Congressional Hearing Considers Private Equity-Controlled Insurers

Link: https://communications.willkie.com/110/1827/uploads-(icalendars-pdf-documents)/congressional-hearing-considers-private-equity-controlled-insurers.pdf

Excerpt:

On September 8, 2022, the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs (“Senate Banking Committee”) held a hearing to consider “Current Issues in Insurance.” One of the items discussed at the hearing was Senator Sherrod Brown’s (D-OH) March 2022 letter to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (the “NAIC”) and U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) regarding private equity-controlled insurers.1

In his letter, Senator Brown requested that FIO, in consultation with the NAIC, prepare a report for Congress that evaluates the investment strategies pursued by private equity-controlled insurers, the impact on protections for pension plan beneficiaries following pension risk transfer arrangements, and whether state regulatory regimes are capable of assessing and managing risks related to private equity-controlled insurers. In the early summer, the NAIC and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (on behalf of FIO) each provided substantive responses to Senator Brown.2

Author(s): Kara Baysinger | Leah Campbell | Jane Callanan | Matthew J. Gaul
Donald B. Henderson, Jr. | David G. Nadig | Allison J. Tam

Publication Date: 27 Sept 2022

Publication Site: Willkie Farr & Gallagher

Letter to FIO and NAIC from Senate Banking Committee

Link: https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/brown_letter_on_insurance_031622.pdf

Excerpt:

  1. What risks do the more aggressive investment strategies pursued by private equity-controlled insurers present to policyholders?
  2. What risks do lending and other shadow-bank activities pursued by companies that also
    own or control significant amounts of life insurance-related assets pose to policyholders?
  3. Are there risks to the broader economy related to investment strategies, lending, and
    other shadow-bank activities pursued by these companies?
  4. In cases of pension risk transfer arrangements, what is the impact on protections for
    pension plan beneficiaries if plans are terminated and replaced with lump-sum payouts or
    annuity contracts? Specifically, how are protections related to ERISA and PBGC
    insurance affected in these cases?
  5. Given that many private equity firms and asset managers are not public companies, what
    risks to transparency arise from the transfer of insurance obligations to these firms? Will
    retirees and the public have visibility into the investment strategies of the firms they are
    relying on for their retirements?
  6. Are state regulatory regimes capable of assessing and managing the risks related to the
    more complex structures and investment strategies of private equity-controlled insurance
    companies or obligations? If not, how can FIO work with state regulators to aid in the
    assessment and management of these risks?

Author(s): Sen. Sherrod Brown

Publication Date: 16 March 2022

Publication Site: U.S. Senate Banking Committee

Federal Insurance Office: A Study in Evasiveness

Link: https://www.insurancejournal.com/blogs/2022/09/12/684696.htm

Excerpt:

A September 8 U.S. Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing on current issues in insurance included useful discussion on some of the industry’s most pressing concerns. Comments from the committee’s members and from one witness, Maryland Insurance Commissioner Kathleen Birrane, shed light on insurance for cyber and pandemic events; the impact of private equity firms acquiring pension obligations from life insurers (pension risk transfer); and pressures on the United States to conform to global regulatory regimes, which impact U.S. insurer capital standards. The hearing also featured profound evasiveness from the other witness, Federal Insurance Office (FIO) Director Steven Seitz.

….. sparks began to fly when Sen. Toomey asked Seitz questions which went unanswered, or drew bureaucratic doublespeak responses. A heated exchange between Sen. Toomey and Seitz, in which Sen. Toomey grew visibly irritated, demonstrated Seitz’ frustrating equivocation in explaining FIO’s relationship to the International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS). An excerpt from the exchange below gives a flavor of the tone:

Sen. Toomey: Are you involved in an effort to make recommendations to the IAIS regarding private equity’s involvement in insurance?

Seitz: Umm. As part of our work at the IAIS, we’re closely coordinating the NAIC with the Federal Reserve and the states on a variety of issues, including work relating to the capital standards and the holistic framework which the NAIC is adopting.

Sen. Toomey: You didn’t answer my question. Are you personally involved in research or development of a memo, or an analysis that will include policy recommendations to the IAIS regarding private equity in insurance?

Seitz: You know, our teams are working closely with the NAIC and the states. You know, I am a member of the executive committee, and there are a variety of topics that the IAIS is discussing. And one of those topics at upcoming meetings that we will be discussing is private equity.

