loss reserves in the first quarter of 2003. The reported results of PMI Australia were affected by the appreciation in the Australian dollar in 2003. The average USD/AUD currency exchange rate was 0.5930 for the first three months of 2003 and 0.5185 for the first three months of 2002.
Premiums written and earned PMI Australias net premiums written and premiums earned for the first quarter of 2003 were favorably affected by the appreciation of the Australian dollar. In addition, the increase in net premiums written in the first quarter of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was attributable to a decrease in premiums ceded under captive reinsurance agreements during the first quarter of 2003. The increase in premiums earned in the first quarter of 2003 over the first quarter of 2002 was due in part to growth in the insurance portfolio.
Net investment income PMI Australias investment portfolio was $445.8 million at March 31, 2003 compared to $328.0 million at March 31, 2002. The growth was driven by positive cash flows from operations and the appreciation of the Australian dollar. The pre-tax book yield was 5.11% at March 31, 2003 compared to 6.15% at March 31, 2002. This decrease was partially due to the downward movement in bond rates, and adjustments made to interest and dividend income at 2002 year-end to conform to GAAP as applied in the U.S.
Losses and loss adjustment expenses The decrease in losses and loss adjustment expenses in the first three months of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was due to declines in claim payments and loss reserves and currency exchange rate appreciation. PMI Australia reduced its loss reserves in the first quarter of 2003 as a result of a reduction in the number of defaults as of March 31, 2003, which was attributable to stable economic conditions with continued low unemployment, low interest rates and continued property value growth. PMI Australias default rate at March 31, 2003 was 0.24% compared with 0.29% at March 31, 2002.
24
Underwriting and operating expenses The increase in underwriting and operating expenses in the first quarter of 2003 compared to the first quarter of 2002 was due in part to an increase in the number of employees resulting from a sales force restructuring in 2002, increased expenses related to special projects, and exchange rate appreciation.
Primary new insurance written and insurance in force PMI Australias primary new insurance written includes flow channel insurance and insurance on residential mortgage-backed securities, or RMBS. In Australia, an active securitization market exists due in part to the absence of U.S.-type GSEs. RMBS transactions include insurance on seasoned portfolios comprised of prime credit quality loans that have loan-to-value ratios often below 80%. The loan-to-value ratio is the ratio of the original loan amount to the value of the property. The following table presents the components of PMI Australias primary new insurance written, insurance in force and risk in force.
(USD in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(USD in millions) |
|
|
|
| ||||
Flow insurance written |
|
$ |
2,915 |
|
$ |
2,623 |
|
|
11 |
% |
RMBS insurance written |
|
|
1,210 |
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total primary new insurance written |
|
$ |
4,125 |
|
$ |
3,712 |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(USD in millions) |
|
|
|
| ||||
Primary insurance in force |
|
$ |
60,227 |
|
$ |
45,146 |
|
|
33 |
% |
Primary risk in force |
|
$ |
54,749 |
|
$ |
41,075 |
|
|
33 |
% |
The increase in primary new insurance written in the first quarter of 2003 over the first quarter of 2002 was driven primarily by the appreciation of the Australian dollar, as discussed above. In recent years, an increase in the Australian governments first-time homeowners grant program amounts has favorably impacted overall mortgage market expansion in Australia. The governments return to prior lower grant amounts in 2003 could negatively impact the size of the overall mortgage market in Australia and PMI Australias primary new insurance written in 2003.
25
PMI Europe
The following table sets forth the results of PMI Europe.
(USD in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
Net investment income |
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
Income taxes |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Net income |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in premiums earned in the first three months of 2003 over the corresponding period in 2002 was attributable to growth in PMI Europes credit default swaps in force in the past 12 months. PMI Europe had five credit default swaps in force at March 31, 2003, and had assumed $395.8 million of mortgage default risk on $3.1 billion of mortgages on properties in the United Kingdom, and $141.4 million of default risk on $3.7 billion of mortgages on properties in Germany. PMI Europe did not complete any new transactions in the first quarter of 2003. The majority of the default risk that PMI Europe has insured was highly rated by at least one of the international credit rating agencies.
PMI Europes net investment income includes realized investment gains and losses from investment activity and currency exchange gains and losses when the investments are sold. PMI Europes net investment income also includes gains and losses on currency re-measurement, which represent the revaluation of assets and liabilities held by PMI Europe that are denominated in non-functional currencies into the functional currency, the Euro. PMI Europe incurred re-measurement losses of $0.4 million in the first quarter of 2003 compared to gains of $0.2 million in the first quarter of 2002.
The increase in losses and loss adjustment expenses was due to an increase in reserves for losses and claims. The increase in underwriting and operating expenses in the first quarter of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was due primarily to an increase in staff.
PMI Europes investment portfolio at March 31, 2003 totaled $99.6 million compared to $87.6 million at March 31, 2002. The growth of the investment portfolio was driven by the return on investment and the appreciation of the Euro relative to the U.S. dollar. The pre-tax book yield was 4.77% as of March 31, 2003 and 4.33% as of March 31, 2002. PMI Europes portfolio yield improved due to the reallocation of money market funds to fixed income securities.
Hong Kong
The following table sets forth the results of PMIs Hong Kong reinsurance operations.
(USD in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross reinsurance premiums written |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
|
(53 |
)% |
Reinsurance premiums earned |
|
$ |
1.3 |
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
44 |
% |
PMIs Hong Kong branch reinsures mortgage risk for the Hong Kong Mortgage Corporation. The decrease in gross reinsurance premiums written in the first quarter of 2003 was the result of continued
26
slow economic conditions which have dampened mortgage origination activity and a reduction in the penetration rate of the Hong Kong Mortgage Corporations mortgage insurance program.
Title Insurance Operations
The following table sets forth the results of our title insurance subsidiary American Pioneer Title Insurance Company, or APTIC.
(USD in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
60.6 |
|
$ |
48.1 |
|
|
26 |
% |
Net investment income |
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
33 |
% |
Other income |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
50 |
% |
Loss and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
104 |
% |
Underwriting and operating expenses |
|
|
54.9 |
|
|
44.4 |
|
|
24 |
% |
Income taxes |
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Net income |
|
$ |
3.0 |
|
$ |
2.5 |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
Combined ratios |
|
|
94.0 |
% |
|
93.3 |
% |
|
0.7 |
pps |
The increase in premiums earned in the first three months of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was attributable to an increase in total residential mortgage originations, as discussed above in the U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations segment section.
The increase in underwriting and other expenses in the first quarter of 2003 over the first quarter of 2002 was primarily due to increases in agency fees and commissions related to higher premiums earned. The increase in losses and loss adjustment expenses in the first three months of 2003 compared to the corresponding period in 2002 was the result of an increase in claim payments of $1.1 million and additions to loss reserves of $1.4 million. The increase in APTICs loss reserves in the first quarter of 2003 was driven in part by the strengthening of reserves for estimated defaults incurred but not reported associated with the increase in APTICs new business writing.
The combined ratio for our Title Insurance operations is the ratio of total losses and loss adjustment expenses and underwriting and other operating expenses to premiums earned and other income.
