SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2017

Long-Duration Contracts, Assumptions by Product and Guarantee [Line Items]

Accounting for Variable Annuities with GMDB and GMIB Features

Future claims exposure on products with guaranteed minimum death benefit (“GMDB”) and guaranteed minimum income benefit (“GMIB”) features are sensitive to movements in the equity markets and interest rates. The Company has in place various hedging programs utilizing derivatives that are designed to mitigate the impact of movements in equity markets and interest rates. The accounting for these various hedging programs does not qualify for hedge accounting treatment. As a result, changes in the value of the derivatives will be recognized in the period in which they occur while offsetting changes in reserves and deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”) will be recognized over time in accordance with policies described in the Company’s Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2016, under “Policyholders’ Account Balances and Future Policy Benefits” and “DAC”. These differences in recognition contribute to earnings volatility.

GMIB reinsurance contracts are used to cede to affiliated and non-affiliated reinsurers a portion of the exposure on variable annuity products that offer the GMIB feature. The GMIB reinsurance contracts are accounted for as derivatives and are reported at fair value. Gross reserves for GMIB are calculated on the basis of assumptions related to projected benefits and related contract charges over the lives of the contracts and therefore will not immediately reflect the offsetting impact on future claims exposure resulting from the same capital market and/or interest rate fluctuations that cause gains or losses on the fair value of the GMIB reinsurance contracts. The changes in the fair value of the GMIB reinsurance contracts are recorded in the period in which they occur while offsetting changes in gross reserves and DAC for GMIB are recognized over time in accordance with policies described in the Company’s Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2016 under “Policyholders’ Account Balances and Future Policy Benefits” and “DAC”. These differences in recognition contribute to earnings volatility.

Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

In October 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued updated guidance on consolidation of interests held through related parties that are under common control, which alters how a decision maker needs to consider indirect interests in a VIE held through an entity under common control. The new guidance amends the recently adopted consolidation guidance analysis. Under the new guidance, if a decision maker is required to evaluate whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, it will need to consider only its proportionate indirect interest in the VIE held through a common control party. The Company adopted the revised guidance effective January 1, 2017. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued new guidance simplifying the transition to the equity method of accounting. The amendment eliminates the requirement that when an investment qualifies for use of the equity method as a result of an increase in the level of ownership interest or degree of influence, an investor must adjust the investment, results of operations and retained earnings retroactively on a step-by-step basis as if the equity method had been in effect during all previous periods that the investments had been held. The Company adopted the revised guidance effective January 1, 2017. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on improvements to employee share-based payment accounting. The amendment includes provisions intended to simplify various aspects related to how share-based payments are accounted for and presented in the financial statements including: income tax effects of share-based payments, minimum statutory tax withholding requirements and forfeitures. The Company adopted the revised guidance effective January 1, 2017. Adoption of this guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Future Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2017, the FASB issued guidance on stock compensation. The new guidance provides clarity and reduces both diversity in practice and cost and complexity when applying the guidance to a change to the terms or conditions of a share based payment award. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted. The new guidance will be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption of this guidance. Management is currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued guidance that requires certain premiums on callable debt securities to be amortized to the earliest call date. The new guidance will better align interest income recognition with the manner in which market participants price these instruments. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted and is to be applied on a modified retrospective basis. Management is currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued new guidance on the presentation of net periodic pension and post-retirement benefit costs that required bifurcation of net benefit cost. The service cost component will be presented with other employee compensation costs in operating income (or capitalized in assets). The other components will be reported separately outside of operations and will not be eligible for capitalization. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017 with early adoption permitted and is to be applied retrospectively for changes in the income statement presentation of net benefit cost and prospectively for changes in capitalization eligibility. Management is currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016, the FASB issued revised guidance to lease accounting. The revised guidance will require lessees to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for virtually all of their leases. Lessor accounting will continue to be similar to the current model, but updated to align with certain changes to the lessee model. Extensive quantitative and qualitative disclosures, including significant judgments made by management, will be required to provide greater insight into the extent of revenue and expense recognized and expected to be recognized from existing contracts. The revised guidance is effective for interim and annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. Management is currently evaluating the impact that adoption of this guidance will have on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued new revenue recognition guidance that is intended to improve and converge the financial reporting requirements for revenue from contracts with customers with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The new guidance applies to contracts that deliver goods or services to a customer, except when those contracts are for: insurance, leases, rights and obligations that are in the scope of certain financial instruments (i.e., derivative contracts) and guarantees other than product or service warranties. The new guidance is effective for interim and annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company has not yet completed this analysis, but based on the analysis completed to date, management does not expect the standard to have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations.