Sen. Toomey: You’re obviously trying to evade my question. I don’t know why it’s such a difficult question to answer…

Author(s): Jerry Theodorou

Publication Date: 12 Sept 2022

Publication Site: Insurance Journal

Current Issues in Insurance

Link: https://www.banking.senate.gov/hearings/current-issues-in-insurance

Excerpt: https://www.banking.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Brown%20Statement%209-8-22.pdf

Statement from Chair Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

Every American needs insurance – whether it’s auto insurance to protect us when we’re on the
road, or homeowners’ insurance to protect the biggest investment for most families, or life
insurance to cement your family’s financial security in the event of a tragedy.
It’s our job to make sure that the industry is protecting Americans’ hard-earned money – not
putting it at risk.
American insurance companies are regulated by state insurance commissioners. The state-based
system of insurance regulation is historic, and ensures local markets and needs are taken into
consideration.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners coordinates state commissioners across
all jurisdictions, to identify and address risks to the entire system.
In the Wall Street Reform Act, Congress created the Federal Insurance Office within the
Treasury Department to promote national coordination in the insurance sector. It’s common
sense – insurers operate across all state jurisdictions and internationally.
I’m pleased to have both the Maryland Commissioner Kathleen Birrane on behalf of the NAIC,
and Director Seitz of FIO testify today.
If we’re going to keep Americans’ hard-earned money safe, it is more important than ever that
they work together.
Today we’ll explore many important topics.
For example, three months ago, Lockheed Martin transferred $4.3 billion of its pensions to
Athene Holding – an insurance holding company specializing in life insurance and owned by the
private equity firm, Apollo Global Management.
Overnight, Lockheed Martin employees and retirees were notified that their pensions would be
managed by Athene and no longer governed by ERISA or the Pension Benefit Guaranty
Corporation.
This is just one recent example of private equity giants’ expansion into people’s pensions and the
insurance industry.
We know that workers end up worse off when Wall Street private equity firms get involved.
We’ve seen it over and over, in industry after industry.
In March, I asked the NAIC and FIO to look into private equity’s expansion into similar pensionrisk transfer transactions. We need to understand the risks to workers whose financial security
depends on pension and retirement programs.
The NAIC and FIO provided thoughtful responses to my letter. The NAIC has been monitoring
the risk-taking behavior of private equity-owned insurers.
FIO has done similar work, and also looked at the wider interconnectedness of insurance and
reinsurance markets across the world. Those connections have added to systemic risk concerns,
because U.S. insurance companies depend even more on the financial health of insurance
companies outside the U.S.
Taken together, our insurance authorities are focused on these emerging and complex risks to
safeguard our economy.
Our communities and families rely on insurance companies to protect their loved ones, their
homes, small business, and so many parts of our lives. We can’t ignore when risks build up, or
firms behave irresponsibly.
And we know who always pays the price when they do. It’s not insurance executives. It’s not
private equity executives. It’s not Wall Street.
It’s workers and their families. And it’s taxpayers, who were forced to bail out AIG 15 years ago.
That should never happen again.
That also means looking around the corner to make sure the industry and agencies are prepared
for risks as they develop. As more Americans face increasingly severe climate catastrophes like
wildfires and hurricanes each year, we need to help communities prepare – and we need to
ensure insurance watchdogs and the companies they oversee are prepared.
In the aftermath of some of these natural disasters, we have seen instances where insurers either
raise prices or stop offering insurance altogether, leaving families and businesses struggling to
find affordable coverage as they rebuild their lives and communities.
We also know this industry has a long history of racial discrimination, just like so many big
industries.
Black and brown families face more difficulty in getting insurance across the board. We’ve seen
this happen in auto insurance.
Earlier this year, The New York Times also reported that customers, insurance agents, and
employees sued State Farm for discrimination in the workplace and in paying out claims.
My colleague Chairwoman Waters has been working on learning more about this as well. Her
committee recently requested information about large life and P&C insurers’ involvement in
financing chattel slavery.
And I’m glad FIO and NAIC are also working on this. NAIC is investigating through its Special
Committee on Race and Insurance.
And I look forward to reviewing FIO’s upcoming report on availability and affordability of auto
insurance, and hope it will shed more light on racial equity in accessing this insurance.
Finally, later this year, the International Association of Insurance Supervisors will meet to
consider whether the U.S. insurance system’s review of capital adequacy standards meets
international criteria.
Because we regulate insurance differently here in the U.S., where state and local markets and
international markets are served by the same companies, it’s important that representatives of the
U.S. system like FIO and the NAIC advocate for fair treatment by the international regulators.
And now that the Fed Vice Chair for Supervision has been confirmed, Michael Barr and the
offices testifying here today will get to work with our international counterparts in this process.
All of these issues show how critical the work of FIO and NAIC is to our economy’s health and
stability. I expect FIO and NAIC to prioritize monitoring these risks in their ongoing work.

