UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

 

 

FORM 10-K

 

 

 

 

 

Commission File Number: 1-13277

 

 

 

 

CNA SURETY CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

(312) 822-5000

 

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

 

 

 

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

 

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

Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value

(Title of Class)

 

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes o     No þ

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes o     No þ

 

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

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes o     No þ

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (Section 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes o     No þ

 

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates was $271.4 million based upon the closing price of $16.07 per share on June 30, 2010, using beneficial ownership of stock rules adopted pursuant to Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to exclude voting stock owned by Directors, Officers and Major Stockholders, some of whom may not be held to be affiliates upon judicial determination.

 

At February 8, 2011, 44,773,357 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock were outstanding.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

 

Portions of the CNA Surety Corporation Proxy Statement prepared for the 2011 annual meeting of shareholders, pursuant to Regulation 14A, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.

 

 

CNA SURETY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

CNA SURETY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

 

 

CNA Surety Corporation (“CNA Surety” or the “Company”) is an insurance holding company in the United States formed through the September 30, 1997 combination of the surety business of CNA Financial Corporation (“CNAF”) with Capsure Holdings Corp.’s (“Capsure”) insurance subsidiaries. CNA Surety is currently one of the largest surety providers in the United States with an approximate market share of 7.8% (based upon 2009 Surety and Fidelity Association of America (“SFAA”) written premium data). CNA Surety’s wide selection of surety products ranges from very small commercial bonds to large contract bonds.

 

In December 1996, CNAF and Capsure agreed to merge (the “Merger”) the surety business of CNAF with Capsure’s insurance subsidiaries, Western Surety Company (“Western Surety”), Surety Bonding Company of America (“Surety Bonding”) and Universal Surety of America (“Universal Surety”), into CNA Surety. Through its insurance subsidiaries, CNAF owns approximately 61% of the outstanding common stock of CNA Surety. Loews Corporation owns approximately 90% of the outstanding common stock of CNAF. CNAF, through its operating subsidiaries, writes multiple lines of property and casualty insurance, including surety business that is reinsured by Western Surety. The principal operating subsidiaries of CNAF that wrote the surety line of business for their own account prior to the Merger were Continental Casualty Company and its property and casualty affiliates (collectively, “CCC”) and The Continental Insurance Company and its property and casualty affiliates (collectively, “CIC”).

 

In October 2010, the Company received an unsolicited proposal from CNAF to acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock that are not currently owned by subsidiaries of CNAF at a purchase price of $22.00 per share in cash (the “CNAF Proposal”). The Company’s Board of Directors appointed a special committee (the “Special Committee”), comprised solely of the Company’s three independent directors, to review and evaluate the CNAF proposal. The Special Committee retained both legal and financial advisors to assist in their consideration of the CNAF Proposal.

 

On February 4, 2011, the Special Committee announced that it does not support the terms of the proposal and advised CNAF that it is open to alternate proposals.

 

The Company’s corporate objective is to be the leading provider of surety and surety-related products in North America and to be the surety of choice for its customers and independent agents and brokers. CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries write surety and fidelity bonds in all 50 states through a combined network of approximately 37,000 independent agencies. CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries are Western Surety, Surety Bonding and Universal Surety. The insurance subsidiaries write, on a direct basis or as business assumed from CCC and CIC, small fidelity and non-contract surety bonds, referred to as commercial bonds; small, medium and large contract bonds; and errors and omissions (“E&O”) liability insurance. Western Surety is a licensed insurer in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Surety Bonding is licensed in 28 states and the District of Columbia. Universal Surety is licensed in 44 states and the District of Columbia.

 

A.M. Best Company, Inc.

 

In February 2010, A.M. Best Company, Inc. (“A.M. Best”) affirmed the A (Excellent) rating and stable rating outlook for Western Surety, Surety Bonding and Universal Surety. An A (Excellent) rating is assigned to those companies which A.M. Best believes have an excellent ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders. A-rated insurers have been shown to be among the strongest in ability to meet policyholder and other contractual obligations. A.M. Best’s letter ratings range from A++ (Superior) to F (In Liquidation) with A++ being highest. The rating outlook indicates the potential direction of a company’s rating for an intermediate period, generally defined as the next 12 to 36 months.

 

Through intercompany reinsurance and related agreements, CNA Surety’s customers have access to CCC’s broader underwriting capacity. CCC’s A rating and stable rating outlook was also affirmed in February 2010.

 

Standard and Poor’s

 

CCC, Western Surety, Surety Bonding and Universal Surety are currently rated A- (Stable) by Standard and Poor’s (“S&P”). S&P’s letter ratings range from AAA (Extremely Strong) to CC (Extremely Weak) with AAA being highest. Ratings from AA to CCC may be modified by the addition of a plus or minus sign to show relative standing within the major rating categories. An insurer rated A has strong financial security characteristics, but is somewhat more likely to be affected by adverse business conditions than are insurers with higher ratings.

 

The United States surety market is represented by bonds required by federal statutes, state laws and local ordinances. These bonding requirements range from federal construction projects, where the contractor is required to post performance and payment bonds which guarantee performance of contracts to the government as well as payment of bills to subcontractors and suppliers, to license and permit bonds which guarantee compliance with legal requirements for business operations.

 

Products and Policies

 

Unlike a standard, two-party insurance policy, surety bonds are three-party agreements in which the issuer of the bond (the surety) joins with a second party (the principal) in guaranteeing to a third party (the owner/obligee) the fulfillment of some obligation on the part of the principal. The surety is the party who guarantees fulfillment of the principal’s obligation to the obligee. In addition, sureties are generally entitled to recover from the principal any losses and expenses paid to third parties. The surety’s responsibility is to evaluate the risk and determine if the principal meets the underwriting requirements for the bond. Accordingly, surety bond premiums primarily reflect the type and class of risk and related costs associated with both processing the bond transaction and investigating the applicant including, if necessary, an analysis of the applicant’s credit-worthiness and ability to perform.

 

There are two broad types of surety products — contract surety and commercial surety bonds. Contract surety bonds secure a contractor’s performance and/or payment obligation generally with respect to a construction project. Contract surety bonds are generally required by federal, state and local governments for public works projects. Commercial surety bonds include all surety bonds other than contract and cover obligations typically required by law or regulation.

 

Contract bond guarantee obligations include the following:

 

Bid bonds: used by contractors submitting proposals on potential contracts. These bonds guarantee that a contractor will enter into a contract at the amount bid and post the appropriate performance bonds.

 

Performance bonds: guarantee to the owner the performance of the contractor’s obligations according to the terms and conditions of the contract.

Payment bonds: guarantee payment of the contractor’s obligations under the contract for labor, subcontractors and materials supplied to the project. Payment bonds are utilized in public projects where liens are not permitted.

 

Other examples of contract bonds are completion, maintenance and supply bonds.

 

Commercial surety business is comprised of bonds covering obligations typically required by law or regulation, such as the following:

 

License and Permit bonds: required by statutes or ordinances for a number of purposes including guaranteeing the payment of certain taxes and fees and providing consumer protection as a condition to granting licenses related to selling real estate or motor vehicles and contracting services.

 

Judicial and Fiduciary bonds: required by statutes, courts or legal documents for the protection of those on whose behalf a fiduciary acts. Examples of such fiduciaries include executors and administrators of estates and guardians of minors and incompetents.

 

Public Official bonds: required by statutes and ordinances to guarantee the lawful and faithful performance of the duties of office by public officials.

 

CNA Surety also assumes contract and commercial surety bonds for international risks. Such bonds are written to satisfy the international bond requirements of domestic customers and for select foreign clients.