Other
The results of our Other business segment include contract underwriting revenue and related operating expenses of MSC, interest and dividend income, interest expense and corporate overhead of our holding company, or The PMI Group, as well as the equity earnings of our unconsolidated strategic investments except CMG, which are included in the results of U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations. Our Other business segments results are summarized as follows:
27
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Percentage |
| |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated strategic investments |
|
$ |
6.0 |
|
$ |
7.6 |
|
|
(21 |
)% |
Other income |
|
$ |
10.5 |
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
50 |
% |
Underwriting and operating expenses |
|
$ |
17.9 |
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
15 |
% |
Net income |
|
$ |
0.5 |
|
$ |
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
The decrease in equity earnings from our unconsolidated strategic investments, excluding CMG, was due to the $2.6 million loss from certain private equity limited partnership investments, partially offset by an increase in equity earnings of our unconsolidated strategic investment Fairbanks. Fairbanks contributed $7.1 million of equity earnings in the first quarter of 2003 compared to $3.7 million in the corresponding period in 2002. On May 1, 2003, Standard & Poors Ratings Service, or S&P, announced a downgrade in its residential subprime and residential special service ranking for Fairbankssubsidiary, Fairbanks Capital Corp., or Fairbanks Capital, from strong to below average as of April 30, 2003, with a stable outlook. On May 5, 2003, Moodys Investors Service, or Moodys, downgraded Fairbanks Capitals ratings for Primary Servicer of residential subprime mortgage loans and for Special Servicer from SQ1 (Strong) to SQ4 (Below Average). On May 13, 2003, Fitch Ratings, or Fitch, downgraded Fairbanks Capitals residential primary servicer rating for subprime, Alt-A and Home Equity from RPS1 to RPS2 and its special servicer rating from RSS1 to RSS2, which ratings are on rating watch negative. Fairbanks Capitals ability to continue to service new and existing servicing portfolios is uncertain. As a result of these and other developments at Fairbanks, the contribution of Fairbanks to our consolidated net income may decrease substantially going forward. See Investment Considerations, page 42, below, for additional discussion of those developments.
Other income, which was generated by MSC, increased in the first quarter of 2003 over the corresponding period of 2002, primarily attributable to increased contract underwriting activity in connection with higher mortgage origination volume.
Operating expenses, which were incurred by MSC and The PMI Group, increased in the first quarter of 2003 over the first quarter of 2002, as a result of increased contract underwriting expense allocations (see U.S. Mortgage Insurance Operations business segment discussion above) related to higher mortgage origination volume. Contract underwriting allocations were $12.1 million in the first quarter of 2003 compared with $8.6 million in the first quarter of 2002.
Taxes
Our effective tax rate was 28.0% for the first three months of 2003 compared to 30.7% for the first three months of 2002. The decrease was primarily due to an increase in the proportion of income derived from PMI Australia and Fairbanks, which have lower effective tax rates. Our effective tax rate can vary for a number of reasons, including differences in the proportion of earnings taxed at lower marginal tax rates in certain foreign jurisdictions and differences in the proportion of tax-exempt earnings relative to consolidated pre-tax income.
28
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
The PMI Groups principal sources of funds are dividends from its subsidiaries, primarily PMI and APTIC, investment income, and funds that may be raised from time to time in the capital markets. PMI generates substantial cash flows from premiums written on its insurance business and from investment returns on its investment portfolio.
PMIs ability to pay dividends to The PMI Group is affected by state insurance laws, credit agreements, credit rating agencies and the discretion of insurance regulatory authorities. The laws of Arizona, PMIs state of domicile for insurance regulatory purposes, provide that PMI may pay out of any available surplus account, without prior approval of the Director of the Arizona Department of Insurance, dividends during any 12-month period in an amount not to exceed the lesser of 10% of policyholders surplus as of the preceding year end or the last calendar years investment income. In addition to Arizona, other states may limit or restrict PMIs ability to pay shareholder dividends. For example, California, New York and Illinois prohibit mortgage insurers from declaring dividends except from undivided profits remaining above the aggregate of their paid-in capital, paid-in surplus and contingency reserves. Under Arizona law, PMI would be able to pay dividends of approximately $27.8 million in 2003 without prior approval of the Director of the Arizona Department of Insurance.
The laws of Florida limit the payment of dividends by APTIC to The PMI Group to, subject to certain restrictions, the greater of (i) 10% of policyholders surplus derived from realized net operating profits and net realized capital gains, or (ii) APTICs entire net operating profits and realized net capital gains derived during the immediately preceding calendar year. As with PMI, the various credit rating agencies and insurance regulatory authorities have broad discretion to affect the payment of dividends to The PMI Group by APTIC. Under Florida law, APTIC would be able to pay dividends of $9.0 million in 2003 without prior permission from the Florida Department of Insurance.
The PMI Groups principal uses of funds are payments of dividends to shareholders, common stock repurchases, investments and acquisitions, and interest payments. During the first quarter of 2003, we repurchased $19.7 million of our common stock, completing a $100 million stock repurchase program authorized in 1998. In February 2003, The PMI Groups Board of Directors authorized a new stock repurchase program in the amount of $100 million. To date, no repurchases have occurred under this authorization. The PMI Groups available funds were $322.5 million at March 31, 2003, a decrease from the March 31, 2002 balance of $337.0 million, due largely to the repurchase of our common stock.
We believe that The PMI Group has sufficient cash to meet all of our short- and medium-term obligations, and we maintain excess liquidity to support our operations. As of March 31, 2003, we had $288.9 million of liquid funds in cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments to meet ongoing cash requirements. Our investment portfolios hold primarily investment grade securities comprised of readily marketable fixed income and equity securities. At March 31, 2003, the fair value of these securities in our investment portfolios that are designated as available-for-sale increased to $2.6 billion from $2.3 billion at March 31, 2002 as a result of positive cash flows from consolidated operations. Our investments are recorded at fair value, and the differences between the fair value and amortized cost, net of applicable taxes, are reflected in accumulated other comprehensive income in shareholders equity. Our accumulated other comprehensive income consists of changes in unrealized net gains and losses on investments, less realized gains and losses included in net income and currency translation gains and losses, net of deferred taxes.
We have a bank credit line in the amount of $25.0 million with a major financial institution and there are no outstanding borrowings under the credit line. The agreement expires on December 29, 2003. This financial instrument contains certain financial covenants and restrictions, including risk-to-capital ratios and minimum capital and dividend restrictions.
29
On April 25, 2003, we completed a repurchase transaction with a major financial institution. Under the agreement, we borrowed an aggregate of $100.2 million at a blended rate of 1.365% for 32 days. On May 5, 2003, we completed a second repurchase transaction in which we borrowed an aggregate of $98.9 million at a blended rate of 1.453% for 10 days, and renewed this transaction on May 15, 2003 for an additional 13 days. These transactions are collateralized by certain agency securities and corporate bonds. These transactions may be renewed at the end of their terms and we may from time to time execute additional repurchase agreements under our master agreement with this financial institution.
