COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

(A) Legal Proceedings

In the normal course of business, the Company is involved or may become involved in various legal actions in which claims for alleged economic and punitive damages have been or may be asserted, some for substantial amounts. In recent years, carriers offering life insurance and annuity products have faced litigation, including class action lawsuits, alleging improper product design, improper sales practices, and similar claims. As discussed below, the Company has been a defendant over the past several years in two such class action lawsuits. Given the uncertainty involved in these types of actions, the ability to make a reliable evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or an estimate of the amount of or range of potential loss is endemic to the particular circumstances and evolving developments of each individual matter on its own merits.

The Company was a defendant in a class action lawsuit initially filed on September 17, 2004, in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles. The California state court certified a class consisting of certain California policyholders age 65 and older alleging violations under California Business and Professions Code section 17200. The court additionally certified a subclass of 36 policyholders alleging fraud against their agent, and vicariously against the Company. The California Insurance Department intervened in this case asserting that the Company violated California insurance laws. The parties to this case became involved in court-ordered mediation and ongoing negotiations. On February 22, 2010, the Company reported in a Form 8-K filing a settlement agreement with the plaintiffs and plaintiff in intervention providing a settlement benefit of approximately $17 million which was included in the Company's legal accrual provision at December 31, 2009. The settlement agreement was given final court approval at a Fairness Hearing on August 20, 2010. Including attorney's fees, policy benefits and other considerations, the Company paid out approximately $22.4 million in the third and fourth quarters of 2010.

The Company is currently a defendant in a second class action lawsuit pending as of June 12, 2006, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The case is titled In Re National Western Life Insurance Deferred Annuities Litigation. The complaint asserts claims for RICO violations, Financial Elder Abuse, Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200, et seq, Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17500, et seq, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Fraudulent Concealment, Cal. Civ. Code 1710, et seq, Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and Unjust Enrichment and Imposition of Constructive Trust. On July 12, 2010 the Court certified a nationwide class of policyholders under the RICO allegation and a California class under all of the remaining causes of action except breach of fiduciary duty. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses in this cause and intends to vigorously defend itself against the asserted claims. In addition, given the speculative and vague damage theories presented by the plaintiffs in the matter, the inability to ascertain any financial harm to the class of policyholders, and the current status of the case before the Court, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate a possible range of loss for disclosure in the accompanying financial statements. Therefore, no amounts have been provided in the financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2011 for this matter.

In addition to the two class action lawsuits described above, the Company is the named defendant in the case of Sheila Newman vs. National Western Life Insurance Company, which alleged mishandling of policyholder funds by an agent. On February 3, 2010, the 415th Judicial District Court of Parker County in Weatherford, Texas, entered a Final Judgment against the Company of approximately $208,000 including actual damages of $113,000 and amounts for attorney's fees, and prejudgment interest on the actual damages. In addition, the Final Judgment included $150 million for exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals on August 11, 2011, reversed the trial court judgment in its entirety and rendered a take nothing verdict in favor of National Western. Plaintiffs (Appellees) filed a motion for a rehearing which the Court ruled on October 13, 2011, that the trial court's judgment was still reversed and judgment was still entered that Newman take nothing, all in favor of National Western. The Plaintiffs (Appellees) filed a Motion for Reconsideration En Banc which the Court of Appeals denied on October 27, 2011. The Plaintiffs (Appellees) then filed a Motion for Rehearing of the Court's amended decision, which the Court of Appeals denied on December 22, 2011.

Although there can be no assurances, at the present time, the Company does not anticipate that the ultimate liability arising from such other potential, pending, or threatened legal actions will have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or operating results of the Company.

The Company was involved in litigation as the plaintiff in a matter pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (“District Court”) against defendant, Western National Life Insurance Company and its parent company, AGC Life Insurance Company. The matter dealt with the alleged infringement of registered trademarks held by the Company. On March 25, 2011, the parties executed a Memorandum of Understanding on Settlement (“Memorandum”) under which the Company was to receive a settlement payment of $4 million . This amount has been received and was included in Other revenues, net of attorney fees, in the financial statements in the second quarter, 2011. The parties entered into a final written confidential settlement agreement originally dated May 2, 2011 and amended August 15, 2011.

Brazilian insurance regulators have sought to impose substantial penal fines against National Western. The Company firmly believes that Brazilian insurance regulators have no jurisdiction over the Company and that any such fines would be unenforceable against it.

(B) Financial Instruments

In order to meet the financing needs of its customers in the normal course of business, the Company is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk. These financial instruments are commitments to extend credit which involve elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheet.

The Company's exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit is represented by the contractual amounts, assuming that the amounts are fully advanced and that collateral or other security is of no value. Commitments to extend credit are legally binding agreements to lend to a customer that generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Commitments do not necessarily represent future liquidity requirements, as some could expire without being drawn upon. The Company uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. The Company controls the credit risk of these transactions through credit approvals, limits, and monitoring procedures.

The Company had $0 million of commitments to extend credit relating to mortgage loans at December 31, 2011. The Company evaluates each customer's creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis.

The Company is subject to state guaranty association assessments in all states in which it is licensed to do business. These associations generally guarantee certain levels of benefits payable to resident policyholders of insolvent insurance companies. Many states allow premium tax credits for all or a portion of such assessments, thereby allowing potential recovery of these payments over a period of years. However, several states do not allow such credits.

The Company estimates its liabilities for guaranty association assessments by using the latest information available from the National Organization of Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Associations. The Company monitors and revises its estimates for assessments as additional information becomes available which could result in changes to the estimated liabilities. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, liabilities for guaranty association assessments totaled $2.0 million and $2.2 million, respectively. Other operating expenses related to state guaranty association assessments were minimal for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009.

(D) Leases

The Company had leased various computers and other office related equipment under operating leases. Rental expenses for these leases were $0.2 million, $0.2 million and $0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The Company's lease commitment expired October 31, 2011 and was not renewed. Currently the Company has no future annual lease obligations as of December 31, 2011.



2012	$	—
2013 and thereafter	—

Total	$	—

(E) Compensation Plan

Effective January 1, 2006, the Company implemented a Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Plan to provide incentive bonuses to eligible agents. Agents qualify for participation by meeting certain sales goals each year. Company contributions are subject to a vesting schedule based on the agents’ years of qualification in the plan. The Company expects to contribute $1.0 million to the plan in 2012.