 

In addition, the Company markets surety-related products such as fidelity bonds and E&O insurance. Fidelity bonds cover losses arising from employee dishonesty. Examples of purchasers of fidelity bonds are law firms, insurance agencies and janitorial service companies. CNA Surety writes E&O policies for two classes of insureds: notaries public and tax preparers. The notary public E&O policy is marketed as a companion product to the notary public bond and the tax preparer E&O policy is marketed to small tax return preparation firms.

 

Although all of its products are sold through the same independent insurance agent and broker distribution network, the Company’s underwriting is organized by the two broad types of surety products — contract surety and commercial surety, which also includes fidelity bonds and other insurance products for these purposes. These two operating segments have been aggregated into one reportable business segment for financial reporting purposes because of their similar economic and operating characteristics.

 

The following tables set forth, for each principal class of bonds, gross written premiums, net written premiums and number of domestic bonds and policies in force and the respective percentages of the total for the past three years (amounts in thousands):

 

 

 

 

The following table sets forth the average bond penalty/policy limit for each principal class of bonds for the past three years (amounts in thousands):

 

 

In 2010 no individual agency generated more than 1.2% of aggregate gross written premiums. Approximately $93.3 million, or 21.2%, of gross written premiums were generated from national insurance brokers in 2010 with the single largest national broker production comprising $22.9 million, or 5.2%, of gross written premiums.

 

The Company principally markets its products in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Its products are marketed primarily through independent producers, including multi-line agents and brokers such as surety specialists, many of whom are members of the National Association of Surety Bond Producers. CNA Surety enjoys broad national distribution of its products, which are marketed through approximately 37,000 of the approximately 44,000 independent property and casualty insurance agencies in the United States. In addition, the Company employs 40 full-time salaried marketing representatives and 5 telemarketing representatives to continually service its vast producer network. Relationships with these independent producers are maintained through the Company’s 38 local branch offices.

The following table sets forth the distribution of the business of CNA Surety, by state based upon gross written premiums in each of the last three years:

 

 

 

 

Contract Surety

 

The Company broadly targets contractors with less than $200 million in contracted work in progress, and more selectively targets contractors with larger work programs. During 2010, the Company extended its strategy to also target contractors with the largest work programs. Often referred to as “jumbo” contractors, these accounts are typically served by a group of sureties with each surety taking a share of the bonds written for the account. The Company’s contract market is comprised of small contractors (less than $10 million in work in progress), medium contractors ($10-$100 million) and large contractors (greater than $100 million). With respect to contract surety, exposures are measured in terms of bonded backlog which is an indication of the Company’s exposure in event of default before indemnification recoveries. The Company actively monitors the exposure on each account through a variety of underwriting methods. Some of these accounts are maintained on a “co-surety” or joint insurer basis with other sureties in order to manage aggregate exposure.

 

Commercial Surety

 

A large portion of the commercial surety market is comprised of small obligations that are routine in nature and require minimal underwriting. Customers are focused principally on prompt and efficient service. These small transactional bonds and related fidelity bonds and E&O products represent approximately 79% of the Company’s non-contract gross written premiums and 29% of the Company’s total gross written premiums.

 

The Company continues to focus its marketing efforts on this small commercial bond market through its Sioux Falls, South Dakota service center. In this market segment, CNA Surety emphasizes one-day response service, easy-to-use forms and an extensive array of commercial bond products. Independent agents use bONdLINE, which is an Internet-based tool, to request and deliver bonds. In addition, the Company may provide independent agents with pre-executed bond forms, powers of attorney and facsimile authorizations that allow them to issue many standard bonds in their offices. CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries may also direct their marketing to particular industries or classes of bonds on a broad basis. For instance, the Company maintains programs directed at notary bonds.

 

CNA Surety also maintains specific underwriting staff in Chicago, Illinois dedicated to middle market and “Fortune 1000” accounts. The Company’s corporate commercial account business represents approximately 21%

of the Company’s commercial gross written premiums and approximately 8% of the Company’s total gross written premiums.

 

CNA Surety is focused on consistent underwriting profitability. The extent and sophistication of underwriting activity varies by type of risk. Contractor accounts and large commercial surety customers undergo credit, financial and managerial review and analysis on a regular basis. Certain classifications of bonds, such as fiduciary and court appeal bonds, also require more extensive underwriting.

 

CNA Surety also targets various products in the surety and fidelity bond market which are characterized by relatively low-risk exposure and small bond amounts. The underwriting criteria, including the extent of bonding authority granted to independent agents, varies depending on the class of business and the type of bond. For example, relatively little underwriting information is typically required of certain low-exposure risks such as notary bonds.

 

The surety and fidelity market is highly competitive. According to 2009 data from the SFAA, the U.S. market aggregates approximately $6.3 billion in direct written premiums, comprised of approximately $5.2 billion in surety premiums and approximately $1.1 billion in fidelity premiums. The 20 largest surety companies account for approximately 82% of the domestic surety market and 94% of the domestic fidelity market. The large diversified insurance companies hold the largest market shares. In 2009, CNA Surety was the fourth largest surety provider with a 7.8% market share.

 

Primary competitors of CNA Surety are approximately 20 national, multi-line companies participating in the surety market throughout the country. Management believes that its principal strengths are diverse product offerings, service and accessibility and long-term relationships with agents and accounts. Competition increased as a result of ten years of profitable underwriting experience through 1999. This competition has typically manifested itself through reduced premium rates and relaxation of underwriting standards. Beginning in 2000 and through the end of 2005, the surety industry’s underwriting performance was negatively impacted by the significant increases in corporate defaults. Firming of rates, more stringent underwriting and an improved economy resulted in the surety and fidelity industry returning to profitability in 2006. The surety market has been profitable for most carriers since 2006 and competition remains strong. However, the surety market remains steady, with little, if any, deterioration in underwriting and pricing.

 

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries, in the ordinary course of business, purchase reinsurance from other insurance companies and affiliates. Reinsurance arrangements are used to limit maximum loss, provide greater diversification of risk, minimize exposure on larger risks and allow us to meet certain regulatory restrictions that would otherwise limit the size of bonds the Company can write. Reinsurance contracts do not relieve the Company of its primary obligations to claimants. Therefore, a contingent liability exists with respect to reinsurance ceded to the extent that any reinsurer is unable to meet the obligations assumed under reinsurance contracts. The Company evaluates the financial condition of its reinsurers, monitors concentrations of credit risk and establishes allowances for uncollectible amounts when indicated. At December 31, 2010, the Company holds approximately $4.2 million of letters of credit as collateral for reinsurance receivables.

 

The Company’s reinsurance program is predominantly comprised of excess of loss reinsurance contracts that limit the Company’s retention on a per principal basis. The Company’s reinsurance coverage is provided by third party reinsurers and related parties. Refer to Item 7., Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8., Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Reinsurance, for further discussion.

The Company had no reinsurance receivable from affiliates as of December 31, 2010 or 2009. CNA Surety’s largest reinsurance recoverable from a third party, a company rated A+ by A.M. Best, was approximately $7.8 million and $9.0 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

 

Due to the nature of the reinsurance products available to the Company and other sureties, reinsurers may cover principals for whom the Company writes surety bonds in one year, but then exclude or provide only limited reinsurance for these same principals in subsequent years. As a result, the Company may continue to have exposure to these principals with limited or no reinsurance for bonds written during years that the Company had reinsurance covering these principals.