We manage our capital resources based on our cash flows, total capital and rating agency requirements. As of March 31, 2003, our shareholders equity was $2.3 billion. Our long-term debt and other capital securities outstanding at March 31, 2003 was $471.5 million, consisting of the following:
|
|
$360.0 million 2.50% Senior Convertible Debentures due July 15, 2021; |
|
|
$63.0 million 6.75% Notes due November 15, 2006; and |
|
|
$48.5 million 8.309% Capital Securities maturing on February 1, 2027. |
In July 2001, we issued $360.0 million of 2.50% Senior Convertible Debentures. The convertible debentures are due in 2021 and are redeemable at our option beginning in 2006. Under the terms of the indenture, an event of default would occur upon a failure to pay when due any indebtedness for borrowed money of The PMI Group or any of our designated subsidiaries, as defined in the indenture. If there is an event of default on our convertible debentures, the principal amount of our convertible debentures, plus any accrued and unpaid interest, including contingent interest, may be declared immediately due and payable. Under the indenture, designated subsidiaries includes any subsidiary of The PMI Group whose assets constitute 15.0% or more of the total assets of The PMI Group on a consolidated basis. Under the indenture, an entity is a subsidiary of The PMI Group if we own or control at least a majority of its outstanding voting stock. Based in part upon information provided to us by Fairbanks, we believe that we had no subsidiaries that constituted designated subsidiaries as a result of the asset test described above as of March 31, 2003. However, we are not in a position to determine, on a current basis, whether Fairbanks is a designated subsidiary because changes in The PMI Groups and Fairbanks assets will determine whether the assets test described above is satisfied and the accounting data necessary to make this determination is not available until some time subsequent to the date as of which the calculation is to be performed. It is possible that Fairbanks will constitute a designated subsidiary at any time as a result of changes in The PMI Groups and Fairbanks assets following March 31, 2003. Under the provisions of one of Fairbanks credit facilities, an event of default is deemed to occur if Fairbanks loses its above average (or equivalent) residential special servicer rating from S&P, Moodys or Fitch. However, prior to the actions of the rating agencies described above, Fairbanks obtained a waiver under this credit agreement temporarily providing that such actions, in themselves, will not constitute events of default under the credit agreement. Notwithstanding the waiver, however, it is possible that these rating agency actions could have a material adverse effect on Fairbanks business and result in other defaults or events of default under this or other credit facilities to which Fairbanks or its affiliates are parties. The waiver expires on May 25, 2003.
The rating agencies have assigned the following ratings to The PMI Group and certain of its wholly-owned subsidiaries:
|
|
S&P has assigned The PMI Group counterparty credit and senior unsecured debt ratings of A+ and a preferred stock rating of A-; and has assigned PMI Mortgage Insurance Co. counterparty credit and financial strength ratings of AA+. On May 1, 2003, S&P affirmed The PMI Groups A+ counterparty credit rating and PMIs AA+ counterparty credit and financial strength ratings but changed its outlook with respect to these ratings to negative from stable. |
|
|
Fitch has assigned The PMI Group AA- long term issuer and senior debt ratings; has assigned PMI an AA+ insurer financial strength rating; and has assigned PMI Capital I, the issuer of the 8.309% Capital Securities, an A+ capital securities rating. On May 13, 2003, Fitch affirmed The PMI Groups and PMIs ratings but changed the rating outlook with respect to the debt ratings of The PMI Group from stable to negative. |
|
|
Moodys has assigned an A1 senior unsecured debt rating, stable outlook, with respect to The PMI Groups 2.50% Senior Convertible Debentures and has assigned PMI an Aa2 (stable outlook) insurance financial strength rating. On May 9, 2003, Moodys commented on The PMI Groups investment in Fairbanks but took no action with respect to The PMI Group or PMIs assigned ratings or outlook. |
Our consolidated reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses with respect to insurance claims increased to $358.7 million as of March 31, 2003 from $324.9 million as of March 31, 2002. This increase was due primarily to increases in the reserve balances for U.S. primary insurance books of
30
business as a result of higher levels of default and increases in the reserve balances for our title insurance business as a result of increased mortgage origination volume.
PMI has entered into various capital support agreements with its Australian and European subsidiaries that could require PMI to make additional capital contributions to those subsidiaries for rating agency purposes. With respect to the Australian and European subsidiaries, The PMI Group guarantees the performance of PMIs capital support obligations.
PMIs ratio of net risk in force to statutory capital, or statutory risk-to-capital ratio, at March 31, 2003 was 10.7 to 1, compared to 12.3 to 1 at March 31, 2002.
31
INVESTMENT CONSIDERATIONS
General economic factors may adversely affect our loss experience and demand for mortgage insurance.
Our losses result from borrowers inability to continue to make mortgage payments. The amount of any loss depends in part on whether the home of a borrower who defaults on a mortgage can be sold for an amount that will cover unpaid principal and interest and the expenses of the sale. Favorable economic conditions generally reduce the likelihood that borrowers will lack sufficient income to pay their mortgages and also favorably affect the value of homes, reducing, and in some cases even eliminating, the risk of a loss from a mortgage default. We believe that our loss experience could materially increase as a result of:
|
|
national or regional economic recessions; |
|
|
|
|
|
declining values of homes; |
|
|
|
|
|
higher unemployment rates; |
|
|
|
|
|
deteriorating borrower credit; |
|
|
|
|
|
interest rate volatility; |
|
|
|
|
|
war, terrorist activity or political instability; or |
|
|
|
|
|
combinations of these factors. |
These factors could also materially reduce demand for housing and, consequently, demand for mortgage insurance. The United States has experienced an economic downturn. If this economic downturn continues or worsens, our loss experience could suffer and demand for mortgage insurance could decline.
If interest rates decline, home values increase or mortgage insurance cancellation requirements change, the length of time that PMIs policies remain in force and our revenues could decline.
A significant percentage of the premiums we earn each year is generated from insurance policies that we have written in previous years. As a result, the length of time that insurance remains in force is an important determinant of PMIs revenues. Under certain of our master policies, the policy owner or servicer of the loan may cancel insurance coverage at any time. In addition, the Homeowners Protection Act of 1998 provides for the automatic termination or cancellation of mortgage insurance upon a borrowers request if specified conditions are satisfied. Factors that tend to reduce the length of time that PMIs insurance remains in force include:
|
|
current mortgage interest rates falling below the rates on the mortgages underlying PMIs insurance in force, which frequently results in borrowers refinancing their mortgages and canceling their existing mortgage insurance; |
|
|
|
|
|
appreciation in home values experienced by the homes underlying the mortgages of the insurance in force, which can result in the cancellation of mortgage insurance; and |
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the mortgage insurance cancellation policies of mortgage lenders and investors. |
Although we generally have a history of expanding our business during periods of low interest rates, the resulting increase of new insurance written may not be adequate to compensate us for PMIs loss of insurance in force arising from policy cancellations.
32
If the volume of low down payment home mortgage originations declines, the amount of insurance that we write could also decline, which could result in a decline in our future revenue.
The factors that affect the volume of low down payment mortgage originations include:
|
|
the level of home mortgage interest rates; |
|
|
|
|
|
the health of the domestic economy as well as conditions in regional and local economies; |
|
|
|
|
|
consumer confidence, which may be adversely affected by economic instability, war or terrorist events; |
|
|
|
|
|
housing affordability; |
|
|
|
|
|
population trends, including the rate of household formation; |
|
|
|
|
|
the rate of home price appreciation, which in times of heavy refinancing affects whether refinance loans have loan-to-value ratios that require private mortgage insurance; and |
|
|
|
|
|
government housing policy encouraging loans to first-time homebuyers. |
A decline in the volume of low down payment housing could reduce the demand for private mortgage insurance and therefore, our revenues.
Since we generally cannot cancel mortgage insurance policies or adjust renewal premiums, our financial performance could suffer.
We generally cannot cancel the mortgage insurance coverage that we provide, except in the case of non-payment of premium. In addition, we generally establish renewal premium rates for the life of the mortgage insurance policy when the policy is issued. As a result, the impact of unanticipated claims generally cannot be offset by premium increases on policies in force or limited by non-renewal of insurance coverage. The premiums we charge may not be adequate to compensate us for the risks and costs associated with the insurance coverage we provide to PMIs customers.