Publication Date: 8 Sept 2022

Publication Site: COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS of the U.S. Senate

Annual Report on the Insurance Industry

Link:https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO-2021-Annual-Report-Insurance-Industry.pdf

Graphic:

Excerpt:

Catastrophe losses of $61 billion in 2020 were notably more severe than in 2019, with a record number of
catastrophic events in the United States in 2020.46 Despite the more severe catastrophic event
losses, lower losses in personal and commercial auto and workers’ compensation lines kept total
loss and loss adjustment expenses flat from 2019 to 2020. Reserve development was again
favorable in 2020, adding to underwriting profits. Figure 24 shows losses from catastrophic
events in the United States since 2016, and Figure 25 shows reserve development over the same
period.47 The expense ratio decreased very slightly from 2019 to 2020.

Publication Date: September 2021

Publication Site: Federal Insurance Office

Annual Report on the Insurance Industry — 2021

Link: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO-2021-Annual-Report-Insurance-Industry.pdf

Graphic:

Excerpt:

Figure 15 shows that the average risk-based capital ratio for the L&H sector declined slightly in

  1. Specifically, statutory capital and surplus was 4.26 times the level of minimum required
    regulatory capital on average in 2020 compared to 4.31 times the required level in 2019.

L&H sector net income of $22 billion in 2020 was less than one-half of 2019 levels, affecting the
potential for capital generation. The sector reported a nearly 10 percent increase in death and
annuity benefit expenses, which contributed to a ratio of total benefit expenses to premiums
earned of 50 percent in 2020, rising substantially from 44.4 percent in 2019. According to Fitch
Ratings, life insurer operating results in 2020 were largely impacted by higher claims paid,
primarily due to increased mortality from COVID-19.24


Certain leverage ratios indicate that L&H insurers faced balance sheet pressures in 2020. The
greater financial flexibility afforded by steady leverage ratios has enabled insurers to consistently
fulfill policyholder obligations by: (1) returning a profit by investing the premiums received
from underwriting activities; and (2) limiting the risk exposure from the policies underwritten.
Insurers also employ reinsurance in order to move some of the risks off their own balance sheets
and on to those of reinsurers. Figure 16 provides a view of the L&H sector’s general account
leverage for the last 10 years.

Author(s): Fderal Insurance Office

Publication Date: September 2021

Publication Site: U.S. Dept of the Treasury

The Federal Insurance Office: Looking Back, Looking Forward

Link: https://www.rstreet.org/2021/05/19/the-federal-insurance-office-looking-back-looking-forward/

Full pdf: https://www.rstreet.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Final-No-231-FIO.pdf

Graphic:

Excerpt:

1) The FIO was created in the wake of the financial crisis, as part of the Dodd-Frank Act. It has since been active on two fronts: as a source of information about the insurance industry for the U.S. Department of the Treasury and other branches of government, and as a representative of the insurance industry in international negotiations.

2) The FIO has had a challenging first decade. Since its launch, insurers have been concerned that the introduction of a new federal body, like all bureaucracies, is the camel’s nose in the tent, which would eventually lead to attempted expansion of its scope. Today, even though many have come to accept the FIO—provided it does not attempt to exceed its authority—there are still efforts to abolish it.

3) In the past, government restrictions of the free market with involvement in insurance have proven inefficient and anticompetitive. Should the FIO advance legislative attempts to address “affordability and accessibility” of insurance, it will likely contribute to the disruption of an efficient private market closely regulated at the state level.

Author(s): Jerry Theodorou

Publication Date: 19 May 2021

Publication Site: R Street Institute