 

Periodic actuarial analysis of the Company’s loss reserves is performed. This analysis is based on a variety of techniques that involve detailed statistical analysis of past reporting, settlement activity, and indemnification activity, as well as claim frequency and severity data when sufficient information exists to lend statistical credibility to the analysis. The analysis may be based upon internal loss experience or industry experience. Techniques may vary depending on the type of claim being estimated. While techniques may vary, each employs significant judgments and assumptions. Annually, the reasonableness of actuarial assumptions used and the sufficiency of year-end reserves for each of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are actuarially certified.

 

The estimated liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses includes, on an undiscounted basis, estimates of (a) the ultimate settlement value of reported claims, (b) incurred-but-not-reported (“IBNR”) claims, (c) future expenses to be incurred in the settlement of claims and (d) indemnity recoveries, exclusive of reinsurance recoveries, which are reported as an asset. These estimates are determined based on the Company’s and surety industry loss experience as well as consideration of current trends and conditions. The estimated liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses is an estimate and there is the potential that actual future loss payments will differ significantly from initial estimates. The methods of determining such estimates and the resulting estimated liability are regularly reviewed and updated. Changes in the estimated liability are reflected in income in the period in which such changes are determined to be needed. The determination of the Company’s reserves for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses is inherently a subjective exercise which requires management to analyze, weigh and balance numerous macroeconomic, customer specific and claims specific factors and trends, most of which, in and of themselves, are inherently uncertain and difficult to predict. A discussion of this process is included in Item 7., Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

A table is included in Item 8., Note 7 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Reserves for Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses, that presents the activity in the reserves for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses for the Company and is incorporated herein by reference. This table highlights the impact of revisions to the estimated liability established in prior years.

 

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the consolidated loss reserves reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), and the reserves reported to state insurance regulatory authorities in accordance with statutory accounting practices (“SAP”) as of December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):

 

 

The following loss reserve development table illustrates the change over time of reserves established for the Company’s estimated losses and loss adjustment expenses at the end of various calendar years. The first section shows the reserves as originally reported at the end of the stated year. The second section shows the cumulative amounts paid as of the end of successive years with respect to that reserve liability. The third section shows

re-estimates of the original recorded reserve as of the end of each successive year which is the result of management’s expanded awareness of additional facts and circumstances that pertain to the unsettled claims. The last section compares the latest re-estimated reserve to the reserve originally established and indicates whether the original reserve was adequate or inadequate to cover the estimated costs of unsettled claims on net basis, excluding the effect of foreign exchange revaluation on loss reserves assumed in non-U.S. currencies, primarily the Canadian dollar. The loss reserve development table is cumulative as of each December 31, and, therefore, ending balances should not be added since the amount at the end of each calendar year includes activity for both the current and prior years.

 

The following table provides a reconciliation of the Company’s re-estimated reserves on a net basis provided above to the re-estimated reserves on a gross basis (dollars in thousands):

 

 

Proactive claims management is an important factor for the profitable underwriting of surety and fidelity products. The Company maintains an experienced and dedicated staff of in-house claim specialists. Claim handling for the Company’s contract and large commercial account business is performed in Chicago. Claims for the Company’s small commercial bonds and the related fidelity bonds and E&O insurance are handled in Sioux Falls. The disposition of claims and other claim-related activity is performed in accordance with established policies, procedures and expense controls designed to minimize loss costs and maximize indemnification recoveries. Indemnity and subrogation rights exist on a significant portion of the business written, enabling the Company to pursue loss recovery from the principal.

 

The Company does not typically bond contractors that specialize in hazardous environmental remediation work. The Company does, however, provide bonding programs for several accounts that have incidental environmental exposure. In the commercial surety market, the Company provides bonds to large corporations that are in the business of mining various minerals and are obligated to post reclamation bonds that guarantee that property which was disturbed during mining is returned to an acceptable condition when the mining is completed. The Company also provides court and other surety bonds for large corporations wherein the underlying action involves environmental-related issues. While no environmental responsibility is overtly provided by commercial or contract bonds, some risk of environmental exposure may exist if the surety were to assume certain rights in the completion of a defaulted project or through salvage recovery. At December 31, 2010, the Company estimates it has no incurred losses on open claims of this nature.

 

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries are subject to varying degrees of regulation and supervision in the jurisdictions in which they transact business under statutes that delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative powers to state insurance regulators. In general, an insurer’s state of domicile has principal responsibility for such regulation which is designed generally to protect policyholders rather than investors and relates to matters such as the standards of solvency which must be maintained; the licensing of insurers and their agents; the examination of the affairs of insurance companies, including periodic financial and market conduct examinations; the filing of annual and other reports, prepared on a statutory basis, on the financial condition of insurers or for other purposes; establishment and maintenance of reserves for unearned premiums and losses; and requirements regarding numerous other matters. Licensed or admitted insurers generally must file with the insurance regulators of such states, or have filed on its behalf, the premium rates and bond and policy forms used within each state. In some states, approval of such rates and forms must be received from the insurance regulators in advance of their use.

 

Western Surety, Surety Bonding and Universal Surety are domiciled in South Dakota. Western Surety is licensed in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Surety Bonding is licensed in 28 states and the District of Columbia. Universal Surety is licensed in 44 states and the District of Columbia.

 

Insurance regulations generally also require registration and periodic disclosure of certain information concerning ownership, financial condition, capital structure, general business operations and any material

transactions or agreements by or among affiliates. Such regulation also typically restricts the ability of any one person to acquire 10% or more, either directly or indirectly, of a company’s stock without prior approval of the applicable insurance regulatory authority. In addition, dividends and other distributions to stockholders generally may be paid only out of unreserved and unrestricted statutory earned surplus. Such distributions may be subject to prior regulatory approval, including a review of the implications on Risk-Based Capital requirements. A discussion of Risk-Based Capital requirements for property and casualty insurance companies is included in both Item 7., Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8., Note 13 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Statutory Financial Data. Without prior regulatory approval, Western Surety may pay stockholder dividends of $140.2 million to CNA Surety in 2011. For the year ended December 31, 2010, CNA Surety received no dividends from its insurance subsidiaries.

 

CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries are subject to periodic financial and market conduct examinations. These examinations are generally performed by the domiciliary state insurance regulatory authorities; however, they may be performed by any jurisdiction in which the insurer transacts business. During 2008, the South Dakota Division of Insurance began its financial examination of Western Surety, Surety Bonding and Universal Surety as of and for the period January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2008. The final financial examination report was filed with the South Dakota Division of Insurance on December 11, 2009. On January 13, 2010, the Company was notified that the final examination report was adopted by the Director of the South Dakota Division of Insurance as filed. No adverse findings were included in the final examination report.

 

Certain states in which CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries conduct their business require insurers to join a guaranty association. Guaranty associations provide protection to policyholders of insurers licensed in such states against the insolvency of those insurers. In order to provide the associations with funds to pay certain claims under policies issued by insolvent insurers, the guaranty associations charge members assessments based on the amount of direct premiums written in that state. Such assessments were not material to CNA Surety’s results of operations in 2010.

 

Western Surety and Surety Bonding each qualifies as an acceptable surety for federal and other public works project bonds pursuant to U.S. Department of Treasury regulations. U.S. Treasury underwriting limitations are based on an insurer’s statutory surplus. The underwriting limitations of Western Surety and Surety Bonding were $54.7 million and $0.7 million, respectively, for the twelve-month period ended June 30, 2010. Effective July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, the underwriting limitations of Western Surety and Surety Bonding are $67.1 million and $0.8 million, respectively. Through a surety quota share treaty (the “Quota Share Treaty”) between CCC and Western Surety, discussed in both Item 7., Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8., Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Reinsurance, CNA Surety has access to CCC and its affiliates’ U.S. Department of Treasury underwriting limitations. Effective July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, the underwriting limitations of CCC and its affiliates utilized under the Quota Share Treaty total $892.1 million. CNA Surety management believes that the foregoing U.S. Treasury underwriting limitations are sufficient for the conduct of its business.