The risk-based capital rule issued by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight could require us to obtain a claims-paying ability rating of AAA and could cause PMIs business to suffer.
On February 20, 2002, the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, or OFHEO, finalized a risk-based capital rule that treats credit enhancements issued by private mortgage insurance companies with claims-paying ability ratings of AAA more favorably than those issued by private mortgage insurance companies with AA ratings. The rule also provides capital guidelines for the GSEs in connection with their use of other types of credit protection counterparties in addition to mortgage insurers. Under the rule, which became effective in the third quarter of 2002, OFHEO tests the GSEs capital position every quarter. PMI has an AA+ rating. It is not apparent at this point that the finalized rule will result in the GSEs increasing their use of either AAA-rated mortgage insurers instead of AA-rated entities or credit protection counterparties other than mortgage insurers. Changes in the preferences of the GSEs for private mortgage insurance to other forms of credit enhancement as a result of the new OFHEO risk-based capital rule, or a tiering of mortgage insurers based on their credit rating, could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
33
PMIs revenues and profits could decline if we lose market share as a result of industry competition.
The principal sources of PMIs competition include:
|
|
other private mortgage insurers, some of which are subsidiaries of well-capitalized, diversified public companies with direct or indirect capital reserves that provide them with potentially greater resources than we have; |
|
|
|
|
|
federal and state governmental and quasi-governmental agencies, principally the Federal Housing Administration, or FHA, and the Veterans Administration, or VA; and |
|
|
|
|
|
mortgage lenders that choose not to insure against borrower default, self-insure through affiliates or offer residential mortgage products that do not require mortgage insurance. |
If we are unable to compete successfully, our business will suffer.
If mortgage lenders and investors select alternatives to private mortgage insurance, the amount of insurance that we write could decline, which could reduce our revenues and profits.
Alternatives to private mortgage insurance include:
|
|
government mortgage insurance programs, including those of the FHA and the VA; |
|
|
|
|
|
member institutions providing credit enhancement on loans sold to a Federal Home Loan Bank; |
|
|
|
|
|
investors holding mortgages in their portfolios and self-insuring; |
|
|
|
|
|
mortgage lenders maintaining lender recourse or participation with respect to loans sold to the GSEs; |
|
|
|
|
|
investors using credit enhancements other than private mortgage insurance or using other credit enhancements in conjunction with reduced levels of private mortgage insurance coverage; and |
|
|
|
|
|
mortgage lenders structuring mortgage originations to avoid private mortgage insurance, such as a first mortgage with an 80% loan-to-value ratio and a second mortgage with a 10% loan-to-value ratio, which is referred to as an 80/10/10 loan, rather than a first mortgage with a 90% loan-to-value ratio. |
These alternatives, or new alternatives to private mortgage insurance that may develop, could reduce the demand for private mortgage insurance and cause our revenues and profitability to decline.
The OFHEO risk-based capital rule may allow large financial entities such as banks, financial guarantors, insurance companies and brokerage firms to provide or arrange for products that may efficiently substitute for some of the capital relief provided to the GSEs by private mortgage insurance. Many of these entities have significantly more capital than we have and a few have AAA ratings. The ability of these companies to offer or arrange for the products described above will be dependent upon, among other things, how the OFHEO risk-based capital rule is interpreted and administered and the willingness of the GSEs to utilize such forms of credit enhancement. Our financial condition and results of operations could be harmed if the GSEs were to use these products in lieu of mortgage insurance.
34
Legislation and regulatory changes may reduce demand for private mortgage insurance, which could harm our business.
Increases in the maximum loan amount or other features of the FHA mortgage insurance program can reduce the demand for private mortgage insurance. Legislative and regulatory changes have caused, and may cause in the future, demand for private mortgage insurance to decrease and this could harm our financial condition and results of operations.
PMI depends on a small number of customers and our business and financial performance could suffer if PMI were to lose the business of a major customer.
PMI is dependent upon a small number of customers. Through their various origination channels, PMIs top ten customers accounted for approximately 42% of PMIs premiums earned in the first quarter of 2003. The loss of business from any major customer, through the use of self-insurance, other types of credit enhancement or otherwise, could seriously harm our business and results of operations.
Mortgage insurers, including PMI, may acquire significant percentages of their business through negotiated transactions (including bulk primary and modified pool insurance) with a limited number of customers. For one type of negotiated transaction, modified pool insurance, the majority of PMIs business in the first quarter of 2003 came through PMIs participation in a market outreach program offered by Fannie Mae in which PMIs modified pool insurance product enhances the primary coverage offered by PMI and other insurers. This market outreach program allows lenders to take a more comprehensive view of a borrowers creditworthiness and expand the benefit of conventional financing to homeowners. The loss of Fannie Mae as a customer of PMI could reduce our revenue, and if not replaced, harm our financial condition and results of operations.
PMI could lose premium revenue if the GSEs reduce the level of private mortgage insurance coverage required for low down payment mortgages or reduce their need for mortgage insurance.
The GSEs are the beneficiaries on a substantial majority of the insurance policies we issue as a result of their purchases of home loans from lenders or investors. The GSEs offer programs that require less mortgage insurance coverage on mortgages approved by their automated underwriting systems. If the reduction in required levels of mortgage insurance becomes widely accepted by mortgage lenders, or if they further reduce mortgage insurance coverage requirements for loans they purchase, PMIs premium revenue would decline and our financial condition and results of operations could suffer.
In the past, Freddie Mac has sought a permanent charter amendment that would allow it to utilize alternative forms of default loss protection or otherwise forego the use of private mortgage insurance on higher loan-to-value mortgages. Fannie Mae has announced its intention to increase its share of revenue associated with the management of mortgage credit risk and interest rate risk by retaining mortgage credit risk previously borne by a number of other parties, including mortgage insurers. The reduction by the GSEs in their use or required level of mortgage insurance could reduce our revenue.
Products introduced by the GSEs, if widely accepted, could harm our profitability.
The GSEs have products for which they will, upon receipt from lenders of loans with primary insurance, restructure the mortgage insurance coverage by reducing the amount of primary insurance coverage and adding a second layer of insurance coverage, usually in the form of pool insurance. Under these programs, the GSEs may provide services to the mortgage insurer and the mortgage insurer may be required to pay fees to the GSEs for the benefits provided through the reduced insurance coverage or the services provided. These new products may prove to be less profitable than PMIs traditional mortgage
35
insurance business and, if they become widely accepted, could harm our financial condition and results of operations.
Lobbying activities by large mortgage lenders calling for expanded federal oversight and legislation relating to the role of the GSEs in the secondary mortgage market could damage PMIs relationships with those mortgage lenders and the GSEs.
Together with the GSEs and mortgage lenders, we jointly develop and make available various products and programs. These arrangements involve the purchase of PMIs mortgage insurance products and frequently feature cooperative arrangements between the parties. In 1999, a coalition of financial services and housing-related trade associations, including the Mortgage Insurance Companies of America and several large mortgage lenders, formed FM Watch, a lobbying organization that supports federal oversight of the GSEs. The GSEs in turn have criticized the activities of FM Watch. These activities could polarize Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and members of FM Watch as well as PMIs customers and us. As a result of any such polarization, PMIs relationships with the GSEs could limit PMIs opportunities to do business with some mortgage lenders. Conversely, PMIs relationships with these large mortgage lenders could limit PMIs ability to do business with the GSEs. Either of these outcomes could harm our financial condition and results of operations.
The institution of new eligibility guidelines by Fannie Mae could harm our profitability and reduce our operational flexibility.