Consolidation of VIEs

A VIE must be consolidated by its primary beneficiary, which generally is defined as the party who has a controlling financial interest in the VIE. The Company is deemed to have a controlling financial interest in a VIE if it has (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly affect the VIE’s economic performance, and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive income from the VIE that potentially could be significant to the VIE. For purposes of evaluating (ii) above, fees paid to the Company as a decision maker or service provider are excluded if the fees are compensation for services provided commensurate with the level of effort required to be performed and the arrangement includes only customary terms, conditions or amounts present in arrangements for similar services negotiated at arm’s length.

If the Company has a variable interest in an entity that is determined not to be a VIE, the entity then is evaluated for consolidation under the voting interest entity (“VOE”) model. For limited partnerships and similar entities, the Company is deemed to have a controlling financial interest in a VOE, and would be required to consolidate the entity, if the Company owns a majority of the entity’s kick-out rights through voting limited partnership interests and other limited partners do not hold substantive participating rights (or other rights that would indicate that the Company does not control the entity). For entities other than limited partnerships, the Company is deemed to have a controlling financial interest in a VOE if it owns a majority voting interest in the entity.

The analysis performed to identify variable interests held, determine whether entities are VIEs or VOEs, and evaluate whether the Company has a controlling financial interest in such entities requires the exercise of judgment and is updated on a continuous basis as circumstances change or new entities are developed. The primary beneficiary evaluation generally is performed qualitatively based on all facts and circumstances, including consideration of economic interests in the VIE held directly and indirectly through related parties and entities under common control, as well as quantitatively, as appropriate.

Fair Value Measurement

Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The accounting guidance established a fair value hierarchy that requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value, and identifies three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:


Level 1	Unadjusted quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Level 1 fair values generally are supported by market transactions that occur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis.


Level 2	Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar instruments, quoted prices in markets that are not active, and inputs to model-derived valuations that are directly observable or can be corroborated by observable market data.


Level 3	Unobservable inputs supported by little or no market activity and often requiring significant management judgment or estimation, such as an entity’s own assumptions about the cash flows or other significant components of value that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.

The Company uses unadjusted quoted market prices to measure the fair value of instruments that are actively traded in financial markets. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are measured using present value or other valuation techniques. The fair value determinations are made at a specific point in time, based on available market information and judgments about the financial instrument, including estimates of the timing and amount of expected future cash flows and the credit standing of counterparties. Such adjustments do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering for sale at one time the Company’s entire holdings of a particular financial instrument, nor do they consider the tax impact of the realization of unrealized gains or losses. In many cases, the fair value cannot be substantiated by direct comparison to independent markets, nor can the disclosed value be realized in immediate settlement of the instrument.

Management is responsible for the determination of the value of investments carried at fair value and the supporting methodologies and assumptions. Under the terms of various service agreements, the Company often utilizes independent valuation service providers to gather, analyze, and interpret market information and derive fair values based upon relevant methodologies and assumptions for individual securities. These independent valuation service providers typically obtain data about market transactions and other key valuation model inputs from multiple sources and, through the use of widely accepted valuation models, provide a single fair value measurement for individual securities for which a fair value has been requested. As further described below with respect to specific asset classes, these inputs include, but are not limited to, market prices for recent trades and transactions in comparable securities, benchmark yields, interest rate yield curves, credit spreads, quoted prices for similar securities, and other market-observable information, as applicable. Specific attributes of the security being valued also are considered, including its term, interest rate, credit rating, industry sector, and when applicable, collateral quality and other security- or issuer-specific information. When insufficient market observable information is available upon which to measure fair value, the Company either will request brokers knowledgeable about these securities to provide a non-binding quote or will employ internal valuation models. Fair values received from independent valuation service providers and brokers and those internally modeled or otherwise estimated are assessed for reasonableness.