 

CNA Surety insurance subsidiaries’ investment practices must comply with insurance laws and regulations. Generally, insurance laws and regulations prescribe the nature and quality of, and set limits on, the various types of investments that may be made by CNA Surety’s insurance subsidiaries.

 

The Company’s investment portfolio generally is managed to maximize after-tax investment return, while minimizing credit risk with investments concentrated in high-quality income securities. CNA Surety’s portfolio is managed to provide diversification by limiting exposures to any one industry, issue or issuer, and to provide liquidity by investing in the public securities markets. The portfolio is structured to support CNA Surety’s insurance underwriting operations and to consider the expected duration of liabilities and short-term cash needs.

 

An investment committee of CNA Surety’s Board of Directors (“Investment Committee”) establishes investment policy and oversees the management of each portfolio. A professional independent investment advisor has been engaged to assist in the management of each insurance subsidiary investment portfolio pursuant to established Investment Committee guidelines. The insurance subsidiaries pay an advisory fee based on the fair value of the assets under management.

 

As of December 31, 2010, the Company employed 719 persons. CNA Surety has not experienced any work stoppages. Management of CNA Surety believes its relations with its employees are good.

 

A copy of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as CNA Surety’s subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to such reports are available, free of charge, on the Internet at CNA Surety’s website (www.cnasurety.com) when filed with or submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). CNA Surety also provides links to the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers, including CNA Surety, that file electronically with the SEC. Any materials the Company files with the SEC may be read and obtained at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. Information regarding the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. This reference to CNA Surety’s website or the SEC’s address does not constitute incorporation by reference of the information contained on the website and should not be considered part of this document.

 

 

Our business faces many risks. Some of the more significant risks that we face are described below. There may be additional risks that we do not currently perceive to be significant or that we are not currently aware of that may also impact our business. Each of the risks and uncertainties described below could lead to events or circumstances that have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or equity.

 

In addition, ownership of our common stock may be subject to risks associated with the liquidity of the investment. Approximately 61% of our common stock is owned by affiliates of CNAF. This concentration of ownership may reduce the number of market participants willing to purchase our stock and limit the ability of a minority owner to liquidate their position.

 

As previously discussed, the Company received an unsolicited proposal from CNAF to acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock that are not currently owned by subsidiaries of CNAF at a purchase price of $22.00 per share in cash (the “CNAF Proposal”). Following public disclosure of the CNAF Proposal, the Company’s common stock has traded at levels substantially higher than prior to the CNAF Proposal. The price of the Company’s common stock is subject to significant risks associated with the CNAF Proposal including whether a transaction is completed, its financial terms and potential litigation.

 

We may determine that our loss reserves are insufficient to cover our estimated ultimate unpaid liability for claims and we may need to increase them.

 

We maintain loss reserves to cover our estimated ultimate unpaid liability for claims and claim adjustment expenses for reported and unreported claims. Reserves represent our best estimate at a given accounting date. Loss reserves are not an exact calculation of liability but instead are complex estimates derived by us, generally utilizing a variety of reserve estimation techniques from numerous assumptions and expectations about future events, many of which are highly uncertain, such as estimates of claims severity, frequency of claims, inflation, claims handling, case reserving policies and procedures, underwriting and pricing policies, changes in the legal and regulatory environment and the lag time between the occurrence of an insured event and the time of its ultimate settlement. Many of these uncertainties are not precisely quantifiable and require significant judgment on our part.

 

In light of the many uncertainties associated with establishing the estimates and making the assumptions necessary to establish reserve levels, we review and change our reserve estimates in a regular and ongoing process as experience develops and further claims are reported and settled. If estimated reserves are insufficient for any reason, the required increase in reserves would be recorded as a charge against our earnings for the period in which reserves are determined to be insufficient.

 

Surety losses and our results can be volatile.

 

In the past, our results have been adversely impacted by a relatively small number of large claims. In addition, our results have been significantly impacted by increases in corporate default rates. These past occurrences illustrate that our loss experience and results can be volatile.

We have a significant concentration of exposure to construction firms.

 

A significant portion of our business is guaranteeing the performance of construction firms. Therefore, we are exposed to the challenges that the construction industry faces. The last several years have been particularly challenging as significant issues in the home builder segment have spilled over into the non-residential segments of the construction industry. These challenges include a substantial reduction in the availability of new work and intense competition among contractors for the limited amount of new work. As a result of these challenges, we have experienced a lower demand for our bonds, and we may experience a higher frequency of claims and higher losses.

 

Our premium writings and profitability are impacted by the availability and cost of reinsurance and our reinsurance purchasing decisions.

 

Reinsurance coverage is an important component of our capital structure. Reinsurance allows us to meet certain regulatory restrictions that would otherwise limit the size of bonds that we write and limit the market segments in which we could compete. In addition, reinsurance reduces the potential volatility of earnings and protects our capital by limiting the amount of loss associated with any one bond principal. We have experienced periods where it was difficult for us to buy as much reinsurance as we desired and when reinsurance costs have risen substantially. The availability and cost of reinsurance protection depends on a number of factors such as our loss experience, the surety industry’s loss experience, the number of reinsurers willing to provide coverage and broader economic conditions. If sufficient reinsurance is not available or is too costly or if we purchase insufficient reinsurance, we may need to reduce our premium writings and may be susceptible to higher losses.

 

In addition, due to the nature of the reinsurance products we purchase, reinsurers may cover principals for whom the Company writes surety bonds in one year, but then exclude or provide only limited reinsurance for these same principals in subsequent years. As a result, we may continue to have exposure to these principals with limited or no reinsurance for bonds written during years that we had reinsurance covering these principals.

 

We may not be able to collect amounts owed to us by reinsurers.

 

Amounts recoverable from reinsurers are reported as receivables in our balance sheets and are estimated in a manner consistent with loss and loss adjustment expense reserves. The ceding of insurance does not, however, discharge our primary liability for claims. As a result, we are subject to credit risk relating to our ability to recover amounts due from reinsurers. It is possible that future financial deterioration of our reinsurers could result in certain balances becoming uncollectible.

 

We rely upon affiliated companies that we do not control to conduct certain aspects of our business.

 

Due to regulatory restrictions that limit the size of the bonds that our insurance subsidiaries can write, we utilize the capacity of affiliated companies to service some parts of our business. If this capacity is no longer available to us, no longer satisfies the regulatory requirements or no longer meets customer requirements, we may need to stop servicing parts of our business.

 

Rating agencies may downgrade their ratings for us or for affiliated companies that we rely on to write business. This would adversely affect our ability to write business.

 

Our customers often refer to the financial strength ratings assigned by A.M. Best, S&P and other similar companies when they are choosing a surety company. Because we use the underwriting capacity of CCC, an affiliate, to serve larger accounts, our financial strength ratings, as well as those of CCC, factor into customers’ decisions. If our ratings or CCC’s ratings are downgraded, we may experience a significant reduction in premium writings.

 

We face intense competition.

 

All aspects of the insurance industry are highly competitive and we must continuously allocate resources to refine and improve our products and services. Insurers compete on the basis of factors including products, price, services, ratings and financial strength. Although we seek pricing that will result in what we believe are adequate returns on the capital allocated to our business, we may lose business to competitors offering competitive products at lower prices. We compete with a large number of stock and mutual insurance companies and other entities for

both distributors and customers. We also compete against providers of substitute products such as letters of credit in certain markets.

 

Demand for our products is created by laws that could be changed.