Fannie Mae is in the process of revising its approval requirements for mortgage insurers, including PMI. We have been in discussions with Fannie Mae about its proposed guidelines, and we anticipate that the new requirements will be finalized during 2003 to be effective at a later date. The guidelines as proposed would cover substantially all areas of PMIs mortgage insurance operations, require the disclosure of certain activities and new products, allow for other approved types of mortgage insurers rated below AA, and give Fannie Mae increased rights to revise the eligibility standards of mortgage insurers. We do not know what form the eligibility guidelines will ultimately take or whether any new guidelines will be issued.
HUDs proposed RESPA reform regulation, if implemented in its current form, could harm our profitability.
The U.S. Housing and Urban Development Department, or HUD, has proposed the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974, or RESPA, Proposed Rule to Simplify and Improve the Process of Obtaining Mortgages to Reduce Settlement Costs to Consumers, or RESPA Rule, which if implemented would give lenders and other packagers the option of offering a Guaranteed Mortgage Package, or GMP, or providing a good faith estimate of settlement costs subject to a 10% tolerance level. To promote the use of a GMP, qualifying packages would be entitled to a safe harbor from litigation under RESPAs anti-kickback rules. Mortgage insurance and title insurance are included in the package to the extent an upfront premium is charged. This could encompass some, but not all, of the policies written and the premiums charged by a mortgage insurer or a title insurer with respect to a single loan. Inclusion in the package could cause settlement service providers, such as mortgage insurers and title insurers, to experience reductions in the prices of their services or products. The public comment period on the RESPA Rule terminated on October 28, 2002. The Mortgage Insurance Companies of America submitted comments on behalf of the mortgage guaranty insurance industry, including PMI. The American Land Title Association, the trade association for title insurers, also submitted comments on behalf of its members, including our title insurance company American Pioneer Title Insurance Company. We do not know what form the final rule will ultimately take. HUD has stated that it intends to publish the final RESPA Rule later in 2003.
36
Mortgage lenders increasingly require us to reinsure a portion of the mortgage insurance default risk on mortgages that they originate with their captive reinsurance companies, which will reduce PMIs net premiums written.
PMIs customers have indicated an increasing demand for captive reinsurance agreements. Under these agreements, a reinsurance company, which is usually an affiliate of the customer, assumes a portion of the mortgage insurance default risk on mortgage loans originated by the customer in exchange for a portion of the insurance premiums. An increasing percentage of PMIs new insurance written is being generated by customers with captive reinsurance companies, and we expect that this trend will continue. An increase in captive reinsurance agreements will decrease PMIs net premiums written, which may negatively impact the yield that we obtain on net premiums earned for customers with captive reinsurance agreements. If we do not provide PMIs customers with acceptable risk-sharing structured transactions, including potentially increasing levels of premium cessions in captive reinsurance agreements, PMIs competitive position may suffer.
The premiums PMI charges for mortgage insurance on less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans, and the associated investment income, may not be adequate to compensate for future losses from these products.
PMIs primary insurance and modified pool insurance written includes less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans. The credit quality, loss development and persistency on these loans can vary significantly from PMIs traditional A-quality loan business. We have experienced higher default rates for these loans and expect that trend to continue. We cannot be sure that this book of business will generate the same returns as PMIs standard business or that the premiums that PMI charges on less-than-A quality loans and non-traditional loans will adequately offset the associated risk.
PMIs primary risk in force consists of mortgage loans with high loan-to-value ratios, which generally result in more claims than mortgage loans with lower loan-to-value ratios.
At March 31, 2003, approximately:
|
|
41% of PMIs primary risk in force consisted of mortgages with loan-to-value ratios greater than 90% but less than or equal to 95%, which we refer to as 95s. Risk in force is the dollar amount equal to the product of each individual insured mortgage loans current principal balance and the percentage specified in the insurance policy of the claim amount that would be payable if a claim were made. In our experience, 95s have higher claims frequency rates than mortgages with loan-to-value ratios greater than 85% but less than or equal to 90%, which we refer to as 90s. |
|
|
|
|
|
7% of PMIs primary risk in force consisted of mortgages with loan-to-value ratios greater than 95% but less than or equal to 97%, which we refer to as 97s. In our experience, 97s have higher claims frequency rates than 95s. We also insure mortgages with loan-to-value ratios greater than 97%, which we believe have claims frequency rates higher than 97s. 4% of PMIs primary risk in force consisted of mortgages with loan-to-value ratios greater than 97%. |
|
|
|
|
|
9% of PMIs primary risk in force consisted of adjustable rate mortgages, which we refer to as ARMs. In our experience, although ARMs have lower initial interest rates, ARMs have claims frequency rates that exceed the rates associated with PMIs book of business as a whole. |
37
The concentration of primary insurance in force in relatively few states could increase claims and losses and harm our financial performance.
In addition to being affected by nationwide economic conditions, we could be particularly affected by economic downturns in specific regions of the United States where a large portion of PMIs business is concentrated. In addition, refinancing of mortgage loans can have the effect of concentrating PMIs insurance in force in economically weaker areas because mortgages in areas experiencing appreciation of home values are less likely to require mortgage insurance at the time of refinancing than are mortgages in areas experiencing limited or no appreciation of home values.
We delegate underwriting authority to mortgage lenders that may cause us to insure unacceptably risky mortgage loans, which could increase claims and losses.
The majority of PMIs new insurance written is underwritten pursuant to a delegated underwriting program. Once a mortgage lender is accepted into PMIs delegated underwriting program, that mortgage lender may determine whether mortgage loans meet PMIs program guidelines and may commit us to issue mortgage insurance. We expect to continue offering delegated underwriting to approved lenders and may expand the availability of delegated underwriting to additional customers. If an approved lender commits us to insure a mortgage loan, we may not refuse to insure, or rescind coverage on, that loan even if we reevaluate that loans risk profile or the lender failed to follow PMIs delegated underwriting guidelines, except in very limited circumstances. Therefore, an approved lender could cause us to insure mortgage loans with unacceptable risk profiles prior to PMIs termination of the lenders delegated underwriting authority.
If we fail to properly underwrite mortgage loans under PMIs contract underwriting services, we may be required to assume the cost of repurchasing those loans. In addition, we may not be able to recruit a sufficient number of qualified underwriting personnel.
We provide contract underwriting services for a fee. These services help PMIs customers to improve the efficiency and quality of their operations by outsourcing all or part of their mortgage loan underwriting to us. As a part of PMIs contract underwriting services, we provide monetary and other remedies to PMIs customers in the event that we fail to properly underwrite a mortgage loan. Such remedies may include:
|
|
the purchase of additional mortgage insurance; |
|
|
|
|
|
assumption of some or all of the costs of repurchasing insured and uninsured loans from the GSEs and other investors; or |
|
|
|
|
|
the provision of indemnification to customers in the event that the loans default for varying reasons, including, but not limited to, underwriting errors. |
Generally, the scope of these remedies is in addition to those contained in PMIs master policies. Worsening economic conditions or other factors that could continue to increase PMIs default rate could also cause the number and severity of the remedies that must be offered by PMIs wholly-owned subsidiary MSC to increase. Such an increase could have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations. There are limitations on the number of available underwriting personnel and heavy price competition among mortgage insurance companies. PMIs inability to recruit and maintain a sufficient number of qualified underwriters or any significant increase in the cost we incur to satisfy PMIs underwriting services obligations could harm our financial condition and results of operations.