 

We believe that the vast majority of the demand for our products results from federal, state and local laws that mandate the use of surety bonds. If these laws are relaxed or eliminated, our business would be severely impacted.

 

We are subject to capital adequacy requirements and, if we do not meet these requirements, regulatory agencies may restrict or prohibit us from operating our business.

 

Insurance companies are subject to Risk-Based Capital standards set by state regulators to help identify companies that merit further regulatory attention. These standards apply specified risk factors to various asset, premium and reserve components of our statutory capital and surplus reported in our statutory financial statements. Current rules require companies to maintain statutory capital and surplus at a specified minimum level determined using the Risk-Based Capital formula. If we do not meet these minimum requirements, state regulators may restrict or prohibit us from operating our business.

 

Our insurance subsidiaries, upon whom we depend for dividends and advances in order to fund our working capital needs, are limited by state regulators in their ability to pay dividends.

 

We are a holding company and are dependent upon dividends, advances, loans and other sources of cash from our subsidiaries in order to meet our obligations. Without specific approval by the subsidiaries’ domiciliary state department of insurance, dividend payments are generally limited to amounts determined by formula. If we are restricted, by regulatory rules or otherwise, from paying or receiving intercompany dividends, we may not be able to fund our working capital needs and debt service requirements from available cash. As a result, we would need to look to other sources of capital which may be more expensive or may not be available at all.

 

Some of the credit that may be extended to us requires ongoing compliance with conditions and limitations regarding our profitability and financial condition.

 

From time to time, the Company may borrow money from banks. Typically, this borrowing would include requirements that we meet certain tests of profitability and financial condition. If we did not meet these tests, we could be required to repay outstanding borrowings. If we are capable of repaying the borrowings, we may experience a reduction in capital strength that may hamper our ability to conduct business. If we cannot access this credit or are not capable of repaying the borrowings, we would need to look to other sources of capital which may be more expensive or may not be available at all.

 

Our investment portfolio may suffer reduced returns or losses.

 

Investment returns are an important part of our overall profitability. General economic conditions, fluctuations in interest rates and many other factors beyond our control can adversely affect the returns and the overall value of our investment portfolio. In addition, any defaults in the payments due to us for our investments, especially with respect to liquid corporate and municipal bonds, could reduce our investment income and realized investment gains or could cause us to incur investment losses. As a result of these factors, we may not realize an adequate return on our investments, may incur losses on sales of our investments and may be required to write down the value of our investments.

 

We rely on our information technology and telecommunications systems to conduct our business.

 

Our business is highly dependent upon the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems. We rely on these systems to process new and renewal business, provide customer service, make claims payments and facilitate collections and cancellations, as well as to perform actuarial and other analytical functions necessary for pricing and product development.

 

 

None.

 

CNA Surety leases its executive offices and its shared branch locations with CCC under the Administrative Services Agreement (“ASA”) with CCC discussed in detail in Item 8., Note 14 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Related Party Transactions. CNA Surety currently uses approximately 89,000 square feet and related personal property at 35 branch locations and its home and executive offices (30,360 square feet) in Chicago, Illinois. In 2010, CNA Surety’s annual rent under the ASA was approximately $2.1 million. Annual rent for space leased through the ASA will be approximately $2.0 million beginning January 1, 2011.

 

CNA Surety leases approximately 83,550 square feet of office space for its primary processing and service center at 101 South Phillips Avenue, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, under a lease expiring in 2012. The annual rent, which is subject to annual adjustments, was $1.8 million as of December 31, 2010. On September 21, 2010, CNA Surety entered into a lease agreement for a new property to be occupied following the expiration of the current lease. The new lease includes various contingencies including completion of construction of the building and office space to be occupied. The lease term shall be ten years from its commencement date as defined in the agreement. Other specific lease terms such as final rental square feet and cost will be finalized upon satisfaction of the required contingencies.

 

CNA Surety also leased space for contract and commercial branch offices in San Juan, Puerto Rico and Rocklin, California. Annual rent for these offices was $0.1 million with leases terminating in 2011 and 2012, respectively. In 2011, CNA Surety will also lease space in San Antonio, Texas, with a lease terminating in 2016. Annual rent under this lease will be less than $0.1 million.

 

 

The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to various lawsuits arising in the normal course of business. The Company believes the resolution of these lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or its results of operations.

 

 

The Company’s common stock (“Common Stock”) trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol SUR. On February 8, 2011 the last reported sale price for the Common Stock was $25.16 per share. The following table shows the range of high and low sales prices for shares of the Common Stock as reported on the New York Stock Exchange during 2010 and 2009.

 

The following table and graph present the Company’s common stock market performance over the last five years compared to appropriate industry indices:

 

 

 

The number of stockholders of record of Common Stock on February 4, 2011 was approximately 2,300.

 

A summary of outstanding options and shares authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2010 follows:

 

 

Dividends

 

Effective November 21, 2002, the Company announced that its Board of Directors suspended its quarterly cash dividend. The reintroduction of a quarterly or annual dividend and the amount of any such dividend will be reassessed at future Board meetings.

 

The following financial information for CNA Surety as of and for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 has been derived from the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto.

 

 

 

 

 

CNA Surety Corporation is an insurance holding company in the United States. Through its insurance subsidiaries, CNA Financial Corporation (“CNAF”) owns approximately 61% of the outstanding common stock of CNA Surety Corporation. Loews Corporation owns approximately 90% of the outstanding common stock of CNAF. The following is a discussion and analysis of CNA Surety Corporation and its subsidiaries’ (collectively, “CNA Surety” or the “Company”) operating results, liquidity and capital resources and financial condition. The most significant risks and uncertainties impacting the operating performance and financial condition of the Company are discussed in Item 1A., Risk Factors, of this Form 10-K. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements of CNA Surety and Notes thereto.

 

CNAF Proposal

 

In October 2010, the Company received an unsolicited proposal from CNAF to acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock that are not currently owned by subsidiaries of CNAF at a purchase price of $22.00 per share in cash (the “CNAF Proposal”). The Company’s Board of Directors appointed a special committee (the “Special Committee”), comprised solely of the Company’s three independent directors, to review and evaluate the CNAF proposal. The Special Committee retained both legal and financial advisors to assist in their consideration of the CNAF Proposal.

 

On February 4, 201l, the Special Committee announced that it does not support the terms of the proposal and advised CNAF that it is open to alternate proposals.

 

Critical Accounting Policies

 

The Company’s accounting policies related to reserves and disclosures for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses and related estimates of reinsurance recoverables are particularly critical to an assessment of the Company’s financial results. Given the nature of the surety business, the determination of these balances is inherently a highly subjective exercise which requires management to analyze, weigh and balance numerous macroeconomic, customer specific and claim specific factors and trends, most of which, in and of themselves, are inherently uncertain and difficult to predict. In addition, management believes the other most critical accounting policies and related disclosures for purposes of understanding the Company’s results of operations and financial condition pertain to investments, goodwill and other intangible assets, recognition of premium revenue and the related unearned premium liability and deferred policy acquisition costs.

 

Reserves for Unpaid Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses and Reinsurance

 

CNA Surety accrues liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”) under its surety and property and casualty insurance contracts based upon estimates of the ultimate amounts payable under the contracts related to losses occurring on or before the balance sheet date.

 

Reported claims are in various stages of the settlement process. Due to the nature of surety, which is the relationship among three parties whereby the surety guarantees the performance of the principal to a third party (the obligee), the investigation of claims and the establishment of case estimates on claim files can be a complex process that can occur over a period of time depending on the type of bond(s) and the facts and circumstances involving the particular bond(s), the claim(s) and the principal. Case reserves are typically established after a claim is filed and an investigation and analysis has been conducted as to the validity of the claim, the principal’s response to the claim and the principal’s financial viability. To the extent it is determined that there are no bona fide defenses to the claim and the principal is unwilling or financially unable to resolve the claim, a case reserve is established on the claim file for the amount the Company estimates it will have to pay to honor its obligations under the provisions of the bond(s).

 

While the Company intends to establish initial case reserve estimates that are sufficient to cover the ultimate anticipated loss on a claim file, some estimates need to be adjusted during the life cycle of the claim file as matters continue to develop. Factors that can necessitate case reserve increases or decreases are the complexity of the

bond(s) and/or underlying contract(s), if additional and/or unexpected claims are filed, if the financial condition of the principal or obligee changes or as claims develop and more information is discovered that was unknown and/or unexpected at the time the initial case reserve estimate was established. Ultimately, claims are resolved through payment and/or a determination that, based on the information available, a case reserve is no longer required.

 

As of any balance sheet date, not all claims have been reported and some claims may not be reported for many years. As a result, the liability for unpaid losses includes significant estimates for incurred-but-not-reported (“IBNR”) claims. The IBNR reserves also include provisions for losses in excess of the current case reserve for previously reported claims and for claims that may be reopened. The IBNR reserves also include offsets for anticipated indemnity recoveries.

 

The following table shows the estimated liability as of December 31, 2010 for unpaid claims applicable to reported claims and to IBNR (dollars in thousands) for each sub-line of business:

 

 

Periodic actuarial analyses of the Company’s loss reserves are performed. These analyses include a comprehensive review performed in the fourth quarter based on data as of September 30 and an update of the comprehensive review performed in January based on data as of December 31. In between these analyses, management monitors claim activity against benchmarks of expected claim activity prepared in connection with the comprehensive review and records adjustments as necessary.

 

The actuarial analyses are based upon multiple projection methodologies that involve detailed statistical analysis of past claim reporting, settlement activity, and indemnification activity, as well as claim frequency and severity data when sufficient information exists to lend statistical credibility to the analysis. The analysis may be based upon internal loss experience or industry experience. Methodologies may vary depending on the type of claim being estimated. While methodologies may vary, each employs significant judgments and assumptions.

 

In estimating the unpaid claim liabilities, the following projection methodologies are employed:

 

 

The following provides a summary of these projection methodologies:

 

Historical Development Method

 

As a group of claims mature, their collective value changes. This change in value over time is referred to as loss development. The loss development method is a traditional actuarial approach which relies on the historical changes in losses from one evaluation point to another to project the current valuation of losses to ultimate settlement values. Development patterns which have been exhibited by more mature (older) years are used to estimate the expected development of the less mature (more recent) years. The strength of this method is that it is very responsive to emerging loss experience for each accident year. The weakness is that this method can become highly leveraged and volatile for less mature accident years.

Bornhuetter-Ferguson Method

 

The incurred Bornhuetter-Ferguson (“B-F”) method is commonly used to provide a more stable estimate of ultimate losses in situations where loss development is volatile, substantial and/or immature. The method calculates IBNR (or unpaid loss when conducting a paid B-F projection) directly as the product of: Expected Ultimate Losses multiplied by IBNR (or Unpaid) Percentage.

 

The IBNR (or unpaid) percentage is derived from the incurred (or paid) loss development patterns. Various approaches can be used to determine the expected ultimate losses (e.g., prior year estimates, pricing assumptions, etc.). An expected loss ratio (ultimate losses divided by earned premium) based on review of prior accident years’ loss ratio experience is utilized to obtain an estimate of expected ultimate losses. This estimate is then applied to the more recent accident years’ earned premium. The strength of the B-F method is that it is less leveraged than the historical development method and thus does not result in an overreaction to an unusual claim occurrence (or an unusual lack of claims). The weakness of the method is that it is reliant on an initial expectation of ultimate losses.

 

Frequency-Severity Method

 

This method first projects the expected number of claims for each accident year and then multiplies this estimate by the expected average cost of claims for the applicable accident year. The number of claims can be projected using the historical development technique or other methodology. The average cost of claims for the more recent accident years is estimated by observing the estimated average cost of claims for the older more mature accident years and trending those values to appropriate cost levels for the more recent accident years. The strength of this method is that it is not reliant on loss development factors for less mature accident years which can become highly leveraged and volatile. The weakness is that this method is slow to react to an abrupt change in claim severities.

 

Loss Ratio Method

 

This method relies on historical projected ultimate loss ratios for the more mature accident years to estimate the more recent, less mature accident years’ ultimate losses. Applying a selected loss ratio (by reviewing more mature years) to the more recent years’ earned premium results in an indication of the more recent years’ ultimate losses. The strength of this method is that it can be used in connection with a company’s pricing targets and can be used when the historical data has limited credibility. The weakness of this method is that it is slow to react to the emerging loss experience for a particular accident year.

 

Each of the projection methodologies employed rely to varying degrees on the basic assumption that the Company’s historical claim experience is indicative of the Company’s future claim development. The amount of weight given to any individual projection method is based on an assessment of the volatility of the historical data and development patterns, an understanding of the changes in the overall surety industry over time and the resultant potential impact of these changes on the Company’s prospective claims development, an understanding of the changes to the Company’s processes and procedures within its underwriting, claims handling and data systems functions, among other things. The decision as to how much weight to give to any particular projection methodology is ultimately a matter of experience and professional judgment.

 

Surety results, especially for contract and certain commercial products like insurance program bonds, workers compensation insurance bonds and reclamation bonds, tend to be impacted by fewer, but more severe, losses. With this type of loss experience, it is more difficult to estimate the required reserves, particularly for the most current accident years which may have few reported claims. Therefore, assumptions related to the frequency and magnitude of severe loss are key in estimating surety loss reserves.

 

The indicated reserve, or actuarial point estimate, was developed by reviewing the Company’s claims experience by accident year for individual sub-lines of business. Within each sub-line, the selection of the point estimate was made after consideration of the appropriateness of the various projection methodologies in light of the sub-line’s loss characteristics and historical data. In general, for the older, more mature, accident years the historical development method (i.e., link ratio method) was relied upon more heavily. For the more recent years, the indicated reserves were more heavily based on the Bornhuetter-Ferguson and loss ratio methods since these are not as reliant

on the Company’s large (i.e., leveraged) development factors and thus are believed to represent a more stable set of methods from which to select indicated reserves for the more recent years.

 

The actuarial analysis is the primary tool that management utilizes in determining its best estimate of loss reserves. However, the carried reserve may differ from the actuarial point estimate as a result of management’s consideration of the impact of factors such as the following, especially as they relate to the current accident year:

 

 

Management believes that the impact of the factors listed above, and others, may not be fully quantifiable through actuarial analysis. Accordingly, management applies its judgment of the impact of these factors, and others, to its selection of the recorded loss reserves.

 

The following table shows the point estimate as determined by the actuarial analysis as compared to the actual loss reserve established by management, both gross and net of reinsurance (dollars in thousands):

 

 

At December 31, 2010, management’s recorded gross and net reserves were higher than the actuarial point estimate. Management recorded reserves that were materially consistent with the actuarial point estimates for accident years 2008 and prior. For accident years 2009 and 2010, management recorded reserves that deviated from the actuarial indications due to the belief that the potential impact on losses of the economic recession and associated challenges facing construction firms was not fully reflected in the actuarial analyses. To determine the recorded reserves for accident years 2009 and 2010, management used the same methodology that was used in 2009. This methodology relied on an analysis of past experience for accident years that were impacted by periods of economic difficulties. This analysis was influenced by management’s assessment of key factors like the length and depth of the recession, the particular challenges facing construction firms, the financial strength of bonded contractors, the contractors’ responses to the economic challenges and the Company’s and the industry’s underwriting discipline. This analysis also included adjustments to historical results to reflect differences in premium rates, reinsurance coverage and changes in underwriting appetite, particularly related to large commercial risks.