38
PMIs loss experience may increase as PMIs policies continue to age.
The majority of claims with respect to primary insurance written through PMIs flow channel have historically occurred during the third through the sixth years after issuance of the policies. As of March 31, 2003, approximately 91% of PMIs risk in force was written after December 31, 1997. As a result, we believe PMIs loss experience may increase as PMIs policies continue to age. If the claim frequency, which is the percentage of loans insured that have resulted in a paid claim, on PMIs risk in force significantly exceeds the claim frequency that was assumed in setting PMIs premium rates, our financial condition and results of operations and cash flows would be harmed.
Our loss reserves may be insufficient to cover claims paid and loss-related expenses incurred.
We establish loss reserves to recognize the liability for unpaid losses related to insurance in force on mortgages that are in default. These loss reserves are based upon our estimates of the claim rate and average claim amounts, as well as the estimated costs, including legal and other fees, of settling claims. These estimates are regularly reviewed and updated using currently available information. Any adjustments, which may be material, resulting from these reviews are reflected in our consolidated results of operations. Our reserves may not be adequate to cover ultimate loss development on incurred defaults. Our financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed if our reserve estimates are insufficient to cover the actual related claims paid and loss-related expenses incurred.
If we are unable to introduce and successfully market new products and programs, our competitive position could suffer.
From time to time, we introduce new mortgage insurance products or programs. Our competitive position and financial performance could suffer if we experience delays in introducing competitive new products and programs or if these products or programs are less profitable than our existing products and programs.
PMIs settlement in the putative RESPA class action lawsuit Baynham v. PMI Mortgage Insurance Co. contains a three-year injunction terminating on December 31, 2003 which relates, in part, to the terms upon which we offer certain products and services. As some of PMIs competitors have not agreed to abide by the terms of the injunction, PMIs compliance with the injunction could inhibit its ability to compete with respect to the offering of new products and structures through the end of this year, and this could have a material adverse effect upon our financial condition and results of operations.
If our claims-paying ability is downgraded below AA-, mortgage lenders and the mortgage securitization market may not purchase mortgages or mortgage-backed securities insured by us, which could materially harm our financial performance.
The claims-paying ability of PMI, our largest wholly-owned subsidiary, is currently rated AA+ (Excellent) by S&P, Aa2 (Excellent) by Moodys, and AA+ (Very Strong) by Fitch. These ratings may be revised or withdrawn at any time by one or more of the rating agencies. These ratings are based on factors relevant to PMIs policyholders and are not applicable to our common stock or outstanding debt. The rating agencies could lower or withdraw our ratings at any time as a result of a number of factors, including:
|
|
underwriting or investment losses; |
|
|
|
|
|
the necessity to make capital contributions to our subsidiaries pursuant to capital support agreements; |
|
|
|
|
|
other adverse developments in PMIs financial condition or results of operations; or |
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the views of rating agencies of our risk profile. |
39
If PMIs claims-paying ability rating falls below AA- from S&P or Aa3 from Moodys, investors, including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, will not purchase mortgages insured by us, which would seriously harm our financial condition and results of operations. In January 2003, Fitch announced that it had revised its rating outlook for the U.S. private mortgage insurance industry from Stable to Negative, due to a variety of factors affecting the industrys long-term fundamentals. Fitch currently maintains a Stable rating outlook on all eight U.S. private mortgage insurers, including PMI, but it has stated that it may change some insurers rating outlooks to Negative in 2003. On May 1, 2003, S&P affirmed PMIs rating but changed the outlook to Negative due to concerns expressed by S&P related to our investment in Fairbanks, as discussed further below.
Our ongoing ability to pay dividends to our shareholders and meet our obligations primarily depends upon the receipt of dividends and returns of capital from our insurance subsidiaries and our investment income.
Our principal sources of funds are dividends from our subsidiaries, investment income and funds that may be raised from time to time in the capital markets. Factors that may affect our ability to maintain and meet our capital and liquidity needs include:
|
|
the level and severity of claims experienced by our insurance subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
|
|
the performance of the financial markets; |
|
|
|
|
|
standards and factors used by various credit rating agencies; |
|
|
|
|
|
financial covenants in our credit agreements; and |
|
|
|
|
|
standards imposed by state insurance regulators relating to the payment of dividends by insurance companies. |
Any significant change in these factors could prevent us from being able to maintain the capital resources required to meet our business needs.
An increase in PMIs risk-to-capital ratio could prevent it from writing new insurance, which would seriously harm our financial performance.
The state of Arizona, PMIs state of domicile for insurance regulatory purposes, and other states limit the amount of insurance risk that may be written by PMI, based on a variety of financial factors, primarily the ratio of net risk in force to statutory capital, or the risk-to-capital ratio.
Other factors affecting PMIs risk-to-capital ratio include:
|
|
limitations under the runoff support agreement with Allstate Insurance Company, which prohibit PMI from paying any dividends if, after the payment of the dividend, PMIs risk-to-capital ratio would equal or exceed 23 to 1; |
|
|
|
|
|
our credit agreement; and |
|
|
|
|
|
capital requirements necessary to maintain our credit ratings and PMIs claims-paying ability ratings. |
Generally, the methodology used by the rating agencies to assign credit or claims-paying ability ratings permits less capital leverage than under statutory or other requirements. Accordingly, we may be required to meet capital requirements that are higher than statutory or other capital requirements to satisfy rating agency requirements.
40
PMI has several alternatives available to help control its risk-to-capital ratio, including:
|
|
obtaining capital contributions from The PMI Group; |
|
|
|
|
|
obtaining third party credit enhancements; and |
|
|
|
|
|
reducing the amount of new business written. |
We may not be able to raise additional funds, or do so on a timely basis, in order to make a capital contribution to PMI. In addition, third party credit enhancements may not be available to PMI or, if available, may not be available on satisfactory terms. A material reduction in PMIs statutory capital, whether resulting from underwriting or investment losses or otherwise, or a disproportionate increase in risk in force, could increase its risk-to-capital ratio. An increase in PMIs risk-to-capital ratio could limit its ability to write new business, impair PMIs ability to pay dividends to The PMI Group and seriously harm our financial condition and results of operations.
Our international insurance subsidiaries subject us to numerous risks associated with international operations.
We have subsidiaries in Australia and Europe. We have committed and may in the future commit additional significant resources to expand our international operations. Accordingly, in addition to the general economic factors discussed above, we are subject to a number of risks associated with international business activities. These risks include:
|
|
the need for regulatory and third party approvals; |
|
|
|
|
|
challenges in attracting and retaining key foreign-based employees, customers and business partners in international markets; |
|
|
|
|
|
economic downturns in the foreign mortgage origination markets targeted, particularly the economies of Australia and Europe; |
|
|
|
|
|
interest rate volatility in a variety of countries; |
|
|
|
|
|
unexpected changes in foreign regulations and laws; |
|
|
|
|
|
the burdens of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws; |
|
|
|
|
|
potentially adverse tax consequences; |
|
|
|
|
|
restrictions on the repatriation of earnings; |
|
|
|
|
|
foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; |
|
|
|
|
|
potential increases in the level of defaults and claims on policies insured by foreign-based subsidiaries; |
|
|
|
|
|
the need to successfully develop and market products appropriate to the foreign market, including the development and marketing of credit enhancement products to European lenders and for mortgage securitizations; |
|
|
|
|
|
PMI Australias loss of a significant customer; and |
|
|
|
|
|
natural disasters and other events (e.g. toxic contamination) that would damage European properties and that could precipitate borrower default. |
41
The performance of our unconsolidated strategic investments could harm our consolidated financial results.
We have made significant investments in the equity securities of several privately-held companies, including:
|
|
Fairbanks, which is the parent company of Fairbanks Capital, a third-party servicer of single-family residential mortgages specializing in the resolution of nonperforming, subperforming, subprime, Alternative A and home equity loans; |
|
|
|
|
|
RAM Holdings Ltd. and RAM Holdings II Ltd., or RAM Re, which are the holding companies for RAM Reinsurance Company, Ltd., a financial guaranty reinsurance company based in Bermuda; |
|
|
|
|
|
CMG, which offers mortgage insurance for loans originated by credit unions; and |
|
|
|
|
|
Truman Founders, LLC, or Truman, which is the general partner and majority-owner of Truman Investment Fund, L.P., a purchaser of residential whole loans. |
Fairbanks, RAM Re, CMG and Truman are accounted for on the equity method of accounting in our consolidated financial statements. Our investments in these unconsolidated strategic investments totaled $279.3 million as of March 31, 2003, compared to $182.3 million as of March 31, 2002, and our equity in earnings from these unconsolidated strategic investments was $11.4 million in the first three months of 2003 compared with $10.4 million in the first three months of 2002. Although our ability to engage in additional strategic investments is subject to the availability of capital and maintenance of our claims-paying ability ratings by rating agencies, we currently expect to make additional strategic investments in the future.
The nature of the businesses conducted by Fairbanks, RAM Re and Truman differs significantly from our core business of providing residential mortgage insurance. Accordingly, these companies are subject to a number of significant risks that arise from the nature of their businesses. For example, Fairbanks business is subject to extensive regulation, supervision and licensing by various state and federal agencies. On the federal level, Fairbanks business is regulated by, among other statutes and regulations, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, RESPA, the Truth in Lending Act and the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994. Fairbanks is also subject to the laws of the states in which it is licensed as a debt collector relating to its practices, procedures and type and amount of fees it can collect from borrowers. Subprime servicers, including Fairbanks Capital, have come under increasing regulatory and public scrutiny. In October 2002, the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, informed Fairbanks that it is the subject of an FTC investigation to determine whether Fairbanks Capitals loan servicing or other practices violate or have violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act or other laws enforced by the FTC. In March 2003, Senator Barbara Mikulski requested the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, to initiate a criminal investigation into Fairbanks Capitals servicing practices. Senator Paul Sarbanes has also asked HUD to review Fairbanks Capitals servicing practices. Failure to comply with applicable regulations can lead to, among other remedies, termination or suspension of licenses, class action lawsuits and administrative enforcement actions.
State and federal banking regulatory agencies, state attorneys general offices, the FTC, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and state and local governmental authorities have increased their focus on lending and servicing practices in the subprime lending industry. State, local and federal governmental agencies have imposed sanctions for practices, including, but not limited to, charging borrowers excessive fees and failing to adequately disclose the
42
material terms of loans or servicing or collection requirements to the borrowers. It is possible that in the future, state, local or federal authorities will seek to require changes in Fairbanks business, including the imposition of fines on Fairbanks, or the revocation of its licenses to operate as a servicing organization.
Fairbanks is also subject to private litigation, including a number of purported class action suits, alleging violations of federal and state laws governing the activities of servicers. We expect that as a result of the publicity surrounding lending and servicing practices, Fairbanks may be subject to other purported class action suits in the future. In addition, in April 2003, PMI was named as a defendant in the action, Fairbanks Capital Cases I & II, a putative class action filed in the California Superior Court in the county of Contra Costa. In May 2003, PMI filed a demurrer to the plaintiffs complaint in this action, seeking to dismiss all claims alleged against PMI.
Fairbanks has procedures and controls to monitor compliance with numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations. More restrictive laws, rules and regulations may be adopted in the future that could make compliance more difficult or expensive which could hinder Fairbanks ability to operate profitably.
Our investment in Fairbanks, and consequently our financial results, could be negatively impacted by the ultimate resolution of the litigation and/or pending or threatened actions involving Fairbanks. Fairbanks could also be harmed by a devaluation of its servicing portfolio.
On May 1, 2003, S&P announced a downgrade in its residential subprime and residential special loan servicer ranking for Fairbanks Capital from strong to below average as of April 30, 2003, with a stable outlook. On May 5, 2003, Moodys downgraded Fairbanks Capitals ratings for Primary Servicer of residential subprime mortgage loans and for Special Servicer from SQ1 (Strong) to SQ4 (Below Average). On May 13, 2003, Fitch downgraded Fairbanks Capitals residential primary servicer rating for subprime, Alt-A and Home Equity from RPS1 to RPS2 and its special servicer rating from RSS1 to RSS2, which ratings are on rating watch negative. Under the provisions of one of Fairbanks credit facilities, an event of default is deemed to occur if Fairbanks loses its above average (or equivalent) residential special servicer rating from S&P, Moodys or Fitch. However, prior to the actions of the rating agencies described above, Fairbanks obtained a waiver under this credit agreement temporarily providing that such actions, in themselves, will not constitute events of default under the credit agreement. Notwithstanding the waiver, however, it is possible that these rating agency actions could have a material adverse effect on Fairbanks business and result in other defaults or events of default under this or other credit facilities to which Fairbanks or its affiliates are parties. The waiver expires on May 25, 2003.
Fairbanks Capitals ability to continue to service new and existing servicing portfolios is uncertain. Fairbanks is highly leveraged and dependent upon debt facilities with lenders to make servicing and delinquency advances in the regular course of its business, to finance the acquisition of mortgage servicing rights and for other business purposes. Fairbanks is in discussions with its lenders in an effort to maintain the continuing availability of its debt facilities. However, there can be no assurance as to the outcome of those discussions. If Fairbanks were to lose access to debt facilities for any reason, Fairbanks will be unable to continue funding its operations or pay its debts as they become due. Due to these current and potential future adverse events, our investment balance of $140 million as of March 31, 2003 could become impaired. In addition, future income from Fairbanks operations may also be negatively impacted.
RAM Re is also subject to various risks. For example, RAM Re could be harmed by a downgrade or withdrawal of its claims paying ratings by one or more of the rating agencies or by failing to establish itself as a significant market participant since it is currently the smallest of the financial guaranty reinsurers.
Our unconsolidated strategic investments could also be harmed by interest rate volatility, the loss of key personnel and their failure to execute future business plans.
43
We do not control the companies in which we strategically invest. Accordingly, we are entirely dependent upon their management to operate their businesses. We may never realize any return on these investments and we may suffer a complete loss of these investments, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We do not control Fairbanks and cannot prevent Fairbanks from defaulting on its indebtedness, which default could under certain circumstances constitute an event of default under our convertible debentures.
Under the terms of the indenture for our 2.50% Senior Convertible Debentures due July 15, 2021, an event of default would occur upon a failure to pay when due, or a default that results in the acceleration of, any indebtedness for borrowed money of The PMI Group or of our designated subsidiaries in an aggregate amount of $25 million or more, unless the acceleration is rescinded, stayed or annulled within 30 days after written notice of default is given to us. In addition, an event of default would occur upon certain events of bankruptcy, insolvency or reorganization with respect to (i) any of our designated subsidiaries or (ii) any group of two or more of our subsidiaries that, taken as a whole, would constitute a designated subsidiary. We cannot be sure that the foregoing events will not occur. If there is an event of default on our convertible debentures, the principal amount of our convertible debentures, plus any accrued and unpaid interest, including contingent interest, may be declared immediately due and payable. Under the indenture, designated subsidiaries means PMI, PMI Australia, PMI Mortgage Insurance Australia (Holdings) Pty Limited, and any other existing or future, direct or indirect, subsidiary of The PMI Group whose assets constitute 15.0% or more of the total assets of The PMI Group on a consolidated basis. Under the indenture, a company is a subsidiary of The PMI Group if we own or control at least a majority of its outstanding voting stock. Based in part upon information provided to us by Fairbanks, as of March 31, 2003, we believe that we did not have any designated subsidiaries as a result of the asset test. However, we believe, based in part upon information we received from Fairbanks, that Fairbanks was a designated subsidiary as recently as February 28, 2003. We are not in a position to determine, on a current basis, whether Fairbanks is a designated subsidiary because changes in The PMI Groups and Fairbanks assets will determine whether the assets test described above is satisfied and the accounting data necessary to make this determination is not available until some time subsequent to the date as of which the calculation is to be performed. It is possible that Fairbanks will constitute a designated subsidiary at any time as a result of changes in The PMI Groups and Fairbanks assets following March 31, 2003. Recently, S&P announced a downgrade in its residential subprime and residential special loan servicer ranking for Fairbanks Capital from strong to below average as of April 30, 2003, with a stable outlook; Moodys downgraded Fairbanks Capitals ratings for Primary Servicer of residential subprime mortgage loans and for Special Servicer from SQ1 (Strong) to SQ4 (Below Average); and Fitch downgraded Fairbanks Capital's residential primary servicer rating for subprime, Alt-A and Home Equity from RPS1 to RPS2 and its special servicer rating from RSS1 to RSS2, which ratings are on rating watch negative. Under the provisions of one of Fairbanks credit facilities, an event of default is deemed to occur if Fairbanks loses its above average (or equivalent) residential special servicer rating from S&P, Moodys or Fitch. However, prior to the actions of the rating agencies described above, Fairbanks obtained a waiver under this credit agreement temporarily providing that such actions, in themselves, will not constitute events of default under the credit agreement. Notwithstanding the waiver, however, it is possible that these rating agency actions could have a material adverse effect on Fairbanks business and result in other defaults or events of default under this or other credit facilities to which Fairbanks or its affiliates are parties. The waiver expires on May 25, 2003.
44
If we are unable to keep pace with the technological demands of our customers or with the technology-related products and services offered by our competitors, our business and financial performance could be significantly harmed.
Participants in the mortgage lending and mortgage insurance industries increasingly rely on e-commerce and other technology to provide and expand their products and services. An increasing number of our customers require that we provide our products and services electronically via the Internet or electronic data transmission, and the percentage of our new insurance written delivered electronically is increasing. We expect this trend to continue, and accordingly, we believe that it is essential that we continue to invest substantial resources in maintaining electronic connectivity with our customers and, more generally, on e-commerce and technology. Our business will suffer if we do not satisfy all technological demands of our customers and keep pace with the technological capabilities of our competitors.
While we intend to protest the assessment we received in 2002, and any future assessment we may receive, from the California Franchise Tax Board, there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome of these protests.
In the fourth quarter of 2002, we received a notice of assessment from the California Franchise Tax Board, or FTB, for the tax year ended December 31, 1997 in the amount of $2.8 million, not including the federal tax benefits from the payment of such assessment or interest that might be included on amounts, if any, ultimately paid to the FTB. During the first quarter of 2003, we received a notice of assessment from the FTB for the tax years ended December 31, 1998 through 2000 in the amount of $11.1 million, not including federal tax benefits or interest. The assessments are the result of a memorandum issued by the FTB in April 2002. The memorandum, which is based partly on the California Court of Appeals decision in Ceridian v. Franchise Tax Board, challenges the exclusion from California income tax of dividends received by holding companies from their insurance company subsidiaries for the tax years ending on or after December 1, 1997. While we intend to protest the current and any future assessments, we cannot assure you as to the ultimate outcome of these protests.
45
ITEM 3. |
The fair value of investments in our portfolio is interest rate sensitive and is subject to change based on interest rate movements. A 100 basis points increase or decrease in interest rates would result in a range of 4-8% decrease or increase in the value of our fixed-income investment portfolio. These hypothetical estimates of changes in fair value are primarily related to our fixed-income securities as the fair values of fixed-income securities fluctuate with increases or decreases in interest rates. At March 31, 2003, $2.4 billion of the $2.7 billion total investment portfolio was in fixed-income securities, including municipal bonds, U.S. government bonds, corporate bonds and preferred stock. The effective duration of our fixed-income investment portfolio was 4.3 years at March 31, 2003, and we do not expect to recognize any adverse impact to our income or cash flows based on the above projection.
As of March 31, 2003, $445.8 million of our invested assets were held by PMI Australia and were denominated in Australian dollars. The value of the Australian dollar strengthened relative to the U.S. dollar to 0.604 U.S. dollars at March 31, 2003 compared to 0.562 at December 31, 2002. As of March 31, 2003, $99.6 million of our invested assets were held by PMI Europe and were predominantly denominated in Euros. The value of the Euro appreciated relative to the U.S. dollar to 1.092 at March 31, 2003, compared to 1.049 at December 31, 2002.
ITEM 4. |
The Companys management, under the supervision and with the participation of the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, performed an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-14(c) and 15d-14(c) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) within 90 days of the filing date of this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the Companys disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the date of such evaluation. The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have stated that there were no significant changes in our internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect those controls subsequent to the date of their most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and weaknesses.
46
ITEM 6. |
||
|
| |
(a) |
Exhibits The exhibits listed in the accompanying Index to Exhibits is filed as part of this Form 10-Q. | |
|
| |
(b) |
Reports on Form 8-K: | |
|
| |
|
On March 31, 2003, we filed with the SEC a report on Form 8-K relating to the certifications of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer for our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. | |
|
| |
|
On April 23, 2003, we furnished the SEC, pursuant to Regulation FD, a report on Form 8-K, relating to our financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2003. | |
|
| |
|
On May 2, 2003, we filed with the SEC a report on Form 8-K relating to certain ratings announcements by S&P related to us and Fairbanks Capital and furnishing, pursuant to Regulation FD, information relating to our estimated operating results for 2003. | |
47
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
THE PMI GROUP, INC. |
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2003 |
/s/ DONALD P. LOFE, JR. |
|
|
|
|
|
Donald P. Lofe, Jr. |
|
|
|
|
May 15, 2003 |
/s/ BRIAN P. SHEA |
|
|
|
|
|
Brian P. Shea |
|
48
CERTIFICATION
I, W. Roger Haughton, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The PMI Group, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and
6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: May 15, 2003
/s/ W. ROGER HAUGHTON |
|
|
|
W. Roger Haughton |
|
49
CERTIFICATION
I, Donald P. Lofe, Jr., certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The PMI Group, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the Evaluation Date); and
c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and
6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
Date: May 15, 2003
/s/ DONALD P. LOFE, JR. |
|
|
|
Donald P. Lofe, Jr. |
|
50
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
Exhibit Number |
|
Description of Exhibit |
|
|
|
10.23 |
|
Master Repurchase Agreement dated as of April 24, 2003 between Banc of America Securities LLC and The PMI Group, Inc. |
|
|
|
99.1 |
|
Certificate by Chief Executive Officer. |
|
|
|
99.2 |
|
Certificate by Chief Financial Officer. |