 

At December 31, 2009, management’s recorded gross and net reserves were also higher than the actuarial point estimate primarily due to the factors and analysis described above as related to accident years 2008 and 2009. Recorded reserves for accident years 2007 and prior were materially consistent with the actuarial point estimates.

Receivables recorded with respect to insurance losses ceded to reinsurers under reinsurance contracts are estimated in a manner similar to liabilities for insurance losses and, therefore, are also subject to uncertainty. In addition to the factors cited above, assumptions are made regarding the impact of reinsurance programs to be in place in future periods. Estimates of reinsurance recoveries may prove uncollectible if the reinsurer is unable to perform under the contract. Reinsurance contracts do not relieve the ceding company of its obligations to indemnify its own policyholders.

 

Casualty insurance loss reserves are subject to a significant amount of uncertainty. Given the nature of surety losses with its low frequency, high severity characteristics, this is particularly true for surety loss reserves. As a result, the range of reasonable loss reserve estimates may be broader than that associated with traditional property/casualty insurance products. While the loss reserve estimates represent the best professional judgments, arrived at after careful actuarial analysis of the available data, it is important to note that variation from the estimates is not only possible but, in fact, probable. The sources of this inherent variability are numerous — future economic conditions, court decisions, legislative actions and individual large claim impacts, for example.

 

The range of reasonable reserve estimates is not intended to reflect the maximum and/or minimum possible outcomes; but rather reflects a range of reasonable estimates given the uncertainty in estimating unpaid claim liabilities for surety business. Further, there is no generally accepted method of estimating reserve ranges, but rather many concepts are currently being vetted within actuarial literature.

 

In developing the indicated range of reserve estimates, a bootstrapping based methodology was utilized in order to estimate the distribution of reserves. The bootstrap method is premised on the idea that the volatility in a company’s historical paid and incurred loss development is representative of the variability in a company’s future payments and thus can be used to estimate the variability within a company’s reserve estimate. Given the dispersion of the reserve indications, the 50th and 75th percentile were selected as representing a reasonable range of reserve estimates.

 

At December 31, 2010, the range of reasonable loss reserve estimates, net of reinsurance receivables, was from $313 million to $381 million. Ranges of reasonable loss reserve estimates are not calculated for the sub-lines of business. Management believes that the range calculated over total reserves provides the most meaningful information due to the importance of correlation of losses between the sub-lines of business related to the impact of general economic conditions.

 

The primary factors that would result in the Company’s actual losses being closer to either end of the reserve range are the number of large claims, as well as the number of large indemnification amounts. In other words, the primary factors that, if they were to occur, would result in the Company’s actual payments being at the high end of the indicated range are if the Company experiences an unusually high number of large claims and/or an unusually low number of large indemnification recoveries. Conversely, if the Company were to experience an unusually low number of large claims and/or an unusually high number of large indemnification recoveries, the Company’s actual payments would tend to be at the low end of the range. These variations in outcomes could be driven by broader issues such as the state of the construction economy or the level of corporate defaults, or by the specific facts and circumstances surrounding individual claims. Again, it is important to note that it is possible that the actual payments could fall outside of the estimated range.

 

Due to the inherent uncertainties in the process of establishing the liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses, the actual ultimate claims amounts will differ from the currently recorded amounts. This difference could have a material effect on reported earnings and financial condition. Future effects from changes in these estimates will be recorded in the period such changes are determined to be needed.

 

Investments

 

Management believes the Company has the ability to hold all fixed income securities to maturity. However, the Company may dispose of securities prior to their scheduled maturity due to changes in interest rates, prepayments, tax and credit considerations, liquidity or regulatory capital requirements, or other similar factors. As a result, the Company considers all of its fixed income securities (bonds) and equity securities as available-for-sale. These

securities are reported at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of deferred income taxes, reported in stockholders’ equity as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income.

 

All securities transactions are recorded on the trade date. Investment gains or losses realized on the sale of securities are determined using the first-in, first-out method. Cash flows from purchases, sales and maturities of fixed income and equity securities are reported gross in the investing activities section of the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

 

Fixed income securities in an unrealized loss position that the Company intends to sell, or it more likely than not will be required to sell before recovery of amortized cost, are considered to be other-than-temporarily impaired (“OTTI”). These securities are written down to fair value and the resulting losses are recognized in realized gains/losses in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Fixed income securities in an unrealized loss position for which management believes a credit loss exists are also considered to be other-than-temporarily impaired. For those securities, the Company bifurcates the impairment into a credit component and a non-credit component. The credit component, which represents the difference between discounted expected cash flows and the fixed income security’s amortized cost, is recognized in earnings and the non-credit component is recognized in other comprehensive income.

 

The amortized cost of fixed income securities is determined based on cost, adjustments for previously recorded OTTI losses and the cumulative effect of amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts using the interest method. Such amortization and accretion are included in investment income. For mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities, the Company considers estimates of future prepayments in the calculation of the effective yield used to apply the interest method. If a difference arises between the anticipated prepayments and the actual prepayments, the Company recalculates the effective yield based on actual prepayments and the currently anticipated future prepayments. The amortized costs of such securities are adjusted to the amount that would have resulted had the recalculated effective yields been applied since the acquisition of the securities with a corresponding charge or credit to investment income. Prepayment estimates are based on the structural elements of specific securities, interest rates and generally recognized prepayment speed indices.

 

Short-term investments, that generally include U.S. Treasury bills, corporate notes, money market funds and investment grade commercial paper equivalents, are carried at amortized cost, which approximates fair value.

 

Invested assets are exposed to various risks, such as interest rate risk, market risk and credit risk. Due to the level of risk associated with invested assets and the level of uncertainty related to changes in the value of these assets, it is possible that changes in risks in the near term may materially affect the amounts reported in the Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Income.

 

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

 

CNA Surety’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 include goodwill and intangible assets of approximately $138.8 million. This amount primarily represents goodwill and identified intangibles with indefinite useful lives arising from the acquisition of Capsure Holdings Corp.

 

A significant amount of judgment is required in performing intangible assets impairment tests. Such tests include periodically determining or reviewing the estimated fair value of CNA Surety’s reporting units. Under the relevant standard, fair value of a reporting unit refers to the price that would be received to sell the reporting unit as a whole in an orderly transaction between market participants. There are several methods of estimating fair value, including market quotations, asset and liability fair values and other valuation techniques, such as discounted cash flows and multiples of earnings or revenues. The Company uses a valuation technique based on discounted cash flows. Significant inputs to the Company’s discounted cash flow model include estimated capital requirements to support the business, expected cash flows from underwriting activity, required capital reinvestment to support growth and the selected discount rates. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit, including goodwill, exceeds the estimated fair value, then individual assets, including identifiable intangible assets, and liabilities of the reporting unit are estimated at fair value. The excess of the estimated fair value of the reporting unit over the estimated fair value of net assets would establish the implied value of intangible assets. The excess of the recorded amount of intangible assets over the implied value of intangible assets is recorded as an impairment loss.

Insurance Premiums

 

Insurance premiums are recognized as revenue ratably over the term of the related policies in proportion to the insurance protection provided. Contract bonds provide coverage for the length of the bonded project and not a fixed time period. As such, the Company uses estimates of the contract length as the basis for recognizing premium revenue on these bonds. Premium revenues are net of amounts ceded to reinsurers. Unearned premiums represent the portion of premiums written, before ceded reinsurance which is shown as an asset, applicable to the unexpired terms of policies in force determined on a pro rata basis.

 

Insurance premium receivables do not include financing costs or other fees and are presented net of an estimated allowance for doubtful accounts. This allowance is based on a periodic evaluation of the aging and collectibility of premium receivables. Premium receivables and any related allowance are written off after collection efforts have been exhausted.

 

Deferred Policy Acquisitions Costs

 

Policy acquisition costs, consisting of commissions, premium taxes and other underwriting expenses which vary with, and are primarily related to, the production of business, net of reinsurance commissions, are deferred and amortized as a charge to income as the related premiums are earned. The Company periodically tests that deferred policy acquisition costs are recoverable based on the expected profitability embedded in the reserve for unearned premium. If the expected profitability is less than the balance of deferred policy acquisition costs, a charge to net income is taken and the deferred policy acquisition cost balance is reduced to the amount determined to be recoverable. Anticipated investment income is considered in the determination of the recoverability of deferred policy acquisition costs.

 

Results of Operations

 

Financial Measures

 

The Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MD&A”) discusses certain accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and non-GAAP financial measures in order to provide information used by management to monitor the Company’s operating performance. Management utilizes various financial measures to monitor the Company’s insurance operations and investment portfolio. Underwriting results, which are derived from certain income statement amounts, are considered a non-GAAP financial measure and are used by management to monitor performance of the Company’s insurance operations.

 

Underwriting results are computed as net earned premiums less net losses and loss adjustment expenses and net commissions, brokerage and other underwriting expenses. Management uses underwriting results to monitor its insurance operations’ results without the impact of certain factors, including net investment income, net realized investment gains (losses) and interest expense. Management excludes these factors in order to analyze the direct relationship between net earned premiums and the related net losses and loss adjustment expenses along with net commissions, brokerage and other underwriting expenses.

 

Operating ratios are calculated using insurance results and are widely used by the insurance industry and regulators such as state departments of insurance and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners for financial regulation and as a basis of comparison among companies. The ratios discussed in the Company’s MD&A are calculated using GAAP financial results and include the net loss and loss adjustment expense ratio (“loss ratio”) as well as the net commissions, brokerage and other underwriting expense ratio (“expense ratio”) and combined ratio. The loss ratio is the percentage of net incurred losses and loss adjustment expenses to net earned premiums. The expense ratio is the percentage of net commissions, brokerage and other underwriting expenses, including the

amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs, to net earned premiums. The combined ratio is the sum of the loss ratio and expense ratio.

 

While management uses various GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures to monitor various aspects of the Company’s performance, net income is the most directly comparable GAAP measure and represents a more comprehensive measure of operating performance. Management believes that its process of evaluating performance through the use of these non-GAAP financial measures provides a basis for enhanced understanding of the operating performance and the impact to net income as a whole. Management also believes that investors may find these widely used financial measures described above useful in interpreting the underlying trends and performance, as well as to provide visibility into the significant components of net income.

 

Comparison of CNA Surety Actual Results for the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008

 

Analysis of Net Income

 

The Company had net income of $134.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared to $117.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 and $110.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in net income in 2010 over 2009 reflects the higher levels of favorable loss development discussed below, lower underwriting expenses and higher investment income, partially offset by lower net earned premium. The increase in net income in 2009 over 2008 reflects the higher levels of favorable loss development discussed below and higher investment income, partially offset by lower net earned premium.

 

The components of net income are discussed in the following sections.

 

Results of Insurance Operations

 

Underwriting components for the Company for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are summarized in the following table (dollars in thousands):

 

 

Premiums Written/Earned

 

CNA Surety primarily markets contract and commercial surety bonds. Contract surety bonds generally secure a contractor’s performance and/or payment obligation with respect to a construction project. Contract surety bonds are generally required by federal, state and local governments for public works projects. The most common types include bid, performance and payment bonds. Commercial surety bonds include all surety bonds other than contract and cover obligations typically required by law or regulation. The commercial surety market includes numerous types of bonds categorized as court judicial, court fiduciary, public official, license and permit and many miscellaneous bonds that include guarantees of financial performance. The Company also writes fidelity bonds that cover losses arising from employee dishonesty and other insurance products that are generally companion products to certain surety bonds. For example, the Company writes surety bonds for notaries and also offers related errors and omissions insurance coverage.

Through one of its insurance subsidiaries, Western Surety Company (“Western Surety”), the Company assumes significant amounts of premiums primarily from affiliates. This includes surety business written or renewed, net of reinsurance, by Continental Casualty Company (“CCC”) and The Continental Insurance Company (“CIC”), and their affiliates, after September 30, 1997 that is reinsured by Western Surety pursuant to reinsurance and related agreements. Because of certain regulatory restrictions that limit the Company’s ability to write certain business on a direct basis, the Company continues to utilize the underwriting capacity available through these agreements. The Company is in full control of all aspects of the underwriting and claim management of the assumed business from CCC and CIC.

 

CNA Surety also assumes premium on contract and commercial surety bonds for international risks. Such premiums are assumed pursuant to the terms of reinsurance treaties or as a result of specific international bond requirements of domestic customers. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008, assumed premiums written under such arrangements were $4.3 million, $2.4 million and $2.1 million, respectively.

 

Gross written premium, which is the aggregate of direct written premiums and assumed written premiums, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are shown in the table below (dollars in thousands) for each sub-line of business:

 

 

For 2010, gross written premiums increased 0.4 percent to $440.2 million as compared to 2009. Gross written premiums for contract surety increased 1.3 percent to $278.4 million despite continued challenges in the construction industry. For 2010, commercial surety gross written premiums decreased 1.7 percent compared to 2009 due to a modest decline in the small commercial market, partially offset by selective growth in the corporate commercial market. Fidelity and other premiums increased 1.9 percent to $30.5 million.

 

For 2009, gross written premiums decreased 6.2 percent to $438.3 million as compared to 2008. Gross written premiums for contract surety decreased 8.5 percent to $274.8 million primarily due to lower demand resulting from fewer new construction projects. For 2009, commercial surety gross written premiums decreased 1.8 percent compared to 2008 due, in part, to continued adverse economic conditions. Commercial surety gross written premiums for 2008 included a non-recurring premium recognition from a single account of $1.1 million. Fidelity and other premiums decreased 3.2 percent to $29.9 million.

 

The Company’s insurance subsidiaries purchase reinsurance from other insurance companies and affiliates. Reinsurance arrangements are used to limit maximum loss, provide greater diversification of risk and minimize exposure on larger risks. The cost of this reinsurance is recorded as ceded written premium. Ceded written premiums decreased from $27.3 million to $23.9 million for 2010 compared to 2009 primarily due to the lower cost of the Company’s 2010 third party excess of loss treaty.

 

Ceded written premium in 2009 decreased compared to 2008 from $35.5 million to $27.3 million. The Company’s decision to increase the per principal retention from $10.0 million to $15.0 million resulted in lower ceded premiums on the 2009 third party excess of loss treaty. Further, 2008 ceded written premium included $4.2 million recorded as a result of additional losses ceded under the 2007 excess of loss treaty as compared to $0.5 million recorded in 2009 as the result of additional losses ceded under the 2007 third party excess of loss treaty.

Net written premiums, which is gross written premiums less ceded written premiums, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are shown in the table below (dollars in thousands) for each sub-line of business:

 

 

Net written premiums are recognized as revenue over the policy term as net earned premiums. Net earned premiums for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are shown in the table below (dollars in thousands) for each sub-line of business: