Employers Holdings, Inc.
2012 Annual Report
2012
To fellow stockholders
Douglas D. Dirks
President & CEO
Robert J. Kolesar
Chairman of the Board
Our focus in 2012 was to grow our business and to incrementally
obtain better pricing on new and existing business.
We achieved our 2012 goals and are pleased to report strong
revenue at year end 2012, up 25% compared to 2011.
Year-over-year at December 31, 2012 we added 19,121 policies,
increasing policy count 32% and in-force premium 36%. We
have succeeded in building a pipeline of agencies, strategic
partnerships and associations that continue to produce new
business opportunities which are squarely within our underwriting
appetite. In addition, we recently announced a new partnership
with Paychex. In combination with ADP, we have strategic
partnerships with the top industry leaders in payroll outsourcing
services. We expect to complete the roll-out of this new
partnership by the middle of this year.
Pricing improved throughout 2012 as our year-over-year change
in net rate (premium divided by payroll) increased 8.3% by
year-end. This is the largest increase in net rate that we have
experienced in recent years. Our shift to less hazardous classes
of business, particularly in the states we added as a part of the
AmCOMP acquisition in late 2008, worked its way through our
book of business by year-end 2012 and the downward pressure
on premium resulting from that shift in business mix subsided.
Additionally, filed rates rose in a number of our markets including
three of our top five states. In our largest market, California, which
represents over one-half of our total in-force premium, we have
increased our filed rates more than 40% since early 2009.
We are also subject to legislative changes which impact our
business. In September 2012, the California legislature passed
Senate Bill No. 863 (SB 863), which was subsequently signed into
law. SB 863 includes a number of reforms to California’s workers’
compensation system, including increases to permanent disability
benefits offset by reforms designed to reduce costs in the system.
According to the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating
Bureau, the cost savings are expected to be achieved through
a number of measures, including: the creation of a new dispute
resolution process outside of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals
Board for medical treatments and billing issues; new controls on
liens; and calls for new fee schedules for physicians, interpreters,
ambulatory surgery centers, and home health care.
As we have sought higher rates across our book of business, our
hit ratio has remained stable and our retention of existing policies
has been strong. As we continue to aggressively pursue additional
rates on both new and expiring policies, we may see declines in
both our hit ratio on new business and retention rates on renewing
business. We will continue to closely monitor these metrics as
they are good indicators of the strength and durability of the
improving pricing environment.
Because of these increases in premium and pricing, and because
of our continued efforts to control costs throughout 2012, we
were able to achieve substantial improvements in our operating
performance as we regained the business scale lost during the
recent recession.
By year-end 2012, our combined ratio before the impact of
the LPT (the adjusted ratio of total expenses to net premiums
earned) improved by 3.9 percentage points compared to 2011.
The improvement was driven largely by the underwriting expense
component of that ratio. The year-over-year underwriting and
other operating expense ratio declined 3.6 percentage points in
2012 largely due to the increase in net premiums earned and our
previously implemented cost controls.
Our loss ratio before the impact of the LPT remained relatively
stable throughout the year. Underlying loss and loss adjustment
expense (LAE) was driven by higher net premiums earned and
loss provision rates that remained in the high seventies. You
will recall that we increased our provision rate beginning in the
fourth quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011 based upon
development information that we observed at that time. As a
result and unlike some of our peers, we have not been required
to strengthen our overall prior period reserves due to unfavorable
development. Our overall reserves remained adequate throughout
2012. If rate trends continue to exceed loss trends, we will lower
our provision rate in 2013.
We observed favorable development in the reserves related
to the Loss Portfolio Transfer (LPT) and those reserves were
favorably adjusted in the fourth quarter of 2012 in line with our
observations. As a reminder, the LPT Agreement is a retroactive
100% quota share reinsurance agreement with three reinsurers
which was effective as of June 30, 1999, for claims dated June
30, 1995 and prior. Under the Agreement, $1.5 billion in liabilities
were transferred for a one-time fixed cash consideration of $775
million resulting in a gain of $750 million which was recognized as
statutory surplus. The recent adjustment to reserves resulted in a
$100 million reduction to ceded losses under the LPT Agreement.
As a result, we recalculated the deferred gain and the cumulative
amortization on the gain to reflect what the balance would have
been had the current expected ultimate loss been the loss
estimate at June 30, 1999. This raised reported GAAP net income
and earnings per share in 2012.
Additionally, the favorable loss trends related to the LPT claims
resulted in an LPT contingent profit commission of $15.0 million in
2012. Under the LPT Agreement, we are entitled to a contingent
profit commission from the three participating reinsurers based
upon the actual loss experience of the ceded business. In the
past, this contingent profit commission would have reduced
commission expense. Now, the contingent profit commission is
deferred and amortized and is included in the reported deferred
reinsurance gain. As a result of this change in accounting,
revisions were made to our full year financial statements in 2011,
2010, 2009, and 2008.
Reviewing the financial results net of the impacts of the LPT is
particularly important for the fourth quarter and full year reporting
periods in 2012. These results are disclosed in the 2012 Form
10-K which follows and in the fourth quarter earnings press
release Form 8-K filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission
on February 28, 2013.
To fellow stockholders (continued)
Since we became a publicly traded company in early 2007, we
aggressively moved capital through ordinary and extraordinary
dividends out of the operating companies into the holding
company during the softest part of the business cycle. This
movement provided the greatest flexibility for the capital
deployment of approximately $680 million since early 2007. Over
60% of the capital deployed from 2007 through 2012 was returned
to shareholders through $363 million in share repurchases and
$59 million in dividends, which combined represent approximately
120% of earnings before the LPT.
Another 30%, or approximately $188 million, of the total capital
deployed since early 2007 was used to purchase a book of
business in late 2008 that expanded our geographic footprint from
11 to 29 states. By the end of 2012, we have regained much of
the business scale lost during the recession of 2008-2009, our
re-underwriting of the acquired book is complete and our net rate
in the acquired states continues to improve. These states continue
to provide opportunities for increased market share.
Our preferred use of capital is to invest it into our business. In
recent years, we modestly invested capital internally in technology
and efficiency improvements as lower levels of organic growth did
not require additional operating capital for our subsidiaries. As we
continued to grow our business throughout 2012 into an improving
pricing environment, our operating companies required additional
funds. In September of 2012, we contributed back down to our
operating subsidiaries $70 million of the capital that we had moved
to the holding company. This contribution was made to support
growth and to support the subsidiaries’ financial strength ratings.
We will continue to evaluate capital requirements in terms of
capital adequacy to support our A- “excellent” ratings from A.M.
Best and to allow us to take the fullest advantage of improving
market conditions.
Our $2 billion investment portfolio continued to perform well
in 2012 despite historically low yields and continuing volatile
markets. The average book yield of the portfolio was 3.7% and the
tax-equivalent yield was 4.4% at the end of the year. The duration
of fixed maturities in the portfolio was relatively short at 4.2. The
portfolio is weighted heavily toward short- and intermediate-term
bonds to minimize interest rate risk. Equities represented only
5.8% of our portfolio at year-end 2012.
Our growth in policies and premium over the past two years has
been substantial. We believe that growth in policies and premium
will continue throughout 2013 but at a slower rate of increase than
we have seen in recent reporting periods. Our focus will continue
to be on retaining our highest quality and best priced business,
adding appropriately priced new business and building our small
business brand across the country. Challenges in 2013 include
continuing low investment yields and historically high combined
ratios – and these are industry issues, not just issues for us. We
are carefully managing our invested assets to enhance yield and
reduce risk by maintaining a bias toward higher quality securities
with shorter durations. This approach negatively impacts current
earnings but represents what we believe is appropriate prudence
in a highly volatile environment.
To fellow stockholders (continued)
And finally, you may have noticed our new EMPLOYERS logo
on our website. We note with pleasure and pride that the year
2013 is a major milestone for EMPLOYERS. As of this year, with
our history as the state fund, we have been doing business as a
workers’ compensation specialist for one hundred years. While we
have only been a public company since early 2007, in that time
and during one of the most challenging operating environments
for our industry, we have succeeded in growing our adjusted book
value (including the LPT Agreement deferred reinsurance gain)
more than 75% since year-end 2006 and 6% in the twelve months
since December 31, 2011.
On behalf of the Board of Directors and all the men and women of
EMPLOYERS, we thank you for your support.
Douglas D. Dirks
President & CEO
Robert J. Kolesar
Chairman of the Board
Summary of Performance
(Thousands of dollars, except per share and ratios)
Income Statement Data
Net income per diluted share
Net income before LPT per diluted share
Net investment income
Realized gains (losses) on investments, net
Gross premiums written
Underwriting and other operating expense
Earnings per Share
2012
2011
$3.37
$0.22
$72,363
$5,048
$1.30
$0.78
$80,117
$20,161
$580,327
$418,512
$121,440
$100,717
$4.00
$3.00
$2.00
$1.00
$0
$1.69
2008
$1.08
2009
$1.06
2010
$0.78
2011
$0.22
2012
Earnings before the LPT per diluted share
GAAP net income per diluted share
The table below shows the reconciliation of net income before impact of the LPT for the periods presented:
Net income
Impact of the LPT agreement:
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
$106,891
$48,623
$63,469
$74,746
$103,044
Less amortization of LPT deferred reinsurance gain
$16,976
$18,249
$19,323
$19,050
$18,952
Less impact of the LPT reserve adjustment
$73,349
...
...
...
Less impact of the LPT contingent commission adjustment
$9,609
$1,050
$392
$5,707
...
$728
Net income before impact of the LPT agreement
$6,957
$29,324
$43,754
$49,989
$83,364
Combined Ratio
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
106.2%
112.7%
119.2%
91.5%
115.3%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Combined ratio before the LPT
GAAP combined ratio
Balance Sheet Data
Total assets
Total investments
Average pre-tax yield
Tax equivalent yield
Duration
Net unrealized gains
Debt to capital ratio
Stockholders’ equity including LPT deferred gain
Adjusted return on average adjusted equity (net income before the LPT divided by average stockholders’ equity including
LPT deferred gain)
2012
2011
$3,511,339
$3,482,310
$2,149,514
$1,950,745
3.7%
4.4%
4.2
4.1%
5.0%
4.2
$199,305
$179,567
12.0%
12.8%
$820,424
$827,946
0.8%
3.5%
Stockholders’ Equity including LPT Deferred Reinsurance Gain per Diluted Share
$17.50
$20.69
$22.10
$25.09
$26.66
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$30
$25
$20
$15
$10
$5
$0
The table below shows the reconciliation of total stockholders’ equity including the LPT deferred
reinsurance gain for the periods presented:
Total stockholders’ equity
Plus:
LPT deferred reinsurance gain
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
$539,381
$461,983
$477,603
$485,216
$439,820
281,043
365,963
383,399
402,352
414,479
Total stockholders’ equity including LPT deferred reinsurance gain
$820,424 $827,946
$861,002
$887,568
$854,299
34263
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-K
(cid:2) ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012
OR
(cid:3) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT
OF 1934
For the transition period from
to
Commission file number: 001-33245
EMPLOYERS HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Nevada
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
04-3850065
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
10375 Professional Circle, Reno, Nevada 89521
(Address of principal executive offices and zip code)
(888) 682-6671
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class
Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share
New York Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes (cid:3) No (cid:2)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange
Act. Yes (cid:3) No (cid:2)
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 (cid:2) No (cid:3)
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 (§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 (cid:2) No (cid:3)
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and
will not be contained, to the best of 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. (cid:3)
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 definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “non-accelerated filer,” and
“smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer (cid:2)
Accelerated filer (cid:3)
Non-accelerated filer (cid:3)
Smaller reporting company (cid:3)
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30,
2012 was $558,293,802.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes (cid:3) No (cid:2)
Class
February 21, 2013
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share
30,775,229 shares outstanding
Portions of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement relating to the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are
incorporated by reference in Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III of this report.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
36965
EXPLANATORY NOTE
We are revising our consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011
and 2010, and our selected financial data for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009, and
2008 in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. These revisions
are the result of the need to correct the manner in which we account for the contingent profit
commission to which we are entitled under the Loss Portfolio Transfer Agreement (LPT Agreement).
We assessed the impact of these revisions and concluded that they were not material to any of our
financial statements for the each of the three quarters within the nine months ended September 30,
2012, or fiscal years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009, or 2008. As a result, we have not filed
amendments to any of our previously filed Annual Reports on Form 10-K or Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q. We have revised these historical financial results in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Although the effect of these revisions was not material to those previously issued financial statements,
the cumulative effect of reflecting these revisions in the current year would have been material for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. Since these revisions are treated as corrections to our prior period
financial results, the revisions are considered to be a restatement under U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP). Accordingly, the revised financial information included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K has been identified as “restated.”
In 1999, the Nevada State Industrial Insurance System (the Fund) entered into a retroactive 100%
quota share reinsurance agreement through a loss portfolio transfer transaction with third party
reinsurers. On January 1, 2000, one of our insurance subsidiaries, Employers Insurance Company of
Nevada, assumed all of the assets, liabilities and operations of the Fund, including the Fund’s rights and
obligations associated with the LPT Agreement. The LPT Agreement was a non-recurring transaction
which does not affect our ongoing operations. In the quarter ended December 31, 2012, we concluded
that a modification was necessary in order to properly apply reinsurance accounting principles to the
contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement. This modification resulted in a change in the
manner in which we record the estimate of contingent commission receivable—LPT Agreement, which
impacts the amortization of the deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement and is reflected in losses
income and
and loss adjustment expense (LAE)
comprehensive income. The effect of the revisions to the previously issued consolidated statements
of income and comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 was to increase
the commission expense and decrease the losses and LAE, with the net effect of increasing net income
and earnings per share. Additionally, total stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2011 decreased and
there was an increase to the contingent commission receivable—LPT Agreement and the deferred
reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement on the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2011. Note 2
to the consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains tabular
disclosures that set forth certain restated financial information.
incurred in our consolidated statements of
For more information regarding the impact on our financial results, please refer to Part II, Item 6,
“Selected Financial Data,” and Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations,” and to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8,
including Note 2, “Revision of Previously Issued Consolidated Financial Statements,” and Note 21,
“Selected Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited).”
The following tables present
the restatement adjustments on our
previously reported consolidated retained earnings at December 31, 2009 and consolidated net income
and earnings per share for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands, except per share
data):
the summary impacts of
Retained earnings at December 31, 2009 (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$266,491
(13,183)
Retained earnings at December 31, 2009 (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$253,308
2
84697
Net income (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income (as restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Earnings per common share:
Basic (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Basic (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted (previously reported). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted (as restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31,
2011
2010
$48,313
310
$48,623
$
$
$
$
1.30
—
1.30
1.29
0.01
1.30
$62,799
670
$63,469
$ 1.52
0.01
$ 1.53
$ 1.51
0.02
$ 1.53
3
99346
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No.
Forward-Looking Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5
PART 1
Item 1
Business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 1A Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 1B Unresolved Staff Comments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 2
Item 3
Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Legal Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 4 Mine Safety Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PART II
Item 5 Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 6
Selected Financial Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 7 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and
Results of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 7A Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 8
Item 9
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 9A Controls and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 9B Other Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PART III
Item 10 Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 11 Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 12
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Item 13 Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence . . . . . . .
Item 14
Principal Accountant Fees and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6
20
29
29
30
30
31
33
36
56
59
102
102
102
103
103
103
104
104
Item 15 Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
105
PART IV
4
77557
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking
statements if accompanied by meaningful cautionary statements identifying important factors that could
cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed. You should not place undue reliance on
these statements, which speak only as of the date of this report. Forward-looking statements include
those related to our expected financial position, business, financing plans, litigation, future premiums,
revenues, earnings, pricing,
reserves,
acquisitions, competition, and rate increases with respect to our business and the insurance industry
in general. Statements including words such as “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate,”
“may,” “anticipate,” “will” or similar statements of a future or forward-looking nature identify forward-
looking statements.
relationships, expected losses,
investments, business
loss
We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether
as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law. All forward-
looking statements address matters that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from historical or anticipated results, depending on a number of factors. These risks
and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those set forth in Item 1A, “Risk Factors” and the
other documents that we have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
NOTE REGARDING RELIANCE ON STATEMENTS IN OUR CONTRACTS
The agreements included or incorporated by reference as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form
10-K may contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement.
These representations and warranties were made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the
applicable agreement and:
• were not intended to be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of
allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate;
• may have been qualified in such agreement by disclosures that were made to the other party in
connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement;
• may apply contract standards of “materiality” that are different from “materiality” under the
applicable securities laws; and
• were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be
specified in the agreement.
Notwithstanding the inclusion of the foregoing cautionary statements, we acknowledge that we are
responsible for considering whether additional specific disclosures of material information regarding
material contractual provisions are required to make the statements in this report not misleading.
5
56970
PART I
Item 1. Business
General
Employers Holdings, Inc. (EHI) is a holding company incorporated in Nevada in 2005. Unless
otherwise indicated, all references to “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Company” or similar terms refer to EHI
together with its subsidiaries. We had 667 full-time employees at December 31, 2012 and our principal
executive offices are located at 10375 Professional Circle in Reno, Nevada.
Our insurance subsidiaries have each been assigned an A.M. Best Company (A.M. Best) rating of
“A-” (Excellent), with a “negative” financial outlook.
Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form
8-K, amendments to those reports, and Proxy Statement for our Annual Meeting of Stockholders are
available free of charge on our website at www.employers.com as soon as reasonably practicable after
they are electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Our
website also provides access to reports filed by our Directors, executive officers and certain significant
stockholders pursuant to Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In addition, our Corporate
Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Code of Ethics for Senior Financial
Officers, and charters for the standing committees of our Board of Directors are available on our
website. Copies of these documents may also be obtained free of charge by written request to Investor
Relations, 10375 Professional Circle, Reno, Nevada 89521-4802. The SEC also maintains a website at
www.sec.gov that contains the information that we file electronically with the SEC.
Description of Business
We are a specialty provider of workers’ compensation insurance focused on select small businesses
in low to medium hazard industries. We employ a disciplined, conservative underwriting approach
designed to individually select specific types of businesses, predominantly those in the lowest four of the
seven workers’ compensation insurance industry defined hazard groups, that we believe will have fewer
and less costly claims relative to other businesses in the same hazard groups. Workers’ compensation is
provided for under a statutory system wherein most employers are required to provide coverage for
their employees’ medical, disability, vocational rehabilitation, and/or death benefit costs for work-
related injuries or illnesses. We operate as a single reportable segment and conduct operations in
31 states and the District of Columbia, with a concentration in California, where over one-half of our
business is generated. We had total assets of $3.5 billion at December 31, 2012 and 2011. The following
table highlights key results of our operations for the last three years.
For the Years Ended
December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31, 2011 (As Restated) . . . . . .
December 31, 2010 (As Restated) . . . . . .
Net
Premiums
Written
$569,676
410,038
313,098
Total
Revenue
Net
Income
(in thousands, except ratios)
$579,182
464,154
415,604
$106,891
48,623
63,469
Statutory
Combined
Ratio(1)
85.8%
112.1
109.8
(1) Our combined ratio on a statutory basis is a measure of underwriting profitability. Elsewhere in this report, unless otherwise
stated, the term “combined ratio” refers to a calculation based on U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
The statutory combined ratio for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes the impact of a $100.0 million favorable
adjustment to the ceded reserves under the Loss Portfolio Transfer Agreement. See Note 3 in the Notes to our Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Our statutory combined ratio for the five years ended December 31, 2011 was 99.5%, compared to
the industry composite statutory combined ratio of 115.2% for the same five-year period (calculated by
A.M. Best
their business in workers’
compensation).
for individual companies that have more than 50% of
6
33928
Our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled in the following states:
Employers Insurance Company of Nevada (EICN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Employers Compensation Insurance Company (ECIC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Employers Preferred Insurance Company (EPIC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Employers Assurance Company (EAC). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nevada
California
Florida
Florida
State of Domicile
Products and Services
Workers’ compensation provides insurance coverage for the statutorily prescribed benefits that
employers are required to provide to their employees who may be injured or suffer illness in the course
of employment. The level of benefits varies by state, the nature and severity of the injury or disease,
and the wages of the injured worker. Each state has a statutory, regulatory, and adjudicatory system
that sets the amount of wage replacement to be paid, determines the level of medical care required to
be provided, establishes the degree of permanent impairment, and specifies the options in selecting
healthcare providers. These state laws generally require two types of benefits for injured employees:
(a) medical benefits, including expenses related to the diagnosis and treatment of an injury, disease, or
both, as well as any required rehabilitation, and (b) indemnity payments, which consist of temporary
wage replacement, permanent disability payments, and death benefits to surviving family members.
Disciplined Underwriting
Our strategy is to focus on disciplined underwriting and continue to pursue profitable growth
opportunities across market cycles. We carefully monitor market trends to assess new business
opportunities that we expect will meet our pricing and risk standards. We price our policies based on
the specific risks associated with each potential insured rather than solely on the industry class in which
a potential insured is classified. Our disciplined underwriting approach is a critical element of our
culture and we believe that it has allowed us to offer competitive prices, diversify our risks, and out-
perform the industry.
The following table compares our statutory loss and loss adjustment expense (LAE) ratio, a
measure which relates inversely to our underwriting profitability, to the statutory industry composite
loss and LAE ratio reported by A.M. Best (calculated for U.S. insurance companies having more than
50% of their premiums generated by workers’ compensation insurance products).
Year
Statutory Losses and LAE Ratio
A.M. Best
EHI(1)
2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46.4%
51.4
57.5
66.2
77.6
57.4
77.7%
78.6
86.1
87.4
89.6
N/A(2)
(1) Our statutory loss and LAE ratio includes changes to reserves for losses and LAE established for prior periods.
(2) As of the date of this report, statutory industry composite loss and LAE ratio data was not available for 2012.
We execute our underwriting processes through automated systems and experienced underwriters
with specific knowledge of local markets. We have developed automated underwriting templates for
specific classes of business that produce faster quotes when certain underwriting criteria are met. Our
underwriting guidelines consider many factors, such as type of business, nature of operations, and risk
exposures, and are designed to minimize or prevent underwriting of certain undesirable classes of
business.
7
34034
Loss Control
Our loss control professionals provide consultation to policyholders to assist them in preventing
losses and containing costs once claims occur. They also assist our underwriting personnel in evaluating
potential and current policyholders and are an important part of our underwriting discipline.
Premium Audit
We conduct premium audits on substantially all of our policyholders annually upon the policy
expiration. Premium audits allow us to comply with applicable state and reporting bureau requirements
and to verify that policyholders have accurately reported their payroll and employee job classifications.
We also selectively perform interim audits on certain classes of business or if unusual claims are filed or
concerns are raised regarding projected annual payrolls, which could result in substantial variances at
final audit.
Claims and Medical Case Management
The role of our claims department is to actively and efficiently investigate, evaluate, and pay
claims, and to aid injured workers in returning to work in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations. We have implemented rigorous claims guidelines and control procedures in our claims units
and have claims operations throughout
the markets we serve. We also provide medical case
management services for those claims that we determine will benefit from such involvement.
Our claims department also provides claims management services for those claims incurred by the
Nevada State Industrial Insurance System (the Fund) and assumed by EICN and subject to a 100%
retroactive reinsurance agreement (the LPT Agreement) with dates of injury prior to July 1, 1995.
Additional
forth under “—Reinsurance—LPT
Agreement.” We receive a management fee from the third party reinsurers equal to 7% of the loss
payments on these claims.
information regarding the LPT Agreement
is set
We utilize medical provider networks affiliated with Anthem Blue Cross of California (Anthem)
and Coventry Health Care, Inc. and make every appropriate effort to direct injured workers into these
networks for medical treatments. In addition to our medical networks, we work closely with local
vendors, including attorneys, medical professionals, and investigators, to bring local expertise to our
reported claims. We pay special attention to reducing costs and have established discounting
arrangements with the aforementioned service providers. We use preferred provider organizations,
bill review services, and utilization management to closely monitor medical costs.
We actively pursue fraud and subrogation recoveries to mitigate claims costs. Subrogation rights
are based upon state and federal laws, as well as the insurance policies we issue. Our fraud and
subrogation efforts are handled through dedicated units.
Information Technology
Core Operating Systems
We have an efficient, cost-effective and scalable infrastructure that complements our geographic
reach and business model and have developed a highly automated underwriting system. This technology
allows for the electronic submission, review, and quoting of insurance applications that applies our
underwriting standards and guidelines. This policy administration system reduces transaction costs and
provides for more efficient and timely processing of applications for small policies that meet our
independent agents and brokers
underwriting standards. We believe this approach saves our
considerable time in processing customer applications and maintains our competitiveness in our target
markets. We will continue to invest in technology and systems across our business to maximize
efficiency, customer self-service, and create increased capacity that will allow us to lower our expense
ratios while growing premiums.
Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery
We maintain business continuity and disaster recovery plans for our critical business functions,
including the restoration of information technology infrastructure and applications. We have two data
8
19873
centers that act as production facilities and as disaster recovery sites for each other. In addition, we
utilize an off-site data storage facility for critical customer and systems data.
Customers and Workers’ Compensation Premiums
The workers’ compensation insurance industry classifies risks into seven hazard groups, as defined
by the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI), based on severity of claims, with
businesses in the first or lowest group having the lowest claims costs.
We target select small businesses engaged in low to medium hazard industries. Our historical loss
experience has been more favorable for lower industry defined hazard groups than for higher hazard
groups. Further, we believe it is generally less costly to service and manage the risks associated with
these lower hazard groups. Our underwriters use their local market expertise and disciplined
underwriting to select specific types of businesses and risks within the classes of business we underwrite
that allow us to generate loss ratios that are consistently better than the industry average.
The following table sets forth our in-force premiums by hazard group and as a percentage of our
total in-force premiums as of December 31:
Hazard
Group
A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage
of 2012
Total
Percentage
of 2011
Total
Percentage
of 2010
Total
2010
2011
(in thousands, except percentages)
22.5% $ 70,398
25.5
95,783
145,282
33.9
58,534
14.4
19,094
2.9
4,682
0.8
148
<0.1
17.9% $ 45,537
74,435
24.3
120,656
36.9
47,906
14.9
24,592
4.8
7,531
1.2
480
<0.1
14.2%
23.2
37.6
14.9
7.7
2.3
0.1
2012
$120,863
136,849
182,416
77,148
15,850
4,128
88
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$537,342
100.0% $393,921
100.0% $321,137
100.0%
Our in-force premiums for our top ten types of insureds and as a percentage of our total in-force
premiums as of December 31, 2012 were as follows:
Employer Classifications
In-force
Premiums
Percentage
of Total
(in thousands,
except percentages)
Restaurants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dentists, Optometrists, and Physicians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Automobile Service or Repair Shops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hotels, Motels, and Clubs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Wholesale Stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gasoline Stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Real Estate Management. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schools—Colleges and Religious Organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Groceries and Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Apparel Manufacturing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$117,109
36,142
34,444
28,661
27,503
19,783
16,002
15,038
13,090
11,993
$319,765
21.8%
6.7
6.4
5.3
5.1
3.7
3.0
2.8
2.4
2.2
59.4%
We currently write business in 31 states and the District of Columbia. Our business is concentrated
in California, which makes the results of our operations more dependent on the trends that are unique
to that state and that may differ from national trends. State legislation, local competition, economic and
employment trends, and workers’ compensation medical costs trends can be material to our financial
results.
9
35622
As of December 31, 2012, our policyholders had average annual in-force premiums of $6,732. We
are not dependent on any single policyholder and the loss of any single policyholder would not have a
material adverse effect on our business.
Our total
December 31:
in-force premiums and number of policies in-force by state were as follows as of
2012
2011
2010
State
In-force
Premiums
Policies
In-force
California . . . . . . . .
Illinois . . . . . . . . . . .
Georgia . . . . . . . . . .
Florida . . . . . . . . . . .
Nevada. . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$317,890
30,555
22,985
17,676
15,522
132,714
$537,342
46,829
3,302
3,150
2,918
3,876
19,739
79,814
In-force
Premiums
In-force
Premiums
(dollars in thousands)
36,867
$221,910
2,433
24,744
2,050
16,393
2,399
15,226
3,718
14,639
13,226
101,009
$393,921
60,693
Premium
In-force
Policies
In-force
$172,621
18,617
10,772
15,071
16,940
87,116
$321,137
29,244
932
757
1,963
3,596
8,069
44,561
The following trends affected our workers’ compensation business from 2010 through 2012:
• In-force premiums increased 67.3%, primarily due to an increasing number of policies in-force
and higher premium rates; and
• Total policies in-force increased 79.1%, reflecting our efforts to continue to grow our business
profitably across market cycles.
We cannot be certain how these trends will ultimately impact our consolidated financial position
and results of operations.
Our premiums are generally a function of the applicable premium rate, the amount of the insured’s
payroll, and if applicable, a factor reflecting the insured’s historical
loss experience (experience
modification factor). Premium rates vary by state according to the nature of the employees’ duties and
the business of the employer. The premium is computed by applying the applicable premium rate to
each class of the insured’s payroll after it has been appropriately classified. Total policy premium is
determined after applying an experience modification factor and a further adjustment, known as a
schedule rating adjustment, which may be made in certain circumstances, to increase or decrease the
policy premium. Schedule rating adjustments are made based on individual risk characteristics of the
insured and subject to maximum amounts as established in our premium rate filings.
Our premium rates are based upon actuarial analyses for each state in which we do business,
except in “administered pricing” states, primarily Florida and Wisconsin, where premium rates are set
by state insurance regulators.
In September 2012, the California legislature passed Senate Bill No. 863 (SB 863), which was
subsequently signed into law. SB 863 includes a number of reforms to California’s workers’
compensation system, including increases to permanent disability benefits offset by reforms designed
to reduce costs in the system. According to the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau, the
cost savings are expected to be achieved through a number of measures, including: the creation of a new
dispute resolution process outside of
the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board for medical
treatments and billing issues; new controls on liens; and calls for new fee schedules for physicians,
interpreters, ambulatory surgery centers, and home health care.
Any cost savings associated with SB 863 will be dependent on the implementation of the provisions
of the bill and are not included in our current rate filings. We will evaluate SB 863’s mandated
regulations as they are adopted and will adjust our rate filings as indicated. We can offer no assurance
that SB 863 will result in any cost savings for us or when any cost savings might occur.
In California, where we generated 59% of our in-force premiums, we set our premium rates based
upon actuarial analyses of current and anticipated loss trends with a goal of maintaining underwriting
profitability. Due to increasing loss costs, primarily medical cost inflation, we increased our filed
premium rates in California by a cumulative 41.3% since February 1, 2009.
10
23152
The following table sets forth the percentage increases to our filed California rates effective for
new and renewal policies incepting on or after the dates shown.
Effective Date
Premium Rate
Change
Filed in
California
February 1, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
August 15, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
March 15, 2010. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
March 15, 2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
September 15, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
June 15, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.0%
10.5
3.0
2.5
3.9
6.0
Losses and LAE Reserves and Loss Development
We are directly liable for losses and LAE under the terms of the insurance policies our insurance
subsidiaries write. Significant periods of time can elapse between the occurrence of an insured loss, the
reporting of the loss to us and our payment of that loss. Loss reserves are reflected on our consolidated
balance sheets under the line item caption “Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses.” Estimating
reserves is a complex process that involves a considerable degree of judgment by management and is
inherently uncertain. Loss reserve estimates represent a significant risk to our business and we attempt
to mitigate by frequently and routinely reviewing loss cost trends.
For a detailed description of our reserves,
the judgments, key assumptions and actuarial
methodologies that we use to estimate our reserves, and the role of our consulting actuary, see “Item
7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of
Operations—Critical Accounting Policies—Reserves for Losses and LAE” and Note 11 in the Notes to
our Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following tables show changes in the historical loss reserves, on a gross basis and net of
reinsurance, at December 31 for each of the 10 years prior to 2012 for EICN and ECIC, and for each of
the years ended December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2011 for EPIC and EAC. This information is
presented on a GAAP basis and the paid and reserve data is presented on a calendar year basis.
The top line of each table shows the net and gross reserves for unpaid losses and LAE recorded at
each year-end. Such amount represents an estimate of unpaid losses and LAE occurring in that year as
well as future payments on claims occurring in prior years. The upper portion of these tables (net and
gross cumulative amounts paid, respectively) present the cumulative amounts paid during subsequent
years on those losses for which reserves were carried as of each specific year. The lower portions (net
and gross reserves re-estimated, respectively) show the re-estimated amounts of the previously recorded
reserves based on experience as of the end of each succeeding year. The re-estimated amounts change
as more information becomes known about the actual losses for which the initial reserve was carried.
An adjustment to the carrying value of unpaid losses for a prior year will also be reflected in the
adjustments for each subsequent year. The gross cumulative redundancy (deficiency) line represents the
cumulative change in estimates since the initial reserve was established. It is equal to the difference
between the initial reserve and the latest re-estimated reserve amount. A redundancy means that the
original estimate was higher than the current estimate. A deficiency means that the current estimate is
higher than the original estimate.
11
93519
2002
2003
2004
2005
2007
2006
(in thousands)
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Net reserves for losses and LAE
Originally estimated . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 908,326 $ 962,457 $1,089,814 $1,208,481 $1,209,652 $1,217,069 $1,430,128 $1,373,153 $1,323,686 $1,331,523 $1,426,154
Net cumulative amounts paid as
of:
One year later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Three years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Four years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Five years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Six years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Seven years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eight years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nine years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ten years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net reserves re-estimated as of:
One year later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Three years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Four years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Five years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Six years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Seven years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eight years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nine years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ten years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cumulative redundancy
(deficiency):. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross reserves—December 31. . .
Reinsurance recoverable, gross . .
Net reserves—December 31 . . . . .
Gross re-estimated reserves . . . . .
Re-estimated reinsurance
recoverables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net re-estimated reserves . . . . . . .
Gross reserves for losses and
LAE
Originally estimated . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross cumulative amounts paid
as of:
One year later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Three years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Four years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Five years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Six years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Seven years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eight years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nine years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ten years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross reserves re-estimated as
of:
80,946
130,386
165,678
194,400
218,453
242,143
269,341
292,791
313,506
331,681
847,917
805,058
779,373
788,262
788,481
776,329
763,988
755,793
740,182
736,321
91,130
150,391
193,766
226,127
255,851
288,039
315,180
338,611
359,537
924,878
886,711
884,426
877,151
858,617
839,430
826,608
804,958
800,187
96,661
161,252
207,868
247,217
285,388
317,489
344,968
369,270
106,859
175,531
229,911
279,405
321,060
354,765
384,899
109,129
186,014
249,059
302,863
345,801
384,509
127,912
219,496
295,646
354,867
405,556
1,011,759
975,765
954,660
927,382
900,588
883,388
855,070
849,217
1,101,352
1,049,628
1,004,589
970,671
949,446
917,843
907,593
1,149,641
1,085,358
1,035,028
1,010,407
973,921
962,798
1,151,246
1,100,706
1,079,913
1,046,648
1,038,650
214,499
342,174
449,914
532,107
206,653
361,048
472,831
218,569
371,065
225,541
1,378,769
1,352,021
1,319,989
1,303,044
1,359,023
1,340,366
1,324,835
1,324,813
1,313,064
1,333,323
172,005
2,212,368
1,304,042
908,326
1,867,074
162,270
2,193,439
1,230,982
962,457
1,885,825
240,597
2,284,542
1,194,728
1,089,814
1,895,418
300,888
2,349,981
1,141,500
1,208,481
1,918,261
246,854
2,307,755
1,098,103
1,209,652
1,936,441
178,419
2,269,710
1,052,641
1,217,069
1,983,158
127,084
2,506,478
1,076,350
1,430,128
2,259,994
48,318
2,425,658
1,052,505
1,373,153
2,245,496
10,622
2,279,729
956,043
1,323,686
2,178,129
(1,800)
2,272,363
940,840
1,331,523
2,164,595
—
2,231,540
805,386
1,426,154
2,231,540
1,130,753
736,321
1,085,639
800,186
1,046,201
849,217
1,010,668
907,593
973,643
962,798
944,508
1,038,650
956,950
1,303,044
920,661
1,324,835
865,065
1,313,064
831,272
1,333,323
805,386
1,426,154
2,212,368
2,193,439
2,284,542
2,349,981
2,307,755
2,269,710
2,506,478
2,425,658
2,279,729
2,272,363
2,231,540
128,462
224,740
306,006
379,881
447,687
514,091
583,226
649,241
710,168
764,588
137,968
243,203
331,731
407,845
480,283
554,408
624,114
687,757
744,928
142,632
252,379
342,748
424,811
504,918
579,585
647,276
707,823
152,006
264,430
361,524
452,955
537,175
611,093
677,472
152,879
272,478
377,459
473,828
556,978
632,477
170,626
304,146
422,862
522,296
609,775
258,412
449,206
599,176
719,433
269,771
466,398
616,244
260,799
451,359
263,605
One year later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Two years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Three years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Four years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Five years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Six years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Seven years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Eight years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nine years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ten years later . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross cumulative redundancy:. . . $ 345,294 $ 307,614 $ 389,124 $ 431,720 $ 371,314 $ 286,552 $ 246,484 $ 180,162 $ 101,600 $ 107,768 $
2,121,867
2,072,205
2,024,790
2,032,553
2,028,211
2,012,943
2,000,610
1,986,694
1,970,936
1,867,074
2,148,829
2,088,437
2,084,764
2,072,428
2,050,124
2,030,945
2,011,945
1,990,684
1,885,825
2,178,514
2,138,648
2,110,481
2,078,223
2,050,937
2,027,187
2,001,243
1,895,418
2,233,077
2,170,292
2,119,764
2,084,854
2,053,869
2,027,729
1,918,261
2,233,176
2,162,695
2,110,615
2,074,466
2,050,177
1,936,441
2,200,689
2,148,399
2,110,230
2,094,050
1,983,158
2,470,746
2,405,837
2,386,424
2,259,994
2,373,479
2,370,646
2,245,496
2,299,653
2,178,129
2,164,595
—
12
20769
Reinsurance
Reinsurance is a transaction between insurance companies in which an original insurer, or ceding
company, remits a portion of its premiums to a reinsurer, or assuming company, as payment for the
reinsurer assuming a portion of the risk. Excess of loss reinsurance may be written in layers, in which a
reinsurer or group of reinsurers accepts a band of coverage in excess of a specified amount, or
retention, and up to a specified amount. Any liability exceeding the coverage limits of the reinsurance
program is retained by the ceding company. The ceding company also bears the credit risk of a
reinsurer’s insolvency. In accordance with general
industry practices, we purchase excess of loss
reinsurance to protect against the impact of large individual, irregularly- occurring losses, and aggregate
catastrophic losses from natural perils and terrorism. Such reinsurance reduces the magnitude of such
losses on our net income and the capital of our insurance subsidiaries.
Excess of Loss Reinsurance
Our current reinsurance program applies to all covered losses occurring between 12:01 a.m. July 1,
2012 and 12:01 a.m. July 1, 2013. The reinsurance program consists of one treaty covering excess of loss
and catastrophic loss events in five layers of coverage. Our reinsurance coverage is $195.0 million in
excess of our $5.0 million retention on a per occurrence basis, subject to a $2.0 million annual aggregate
deductible and certain exclusions. We are solely responsible for any losses we suffer above $200.0
million except those covered by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007
(TRIPRA). Covered losses which occur prior to expiration or cancellation of the agreement continue to
be obligations of the subscribing reinsurers, subject to the other conditions in the agreement. The
subscribing reinsurers may terminate the agreement only for our breach of the obligations of the
agreement. We are responsible for the losses if the subscribing reinsurer cannot or refuses to pay.
The agreement includes certain exclusions for which our subscribing reinsurers are not liable for
losses, including but not limited to losses arising from the following: reinsurance assumed by us under
obligatory reinsurance agreements; financial guarantee and insolvency; certain nuclear risks; liability as
a member, subscriber, or reinsurer of any pool, syndicate, or association, but not assigned risk plans;
liability arising from participation or membership in any insolvency fund; loss or damage caused by war
or civil unrest other than terrorism; certain workers’ compensation business covering persons employed
in Minnesota; and any loss or damage caused by any act of terrorism involving biological, chemical,
nuclear, or radioactive pollution or contamination. Our underwriting guidelines generally require that
insured risks fall within the coverage provided in the reinsurance program. Any risks written outside the
reinsurance program require executive review and approval.
The agreement provides that we, or any subscribing reinsurer, may request commutation of any
outstanding claim or claims 10 years after the effective date of termination or expiration of the
agreements and provide a mechanism for the parties to achieve valuation for commutation. We may
require a special commutation of the percentage share of any loss in the reinsurance program of any
subscribing reinsurer that is in runoff.
LPT Agreement
In 1999, the Fund entered into a retroactive 100% quota share reinsurance agreement through a
loss portfolio transfer transaction with third party reinsurers. The LPT Agreement commenced on June
30, 1999 and will remain in effect until all claims under the covered policies have closed, the agreement
is commuted, or terminated, upon the mutual agreement of the parties, or the reinsurers’ aggregate
maximum limit of liability is exhausted, whichever occurs earlier. The LPT Agreement does not provide
for any additional termination terms. On January 1, 2000, EICN assumed all of the assets, liabilities and
operations of the Fund, including the Fund’s rights and obligations associated with the LPT Agreement.
Under the LPT Agreement, the Fund initially ceded $1.5 billion in liabilities for the incurred but
unpaid losses and LAE related to claims incurred prior to July 1, 1995, for consideration of $775.0
million in cash. The LPT Agreement, which ceded to the reinsurers substantially all of the Fund’s
outstanding losses as of June 30, 1999 for claims with original dates of injury prior to July 1, 1995,
provides coverage for losses up to $2.0 billion, excluding losses for burial and transportation expenses.
13
31345
The estimated remaining liabilities subject to the LPT Agreement were approximately $672.3 million
and $807.5 million, as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively (See Note 3 in the Notes to our
Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail). Losses and LAE paid with respect to the LPT
Agreement totaled approximately $605.1 million and $569.9 million through December 31, 2012 and
2011, respectively.
The reinsurers agreed to assume responsibilities for the claims at the benefit levels which existed in
June 1999. The LPT Agreement required each reinsurer to place assets supporting the payment of
claims by them in a trust that requires collateral be held at a specified level. The level must not be less
than the outstanding reserve for losses and a loss expense allowance equal to 7% of estimated paid
losses discounted at a rate of 6%. If the assets held in trust fall below this threshold, we may require the
reinsurers to contribute additional assets to maintain the required minimum level of collateral. The
value of these assets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $1.0 billion and $0.9 billion, respectively.
The reinsurers currently party to the LPT Agreement are ACE Bermuda Insurance Limited, XL
Reinsurance Limited, and National Indemnity Company. The contract provides that during the term of
the agreement all reinsurers need to maintain a rating of not less than “A-” as determined by A.M.
Best. Currently, each of the reinsurers party to the LPT Agreement has a rating of A- or higher.
We account for the LPT Agreement as retroactive reinsurance. Upon entry into the LPT
Agreement, an initial deferred reinsurance gain was recorded as a liability on our consolidated balance
sheet as Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement (Deferred Gain). We are also entitled to receive a
contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement. The contingent profit commission is estimated
based on both actual paid results to date and projections of expected paid losses under the LPT
Agreement. As of December 31, 2012, our estimate of ultimate expected contingent profit commission
was $43.8 million.
Recoverability of Reinsurance
Reinsurance makes the assuming reinsurer liable to the ceding company to the extent of the
reinsurance; however,
it does not discharge the ceding company from its primary liability to its
policyholders in the event the reinsurer is unable to meet its obligations under such reinsurance. We
monitor the financial strength of our reinsurers and do not believe that we are currently exposed to any
material credit risk through our reinsurance arrangements because our reinsurance is recoverable from
generally large, well- capitalized reinsurance companies. At December 31, 2012, $1.0 billion was in trust
accounts for reinsurance related to the LPT Agreement and an additional $5.8 million, not related to
the LPT Agreement, was collateralized by cash or letters of credit.
14
06327
The following table provides certain information regarding our ceded reinsurance recoverables for
losses and LAE as of December 31, 2012.
Reinsurer
A.M. Best
Rating(1)
Total
Unpaid
Losses and
LAE
(in thousands)
Total
Paid
A+ $ 860
ACE Bermuda Insurance Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16
A+
ACE Property & Casualty Insurance Company . . . . . . . . . . .
51
A
Alterra Bermuda Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
—
B++
American Healthcare Indemnity Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
A
Aspen Insurance UK Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
43
A+
Everest Reinsurance Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
—
A-
Finial Reinsurance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9
A+
Hannover Rueckversicherung-AG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
49
A
Lloyds Syndicates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A+
71
Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A++ 4,731
National Indemnity Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
160
A
National Union Fire Insurance Co of Pittsburg. . . . . . . . . . . .
A+
26
Partner Reinsurance Europe plc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
135
A
Relia Star Life Insurance Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
39
A+
ST Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46
A+
Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A++
39
Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Ltd (US) . . . . . . . .
3,011
XL Re Limited. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A
168
All Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Various
$9,467
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 67,234
2,364
2,640
2,486
9,571
1,894
6,653
17,759
51,318
7,884
369,789
1,736
1,547
2,393
3,976
10,517
5,265
235,320
5,040
$805,386
Total
$ 68,094
2,380
2,691
2,486
9,584
1,937
6,653
17,768
51,367
7,955
374,520
1,896
1,573
2,528
4,015
10,563
5,304
238,331
5,208
$814,853
(1) A.M. Best’s highest financial strength ratings for insurance companies are “A++” and “A+” (superior), “A” and “A-”
(excellent), and “B++” and “B+” (good).
We review the aging of our reinsurance recoverables on a quarterly basis. At December 31, 2012,
1.8% of our reinsurance recoverables on paid losses were greater than 90 days overdue.
Inter-Company Reinsurance Pooling Agreement
Our insurance subsidiaries are parties to an inter-company pooling agreement for statutory
reporting purposes. Under this agreement, the results of underwriting operations of each company are
transferred to and combined with those of the others and the combined results are then reapportioned.
The allocations under the pooling agreement are as follows:
• EICN—53%
• ECIC—27%
• EPIC—10%
• EAC—10%
Transactions under the pooling agreement are eliminated in consolidation and have no impact on
our consolidated GAAP financial statements.
Investments
As of December 31, 2012, the total amortized cost of our investment portfolio was $2.0 billion and
the fair value of the portfolio was $2.1 billion. These investments provide a source of income, although
short-term changes in interest rates and our current investment strategies affect the amount of
investment income we earn and the fair value of our portfolio. Our investment strategy balances
consideration of duration, yield, and credit risk.
15
81628
We seek to maximize total
investment returns within the constraints of prudent portfolio
management. The asset allocation is reevaluated by the Finance Committee of the Board of Directors
on a quarterly basis. We employ Conning Asset Management (Conning) as our independent investment
manager. Conning follows our written investment guidelines based upon strategies approved by our
Board of Directors. We also utilize Conning’s investment advisory services. These services include
investment accounting and company modeling using Dynamic Financial Analysis (DFA). The DFA tool
is utilized in developing a tailored set of portfolio targets and objectives, which in turn, is used in
constructing an optimal portfolio.
Additional information regarding our investment portfolio, including our approach to managing
investment risk, is set forth under “Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated
Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Investments” and
“Item 7A—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.”
Marketing and Distribution
We market our workers’ compensation insurance products through independent local, regional, and
national agents and brokers; through our strategic partnerships and alliances, including our principal
partners ADP, Inc. (ADP) and Anthem; and through relationships with national, regional, and local
trade groups and associations, including the National Federation of Independent Business.
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers
We establish and maintain strong, long-term relationships with independent insurance agencies that
actively market our products and services. We offer ease of doing business, provide responsive service,
and pay competitive commissions. Our sales representatives and underwriters work closely with
independent agencies to market and underwrite our business. This results in enhanced understanding of
the businesses and risks we underwrite and the needs of prospective customers. We do not delegate
underwriting authority to agents or brokers. We are not dependent on any one agency and the loss of
any one agency would not be material.
The following table sets forth the number of independent agencies that marketed and sold our
in-force premiums generated by those agencies, and the
insurance products,
percentage of in-force premiums generated by our largest agency.
the percentage of
At December 31,
2011
2010
2012
Number of independent agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage of in-force premiums generated by independent agencies . . . . . . . . . .
Percentage of in-force premiums generated by our largest agency. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4,120
3,742
2,610
77.0% 75.7% 77.2%
0.9% 0.9% 1.2%
Strategic Partnerships and Alliances
We have developed important strategic relationships with companies that have established sales
forces and common markets to expand our reach to alternative distribution channels. We jointly market
our workers’ compensation insurance products with ADP’s payroll services and with Anthem’s group
health insurance plans. Additionally, we have entered into other strategic partnerships and alliances
with payroll service providers and insurance brokerages. These relationships have allowed us to access
new customers and to write attractive business in an efficient manner, and we are actively pursuing
additional strategic partnership and alliance opportunities. We do not delegate underwriting authority
to our strategic distribution partners.
Our strategic partnerships and alliances generated 22.6%, 23.8%, and 22.1% of our in-force
premiums as of December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
ADP. ADP is the largest payroll services provider in the United States servicing small and
medium-sized businesses. As part of its services, ADP sells our workers’ compensation insurance
product along with its payroll and accounting services through its insurance agency and field sales staff
primarily to small businesses. The majority of business written is through ADP’s small business unit,
16
74599
which has accounts of 1 to 50 employees. We pay ADP fees that are a percentage of premiums received
for services provided through the ADP program.
ADP markets workers’ compensation insurance using its the Pay-by-Pay(cid:4) (PBP) program. An
advantage of ADP’s PBP program is that the policyholder is not required to pay a deposit at the
inception of the policy. The workers’ compensation premium is deducted each time ADP processes the
policyholders’ payrolls along with its appropriate federal, state, and local taxes. These characteristics of
the PBP program enable us to competitively price the workers’ compensation insurance written as a
part of that program.
Our relationship with ADP is non-exclusive; however, we believe we are a key strategic partner of
ADP for our selected markets and classes of business. Our agreement with ADP may be terminated at
any time by either party without cause upon 120 days notice.
Anthem. The Integrated MediCompSM joint marketing program is an exclusive relationship that
allows us to combine our workers’ compensation product with Anthem’s group health coverage through
a single bill in most cases. We believe that, in general, when businesses purchase this combination of
coverage, their employees make fewer workers’ compensation claims because those employees are
insured for non-work related illnesses or injuries and thus are less likely to seek treatment for a non-
work related illness or injury through their employers’ workers’ compensation insurance policy. As the
largest group health carrier in California, Anthem has negotiated favorable rates with its medical
providers and associated facilities, which we benefit from through reduced claims costs. We pay
Anthem fees that are a percentage of premiums received for services provided under the Integrated
MediComp program.
Our agreement with Anthem automatically renews for one-year periods unless terminated by
either party with at least 60 days notice prior to the expiration of the then current term and has been
renewed through January 1, 2014.
Competition and Market Conditions
The insurance industry is highly competitive, and there is significant competition in the national
workers’ compensation industry that is based on price and quality of services. We compete with other
specialty workers’ compensation carriers, state agencies, multi-line insurance companies, professional
employer organizations, third-party administrators, self-insurance funds, and state insurance pools.
Many of our competitors are significantly larger, are more widely known, and/or possess considerably
greater financial resources. Our primary competitors in California are The Hartford Financial Services
Group, Inc., Travelers Insurance Group Holdings, Inc., Zurich Insurance Group Ltd., and Berkshire
Hathaway Homestate Companies.
Our competitive advantages include our strong reputation in the markets in which we operate,
excellent claims service, experienced and professional independent agents and brokers, our strategic
partnerships and alliances, and the ease of doing business with us. We also strive to maintain the high
quality of our care management services, and to provide consultation services to our agents and
insureds on loss prevention and loss reduction strategies. We also compete on price, based on our
actuarial analysis of current and anticipated loss cost trends.
The workers’ compensation sector continued to see average medical and indemnity claims costs
increase in 2011, the most recent year for which industry data is available. We continue to have
concerns related to the volatility and uncertainty in the financial markets and economic conditions
generally.
Regulation
State Insurance Regulation
Insurance companies are subject to regulation and supervision by the insurance regulator in the
state in which they are domiciled and, to a lesser extent, other states in which they conduct business.
Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to regulation by the states in which our insurance subsidiaries are
supervisory, and
domiciled or
transact business. These state agencies have broad regulatory,
17
90792
administrative powers, including among other things, the power to grant and revoke licenses to transact
business, license agencies, set the standards of solvency to be met and maintained, determine the nature
of, and limitations on, investments and dividends, approve policy forms and rates in some states,
periodically examine financial statements, determine the form and content of required financial
statements, set the rates that we may charge in some states, and periodically examine market conduct.
Detailed annual and quarterly financial statements, prepared in accordance with statutory
accounting principles (SAP), and other reports are required to be filed with the insurance regulator
in each of the states in which we are licensed to transact business. The California Department of
Insurance (California DOI), Florida Office of Insurance Regulation (Florida OIR), and Nevada
Division of Insurance (Nevada DOI) periodically examine the statutory financial statements of their
respective domiciliary insurance companies. In 2012, the California DOI, Florida OIR, and Nevada
DOI completed financial examinations for ECIC, EPIC and EAC, and EICN, respectively. There were
no material findings.
Many states have laws and regulations that limit an insurer’s ability to withdraw from a particular
market. For example, states may limit an insurer’s ability to cancel or not renew policies. Furthermore,
certain states prohibit an insurer from withdrawing one or more lines of business from the state, except
pursuant to a plan that is approved by the state insurance regulator. The state insurance regulator may
disapprove a plan that may lead to market disruption. We are subject to laws and regulations of this
type, and these laws and regulations may restrict our ability to exit unprofitable markets.
Holding Company Regulation. Nearly all states have enacted legislation that regulates insurance
holding company systems. Each insurance company in a holding company system is required to register
with the insurance regulator of its state of domicile and furnish information concerning the operations
of companies within the holding company system that may materially affect
the operations,
management or financial condition of the insurers within the system. All transactions within a holding
company system affecting an insurer must have fair and reasonable terms, the charges or fees for
services performed must be reasonable, the insurer’s total statutory surplus following any transaction
must be both reasonable in relation to its outstanding liabilities and adequate for its needs, and are
subject to other standards and requirements established by law and regulation. Notice to state insurance
regulators is required prior to the consummation of certain affiliated and other transactions involving
our insurance subsidiaries and such transactions may be disapproved by the state insurance regulators.
Pursuant to applicable insurance holding company laws, EICN is required to register with the
Nevada DOI, ECIC is required to register with the California DOI, and EPIC and EAC are required to
register with the Florida OIR. Under these laws, the respective state insurance departments may
examine us at any time, require disclosure of material transactions and require prior notice for, or
approval of, certain transactions.
Change of Control. Our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled in Florida, California and Nevada.
The insurance laws of these states generally require that any person seeking to acquire control of a
domestic insurance company obtain the prior approval of the state’s insurance commissioner. In
Florida, “control” is generally presumed to exist through the direct or indirect ownership of 5% or
more of the voting securities of a domestic insurance company or of any entity that controls a domestic
insurance company. In California and Nevada, “control” is presumed to exist through the direct or
indirect ownership of 10% or more of the voting securities of a domestic insurance company or of any
entity that controls a domestic insurance company. In addition, insurance laws in many states in which
we are licensed require pre-notification to the state’s insurance commissioner of a change in control of a
non-domestic insurance company licensed in those states.
Statutory Accounting and Solvency Regulations. State insurance regulators closely monitor the
financial condition of insurance companies reflected in financial statements based on SAP and can
impose significant financial and operating restrictions on an insurance company that becomes financially
impaired under SAP guidelines. State insurance regulators can generally impose restrictions or
conditions on the activities of a financially impaired insurance company, including: the transfer or
disposition of assets; the withdrawal of funds from bank accounts; payment of dividends or other
distributions; the extension of credit or the advancement of loans; and investments of funds, including
business acquisitions or combinations.
18
06775
Financial, Dividend, and Investment Restrictions. State laws require insurance companies to
maintain minimum levels of surplus and place limits on the amount of premiums a company may write
based on the amount of that company’s surplus. These limitations may restrict the rate at which our
insurance operations can grow.
State laws also require insurance companies to establish reserves for payments of policyholder
liabilities and impose restrictions on the kinds of assets in which insurance companies may invest. These
restrictions may require us to invest in assets more conservatively than we would if we were not subject
to state law restrictions and may prevent us from obtaining as high a return on our assets as we might
otherwise be able to realize absent the restrictions.
The ability of EHI to pay dividends on our common stock and to pay other expenses will be
dependent to a significant extent upon the ability of EICN and EPIC to pay dividends to their
immediate holding company, Employers Group, Inc. (EGI) and, in turn, the ability of EGI to pay
dividends to EHI. Additional information regarding financial, dividend, and investment restrictions is
set forth in Note 17 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Insurance Assessments. All of the states where our insurance subsidiaries are licensed to transact
business require property and casualty insurers doing business within the state to pay various insurance
assessments. We accrue a liability for estimated insurance assessments as direct premiums are written,
losses are recorded, or as other events occur in accordance with various states’ laws and regulations, and
defer these costs and recognize them as an expense as the related premiums are earned. Various
mechanisms exist
these states for assessed insurance companies to recover certain
assessments. Additional information regarding insurance assessments is set forth in Note 14 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements.
in some of
Pooling Arrangements. As a condition to conduct business in some states, insurance companies are
required to participate in mandatory workers’ compensation shared market mechanisms, or pooling
arrangements, which provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage to private businesses that are
otherwise unable to obtain coverage due, for example, to their prior loss experiences.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC). NAIC is a group formed by state
insurance regulators to discuss issues and formulate policy with respect to regulation, reporting, and
accounting of and by U.S. insurance companies. Although the NAIC has no legislative authority and
insurance companies are at all times subject to the laws of their respective domiciliary states and, to a
lesser extent, other states in which they conduct business, the NAIC is influential in determining the
form in which such laws are enacted. Model Insurance Laws, Regulations and Guidelines (Model Laws)
have been promulgated by the NAIC as a minimum standard by which state regulatory systems and
regulations are measured. Adoption of state laws that provide for substantially similar regulations to
those described in the Model Laws is a requirement for accreditation of state insurance regulatory
agencies by the NAIC.
Under the Model Laws, insurers are required to maintain minimum levels of capital based on their
investments and operations. These risk-based capital (RBC) requirements provide a standard by which
regulators can assess the adequacy of an insurance company’s capital and surplus relative to its
operations. An insurance company must maintain capital and surplus of at least 200% of the RBC
computed by the NAIC’s RBC model, known as the “Authorized Control Level” of RBC. At
December 31, 2012, each of our insurance subsidiaries had total adjusted capital in excess of the
minimum RBC requirements.
The key financial ratios of the NAIC’s Insurance Regulatory Information System (IRIS) were
developed to assist state regulators in overseeing the financial condition of insurance companies. These
ratios are reviewed by financial examiners of the NAIC and state insurance regulators for the purposes
of detecting financial distress and preventing insolvency and to select those companies that merit
highest priority in the allocation of the regulators’ resources. IRIS identifies 13 key financial ratios and
specifies a “usual range” for each. Departure from the usual ranges on four or more of the ratios can
lead to inquiries from individual state insurance regulators as to certain aspects of an insurer’s business.
None of our insurance subsidiaries are currently subject to any action by any state regulator with
respect to IRIS ratios.
19
85464
Federal Regulation
We are affected by a variety of federal legislative and regulatory measures and judicial decisions.
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (the 2002 Act) was enacted in November 2002. The
principal purpose of the 2002 Act was to create a role for the Federal government in the provision of
insurance for losses sustained in connection with foreign terrorism. The 2002 Act was extended by
TRIPRA, with the inclusion of some adjustments. The workers’ compensation laws of the various states
generally do not permit the exclusion of coverage for losses arising from terrorism or nuclear,
biological, chemical, or radiological attacks. In addition, we are not able to limit our losses arising from
any one catastrophe or any one claimant. Our reinsurance policies exclude coverage for losses arising
out of nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attacks. Under TRIPRA, federal protection may be
provided to the insurance industry for certain acts of foreign and domestic terrorism, including nuclear,
biological, chemical or radiological attacks.
The impacts of any future terrorist acts are unpredictable, and the ultimate impact on our
insurance subsidiaries, if any, of losses from any future terrorist acts will depend upon their nature,
extent, location, and timing. We monitor the geographic concentration of our policyholders to help
mitigate the risk of loss from terrorist acts.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in our common stock involves risks. In evaluating our company, you should carefully
consider the risks described below, together with all the information included or incorporated by
reference in this annual report. The risks facing our company include, but are not limited to, those
described below. Additional risks that we are not presently aware of or that we currently believe are
immaterial may also impair our business operations. The occurrence of one or more of these events
could significantly and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash
flows, and stock price and you could lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Related to Our Business
Difficult conditions in the economy and capital markets may adversely affect our profitability,
financial condition, and results of operations.
The financial market volatility experienced worldwide that began in 2008 continued into 2012.
Although the U.S. and foreign governments have taken various actions to stabilize financial markets, it
is uncertain whether those actions will be effective over the long-term. Financial market volatility could
continue, resulting in a prolonged negative economic impact.
We cannot predict future market conditions or their impact on our stock price,
investment
portfolio, or our workers’ compensation business. In addition, continuing financial market volatility and
economic downturn could have a material adverse affect on our insureds, agents, claimants, reinsurers,
vendors, and competitors. Depending on financial market conditions, we could incur additional realized
and unrealized losses in the future in our investment portfolio, which could have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Our liability for losses and LAE is based on estimates and may be inadequate to cover our actual
losses and expenses.
We must establish and maintain reserves for our estimated losses and LAE. We establish loss
reserves in our financial statements that represent an estimate of amounts needed to pay and administer
claims with respect to insured claims that have occurred, including claims that have occurred but have
not yet been reported to us. Loss reserves are estimates of the ultimate cost of individual claims based on
actuarial estimation techniques, are inherently uncertain, and do not represent an exact measure of liability.
Several factors contribute to the uncertainty in establishing estimated losses, including the length of
time to settle long-term, severe cases, claim cost inflation (deflation) trends, and uncertainties in the
long-term outcome of legislative reforms. Judgment is required in applying actuarial techniques to
determine the relevance of historical payment and claim settlement patterns under current facts and
circumstances. In certain states, we have a relatively short operating history and must rely on a
combination of industry experience and our specific experience regarding claims emergence and
20
85462
payment patterns, medical cost inflation, and claim cost trends, adjusted for future anticipated changes
in claims-related and economic trends, as well as regulatory and legislative changes, to establish our
best estimate of reserves for losses and LAE. As we receive new information and update our
assumptions over time regarding the ultimate liability, our loss reserves may prove to be inadequate to
cover our actual losses. Any changes in these estimates could be material and could have an adverse
effect on our results of operations and financial condition during the period the changes are made.
The insurance business is subject to extensive regulation and legislative changes, which impact the
manner in which we operate our business.
Our insurance business is subject to extensive regulation by the applicable state agencies in the
jurisdictions in which we operate, most significantly by the insurance regulators in California, Florida,
and Nevada, the states in which our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled. As of December 31, 2012,
over one-half of our in-force premiums were generated in California. Accordingly, we are particularly
affected by regulation in California. The passage of any form of rate regulation in California could
impair our ability to operate profitably in California, and any such impairment could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
More generally,
insurance regulators have broad regulatory powers designed to protect
policyholders and claimants, not stockholders or other investors. Regulations vary from state to state,
but typically address or include:
• standards of solvency, including RBC measurements;
• restrictions on the nature, quality, and concentration of investments;
• restrictions on the types of terms that we can include in the insurance policies we offer;
• mandates that may affect wage replacement and medical care benefits paid under the workers’
compensation system;
• requirements for the handling and reporting of claims and procedures for adjusting claims;
• restrictions on the way rates are developed and premiums are determined;
• the manner in which agents may be appointed;
• establishment of liabilities for unearned premiums, unpaid losses and LAE, and for other
purposes;
• limitations on our ability to transact business with affiliates;
• mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures involving our insurance subsidiaries;
• licensing requirements and approvals that affect our ability to do business;
• compliance with all applicable privacy laws;
• potential assessments for the settlement of covered claims under insurance policies issued by
impaired, insolvent, or failed insurance companies or other assessments imposed by regulatory
agencies; and
• the amount of dividends that our insurance subsidiaries may pay to EGI and, in turn, the ability
of EGI to pay dividends to EHI.
Workers’ compensation insurance is statutorily provided for in all of the states in which we do
business. State laws and regulations specify the form and content of policy coverage and the rights and
benefits that are available to injured workers,
their representatives, and medical providers. In
“administered pricing” states, insurance rates are set by the state insurance regulators and are adjusted
periodically. Rate competition is generally not permitted in these states. Of the states in which we
currently operate, Florida, Wisconsin, and Idaho are administered pricing states. Additionally, we are
exposed to the risk that other states in which we operate will adopt administered pricing laws.
Legislation and regulation impact our ability to investigate fraud and other abuses of the workers’
compensation system in the states in which we do business. Our relationships with medical providers are
also impacted by legislation and regulation, including penalties for failure to make timely payments.
Federal legislation typically does not directly impact our workers’ compensation business, but our
business can be indirectly affected by changes in healthcare, occupational safety and health, and tax and
21
58831
financial regulations. Since healthcare costs are the largest component of our loss costs, we may be
impacted by changes in healthcare legislation, such as the Affordable Care Act, which could effect
healthcare costs in the future. There is also the possibility of federal regulation of insurance.
This extensive regulation of our business may affect the cost or demand for our products and may
limit our ability to obtain rate increases or to take other actions that we might desire to maintain our
profitability. In addition, we may be unable to maintain all required approvals or comply fully with
applicable laws and regulations, or the relevant governmental authority’s interpretation of such laws
and regulations. If that were to occur, we might lose our ability to conduct business in certain
jurisdictions. Further, changes in the level of regulation of the insurance industry or changes in laws or
regulations or interpretations by regulatory authorities could impact our operations, require us to bear
additional costs of compliance, and impact our profitability.
If we fail to price our insurance policies appropriately, our business competitiveness, financial
condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Premiums are based on the particular class of business and our estimates of expected losses and
LAE and other expenses related to the policies we underwrite. We analyze many factors when pricing a
policy, including the policyholder’s prior loss history and industry classification. Inaccurate information
regarding a policyholder’s past claims experience could put us at risk for mispricing our policies, which
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. For
example, when initiating coverage on a policyholder, we must rely on the information provided by the
policyholder or the policyholder’s previous insurer(s) to properly estimate future claims expense. In
order to set premium rates accurately, we must utilize an appropriate pricing model which correctly
assesses risks based on their individual characteristics and takes into account actual and projected
industry characteristics.
Our concentration in California ties our performance to the business, economic, demographic, natural
perils, competitive, and regulatory conditions in that state.
Our business is concentrated in California, where we generated 59% of our in-force premiums as of
December 31, 2012. Accordingly, unfavorable business, economic, demographic, natural perils,
competitive, or regulatory conditions in California could negatively impact our business.
California has been greatly affected by the overall economic downturn and tightening of the credit
markets. The economic condition of the state has resulted in high unemployment and decreased
payrolls. In addition, many California businesses are dependent on tourism revenues, which are, in turn,
dependent on a robust economy. The downturn in the national economy and the economy of California,
or any other event that causes deterioration in tourism, could adversely impact small businesses, such as
restaurants, that we have targeted as customers. The departure from California or insolvency of a
significant number of small businesses could also have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and results of operations. California is also exposed to climate and environmental changes,
natural perils such as earthquakes, along with the possibility of pandemics or terrorist acts. Accordingly,
we could suffer losses as a result of catastrophic events in this state. Because our business is
concentrated in this manner, we may be exposed to economic and regulatory risks or risk from natural
perils that are greater than the risks associated with companies with greater geographic diversification.
We rely on independent insurance agents and brokers.
We market and sell our insurance products primarily through independent, non-exclusive insurance
agents and brokers. These agents and brokers are not obligated to promote our products and can and
do sell our competitors’ products. In addition, these agents and brokers may find it easier to promote
the broader range of programs of some of our competitors than to promote our single-line workers’
compensation insurance products. The loss of a number of our independent agents and brokers or the
failure or inability of these agents to successfully market our insurance programs could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We rely on relationships with our principal strategic partners.
We have agreements with two principal strategic partners, ADP and Anthem, to market and
service our insurance products through their sales forces and insurance agencies. ADP and Anthem
generated 10.3% and 10.1%, respectively, of our total in-force premiums as of December 31, 2012. Our
22
09319
agreement with ADP is not exclusive, and ADP may terminate the agreement without cause upon 120
days notice. Although our distribution agreements with Anthem are exclusive, Anthem may terminate
its agreements with us if the A.M. Best financial strength rating of ECIC is downgraded and we are not
able to provide coverage through a carrier with an A.M. Best financial strength rating of “B++” or
better. Anthem may also terminate its agreements with us without cause upon 60 days notice. The
termination of any of our principal strategic partnership agreements, our failure to maintain good
relationships with our principal strategic partners, or their failure to successfully market our products
may materially reduce our revenues and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
In addition, we are subject to the risk that our principal strategic partners may face financial difficulties,
reputational issues, or problems with respect to their own products and services, which may lead to
decreased sales of our products and services. Moreover, if either of our principal strategic partners
consolidates or aligns itself with another company or changes its products that are currently offered
with our workers’ compensation insurance product, we may lose business or suffer decreased revenues.
We are also subject to credit risk with respect to ADP and Anthem, as they collect premiums on
our behalf for the workers’ compensation products that are marketed together with their own products.
Any failure to remit such premiums to us or to remit such amounts on a timely basis could have an
adverse effect on our results of operations.
A downgrade in our financial strength rating could reduce the amount of business that we are able to
write or result in the termination of certain of our agreements with our strategic partners.
Rating agencies rate insurance companies based on financial strength as an indication of an ability
to pay claims. Our insurance subsidiaries are currently assigned a group letter rating of “A-” (Excellent)
by A.M. Best, which is the rating agency that we believe has the most influence on our business. This
rating is assigned to companies that, in the opinion of A.M. Best, have demonstrated an excellent
overall performance when compared to industry standards. A.M. Best considers “A-” rated companies
to have an excellent ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders. This rating does not refer
to our ability to meet non-insurance obligations.
The financial strength ratings of A.M. Best and other rating agencies are subject to periodic review
using, among other things, proprietary capital adequacy models, and are subject to revision or
withdrawal at any time. Insurance financial strength ratings are directed toward the concerns of
policyholders and insurance agents and are not intended for the protection of investors or as a
recommendation to buy, hold, or sell securities. Our competitive position relative to other companies is
determined in part by our financial strength rating. A reduction in our A.M. Best rating could adversely
affect the amount of business we could write, as well as our relationships with independent agents and
brokers and strategic partners.
In view of the difficulties experienced recently by many financial institutions, including some of our
competitors in the insurance industry, we believe that it is possible that external rating agencies, such as
A.M. Best, may increase their scrutiny of financial institutions, increase the frequency and scope of
their reviews, request additional information from the companies that they rate, including additional
information regarding the valuation of investment securities held, and may adjust upward the capital
and other requirements employed in their models for maintenance of certain rating levels. We cannot
predict what actions rating agencies may take, or what actions we may take in response to the actions of
rating agencies.
One of our strategic partners, Anthem, requires that we offer workers’ compensation coverage
through a carrier with a financial strength rating of “B++” or better by A.M. Best. We currently offer
this coverage through our subsidiary, ECIC. Our inability to offer such coverage could cause a
reduction in the number of policies we write. If ECIC’s financial strength rating were downgraded, and
we were not able to enter into an agreement to provide coverage through a carrier rated “B++” or
better by A.M. Best, Anthem could terminate its distribution agreements with us. We cannot assure you
that we would be able to enter such an agreement if our rating was downgraded.
23
34679
If we are unable to obtain reinsurance or collect on ceded reinsurance, our ability to write new policies
and to renew existing policies could be adversely affected and our financial condition and results of
operations could be materially adversely affected.
At December 31, 2012, we had $815 million of reinsurance recoverables for paid and unpaid losses
and LAE of which $9 million was due to us on paid claims.
We purchase reinsurance to protect us against the costs of severe claims and catastrophic events,
including natural perils and acts of terrorism, excluding nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological
events. On July 1, 2012, we entered into a new reinsurance program that is effective through June 30,
2013. The reinsurance program consists of one treaty covering excess of loss and catastrophic loss events
in five layers of coverage. Our reinsurance coverage is $195 million in excess of our $5 million retention
on a per occurrence basis, subject to a $2 million annual aggregate deductible and certain exclusions.
The availability, amount, and cost of reinsurance depend on market conditions and our loss
experience and may vary significantly. We cannot be certain that our reinsurance agreements will be
renewed or replaced prior to their expiration upon terms satisfactory to us. If we are unable to renew or
replace our reinsurance agreements upon terms satisfactory to us, our net liability on individual risks
would increase and we would have greater exposure to catastrophic losses, which could have a material
adverse affect on our financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, we are subject to credit risk with respect to our reinsurers, and they may refuse to pay
or delay payment of losses we cede to them. We remain liable to our policyholders even if we are
unable to make recoveries that we believe we are entitled to under our reinsurance contracts. Losses
may not be recovered from our reinsurers until claims are paid and, in the case of long- term workers’
compensation cases, the creditworthiness of our reinsurers may change before we can recover amounts
that we are entitled to. The inability of any of our reinsurers to meet their financial obligations could
have a material adverse affect on our financial condition and results of operations.
We obtained reinsurance covering the losses incurred prior to July 1, 1995, and we could be liable for
all of those losses if the coverage provided by the LPT Agreement proves inadequate or we fail to
collect from the reinsurers party to such transaction.
On January 1, 2000, EICN assumed all of the assets, liabilities, and operations of the Fund,
including losses incurred by the Fund prior to such date. EICN also assumed the Fund’s rights and
obligations associated with the LPT Agreement that the Fund entered into with third party reinsurers
with respect to its losses incurred prior to July 1, 1995, see “Item 1—Business—Reinsurance—LPT
Agreement.” We could be liable for all of those losses if the coverage provided by the LPT Agreement
proves inadequate or we fail to collect from the reinsurers party to such transaction. As of December
31, 2012, the estimated remaining liabilities subject to the LPT Agreement were $672 million. If we are
unable to collect on these reinsurance recoverables, our financial condition and results of operations
could be materially adversely affected.
The reinsurers under the LPT Agreement agreed to assume responsibilities for the claims at the
benefit levels which existed in June 1999. Accordingly, if the Nevada legislature were to increase the
benefits payable for the pre-July 1, 1995 claims, we would be responsible for the increased benefit costs
to the extent of the legislative increase. If the credit rating of any of the third party reinsurers that are
party to the LPT Agreement were to fall below ”A-” as determined by A.M. Best or one of the
reinsurers becomes insolvent, we would be responsible for replacing any such reinsurer or would be
liable for the claims that otherwise would have been transferred to such reinsurer. For example, in 2002,
the rating of one of the original reinsurers under the LPT Agreement, Gerling Global International
Reinsurance Company Ltd. (Gerling), dropped below the mandatory ”A-” rating to ”B+.” Accordingly,
we entered into an agreement to replace Gerling with National Indemnity Company at a cost to us of
$33 million. We can give no assurance that circumstances requiring us to replace one or more of the
current reinsurers under the LPT Agreement will not occur in the future, that we will be successful in
replacing such reinsurer or reinsurers in such circumstances, or that the cost of such replacement or
replacements will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
The LPT Agreement also required the reinsurers to each place assets supporting the payment of
claims by them in individual trusts that require that collateral be held at a specified level. The
collateralization level must not be less than the outstanding reserve for losses and a loss expense
24
76567
allowance equal to 7% of estimated paid losses discounted at a rate of 6%. If the assets held in trust fall
below this threshold, we can require the reinsurers to contribute additional assets to maintain the
required minimum level. The value of these assets at December 31, 2012 was $1.0 billion. If the value of
the collateral in the trusts drops below the required minimum level and the reinsurers are unable to
contribute additional assets, we could be responsible for substituting a new reinsurer or paying those
claims without the benefit of reinsurance. One of the reinsurers has collateralized its obligations under
the LPT Agreement by placing shares of stock of a publicly held corporation, with a value of $804
million at December 31, 2012, in a trust to secure the reinsurer’s obligation of $370 million. The value
of this collateral is subject to fluctuations in the market price of such stock. The other reinsurers have
placed treasury and fixed maturity securities in trusts to collateralize their obligations.
Intense competition and the fact that we write only a single line of insurance could adversely affect our
ability to sell policies at rates we deem adequate.
The market for workers’ compensation insurance products is highly competitive. Competition in
our business is based on many factors, including premiums charged, services provided, financial ratings
assigned by independent rating agencies, speed of claims payments, reputation, policyholder dividends,
perceived financial strength, and general experience. In some cases, our competitors offer lower priced
products than we do. If our competitors offer more competitive premiums, dividends or payment plans,
services or commissions to independent agents, brokers, and other distributors, we could lose market
share or have to reduce our premium rates, which could adversely affect our profitability. We compete
with regional and national
insurance companies, professional employer organizations, third-party
administrators, self-insured employers, and state insurance funds. Our main competitors vary from state
to state, but are usually those companies that offer a full range of services in underwriting, loss control,
and claims. We compete on the basis of the services that we offer to our policyholders and on ease of
doing business rather than solely on price.
Many of our competitors are significantly larger and possess greater financial, marketing, and
management resources than we do. Some of our competitors benefit financially by not being subject to
federal income tax. Intense competitive pressure on prices can result from the actions of even a single
large competitor. Competitors with more surplus than us have the potential to expand in our markets
more quickly than we can. Greater financial resources also permit an insurer to gain market share
through more competitive pricing, even if that pricing results in reduced underwriting margins or an
underwriting loss.
Many of our competitors are multi-line carriers that can price the workers’ compensation insurance
they offer at a loss in order to obtain other lines of business at a profit. This creates a competitive
disadvantage for us, as we only offer a single line of insurance. For example, a business may find it
more efficient or less expensive to purchase multiple lines of commercial insurance coverage from a
single carrier.
The property and casualty insurance industry is cyclical in nature and is characterized by periods of
so-called “soft” market conditions in which premium rates are stable or falling, insurance is readily
available, and insurers’ profits decline, and by periods of so-called “hard” market conditions, in which
rates rise, insurance may be more difficult to find, and insurers’ profits increase. According to the
Insurance Information Institute, since 1970, the property and casualty insurance industry experienced
hard market conditions from 1975 to 1978, 1984 to 1987, and 2001 to 2004. Although the financial
performance of an individual
insurance company is dependent on its own specific business
characteristics, the profitability of most workers’ compensation insurance companies generally tends
to follow this cyclical market pattern. We believe the workers’ compensation industry currently has
excess underwriting capacity resulting in lower rate levels and smaller profit margins.
Because of cyclicality in the workers’ compensation market, due in large part to competition,
capacity, and general economic factors, we cannot predict the timing or duration of changes in the
market cycle. We continue to experience price competition in our target markets. This cyclical pattern
has in the past and could in the future adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
If we are unable to compete effectively, our business, financial condition, and results of operations
could be materially adversely affected.
25
69112
We may be unable to realize our investment objectives and economic conditions in the financial
markets could lead to investment losses.
Investment income is an important component of our revenue and net income. Our investment
portfolio is managed by an independent asset manager that operates under investment guidelines
approved by our Board of Directors. Although these guidelines stress diversification and capital
preservation, our investments are subject to a variety of risks that are beyond our control, including
risks related to general economic conditions, interest rate fluctuations, and market volatility. Interest
rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary policies and domestic and
international economic and political conditions. These and other factors affect the capital markets and,
consequently, the value of our investment portfolio.
We are exposed to significant financial risks related to the capital markets, including the risk of
potential economic loss principally arising from adverse changes in the fair value of
financial
instruments. The major components of market risk affecting us are interest rate risk, credit spread risk,
credit risk, and equity price risk. For more information regarding market risk, interest rate risk, or
equity price risk, see “Item 7A—Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.”
The outlook for our investment income is dependent on the future direction of interest rates,
maturity schedules, and cash flow from operations that is available for investment. The fair values of
fixed maturity securities that are “available-for-sale” fluctuate with changes in interest rates and cause
fluctuations in our stockholders’ equity. Any significant decline in our investment income or the value
of our investments as a result of changes in interest rates, deterioration in the credit of companies in
which we have invested, decreased dividend payments, general market conditions, or events that have
an adverse impact on any particular industry or geographic region in which we hold significant
investments could have an adverse effect on our net income and, as a result, on our stockholders’ equity
and policyholder surplus.
The valuation of our investments, including the determination of the amount of impairments,
include estimates and assumptions and could result in changes to investment valuations that may
adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. The use of internally developed
valuation techniques may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts of our investments
and our financial condition.
Additionally, we regularly review our entire investment portfolio, including the identification of
other-than-temporary declines in fair value. The determination of the amount of impairments taken on
our investments is based on our periodic evaluation and assessment of our investments and known and
inherent risks associated with the various asset classes. There can be no assurance that we have
accurately determined the level of other-than-temporary impairments reflected in our financial
statements and additional impairments may need to be taken in the future. Historical trends may not be
indicative of future impairments.
We may require additional capital in the future, which may not be available to us or may be available
only on unfavorable terms.
Our
future capital
requirements will depend on many factors,
including state regulatory
requirements, our ability to write new business successfully, and to establish premium rates and
reserves at levels sufficient to cover losses. If we have to raise additional capital, equity or debt
financing may not be available on terms that are favorable to us. In the case of equity financings, there
could be dilution to our stockholders and the securities may have rights, preferences, and privileges
senior to our common stock. In the case of debt financings, we may be subject to covenants that restrict
our ability to freely operate our business. If we cannot obtain adequate capital on favorable terms or at
all, we may be unable to implement our future growth or operating plans and our business, financial
condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
The capital and credit markets continue to experience volatility and disruption that have negatively
affected market liquidity conditions. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on
stock prices and limited the availability of credit for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’
underlying financial strength. As a result, we may be forced to delay raising capital or be unable to raise
capital on favorable terms, or at all, which could decrease our profitability, significantly reduce our
financial flexibility, and cause rating agencies to reevaluate our financial strength ratings.
26
79392
We are a holding company with no direct operations. We depend on the ability of our subsidiaries to
transfer funds to us to meet our obligations, and our insurance subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends to
us is restricted by law.
EHI is a holding company that transacts substantially all of its business through operating
subsidiaries. Its primary assets are the shares of stock of our insurance subsidiaries. The ability of EHI
to meet obligations on outstanding debt, to pay stockholder dividends and to make other payments,
depends on the surplus and earnings of our subsidiaries and their ability to pay dividends or to advance
or repay funds, and upon the ability of our insurance subsidiaries, to pay dividends to EGI and, in turn,
the ability of EGI to pay dividends to EHI.
Payments of dividends by our insurance subsidiaries are restricted by state insurance laws,
including laws establishing minimum solvency and liquidity thresholds, and could be subject to
contractual restrictions in the future, including those imposed by indebtedness we may incur in the
future. As a result, we may not be able to receive dividends from these subsidiaries and we may not
receive dividends in the amounts necessary to meet our obligations or to pay dividends on our common stock.
We have outstanding indebtedness, which could impair our financial strength ratings and adversely
affect our ability to react to changes in our business and fulfill our debt obligations.
Our indebtedness could have significant consequences, including:
• making it more difficult for us to satisfy our financial obligations;
• limiting our ability to borrow additional amounts to fund working capital, capital expenditures,
debt service requirements, the execution of our business strategy, acquisitions, and other purposes;
• affecting the way we manage our business due to restrictive covenants;
• requiring us to provide collateral which restricts our use of funds;
• requiring us to use a portion of our cash flow from operations to pay principal and interest on
our debt; and
• making us more vulnerable to adverse changes in general economic and industry conditions, and
limiting our flexibility to plan for, and react quickly to, changing conditions.
We rely on our information technology and telecommunication systems, and the failure of these
systems or cyber attacks on our systems could materially and adversely affect 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, administer and make payments on claims, facilitate
collections, and to automatically underwrite and administer the policies we write. The failure of any of
our systems could interrupt our operations or materially impact our ability to evaluate and write new
business. Our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on
third-party systems, and we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds
capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions.
Certain events outside of our control, including cyber attacks on our systems, could render our
systems inoperable such that we would be unable to service our agents, insureds, and injured workers,
or meet certain regulatory requirements. If such an event were to occur and our systems were unable to
be restored or secured within a reasonable timeframe, our business, financial condition, and results of
operations could be adversely affected. Additionally, cyber attacks resulting in a breach of security
could jeopardize the privacy, confidentiality, and integrity of our data or our customers’ data, which
could harm our reputation and expose us to possible liability.
Acts of terrorism and catastrophes could materially adversely impact our financial condition and
results of operations.
Under our workers’ compensation policies and applicable laws in the states in which we operate,
we are required to provide workers’ compensation benefits for losses arising from acts of terrorism. The
impact of any terrorist act is unpredictable, and the ultimate impact on us would depend upon the
nature, extent, location, and timing of such an act. We would be particularly adversely affected by a
terrorist act affecting any metropolitan area where our policyholders have a large concentration of workers.
27
14353
Notwithstanding the protection provided by the reinsurance we have purchased and any protection
provided by the 2002 Act, or its extension, the TRIPRA, the risk of severe losses to us from acts of
terrorism has not been eliminated because our excess of loss reinsurance treaty program contains
various sub-limits and exclusions limiting our reinsurers’ obligation to cover losses caused by acts of
terrorism. Our excess of loss reinsurance treaties do not protect against nuclear, biological, chemical, or
radiological events. If such an event were to impact one or more of the businesses we insure, we would
be entirely responsible for any workers’ compensation claims arising out of such event, subject to the
terms of the 2002 Act and the TRIPRA and could suffer substantial losses as a result.
Our operations also expose us to claims arising out of catastrophes because we may be required to
pay benefits to workers who are injured in the workplace as a result of a catastrophe. Catastrophes can
be caused by various unpredictable events, either natural or man-made. Any catastrophe occurring in
the communities in which we operate or that have significant impacts on one or more of our targeted
classes of business could expose us to potentially substantial losses and, accordingly, could have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Administrative proceedings or legal actions involving our insurance subsidiaries could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our insurance subsidiaries are involved in various administrative proceedings and legal actions in
the normal course of their insurance operations. Our subsidiaries have responded to the actions and
intend to defend against these claims. These claims concern issues including eligibility for workers’
compensation insurance coverage or benefits, the extent of injuries, wage determinations, and disability
ratings. Adverse decisions in multiple administrative proceedings or legal actions could require us to
pay significant amounts in the aggregate or to change the manner in which we administer claims, which
could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Our business is largely dependent on the efforts of our management because of its industry expertise,
knowledge of our markets, and relationships with the independent agents and brokers that sell our
products.
Our success depends in substantial part upon our ability to attract and retain qualified executive
officers, experienced underwriting personnel, and other skilled employees who are knowledgeable
about our business. The current success of our business is dependent in significant part on the efforts of
Douglas D. Dirks, our President and Chief Executive Officer, and William E. Yocke, our Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Many of our regional and local officers are also important
to our operations because of their industry expertise, knowledge of our markets, and relationships with
the independent agents and brokers who sell our products. We have entered into employment
agreements with certain of our key executives. Currently, we maintain key man life insurance for our
Chief Executive Officer. If we were to lose the services of members of our management team or key
regional or local officers, we may be unable to find replacements satisfactory to us and our business. As
a result, our operations may be disrupted and our financial performance and results of operations may
be adversely affected.
Assessments and other surcharges for guaranty funds, second injury funds, and other mandatory
pooling arrangements may reduce our profitability.
All states require insurance companies licensed to do business in their state to bear a portion of the
unfunded obligations of insolvent insurance companies. These obligations are funded by assessments
that can be expected to continue in the future in the states in which we operate. Many states also have
laws that established second injury funds to provide compensation to injured employees for aggravation
of a prior condition or injury, which are funded by either assessments based on paid losses or premium
surcharge mechanisms. In addition, as a condition to the ability to conduct business in some states,
insurance companies are required to participate in mandatory workers’ compensation shared market
mechanisms or pooling arrangements, which provide workers’ compensation insurance coverage from
private insurers. The effect of these assessments and mandatory shared market mechanisms or changes
in them could reduce our profitability in any given period or limit our ability to grow our business.
28
09954
State insurance laws, certain provisions of our charter documents, and Nevada corporation law could
prevent or delay a change of control that could be beneficial to us and our stockholders.
Our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled in Florida, California, and Nevada. The insurance laws of
these states generally require that any person seeking to acquire control of a domestic insurance
company obtain the prior approval of the state’s insurance commissioner. In Florida, “control” is
generally presumed to exist through the direct or indirect ownership of 5% or more of the voting
securities of a domestic insurance company or of any entity that controls a domestic insurance company.
In California and Nevada, “control” is presumed to exist through the direct or indirect ownership of
10% or more of the voting securities of a domestic insurance company or of any entity that controls a
domestic insurance company. In addition, insurance laws in many states in which we are licensed
require pre-notification to the state’s insurance commissioner of a change in control of a non-domestic
insurance company licensed in those states. Because we have insurance subsidiaries domiciled in
Florida, California, and Nevada, any transaction that would constitute a change in control of us would
the insurance
generally require the party acquiring control
commissioners of these states and may require pre-notification of the change of control in these or
other states. The time required to obtain these approvals may result in a material delay of, or deter, any
such transaction. These laws may discourage potential acquisition proposals or tender offers, and may
delay, deter, or prevent a change of control, even if the acquisition proposal or tender offer is favorable
to our stockholders.
to obtain the prior approval of
Provisions of our amended and restated articles of incorporation and amended and restated by-laws
could discourage, delay, or prevent a merger, acquisition, or other change in control of us, even if our
stockholders might consider such a change in control to be favorable. These provisions could also
discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for stockholders to elect Directors and take other
corporate actions. In particular, our amended and restated articles of incorporation and amended and
restated by-laws include provisions:
• dividing our Board of Directors into three classes;
• eliminating the ability of our stockholders to call special meetings of stockholders;
• permitting our Board of Directors to issue preferred stock in one or more series;
• imposing advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our Board of Directors or
for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at the stockholder meetings;
• prohibiting stockholder action by written consent, thereby limiting stockholder action to that
taken at a meeting of our stockholders; and
• providing our Board of Directors with exclusive authority to adopt or amend our by-laws.
These provisions may make it difficult for stockholders to replace Directors and could have the
effect of discouraging a future takeover attempt that is not approved by our Board of Directors, but
which stockholders might consider favorable. Additionally, these provisions could limit the price that
investors are willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2. Properties
Our principal executive offices are 79,533 square feet located in leased premises in Reno, Nevada.
As of February 1, 2013, we leased 253,401 square feet of office space in 10 states. We believe that our
existing office space is adequate for our current needs. We will continue to enter into or exit lease
agreements to address future space requirements, as necessary.
29
81947
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we are involved in pending and threatened litigation in the normal course of
business in which claims for monetary damages are asserted. In the opinion of management, the
ultimate liability, if any, arising from such pending or threatened litigation is not expected to have a
material effect on our result of operations, liquidity, or financial position.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.
30
19966
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases
of Equity Securities
Market Information, Holders, and Stockholder Dividends
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol “EIG.”
There were 1,315 holders of record as of February 21, 2013. High and low sales prices and cash
dividends declared for the last two fiscal years were as follows:
2012
2011
Quarter Ended
Stock Price
High
Low
Cash
Dividends
Declared
March 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
June 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
September 30 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$19.00
18.14
19.41
20.74
$15.89
16.46
17.07
17.50
$0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
Stock Price
High
Low
$20.91
21.00
17.02
18.69
$16.34
15.51
10.73
12.00
Cash
Dividends
Declared
$0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
We currently expect that cash dividends will continue to be paid in the future; however, any
determination to pay additional or future dividends will be at the discretion of our Board of Directors
and will be dependent upon:
• the surplus and earnings of our subsidiaries and their ability to pay dividends and/or other
statutorily permissible payments to us;
• our results of operations and cash flows;
• our financial position and capital requirements;
• general business conditions;
• any legal, tax, regulatory, and/or contractual restrictions on the payment of dividends; and
• any other factors our Board of Directors deems relevant.
There were no unregistered sales of equity securities during the fiscal year that ended December
31, 2012.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
The following table summarizes the repurchase of our common stock for the quarter ended
December 31, 2012:
Total
Number of
Shares
Purchased
Average
Price
Paid Per
Share(1)
Total
Number
of Shares
Purchased as
Part of Publicly
Announced
Programs
Period
October 1—October 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
November 1—November 30, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 1—December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,300
21,524
—
22,824
$17.99
17.95
—
17.95
1,300
21,524
—
22,824
Approximate
Dollar
Value of
Shares that
May Yet be
Purchased
Under the
Program(2)
(in millions)
$51.6
51.2
51.2
(1) Includes commissions paid on stock repurchases.
(2) In November 2010, the Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program for up to $100 million of our common
stock from November 8, 2010 through June 30, 2012 (the 2011 Program). In November 2011, the Board of Directors
authorized a $100 million expansion of the 2011 Program, to $200 million, and extended the repurchase authority pursuant to
the 2011 Program through June 30, 2013. We expect that shares of common stock may be purchased at prevailing market
prices through a variety of methods, including open market or private transactions, in accordance with applicable laws and
regulations and as determined by management. The timing and actual number of shares repurchased will depend on a variety
of factors, including the share price, corporate and regulatory requirements, and other market and economic conditions.
Repurchases under the 2011 Program may be commenced, modified, or suspended from time-to-time without prior notice,
31
65745
and the 2011 Program may be suspended or discontinued at any time. This table does not include shares tendered to satisfy
the exercise price in connection with cashless exercises of employee stock options or shares tendered to satisfy tax
withholding obligations in connection with employee equity awards.
Through December 31, 2012, we repurchased a total of 9,426,131 shares of common stock under
the 2011 Program at an average price of $15.79 per share, including commissions, for a total of $148.8
million.
Performance Graph
The following information compares the cumulative total return on $100 invested in the common
stock of EHI, ticker symbol EIG, for the period commencing on December 31, 2007 and ending on
December 31, 2012 with the cumulative total return on $100 invested in each of the Standard and Poor’s
500 Index (S&P 500) and the Standard and Poor’s 500 Property-Casualty Insurance Index (S&P P&C
Insurance Index). The calculation of cumulative total return assumes the reinvestment of dividends. The
following graph and related information shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed”
with the SEC, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any filing pursuant to the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that we specifically
incorporate it by reference into such filing.
Employers Holding, Inc.
Cumulative Total Return Performance
Total Return Performance
$160
$140
$120
$100
$80
$60
$40
$20
e
u
l
a
V
x
e
d
n
I
Employers Holdings, Inc.
S&P 500
S&P 500 P&C Insurance Index
$0
12/31/07
12/31/08
12/31/09
12/31/10
12/31/11
12/31/12
12/31/2007
12/31/2008
12/31/2009
12/31/2010
12/31/2011
12/31/2012
Period Ending
Employers Holdings, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
S&P 500 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
S&P P&C Insurance Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.18
63.00
70.59
95.06
79.67
79.30
110.05
91.67
86.39
115.61
93.61
86.18
133.34
108.59
103.51
32
46262
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following selected historical consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with
”Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this
annual report on Form 10-K.
The 2008 through 2011 information presented in the following tables has been restated as a result
of the revised manner in which we account for the contingent profit commission to which we are
entitled under the LPT Agreement, as is more fully described in the “Explanatory Note” immediately
preceding Part I, Item 1 and in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8.
Years Ended December 31,
2012
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
2009(1)
As Restated
(unaudited)
2008(1)(2)
As Restated
(unaudited)
(in thousands, except per share amounts and ratios)
Income Statement Data
Revenues:
Net premiums earned . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income . . . . . . . .
Realized gains (losses) on
investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total revenues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income before income taxes . . .
Income tax expense (benefit) . . . . . . .
$501,464
72,363
$363,424
80,117
$321,786
83,032
$404,247
90,484
$328,947
78,062
5,048
307
579,182
97,544
(9,347)
20,161
452
464,154
46,517
(2,106)
10,137
649
415,604
66,992
3,523
791
413
495,935
84,023
9,277
(11,524)
1,293
396,778
113,310
10,266
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$106,891
$ 48,623
$ 63,469
$ 74,746
$103,044
Earnings per common share
Basic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
3.40
3.37
$
1.30
1.30
$
1.53
1.53
$
1.63
1.62
Selected Operating Data
Gross premiums written(3) . . . . . . . . . .
Net premiums written(4) . . . . . . . . . . . .
Combined ratio(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income before impact of the
LPT Agreement(6)(7)(8) . . . . . . . . . . . .
Earnings per common share before
impact of the LPT Agreement(8)
Basic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividends declared . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
2.09
2.09
$318,392
$308,317
$580,327
$569,676
$418,512
$410,038
$322,277
$313,098
$379,949
$368,290
95.3%
113.9%
106.6%
100.1%
85.5%
$
6,957
$ 29,324
$ 43,754
$ 49,989
$ 83,364
$
0.22
0.22
0.24
$
0.79
0.78
0.24
$
1.06
1.06
0.24
$
1.09
1.08
0.24
1.69
1.69
0.24
33
21962
2008(1)(2)
As Restated
(unaudited)
2011
As Restated
As of December 31,
2010
As Restated
2012
2009(1)
As Restated
(unaudited)
(in thousands)
Balance Sheet Data
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . .
Total investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reinsurance recoverable on paid
and unpaid losses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unpaid losses and loss
adjustment expense . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT
Agreement(6)(7). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other Financial Data
Total equity including deferred
reinsurance gain—LPT
Agreement(6)(7)(9) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 140,661
2,149,514
$ 252,300
1,950,745
$ 119,825
2,080,494
$ 188,883
2,029,560
$ 197,429
2,042,941
814,853
3,511,339
951,569
3,482,310
970,458
3,480,665
1,064,843
3,677,248
1,087,738
3,825,098
2,231,540
2,272,363
2,279,729
2,425,658
2,506,478
281,043
112,000
2,971,958
539,381
365,963
122,000
3,020,327
461,983
383,399
132,000
3,003,062
477,603
402,352
132,000
3,192,032
485,216
414,479
182,000
3,385,278
439,820
$ 820,424
$ 827,946
$ 861,002
$ 887,568
$ 854,299
(1) The following table presents the summary impacts of the restatement adjustments on our previously reported consolidated net
income and earnings per share for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and total assets, liabilities, and stockholders’
equity as of December 2009 and 2008:
Net income (previously reported). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income (as restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Earnings per common share:
Basic (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Basic (as restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted (previously reported). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31,
2009
2008
(in thousands, except
per share data)
83,021
(8,275)
$ 101,785
1,259
74,746
$ 103,044
1.81
(0.18)
1.63
1.80
(0.18)
1.62
$
$
$
$
2.07
0.02
2.09
2.07
0.02
2.09
$
$
$
$
$
$
Total assets (previously reported). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$3,676,653
595
$3,825,098
—
Total assets (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$3,677,248
$3,825,098
Total liabilities (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$3,178,254
13,778
$3,380,370
4,908
Total liabilities (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$3,192,032
$3,385,278
Total stockholders’ equity (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 498,399
(13,183)
$ 444,728
(4,908)
Total stockholders’ equity (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 485,216
$ 439,820
(2) On October 31, 2008, we acquired 100% of the outstanding common stock of AmCOMP Incorporated (AmCOMP). The
income statement data for the year ended December 31, 2008 includes the operating results of AmCOMP from November 1,
2008 through December 31, 2008. The balance sheet data as of December 31, 2008 includes the assets and liabilities acquired
from AmCOMP.
(3) Gross premiums written is the sum of direct premiums written and assumed premiums written before the effect of ceded
reinsurance. Direct premiums written are the premiums on all policies our insurance subsidiaries have issued during the year.
Assumed premiums written are premiums that our insurance subsidiaries have received from any authorized state-mandated
pools and a previous fronting facility.
(4) Net premiums written is the sum of direct premiums written and assumed premiums written less ceded premiums written.
Ceded premiums written is the portion of direct premiums written that we cede to our reinsurers under our reinsurance
contracts. (See Note 12 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.)
34
12523
(5) Combined ratio is the sum of the losses and LAE expense, the commission expense, dividends to policyholders, and the
underwriting and other operating expenses, all divided by net earned premiums. Because we only have one operating
segment, holding company expenses are included in the combined ratio.
(6) In connection with our January 1, 2000 assumption of the assets, liabilities and operations of the Fund, our Nevada insurance
subsidiary assumed the Fund’s rights and obligations associated with the LPT Agreement, a retroactive 100% quota share
reinsurance agreement with third party reinsurers, which substantially reduced our exposure to losses for pre-July 1, 1995
Nevada insured risks. Pursuant to the LPT Agreement, the Fund initially ceded $1.5 billion in liabilities for incurred but
unpaid losses and LAE, which represented substantially all of the Fund’s outstanding losses as of June 30, 1999 for claims
with original dates of injury prior to July 1, 1995.
(7) Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement reflects the unamortized gain from our LPT Agreement. Under GAAP, this
gain is deferred and is being amortized using the recovery method. Amortization is determined by the proportion of actual
reinsurance recoveries to total estimated recoveries over the life of the LPT Agreement, except for the contingent profit
commission, which is amortized through June 30, 2024. The amortization is reflected in losses and LAE. We periodically
reevaluate the remaining direct reserves subject to the LPT Agreement and the expected losses and LAE subject to the
contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement. Our reevaluations result in corresponding adjustments, if needed, to
reserves, ceded reserves, contingent commission receivable, and the Deferred Gain, with the net effect being an increase or
decrease, as the case may be, to net income.
(8) We define net income before impact of the LPT Agreement as net income before the impact of: (a) amortization of Deferred
Gain; (b) adjustments to the LPT Agreement ceded reserves; and (c) adjustments to contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement. These are not measurements of financial performance under GAAP, but rather reflect the difference in
accounting treatment between SAP and GAAP, and should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative to any other
measure of performance derived in accordance with GAAP.
We present net income before impact of the LPT Agreement because we believe that it is an important supplemental
measure of operating performance to be used by analysts, investors, and other interested parties in evaluating us.
The LPT Agreement was a non-recurring transaction which does not affect our ongoing operations and consequently we
believe these presentations are useful in providing a meaningful understanding of our operating performance. In addition, we
believe these non-GAAP measures, as we have defined them, are helpful to our management in identifying trends in our
performance because the item excluded has limited significance in our current and ongoing operations.
The table below shows the reconciliation of net income to net income before impact of the LPT Agreement for the periods
presented:
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less amortization of the Deferred Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less impact of the LPT Reserve Adjustment(a) . . . . . . .
Less impact of the LPT Contingent Commission
Adjustment(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2012
2011
As Restated
$106,891
16,976
73,349
$48,623
18,249
—
2010
As Restated
(in thousands)
$63,469
19,323
—
2009
As Restated
2008
As Restated
$74,746
19,050
—
$103,044
18,952
—
9,609
1,050
392
5,707
728
Net income before impact of the LPT Agreement. . . .
$
6,957
$29,324
$43,754
$49,989
$ 83,364
(a) Any adjustment to the estimated reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement results in a cumulative adjustment to the
Deferred Gain, which is also included in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and
comprehensive income, such that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised
reserves been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement (LPT Reserve Adjustment). (See Note 3 in the Notes
to our Consolidated Financial Statements.)
(b) Any adjustment to the contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement results in a cumulative adjustment to
the Deferred Gain, which is also recognized in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and
comprehensive income, such that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised
contingent profit commission been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement. (LPT Contingent Commission
Adjustment). (See Note 3 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.)
(9) We define total equity including the Deferred Gain as total equity plus the Deferred Gain. Total equity including the
Deferred Gain is not a measurement of financial position under GAAP and should not be considered in isolation or as an
alternative to total equity or any other measure of financial health derived in accordance with GAAP.
We present total equity including the Deferred Gain because we believe that it is an important supplemental measure of
financial position to be used by analysts, investors and other interested parties in evaluating us. The LPT Agreement was a
non-recurring transaction and the treatment of the Deferred Gain does not result in ongoing cash benefits or charges to our
current operations and consequently we believe this presentation is useful in providing a meaningful understanding of our
financial position.
The table below shows the reconciliation of total equity to total equity including the Deferred Gain for the periods presented:
As of December 31,
Total equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$539,381
281,043
$461,983
365,963
2012
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
(in thousands)
$477,603
383,399
Total equity including the Deferred Gain . . . . . . . . . . . .
$820,424
$827,946
$861,002
2009
As Restated
2008
As Restated
$485,216
402,352
$887,568
$439,820
414,479
$854,299
35
44237
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be
read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes thereto
included in Item 8 and Item 15 of this report. In addition to historical information, the following
discussion contains forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties and other
factors described in Item 1A of this report. Our actual results in future periods may differ from those
referred to herein due to a number of factors, including the risks described in the sections entitled “Risk
Factors” and “Forward-Looking Statements” elsewhere in this report.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of
Operations contains restated results related to the modification of our method of accounting for the
contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement. See “Explanatory Note” immediately
preceding Part I, Item 1 and Note 2, “Revision of Previously Issued Consolidated Financial
Statements,” to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8 for a detailed discussion of
the modification and effect of the restatement.
Overview
We are a Nevada holding company. Through our insurance subsidiaries, we provide workers’
compensation insurance coverage to select, small businesses in low to medium hazard industries.
Workers’ compensation insurance is provided under a statutory system wherein most employers are
required to provide coverage for their employees’ medical, disability, vocational rehabilitation, and/or
death benefit costs for work-related injuries or illnesses. We provide workers’ compensation insurance
in 31 states and the District of Columbia, with a concentration in California, where over one-half of our
business is generated. Our revenues are primarily comprised of net premiums earned, net investment
income, and net realized gains on investments.
We target small businesses, as we believe that this market is traditionally characterized by fewer
competitors, more attractive pricing, and stronger persistency when compared to the U.S. workers’
compensation insurance industry in general. We believe we are able to price our policies at levels which
are competitive and profitable over the long-term. Our underwriting approach is to consistently
underwrite small business accounts at appropriate and competitive prices without sacrificing long-term
profitability and stability for short-term top-line revenue growth.
Results of Operations
Overall, net income was $106.9 million, $48.6 million, and $63.5 million in 2012, 2011, and 2010,
respectively and we recognized underwriting income (losses) of $23.3 million, $(50.6) million, and
$(21.1) million for the same periods, respectively. Underwriting income or loss is determined by
deducting losses and LAE, commission expense, policyholder dividends, and underwriting and other
operating expenses from net premiums earned. Key factors that affected our financial performance
during 2012 and 2011, each compared to the previous year, respectively, include:
• Gross premiums written increased 39% and 30%;
• Net premiums earned increased 38% and 13%;
• Losses and LAE increased 10% and 36%;
• Underwriting and other operating expenses declined 21% and increased 5%; and
• Income tax expenses decreased $7.2 million to an income tax benefit of $9.3 million in 2012 and
decreased $5.6 million to an income tax benefit of $2.1 million in 2011.
Our results of operations in 2012 were also impacted by: (1) favorable development in the
estimated reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement. The adjustment to the estimated reserves ceded
resulted in a $73.3 million cumulative adjustment to the Deferred Gain, which reduced our losses and
LAE by the same amount during the fourth quarter of 2012 (LPT Reserve Adjustment); (2) an increase
in the contingent commission receivable and the Deferred Gain under the LPT Agreement that resulted
in an $8.6 million cumulative adjustment, which reduced our losses and LAE during the fourth quarter
36
20201
of 2012 (LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment); and (3) guidance issued by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board that, beginning in 2012, changed the definition of policy acquisition costs
which may be capitalized. Our underwriting and other operating expenses increased $7.1 million during
2012 as a result of this change (see Note 5 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for
additional information).
A primary measure of our performance is our ability to increase stockholders’ equity, including the
impact of the Deferred Gain, over the long-term. The following table shows our stockholders’ equity
including the Deferred Gain, stockholders’ equity on a GAAP basis, and number of common shares
outstanding at December 31:
Stockholders’ equity including the Deferred Gain(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GAAP stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Common shares outstanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2012
2011
As Restated
(in thousands, except share data)
$
$
820,424
$
539,381
$
30,771,479
827,946
461,983
32,996,809
(1) Stockholders’ equity including the Deferred Gain is a non-GAAP measure that is defined as total stockholders’ equity plus
the Deferred Gain, which we believe is an important supplemental measure of our capital position.
Our goal is to maintain our focus on disciplined underwriting and to continue to pursue profitable
growth opportunities across market cycles; however, we continue to be affected by persistently low
investment yields and continuing high levels of unemployment nationally. We do not believe overall
economic conditions will change significantly in the near-term.
The comparative components of net income are set forth in the following table.
Net premiums earned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Losses and LAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commission expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2011
2010
As Restated
Years Ended December 31,
2011
As Restated
(in thousands)
$363,424
80,117
20,161
452
464,154
262,511
47,344
3,423
100,717
3,642
(2,106)
$321,786
83,032
10,137
649
415,604
193,297
39,280
4,316
106,026
5,693
3,523
$501,464
72,363
5,048
307
579,182
287,910
65,580
3,204
121,440
3,504
(9,347)
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
472,291
415,531
352,135
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$106,891
$ 48,623
$ 63,469
Less amortization of the Deferred Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less impact of the LPT Reserve Adjustment(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less impact of the LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment(2) . . .
Net income before impact of the LPT Agreement(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16,976
73,349
9,609
18,249
—
1,050
19,323
—
392
$ 6,957
$ 29,324
$ 43,754
(1) Any adjustment to the estimated reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement results in a cumulative adjustment to the
Deferred Gain, which is also included in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of
income and
comprehensive income, such that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised reserves
been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement. (See Note 3 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.)
(2) Any adjustment to the contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement results in a cumulative adjustment to the
Deferred Gain, which is also recognized in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and
comprehensive income, such that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised contingent
profit commission been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement. (See Note 3 in the Notes to our Consolidated
Financial Statements.)
37
05042
(3) We define net income before impact of the LPT Agreement as net income before the impact of: (a) amortization of Deferred
Gain; (b) adjustments to LPT Agreement ceded reserves; and (c) adjustments to contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement. Deferred Gain reflects the unamortized gain from our LPT Agreement. Under GAAP, this gain is deferred and
is being amortized using the recovery method. Amortization is determined by the proportion of actual reinsurance recoveries
to total estimated recoveries over the life of the LPT Agreement, except for the contingent profit commission, which is
amortized through June 30, 2024. The amortization is reflected in losses and LAE. We periodically reevaluate the remaining
direct reserves subject to the LPT Agreement and the expected losses and LAE subject to the contingent profit commission
under the LPT Agreement. Our reevaluations result in corresponding adjustments, if needed, to reserves, ceded reserves,
contingent commission receivable, and the Deferred Gain, with the net effect being an increase or decrease, as the case may
be, to net income. Net income before impact of the LPT Agreement is not a measurement of financial performance under
GAAP, but rather reflects the difference in accounting treatment between statutory and GAAP, and should not be
considered in isolation or as an alternative to net income before income taxes or net income or any other measure of
performance derived in accordance with GAAP.
We present net income before impact of the LPT Agreement because we believe that it is an important supplemental
measure of operating performance to be used by analysts, investors and other interested parties in evaluating us. The LPT
Agreement was a non-recurring transaction, under which the Deferred Gain does not effect our ongoing operations, and,
consequently, we believe this presentation is useful in providing a meaningful understanding of our operating performance. In
addition, we believe this non-GAAP measure, as we have defined it, is helpful to our management in identifying trends in our
performance because the excluded item has limited significance in our current and ongoing operations.
Net Premiums Earned
Net premiums earned were $501.5 million, $363.4 million, and $321.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The increase in net premiums earned over the past
three years was primarily due to increasing policy count and rate increases. In 2011, our net premiums
earned were also impacted by a $14.9 million increase in the accrual for final audit premiums. Changes
including general economic
in the accrual for final audit premium are driven by various factors,
conditions such as unemployment and payroll trends.
The following table shows the percentage change in our in-force premiums, policy count, average
policy size, payroll exposure upon which our premiums are based, and net rate as of December 31, 2012
and 2011, respectively:
Percentage
Increase
2012 Over 2011
Percentage
Increase (Decrease)
2011 Over 2010
In-force premiums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In-force policy count . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Average in-force policy size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In-force payroll exposure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net rate(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
36.4%
31.5
3.7
25.9
8.3
22.7%
36.2
(9.9)
24.4
(1.4)
(1) Net rate, defined as total in-force premiums divided by total insured payroll exposure, is a function of a variety of factors,
including rate changes, underwriting risk profiles and pricing, and changes in business mix related to economic and
competitive pressures.
We expect that total premiums in 2013 across our markets will reflect:
• overall rate increases;
• decelerating policy count growth; and
• increasing average policy size.
Net Investment Income and Realized Gains on Investments
We invest our holding company assets, statutory surplus, and the funds supporting our insurance
liabilities, including unearned premiums and unpaid losses and LAE. We invest in fixed maturity
securities, equity securities, and cash equivalents. Net
income includes interest and
dividends earned on our invested assets and amortization of premiums and discounts on our fixed
maturity securities, less bank service charges and custodial and portfolio management fees. We have
established a high quality/short duration bias in our investment portfolio.
investment
Net investment income was $72.4 million, $80.1 million, and $83.0 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The decrease in net investment income over the past
three years was primarily related to a decrease in the average pre-tax book yield on invested assets. The
38
12045
average pre-tax book yield on invested assets was 3.7%, 4.1%, and 4.2% at December 31, 2012, 2011,
and 2010, respectively, while the tax-equivalent yield on invested assets was 4.4%, 5.0%, and 5.3% as of
the same dates, respectively.
Realized gains and losses on our investments are reported separately from our net investment
income. Realized gains and losses on investments include the gain or loss on a security at the time of
sale compared to its original or adjusted cost (equity securities) or amortized cost (fixed maturity
securities). Realized losses are also recognized when securities are written down as a result of an other-
than-temporary impairment.
Realized gains on investments were $5.0 million, $20.2 million, and $10.1 million for the years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The increase in realized gains on investments
for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010 resulted from a strategic rebalancing of our
investment portfolio to increase portfolio allocations to taxable fixed income sectors, shorten portfolio
duration following the decline in interest rates in the second half of 2011, and increase the allocation to
high dividend equity securities. We also evaluated our portfolio allocation during the fourth quarter of
2010 and elected to shift $20.0 million of our equity securities into a high dividend yield portfolio, which
resulted in a $9.2 million gain.
Additional information regarding our Investments is set forth under “—Liquidity and Capital
Resources—Investments.”
Combined Ratio
The combined ratio, expressed as a percentage, is a key measurement of underwriting profitability.
The combined ratio is the sum of the loss and LAE ratio, the commission expense ratio, policyholder
dividends ratio, and underwriting and other operating expenses ratio. When the combined ratio is below
100%, we have recorded underwriting income, and conversely, when the combined ratio is greater than
100%, we cannot be profitable without investment income. Because we only have one operating
segment, holding company expenses are included in our calculation of the combined ratio.
The following table provides the calculation of our calendar year combined ratios.
Loss and LAE ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other operating expenses ratio. . . . . . . . .
Commission expense ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2012
57.4%
24.2
13.1
0.6
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
72.2%
27.8
13.0
0.9
60.1%
33.0
12.2
1.3
Combined ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
95.3% 113.9%
106.6%
Loss and LAE Ratio. Expressed as a percentage, this is the ratio of losses and LAE to net
premiums earned.
We analyze our loss and LAE ratios on both a calendar year and accident year basis. A calendar
year loss and LAE ratio is calculated by dividing the losses and LAE incurred during the calendar year,
regardless of when the underlying insured event occurred, by the net premiums earned during that
calendar year. The calendar year loss and LAE ratio includes changes made during the calendar year in
reserves for losses and LAE established for insured events occurring in the current and prior years. A
calendar year loss and LAE ratio is calculated using premiums and losses and LAE that are net of
amounts ceded to reinsurers. The calendar year loss and LAE ratio for a particular year will not change
in future periods.
The accident year loss and LAE ratio, or losses and LAE for insured events that occurred during a
particular year divided by the premiums earned for the year, is calculated by dividing the losses and
LAE, regardless of when such loss and LAE are incurred, for insured events that occurred during a
particular year by the net premiums earned for that year. The accident year losses and LAE ratio is
calculated using premiums and losses and LAE that are net of amounts ceded to reinsurers. The
accident year loss and LAE ratio for a particular year can decrease or increase when recalculated in
39
61968
subsequent periods as the reserves established for insured events occurring during that year develop
favorably or unfavorably; and is an operating ratio based on our statutory financial statements and is
not derived from our GAAP financial information.
We analyze our calendar year loss and LAE ratio to measure our profitability in a particular year
and to evaluate the adequacy of our premium rates charged in a particular year to cover expected losses
and LAE from all periods, including development (whether favorable or unfavorable) of reserves
established in prior periods. In contrast, we analyze our accident year loss and LAE ratios to evaluate
our underwriting performance and the adequacy of the premium rates we charged in a particular year in
relation to ultimate losses and LAE from insured events occurring during that year. The loss and LAE
ratios provided in this report are calendar year basis, except where they are expressly identified as
accident year loss and LAE ratios.
Losses and LAE represents our largest expense item and includes claim payments made,
amortization of the Deferred Gain, estimates for future claim payments and changes in those estimates
for current and prior periods, and costs associated with investigating, defending, and adjusting claims.
The quality of our financial reporting depends in large part on accurately predicting our losses and
LAE, which are inherently uncertain as they are estimates of the ultimate cost of individual claims
based on actuarial estimation techniques.
Our indemnity claims frequency (the number of claims expressed as a percentage of payroll) is
unchanged year-over-year and our loss experience indicates an downward trend in medical and
indemnity costs that are reflected in our current accident year loss estimate. We believe our current
accident year loss estimate is adequate; however, ultimate losses will not be known with any certainty
for many years. We assume that increasing medical and indemnity cost trends will continue to impact
our long-term claims costs and current accident year loss estimate, which may be offset by rate
information regarding our reserves for losses and LAE is set forth under
increases. Additional
“—Critical Accounting Policies—Reserves for Losses and LAE.”
Overall, losses and LAE were $287.9 million, $262.5 million, and $193.3 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The increase from 2011 to 2012 was primarily due to
an increase in net earned premiums, which was partially offset by a $73.3 million favorable LPT
Reserve Adjustment and an $8.6 million LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment in the fourth quarter
of 2012. The increase from 2010 to 2011 was primarily due to an increase in the current accident year
loss estimate, an increase in net earned premiums, and the impact of favorable prior accident year loss
development in 2010. Prior accident year loss development in 2012 and 2011 was primarily related to
our assigned risk business. Our accident year loss estimates were 77.0%, 77.2%, and 70.6% for the years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The accident year loss estimate for the year
ended December 31, 2010 excludes a $1.6 million expense related to the commutation of certain
reinsurance treaties and a $0.9 million expense related to the write-off of certain reinsurance
recoverables. The increase in the current accident year loss estimate in 2011 was primarily due to
increased loss costs in California.
The table below reflects losses and LAE reserve adjustments.
Years Ended December 31,
2012
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
(in millions)
Prior accident year (unfavorable) favorable
development, net(1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ (1.8)
$ (1.1)
Amortization of the Deferred Gain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impact of the LPT Reserve Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Impact of the LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment
$17.0
73.3
9.6
$18.2
—
1.1
$16.6
$19.3
—
0.4
(1) Prior accident year (unfavorable) favorable development, net, excludes a $1.6 million expense related to the commutation of
certain reinsurance treaties and a $0.9 million expense related to the write-off of certain reinsurance recoverables, which are
included in losses and LAE for the year ended December 31, 2010.
40
08870
Excluding the impact from the LPT Agreement, losses and LAE would have been $387.8 million,
$281.8 million, and $213.0 million, or 77.3%, 77.5%, and 66.2% of net premiums earned, for the years
ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
Underwriting and Other Operating Expenses Ratio. The underwriting and other operating expenses
ratio is the ratio (expressed as a percentage) of underwriting and other operating expenses to net
premiums earned and measures an insurance company’s operational efficiency in producing,
underwriting, and administering its insurance business.
Underwriting and other operating expenses are those costs that we incur to underwrite and
maintain the insurance policies we issue, excluding commission. These expenses include premium taxes
and certain other general expenses that vary with, and are primarily related to, producing new or
renewal business. Other underwriting expenses include changes in estimates of future write-offs of
premiums receivable, general administrative expenses such as salaries and benefits, rent, office supplies,
depreciation, and all other operating expenses not otherwise classified separately. Policy acquisition
costs are variable based on premiums earned; however, other operating costs are more fixed in nature
and become a smaller percentage of net premiums earned as premiums increase.
Underwriting and other operating expenses were $121.4 million, $100.7 million, and $106.0 million
for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. During the year ended December
31, 2012, bonus and equity compensation expenses increased $7.2 million, our premium taxes and
assessments increased $3.1 million, and bad debt expense increased $2.1 million, partially offset by a
$1.6 million decrease in professional fees, compared to the same period of 2011.
Additionally, implementation of the new accounting guidance for deferred policy acquisition costs
(DAC) resulted in a $7.1 million increase in our underwriting and other operating expenses for the year
ended December 31, 2012. This increase was partially offset by a $1.4 million net reduction in
underwriting and other operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2012, related to a change
in estimate for guarantee fund assessments.
Excluding the impact of the new DAC guidance and the change in estimate for guarantee fund
assessments, underwriting and other operating expenses would have increased $15.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011.
In the first quarter of 2010, we incurred charges of $0.9 million related to staffing reductions to
adjust our insurance operations to reflect activity levels at that time. Subsequently, in the third quarter
of 2010, we announced the reorganization of our operations to eliminate duplicative services and better
align resources with business activity and growth opportunities at that time. In connection with those
efforts and with general cost control efforts, we eliminated approximately 160 positions. In conjunction
with that reorganization, we recorded restructuring charges of $5.2 million in 2010, including $3.0
million related to workforce reductions and $2.2 million related to leases for facilities that were vacated
during the year.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, compensation and facilities related expenses declined
$8.9 million and $3.3 million, respectively, partially offset by a $5.2 million increase in premium taxes
and assessments, compared to the same period of 2010. Underwriting and other operating expenses also
included one-time charges totaling $1.2 million during 2011 for professional service fees related to
acquisition due diligence activity. Excluding total restructuring items incurred in 2010 and the one-time
professional services fees incurred in 2011, underwriting and other operating expenses decreased $0.4
million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010.
Commission Expense Ratio. The commission expense ratio is the ratio (expressed as a percentage)
of commission expense to net premiums earned and measures the cost of compensating agents and
brokers for the business we have underwritten.
Commission expense includes direct commissions to our agents and brokers for the premiums that
they produce for us, as well as incentive payments, other marketing costs, and fees.
Our commission expense was $65.6 million, $47.3 million, and $39.3 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The increases in commission expense from 2010
through 2012 were primarily due to higher net premiums earned, as well as higher agency incentive
commissions due to increased agent production in 2012. Additionally, in 2010, we reduced the estimate
41
69655
of certain administrative fees due to Anthem under our joint marketing agreements by $3.0 million,
which decreased the commission expense. This decrease was partially offset by the re-negotiation of the
terms of a separate reinsurance agreement resulting in an additional $1.8 million in commission expense
in 2010. Excluding the impact of the change in accrual for fees due to Anthem, and the re-negotiated
reinsurance agreement, commission expense would have been 12.6% of net premiums earned for the
year ended December 31, 2010.
Policyholder Dividends Ratio. The policyholder dividends ratio is the ratio (expressed as a
percentage) of policyholder dividends to net premiums earned and measures the cost of returning
premium to policyholders in the form of dividends.
In administered pricing states such as Florida and Wisconsin, insurance rates are set by state
insurance regulators. Rate competition generally is not permitted and policyholder dividend programs
are an important competitive factor in these states. We offer dividend programs to eligible
policyholders, under which a portion of the policyholders’ premium may be returned in the form of
dividends.
Policyholder dividends were $3.2 million, $3.4 million, and $4.3 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Policyholder dividends fluctuate from time to time due
to changes in premium levels on dividend policies and the eligibility of policyholders to receive dividend
payments.
Interest Expense
We incur interest expenses on notes payable. We also had an interest rate swap agreement on our
credit facility with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Wells Fargo), which expired on September
30, 2010.
Interest expense was $3.5 million, $3.6 million, and $5.7 million for the years ended December 31,
2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The decrease in interest expense from 2010 to 2011 was primarily
due to the expiration of the interest rate swap that was in place in 2010. The decrease in interest
expense from 2011 to 2012 was primarily due to the reduction in principal balance on our credit facility
with Wells Fargo by $10 million in the fourth quarter of 2011.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense (benefit) was $(9.3) million, $(2.1) million, and $3.5 million for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The effective tax rate was (9.6)%, (4.5)%, and 5.3%
for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The decreased tax expense from
2010 through 2012 is primarily due to increases in tax exempt income as a percentage of pre-tax net
income, which was 129.7%, 121.4%, and 86.6% for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010,
respectively.
The increased tax exempt income as a percentage of pre-tax net income for the year ended
December 31, 2012, compared to 2011, was primarily due to the impact of the $73.3 million favorable
LPT Reserve Adjustment and a $15.0 million increase to the LPT contingent profit commission in 2012.
The increased tax exempt income as a percentage of pre-tax net income for the year ended December
31, 2011, compared to 2010, was primarily due to a $21.0 million decrease in pre-tax income.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Parent Company
Operating Cash and Cash Equivalents. We are a holding company and our ability to fund our
operations is contingent upon existing capital and our insurance subsidiaries’ abilities to pay dividends
up to the holding company. Payment of dividends by our insurance subsidiaries is restricted by state
insurance laws, including laws establishing minimum solvency and liquidity thresholds. We require cash
to pay stockholder dividends, repurchase common stock, make interest and principal payments on our
outstanding debt obligations, provide additional surplus to our insurance subsidiaries, and fund our
operating expenses.
42
55078
In September 2012, EHI made a cash capital contribution totaling $70 million to its operating
subsidiaries to support future growth and maintain the subsidiaries’ financial strength ratings.
Based on reported capital, surplus, and dividends paid within the last 12 months, the maximum
dividends that may be paid by EICN and EPIC in 2013, without prior approval by the respective state
insurance regulator, are $29.5 million and $20.6 million, respectively.
The holding company had $85.2 million of cash and cash equivalents and fixed maturity securities
maturing within the next 24 months at December 31, 2012. Ten million dollars of our line of credit is
payable on each of December 31, 2013 and December
31, 2014. We believe that the liquidity needs of the holding company over the next 24 months will
be met with cash, maturing investments, and dividends from our insurance subsidiaries.
Share Repurchases. In November 2010, our Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase
program for repurchases of up to $100 million of common stock from November 8, 2010 through June
30, 2012 (the 2011 Program). In November 2011, the Board of Directors authorized a $100 million
expansion of the 2011 Program, to $200 million, and extended the repurchase authority pursuant to the
2011 Program through June 30, 2013. Repurchases under the 2011 Program may be commenced or
suspended from time-to-time without prior notice, and the 2011 Program may be suspended or
discontinued at any time. Through December 31, 2012, we repurchased a total of 9,426,131 shares of
common stock under the 2011 Program at an average price of $15.79 per share, including commissions,
for a total of $148.8 million.
Outstanding Debt. In December 2010, we entered into the Third Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement with Wells Fargo (Amended Credit Facility) under which we were provided with: (a) $100.0
million line of credit through December 31, 2011; (b) $90.0 million line of credit from January 1, 2012
through December 31, 2012; (c) $80.0 million line of credit from January 1, 2013 through December 31,
2013; (d) $70 million line of credit from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014; and (e) $60 million
line of credit from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. Amounts outstanding bear interest at a
rate equal to, at our option: (a) a fluctuating rate of 1.75% above prime rate or (b) a fixed rate that is
1.75% above the LIBOR rate then in effect. The Amended Credit Facility is secured by fixed maturity
securities and restricted cash and cash equivalents that had a fair value of $110.4 million and $126.7
million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The Amended Credit Facility contains customary
non-financial covenants and requires us to maintain $5.0 million of cash and cash equivalents at all
times at the holding company. We are currently in compliance with all applicable covenants. In
accordance with the terms of the contract, we repaid $10.0 million of the line of credit provided by the
Amended Credit Facility on December 28, 2012.
Our total outstanding debt was $112.0 million and $122.0 million as of December 31, 2012 and
2011, respectively. Interest and fees on debt obligations totaled $3.5 million, $3.6 million, and $5.7
million in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
Our capital structure is comprised of outstanding debt and stockholders’ equity. As of December
31, 2012, our capital structure consisted of an $80.0 million principal balance on our Amended Credit
Facility, $32.0 million in surplus notes maturing in 2034, and $820.4 million of stockholders’ equity,
including the Deferred Gain. Outstanding debt was 12.0% of total capitalization, including the Deferred
Gain, as of December 31, 2012.
Operating Subsidiaries
Operating Cash and Cash Equivalents. The primary sources of cash for our insurance operating
subsidiaries are funds generated from underwriting operations, investment income, maturities and sales
of investments, and capital contributions from the parent holding company. The primary uses of cash
are payments of claims and operating expenses, purchases of investments, and payments of dividends to
the parent holding company, which are subject to state insurance laws and regulations.
Our insurance subsidiaries had $330.0 million of cash and cash equivalents and fixed maturity
securities maturing within the next 24 months at December 31, 2012. We believe that our subsidiaries’
liquidity needs over the next 24 months will be met with cash from operations, investment income, and
maturing investments.
43
10646
We purchase reinsurance to protect us against the costs of severe claims and catastrophic events.
On July 1, 2012, we entered into a new reinsurance program that is effective through June 30, 2013. The
reinsurance program consists of one treaty covering excess of loss and catastrophic loss events in five
layers of coverage. Our reinsurance coverage is $195.0 million in excess of our $5.0 million retention on
a per occurrence basis, subject to a $2.0 million annual aggregate deductible and certain exclusions. We
believe that our reinsurance program meets our needs and that we are sufficiently capitalized.
Our insurance subsidiaries are required by law to maintain a certain minimum level of surplus on a
statutory basis. Surplus is calculated by subtracting total liabilities from total admitted assets. The
amount of capital in our insurance subsidiaries is maintained relative to standardized capital adequacy
measures such as risk-based capital (RBC), as established by the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners. The RBC standard was designed to provide a measure by which regulators can assess
the adequacy of an insurance company’s capital and surplus relative to its operations. An insurance
company must maintain capital and surplus of at least 200% of RBC. Each of our insurance subsidiaries
had total adjusted capital in excess of the minimum RBC requirements that correspond to any level of
regulatory action at December 31, 2012.
Various state regulations require us to keep securities or letters of credit on deposit with certain
states in which we do business. Securities having a fair market value of $530.6 million and $522.6 million
were on deposit at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. These laws and regulations govern both
the amount and type of fixed maturity security that is eligible for deposit. Additionally, certain
reinsurance contracts require company funds to be held in trust for the benefit of the ceding reinsurer
to secure the outstanding liabilities we assumed. The fair value of securities held in trust for the benefit
of ceding reinsurers was $35.0 million and $40.3 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Cash Flows
We monitor cash flows at both the consolidated and subsidiary levels. We use trend and variance
analyses to project future cash needs, making adjustments to our forecasts as appropriate.
The table below shows our net cash flows.
2012
Years Ended December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
2010
Cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in):
Operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 131,771
(184,946)
(58,464)
$ 43,215
199,159
(109,899)
$ 56,981
(51,327)
(74,662)
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . .
$(111,639)
$ 132,475
$(69,008)
Operating Activities. Major components of net cash provided by operating activities in 2012
included net premiums received of $508.7 million, investment income received of $79.6 million, and
amounts recovered from reinsurers of $38.2 million. These were partially offset by claims payments of
$315.1 million, underwriting and other operating expenses paid of $116.8 million (including premium
taxes paid of $16.9 million), and commissions paid of $55.2 million.
Major components of net cash provided by operating activities in 2011 included net premiums
received of $358.4 million, investment income received of $90.8 million, and amounts recovered from
reinsurers of $46.1 million. These were partially offset by claims payments of $316.4 million,
underwriting and other operating expenses paid of $93.7 million (including $7.6 million of premium
taxes paid), and commissions paid of $36.3 million.
Major components of net cash provided by operating activities in 2010 included net premiums
received of $321.3 million and investment income received of $89.2 million, partially offset by claims
payments of $263.2 (net of reinsurance recoverables), and underwriting and other operating expenses
paid of $91.5 million.
Investing Activities. In 2012, net cash used in investing activities was primarily related to the
investment of premiums received and the reinvestment of funds from maturities and redemptions. The
44
09915
major sources of net cash provided by investing activities in 2011 were the sale of certain fixed maturity
securities and from maturities and redemptions of other investments during the year. In 2010, net cash
used in investing activities was primarily related to the reinvestment of funds from maturities and
redemptions.
Financing Activities. The majority of cash used in financing activities in 2012, 2011 and 2010 was to
repurchase $41.8 million, $92.0 million, and $63.6 million of our common stock, respectively, and to pay
dividends to stockholders. Additionally, cash was used to pay down $10.0 million on the line of credit
provided by the Amended Credit Facility in 2012 and 2011.
Investments
The amortized cost of our investment portfolio was $1.95 billion and the fair value was $2.15 billion
as of December 31, 2012.
We employ an investment strategy that emphasizes asset quality and considers the durations of
fixed maturity securities against anticipated claim payments and expenditures, other liabilities, and
capital needs. Our investment portfolio is structured so that investments mature periodically in
reasonable relation to current expectations of future claim payments. Currently, we make claim
payments from positive cash flow from operations and use excess cash to invest in operations, invest in
marketable securities, return capital to our stockholders (through dividends and share repurchases), and
fund growth.
As of December 31, 2012, our investment portfolio, which is classified as available-for-sale,
consisted of 94.2% fixed maturity securities whose fair values may fluctuate due to interest rate
changes. We strive to limit interest rate risk by managing the duration of our fixed maturity securities.
Our fixed maturity securities (excluding cash and cash equivalents) had a duration of 4.2 at December
31, 2012. To minimize interest rate risk, our portfolio is weighted toward short-term and intermediate-
term bonds; however, our investment strategy balances consideration of duration, yield, and credit risk.
Our investment guidelines require that the minimum weighted average quality of our fixed maturity
securities portfolio shall be “AA-.” Our fixed maturity securities portfolio had a weighted average
quality of “AA-” as of December 31, 2012, with 65.9% of the market value rated “AA” or better.
We carry our portfolio of equity securities on our balance sheet at fair value. We minimize our
exposure to equity price risk by investing primarily in the equity securities of mid-to-large capitalization
issuers and by diversifying our equity holdings across several
industry sectors. Equity securities
represented 5.8% of our investment portfolio at December 31, 2012.
Given the economic uncertainty and continuing market volatility, we believe that our current asset
allocation best meets our strategy to preserve capital for policyholders, to provide sufficient income to
support insurance operations, and to effectively grow book value over a long-term investment horizon.
We seek to maximize total
investment returns within the constraints of prudent portfolio
management. The asset allocation is reevaluated by the Finance Committee of the Board of Directors
on a quarterly basis. We employ Conning Asset Management (Conning) to act as our independent
investment manager. Conning follows our written investment guidelines based upon strategies approved
by the Board of Directors. In addition to the construction and management of the portfolio, we utilize
the investment advisory services of Conning. These services include investment accounting and
company modeling using Dynamic Financial Analysis (DFA). The DFA tool is utilized to develop
portfolio targets and objectives, which in turn are used in constructing an optimal portfolio.
45
05628
The following table shows the estimated fair value, the percentage of the fair value to total invested
assets, and the average tax equivalent yield based on the fair value of each category of invested assets as
of December 31, 2012.
Category
Estimated
Fair Value
Percentage of Total
Yield
(in thousands, except percentages)
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgaged-backed securities. . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgaged-backed securities. . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 152,490
93,967
758,516
676,243
252,852
56,120
34,240
125,086
7.1%
4.3
35.3
31.5
11.8
2.6
1.6
5.8
Total investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$2,149,514
100.0%
Weighted average yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4%
3.2
5.8
3.8
4.2
3.1
1.2
4.4
4.4%
The following table shows the percentage of total estimated fair value of our fixed maturity
securities as of December 31, 2012 by credit rating category, using the lower of ratings assigned by
Moody’s Investor Service and/or Standard & Poor’s.
Rating
Percentage of Total
Estimated Fair Value
“AAA” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“AA” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“A” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“BBB” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Below Investment Grade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16.6%
49.3
24.5
9.5
0.1
100.0%
Investments that we currently own could be subject to default by the issuer or could suffer declines
in fair value that become other-than-temporary. We regularly assess individual securities as part of our
ongoing portfolio management, including the identification of other-than-temporary declines in fair
value. Our other-than-temporary assessment includes reviewing the extent and duration of declines in
fair value of investments below amortized cost, historical and projected financial performance and near-
term prospects of the issuer, the outlook for industry sectors, credit rating, and macro-economic
changes. We also make a determination as to whether it is not more likely than not that we will be
required to sell the security before its fair value recovers above cost, or to maturity.
Based on our review of fixed maturity and equity securities, we believe that we appropriately
identified the declines in the fair values of our unrealized losses at December 31, 2012 and 2011. We
determined that the unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities were primarily the result of prevailing
interest rates and not the credit quality of the issuers. The fixed maturity securities whose fair value was
less than amortized cost were not determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired given the severity
and duration of the impairment, the credit quality of the issuers, the Company’s intent to not sell the
securities, and a determination that it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to
sell the securities until fair value recovers to above cost, or to maturity.
Based on reviews of the equity securities as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company
recognized total impairments of $0.7 million and $0.1 million in the fair values of eleven and four equity
securities as a result of the severity and duration of the change in fair values of those securities as of
December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
46
31750
The cost or amortized cost, gross unrealized gains, gross unrealized losses, and estimated fair value
of our investments were as follows:
Amortized
Cost
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
(in thousands)
Estimated
Fair Value
At December 31, 2012
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-backed securities . . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total investments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 138,839
88,202
689,776
627,047
236,461
54,755
34,062
1,869,142
81,067
$ 13,651
5,765
68,740
49,461
16,488
1,410
211
155,726
45,399
$ — $ 152,490
93,967
758,516
676,243
252,852
56,120
34,240
—
—
(265)
(97)
(45)
(33)
(440)
(1,380)
2,024,428
125,086
$1,950,209
$201,125
$(1,820)
$2,149,514
At December 31, 2011
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-backed securities . . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total investments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 122,144
101,520
719,431
467,470
262,961
20,756
11,934
1,706,216
64,962
$1,771,178
$ 15,222
6,942
70,391
35,745
19,154
910
471
148,835
34,639
$183,474
$
(1)
(14)
(186)
(1,546)
(604)
(1)
—
(2,352)
(1,555)
$(3,907)
$ 137,365
108,448
789,636
501,669
281,511
21,665
12,405
1,852,699
98,046
$1,950,745
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2012, by
contractual maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities differ from contractual maturities because
borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
Due in one year or less . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after one year through five years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after five years through ten years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after ten years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mortgage and asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortized Cost
Estimated
Fair Value
(in thousands)
$ 113,909
641,161
587,349
201,445
325,278
$ 115,939
684,751
655,031
225,495
343,212
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,869,142
$2,024,428
47
47866
Net realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) on fixed maturity and equity securities were
as follows:
Net realized gains:
Fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2012
December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
2010
$ 3,774
1,274
$ 5,048
$19,315
846
$20,161
$
710
9,427
$10,137
Change in unrealized gains (losses):
Fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 8,803
10,935
$47,897
2,235
$ (2,632)
1,517
$19,738
$50,132
$ (1,115)
Net investment income was as follows:
Fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash equivalents and restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$71,293
3,248
351
2012
December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
$80,361
1,885
279
2010
$83,817
1,399
240
Investment expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
74,892
(2,529)
$72,363
82,525
(2,408)
$80,117
85,456
(2,424)
$83,032
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table identifies our long-term debt and contractual obligations as of December 31,
2012.
Operating leases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes payable(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Capital leases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Losses and LAE reserves(2)(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total contractual obligations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payment Due By Period
Total
Less Than
1 Year
$
24,124
146,134
2,510
2,231,540
$
7,014
12,623
1,130
283,294
1-3 Years
(in thousands)
$ 11,161
74,801
1,380
335,477
4-5 Years
More Than
5 Years
$
5,346
2,879
—
214,963
$
603
55,831
—
1,397,806
$2,404,308
$304,061
$422,819
$223,188
$1,454,240
(1) Notes payable obligations reflect payments for the principal and estimated interest expense based on LIBOR rates plus a
margin. The estimated interest expense was based on the contractual obligations of the debt outstanding as of December 31,
2012. The interest rates range from 1.46% to 4.56%.
(2) The losses and LAE reserves are presented gross of reinsurance recoverables for unpaid losses, which were as follows for
each of the periods presented above:
Recoveries Due By Period
Reinsurance recoverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$(805,386)
$(41,374)
Total
Less Than
1 Year
1-3 Years
(in thousands)
$(79,937)
4-5 Years
More Than
5 Years
$(75,496) $(608,579)
(3) Estimated losses and LAE reserve payment patterns have been computed based on historical information. Our calculation of
loss and LAE reserve payments by period is subject to the same uncertainties associated with determining the level of
reserves and to the additional uncertainties arising from the difficulty of predicting when claims (including claims that have
not yet been reported to us) will be paid. For a discussion of our reserving process, see “—Critical Accounting Policies—
Reserves for Losses and LAE.” Actual payments of losses and LAE by period will vary, perhaps materially, from the above
table to the extent that current estimates of losses and LAE reserves vary from actual ultimate claims amounts due to
variations between expected and actual payout patterns.
48
51589
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Critical Accounting Policies
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires both the use of
estimates and judgment relative to the application of appropriate accounting policies. Our accounting
policies are described in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements, but we believe that the
following matters are particularly important to an understanding of our financial statements because
changes in these estimates or changes in the assumptions used to make them could have a material
impact on our results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.
Reserves for Losses and LAE
Accounting for workers’ compensation insurance requires us to estimate the liability for the
expected ultimate cost of unpaid losses and LAE (loss reserves) as of a balance sheet date. Loss reserve
estimates are inherently uncertain because the ultimate amount we pay for many of the claims we have
incurred as of the balance sheet date will not be known for many years. Our estimate of loss reserves is
intended to equal the difference between the expected ultimate losses and LAE of all claims that have
occurred as of a balance sheet date and amounts already paid. We establish loss reserves based on our
own analysis of emerging claims experience and environmental conditions in our markets and review of
the results of various actuarial projections. Our aggregate carried reserve for unpaid losses and LAE is
the sum of our reserves for each accident year (point estimate) and represents our best estimate of
outstanding loss reserves.
The amount by which estimated losses in the aggregate differ from those previously estimated for a
specific time period is known as reserve “development.” Reserve development is unfavorable when
losses ultimately settle for more than the amount reserved or subsequent estimates indicate a basis for
reserve increases on open claims, causing the previously estimated loss reserves to be “deficient.”
Reserve development is favorable when estimates of ultimate losses indicate a decrease in established
reserves, causing the previously estimated loss reserves to be “redundant.” Development is reflected in
our operating results through an adjustment to incurred losses and LAE during the period in which it is
recognized.
Although claims for which reserves are established may not be paid for several years or more, we
do not discount loss reserves in our financial statements for the time value of money.
The three main components of our reserves for unpaid losses and LAE are case reserves, incurred
but not reported (IBNR) loss reserves, and LAE reserves.
When claims are reported to us, we establish individual estimates of the ultimate cost of each claim
(case reserves). These case reserves are continually monitored and revised in response to new
information and for amounts paid.
IBNR is an actuarial estimate of future payments on claims that have occurred but have not yet
been reported to us. In addition to this provision for late reported claims, we also estimate, and make a
provision for, the extent to which the case reserves on known claims may develop and for additional
payments on closed claims, known as “reopening.” IBNR reserves apply to the entire body of claims
arising from a specific time period, rather than a specific claim. Most of our IBNR reserves relate to
estimated future claim payments on recorded open claims.
LAE reserves are our estimate of the future expenses of investigating, administering, and settling
claims that will be paid to manage claims that have occurred, including legal expenses. LAE reserves
are established in the aggregate, rather than on a claim-by-claim basis.
A portion of our obligations for losses and LAE are ceded to unaffiliated reinsurers. The amount
of reinsurance that will be recoverable on our losses and LAE reserves includes both the reinsurance
recoverable from our excess of loss reinsurance policies, as well as reinsurance recoverable under the
terms of the LPT Agreement.
49
11423
Our reserves for unpaid losses and LAE (gross and net of reinsurance),
including the main
components of such reserves, were as follows:
Case reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IBNR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross unpaid losses and LAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less reinsurance recoverables on unpaid losses and LAE, gross . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net unpaid losses and LAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
As of December 31,
2012
2011
(in thousands)
$ 955,715
979,185
296,640
2,231,540
805,386
$1,426,154
$ 935,263
1,047,220
289,880
2,272,363
940,840
$1,331,523
We use actuarial methodologies to analyze and estimate the aggregate amount of unpaid losses and
LAE. Management considers the results of various actuarial projection methods and their underlying
assumptions, among other factors, in establishing reserves for unpaid losses and LAE.
Judgment is required in the actuarial estimation of loss reserves, including the selection of various
actuarial methodologies to project the following: the ultimate cost of claims; the selection of projection
parameters based on historical company data, industry data, and other benchmarks; the identification
and quantification of potential changes in parameters from historical levels to current and future levels
due to changes in future claims development expectations; and the weighting of differing reserve
indications resulting from alternative methods and assumptions. The adequacy of our ultimate loss
reserves is inherently uncertain and represents a significant risk to our business. We attempt to mitigate
this risk through our claims management processes and by monitoring and reacting to statistics relating
to the cost and duration of claims.
We retain an independent actuarial consulting firm (Consulting Actuary) to perform comprehen-
sive studies of our liability for losses and LAE on a semi-annual basis. The role of the Consulting
Actuary is to conduct sufficient analyses to produce a range of reasonable estimates, as well as a point
estimate, of our liability for unpaid losses and LAE, and to present those results to our actuarial staff
and to management.
The Consulting Actuary determines its point estimate for EICN based on a combination of
methodologies, similar to those utilized for our other insurance subsidiaries, as described below. While
such a determination, based on a combination of methodologies, is valid, management believes that
using strictly paid loss methods for Nevada losses is the preferred approach given our depth of
knowledge of Nevada losses and the consistency of paid data over time resulting from and related to the
statutory prohibition of entering into full and final settlements of Nevada claims. This paid data
provides a stable base for estimation of reserves. The Consulting Actuary has provided us with a
separate calculation for EICN that is based strictly on the historically utilized paid loss methods.
We compile and aggregate our claims data by grouping the claims according to the year or quarter
in which the claim occurred (“accident year” or “accident quarter”) when analyzing claim payment and
emergence patterns and trends over time. Additionally, claims data is aggregated and compiled
separately for different types of claims or claimant benefits and for different states or groups of states in
which we do business.
Our internal actuaries and the Consulting Actuary prepare reserve estimates for all accident years
using our own historical claims data and many of the generally accepted actuarial methodologies for
estimating loss reserves, such as paid loss development methods, incurred loss development methods,
and Bornhuetter-Ferguson methods. These methods vary in their
to different
information, characteristics, and dynamics in the data, and the results assist the actuary in considering
these characteristics and dynamics in the historical data. The methods employed for each segment of
claims data, and the relative weight accorded to each method, vary depending on the nature of the
claims segment and on the age of the claims.
responsiveness
Each actuarial methodology requires the selection and application of various parameters and
assumptions. The key parameters and assumptions include: the pattern with which our aggregate claims
data will be paid or will emerge over time; claims cost inflation rates; the effects of legislative benefit
50
09883
changes and/or judicial changes; and trends in the frequency of claims, both overall and by severity of
claim. We believe the pattern with which our aggregate claims data will be paid or emerge over time
and claims cost inflation rates are the most important parameters and assumptions.
In Nevada, one method involves adjusting historical data for inflation. The inflation rates used in
the analysis are judgmentally selected based on historical year-to-year movements in the cost of claims
observed in our insurance subsidiaries’ data and industry-wide data, as well as on broader inflation
indices. The results of this method would differ if different inflation rates were selected.
In projections using December 31, 2012 data, the method that uses explicit medical cost inflation
assumptions included medical cost inflation assumptions ranging from 3.5% to 5.5%. The selection of
medical cost inflation assumptions used has been based on observed recent and longer-term historical
medical cost inflation in our claims data and in the U.S. economy more generally. The rate of medical
cost inflation, as reflected in our historical medical payments per claim, has averaged approximately
4.2% over the past 10 years. The rate of medical cost inflation in the general U.S. economy, as
measured by the consumer price index-medical care, has averaged approximately 3.8% over the past 10
years.
Management along with internal actuarial staff and the Consulting Actuary separately analyze
LAE and estimate unpaid LAE. These analyses rely primarily on examining the relationship between
the aggregate amounts that have been spent on LAE historically, compared with the volume of claims
activity for the corresponding historical calendar periods. The portion of unpaid LAE that will be
recoverable from reinsurers is estimated based on the contractual reinsurance terms.
The range of estimates of loss reserves produced by the Consulting Actuary is intended to
represent the range in which it is most likely that the ultimate losses will fall. This range is narrower
than the range of indications produced by the individual methods applied because it is not likely that
the high or low result will emerge for every claim segment and accident year. The Consulting Actuary’s
point estimate of loss reserves is based on a judgmental selection for each claim segment from within
the range of results indicated by the different actuarial methods.
Management formally establishes loss reserves for financial statement purposes on a quarterly
basis. In doing so, we make reference to the most current analyses of our Consulting Actuary, and to a
lesser degree, to that of our internal actuarial staff, including a review of the assumptions and the results
of the various actuarial methods used. Comprehensive studies are conducted as of June 30 and
December 31 by both internal actuarial staff and the Consulting Actuary. On the alternate quarters, the
results of the preceding quarter’s studies are updated for actual claim payment activity by internal
actuarial staff.
The aggregate carried reserve calculated by management represents our best estimate of our
outstanding unpaid losses and LAE. In establishing management’s best estimate of unpaid losses and
LAE at December 31 for the last three years, management and internal actuarial staff reviewed and
considered the following: (a) the Consulting Actuary’s assumptions, point estimate, and range; (b) the
inherent uncertainty of workers’ compensation liabilities for unpaid losses and LAE; and (c) the
potential
reversal of California workers’ compensation reforms.
Management did not quantify a specific loss reserve increment for each uncertainty, but rather
established an overall provision for loss reserves that represented management’s best estimate of unpaid
losses and LAE in light of the historical data, actuarial assumptions, point estimate and range, and
current facts and circumstances. Management continued to use a range and point estimate for EICN
based on paid loss methods, which our experience in Nevada indicates is more appropriate.
legislative and/or
judicial
for
Management’s best estimate of unpaid losses and LAE, net of reinsurance, was $6.6 million, $8.4
million, and $13.8 million above the value calculated based on the historically utilized paid loss methods
for EICN and a combination of methodologies for our other insurance subsidiaries at December 31,
2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
51
The table below provides the actuarial range of estimated liabilities for net unpaid losses and LAE
and our carried reserves.
63900
Low end of actuarial range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Carried reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
High end of actuarial range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,307,873
1,426,154
1,620,565
2012
2010
As of December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
$1,227,199
1,331,523
1,471,971
$1,244,038
1,323,686
1,499,042
As of December 31, 2012, California and Nevada represented approximately 79% of our reserves
for unpaid losses and LAE on our consolidated balance sheet.
In California, where our operations began in 2002, the actuaries’ and management’s initial
expectations of ultimate losses and patterns of loss emergence and payment were based on benchmarks
derived from analyses of historical insurance industry data in California. No historical data from our
California insurance subsidiary existed prior to July 1, 2002; however, some historical data was available
for the prior years for some of the market segments we entered in California, but was limited as to the
number of loss reserve evaluation points available. The industry-based benchmarks were judgmentally
adjusted for the anticipated impact of significant environmental changes, specifically the enactment of
major changes to the statutory workers’ compensation benefit structure and the manner in which claims
are administered and adjudicated in California. The actual emergence and payment of claims by our
California insurance subsidiary has been more favorable than those initial expectations through 2009,
due at least in part to the impact of the enactment of major changes in the California workers’
compensation environment; however, our recent loss experience, beginning in 2010, indicates an upward
trend in medical and indemnity costs that are reflected in our loss reserves. We assume that increasing
medical cost trends will continue and will impact our long-term claims costs and loss reserves.
In Nevada, we have compiled a lengthy history of workers’ compensation claims payment patterns
based on the business of the Nevada State Industrial Insurance System (the Fund) and EICN, but the
emergence and payment of claims in recent years has been more favorable than in the long-term history
in Nevada with the Fund. The expected patterns of claim payments and emergence used in the
projection of our ultimate claim payments are based on both long and short-term historical data. In
recent evaluations, claim patterns have continued to emerge in a manner consistent with short-term
historical data. Consequently, our selection of claim projection patterns has relied more heavily on
patterns observed in recent years.
Our
insurance subsidiaries have been operating in a period characterized by changing
environmental conditions in our major markets, entry into new markets, and operational changes.
During periods characterized by such changes, at each evaluation, the actuaries and management must
make judgments as to the relative weight to accord to long-term historical and recent company data,
external data, evaluations of environmental and operational changes, and other factors in selecting the
methods to use in projecting ultimate losses and LAE, the parameters to incorporate in those methods,
and the relative weights to accord to the different projection indications. At each evaluation,
management has given weight to new data, recent indications, and evaluations of environmental
conditions and changes that implicitly reflect management’s expectation as to the degree to which the
future will resemble the most recent information and most recent changes, compared with long-term
claim payment, claims emergence, and claim cost inflation patterns.
More than 59% of our claims payments during the three years ended December 31, 2012 related to
medical care for injured workers. The utilization and cost of medical services in the future is a
significant source of uncertainty in the establishment of loss reserves for workers’ compensation. Our
loss reserves are established based on reviewing the results of actuarial methods, some of which do not
contain explicit medical claim cost inflation rates; however, because medical care may be provided to an
injured worker over many years, and in some cases decades, the pace of medical claim cost inflation has
a significant impact on our ultimate claim payments. For example, if the rate of medical claim cost
inflation increases by 1% above the inflation rate that is implicitly included in the loss reserves at
December 31, 2012, we estimate that future medical costs over the lifetime of current claims would
increase by approximately $84 million on a net-of-reinsurance basis.
52
70275
The range of estimates of unpaid losses and LAE produced by our actuarial reviews of medical cost
inflation data provide some indication of the potential variability of future losses and LAE payments;
however, the full range of potential variation is difficult to estimate because our insurance subsidiaries
do not have a lengthy operating history in many of the states in which we now operate.
Our reserve estimates reflect expected increases in the costs of contested claims, but do not assume
any losses resulting from significant new legal liability theories. Our reserve estimates also assume that
there will not be significant future changes in the regulatory and legislative environment. In the event of
significant new legal liability theories or new regulation or legislation, we will attempt to quantify its
impact on our business.
If the actual unpaid losses and LAE were at the high or the low end of the actuarial range, the
impact on our financial results would have been as follows:
2012
December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
2010
Increase (decrease) in reserves
At low end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At high end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$(118,281) $(104,324) $ (79,648)
175,356
140,448
194,411
Increase (decrease) in equity and net income, net of income tax
effect
At low end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At high end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 76,883
(126,367)
$ 67,811
(91,291)
$ 51,771
(113,981)
Actual losses are affected by a more complex combination of forces and dynamics than any one
model or actuarial methodology can represent, and each methodology is an approximation of these
complex forces and dynamics. None of the methods are designed or intended to produce an indication
that is systematically higher or lower than the other methods. At any given evaluation date, some of the
actuarial projection methods produce indications outside the Consulting Actuary’s selected range.
Accordingly, we believe that the range of potential outcomes is considerably wider than the actuarially
estimated range of the most likely outcomes. We increased our prior years’ net reserves for unpaid
losses and LAE by $1.8 million and $1.1 million as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, while
we decreased our prior years’ reserves for unpaid losses and LAE by $14.1 million as of December 31,
2010, illustrating that changes in estimates of loss reserves can be significant from year-to-year. We have
no basis for anticipating whether actual future payments of losses and LAE may be either greater than
or less than the reserve for unpaid losses and LAE currently on our balance sheet.
Additionally, any adjustment to the estimated ceded reserves under the LPT Agreement results in
a cumulative adjustment to the Deferred Gain, which is also included in losses and LAE incurred in the
consolidated statement of income and comprehensive income, so that the Deferred Gain reflects the
balance that would have existed had the revised reserves been recognized at the inception of the LPT
Agreement. The table below provides the actuarial range of estimated liabilities for gross unpaid losses
and LAE under the LPT Agreement and our carried reserves.
Low end of actuarial range. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LPT carried reserves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
High end of actuarial range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
As of December 31,
2012
(in thousands)
$603,752
672,344
717,530
53
19976
If the actual gross unpaid losses and LAE under the LPT Agreement were at the high or the low
end of the actuarial range, the impact on our financial results, excluding the impact of the contingent
profit commission, would have been as follows:
Increase (decrease) in reserves
At low end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At high end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$(68,592)
45,187
Increase (decrease) in equity and net income resulting from Deferred Gain
At low end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At high end of range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 47,762
(32,644)
December 31,
2012
(in thousands)
Reinsurance Recoverables
Reinsurance recoverables represent: (a) amounts currently due from reinsurers on paid losses and
LAE; (b) amounts recoverable from reinsurers on case basis estimates of reported losses; and (c)
amounts recoverable from reinsurers on actuarial estimates of IBNR for losses and LAE. These
recoverables are based on our current estimates of the underlying losses and LAE, and are reported on
our consolidated balance sheets separately as assets, as reinsurance does not relieve us of our legal
liability to policyholders. We bear credit risk with respect to the reinsurers, which can be significant
considering that some of the unpaid losses and LAE remain outstanding for an extended period of time.
Reinsurers may refuse or fail to pay losses that we cede to them, or they might delay payment. We are
required to pay losses even if a reinsurer refuses or fails to meet its obligations under the applicable
reinsurance agreement. We continually monitor the financial condition and rating agency ratings of our
reinsurers. No material amounts due from reinsurers have been written-off as uncollectible since our
inception in 2000, and we believe that amounts currently reflected in our consolidated financial
statements will similarly not require any material prospective adjustment.
Under the LPT Agreement, the Fund initially ceded $1.5 billion in liabilities for the incurred but
unpaid losses and LAE related to claims incurred prior to July 1, 1995 for consideration of $775.0
million in cash. The estimated remaining liabilities subject to the LPT Agreement were $672.3 million
as of December 31, 2012. Losses and LAE paid with respect to the LPT Agreement totaled $605.1
million at December 31, 2012. We account for the LPT Agreement as retroactive reinsurance. Entry
into the LPT Agreement resulted in a deferred reinsurance gain that was recorded on our consolidated
balance sheet as a liability. The Deferred Gain is being amortized using the recovery method, whereby
the amortization is determined by the proportion of actual reinsurance recoveries to total estimated
recoveries through the life of the LPT Agreement, and the amortization is reflected in losses and LAE.
Changes in estimates of the reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement may significantly impact the
Deferred Gain on our consolidated balance sheet and losses and LAE in our consolidated statement of
income and comprehensive income.
Additionally, we are entitled to receive a contingent commission under the LPT Agreement. The
contingent profit is an amount based on the favorable difference between actual paid losses and LAE
and expected paid losses and LAE as established in the LPT Agreement. The calculation of actual
amounts paid versus expected amounts is determined every five years beginning June 30, 2004 for the
first twenty-five years of the agreement. We are paid 30% of the favorable difference between the
actual and expected losses and LAE paid at each calculation point. Each quarter, management records
its best estimate of the estimated ultimate contingent profit commission through June 30, 2024, which is
impacted by estimates for ceded loss and LAE reserves. The related Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT
Agreement is amortized using the recovery method, whereby the amortization is determined by the
proportion of actual reinsurance recoveries to total estimated recoveries over the life of the contingent
profit commission, or through June 30, 2024, and is recorded in losses and LAE incurred in the
accompanying consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income. Changes in estimates of
the reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement may significantly impact the contingent commission
receivable—LPT Agreement and the Deferred Gain on our consolidated balance sheet and losses and
LAE in our consolidated statement of income and comprehensive income.
54
69000
Recognition of Premium Revenue
Premium revenue is recognized over the period of the contract in proportion to the amount of
insurance protection provided. At the end of the policy term, payroll-based premium audits are
performed on substantially all policyholder accounts to determine net premiums earned for the policy
year. Earned but unbilled premiums include estimated future audit premiums based on our historical
experience. These estimates are subject to changes in policyholders’ payrolls, economic conditions, and
seasonality, and are continually reviewed and adjusted as experience develops or new information
becomes known. Any such adjustments are included in current operations; however, they are partially
offset by the resulting changes in losses and LAE, commission expenses, and premium taxes. Although
considerable variability is inherent in such estimates, we believe that amounts currently reflected in our
consolidated financial statements will similarly not require any material prospective adjustment.
Income Taxes
Our accounting for income taxes considers the current and deferred tax consequences of all
transactions that have been recognized in our consolidated financial statements using the provisions of
enacted tax laws. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between the
financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates
and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. The effect on deferred tax
assets and liabilities resulting from a tax rate change affects our net income or loss in the period that
includes the enactment date of the tax rate change. Our income tax returns are subject to audit by the
Internal Revenue Service and various state tax authorities. Significant disputes may arise with these tax
authorities involving issues of the timing and amount of deductions and allocations of income among
various tax jurisdictions because of differing interpretations of tax laws and regulations. We periodically
evaluate our exposures associated with tax filing positions. Although we believe our positions comply
with applicable laws, we record liabilities based upon estimates of the ultimate outcomes of these
matters.
In assessing whether our deferred tax assets will be realized, we consider whether it is more likely
than not that we will generate future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary
differences become deductible. We consider the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, tax
planning strategies, and projected future taxable income in making this assessment. If necessary, we
establish a valuation allowance to reduce the deferred tax assets to the amounts that are more likely
than not to be realized.
Valuation of Investments
Our investments in fixed maturity and equity securities are classified as available-for-sale and are
reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings and reported as a
separate component of equity, net of deferred taxes, in accumulated other comprehensive income.
Realized gains and losses on sales of
investments are recognized in operations on a specific-
identification basis.
Fair values of our available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities are based on quoted
market prices, where available. These fair values are obtained primarily from third party pricing
services, which generally use Level 1 or Level 2 inputs in accordance with FASB guidance. The
Company obtains a quoted price for each security from third party pricing services, which are derived
through recently reported trades for identical or similar securities. For securities not actively traded, the
third party pricing services may use quoted market prices of similar instruments or discounted cash flow
analyses, incorporating inputs that are currently observable in the markets for similar securities. Inputs
that are often used in the valuation methodologies include, but are not limited to, broker quotes,
benchmark yields, credit spreads, default rates, and prepayment speeds. The Company also performs
quarterly analysis on the prices received from third parties to determine whether the prices are
reasonable estimates of fair value, including confirming the fair values of these securities through
observable market prices using an alternative pricing source. If differences are noted in this review, the
Company may obtain additional information from other pricing services to validate the quoted price.
See Note 7 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
55
87361
Impairment of Investment Securities. When, in the opinion of management, a decline in the fair
value of an equity security below its cost is considered to be “other-than-temporary,” the equity
security’s cost is written down to its fair value at the time the other-than-temporary decline is identified.
The determination of an other-than-temporary decline for debt securities includes, in addition to other
relevant factors, a presumption that if the fair value is below cost by a significant amount for a period of
time, a bifurcation of the write-down may be necessary. If management has the intent to sell the debt
security or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery,
the investment is written down to its fair value and the entire impairment is recorded as a realized loss
due to credit in the accompanying consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income. If
management does not have the intent to sell or will not be required to sell the debt security but does
not expect to recover the amortized cost basis of the debt security, the amount of the other-than-
temporary impairment is bifurcated between credit loss and other loss and recorded as a component of
realized gains and losses and in other comprehensive income, respectively,
in the consolidated
statements of income and comprehensive income. The amount of any write-down is determined by the
difference between the cost or amortized cost of the debt security and its fair value at the time the
other-than-temporary decline is identified.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
We prepare a valuation analysis for goodwill and other intangible assets, whereby we identify
whether events have occurred that may impact the carrying value of these assets and make assumptions
regarding future events, such as cash flows and profitability. Differences between the assumptions used
to prepare these valuations and actual results could materially impact the carrying amount of these
assets and our operating results.
New Accounting Standards
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs
In October 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update Number 2010-26, Accounting for
Costs Associated with Acquiring or Renewing Insurance Contracts that became effective in 2012. This
guidance changed the definition of acquisition costs which may be capitalized to specify costs which
including
relate directly to the successful acquisition of new or renewal
underwriting, policy issuance and processing, medical and inspection, and sales force contract selling.
It also defines incremental direct costs that must be capitalized as costs that result directly from contract
transactions that are essential to contract issuance, which would not have been incurred had the
contract transaction not occurred. All other costs are expensed as incurred. Capitalized costs are
amortized over the life of the contract. The Company adopted this standard on a prospective basis on
January 1, 2012 and the net effect of implementing this guidance was a $7.1 million increase in
underwriting and other operating expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.
insurance contracts,
Other Recent Accounting Guidance
Prior to December 31, 2012, additional accounting guidance had been issued that we either
implemented during 2012 or will implement in future periods. None of this guidance had or is expected
to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. See Note 6 in
the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Market risk is the risk of potential economic loss principally arising from adverse changes in the
fair value of financial instruments. The major components of market risk affecting us are credit risk,
interest rate risk, and equity price risk.
56
70112
Credit Risk
Our fixed maturity securities portfolio is exposed to credit risk, which we attempt to manage
through issuer and industry diversification. Our investment guidelines include limitations on the
minimum rating of fixed maturity securities in our investment portfolio, as well as restrictions on
investments in fixed maturity securities of a single issuer.
We also bear credit risk with respect to the reinsurers, which can be significant considering that
some of the unpaid losses and LAE remain outstanding for an extended period of time. We are
required to pay losses even if a reinsurer refuses or fails to meet its obligations under the applicable
reinsurance agreement. We continually monitor the financial condition and rating agency ratings of our
reinsurers. Additionally, we bear credit risk with respect to premiums receivable, which is generally
diversified due to the large number of entities composing the Company’s policyholder base and their
dispersion across many different industries.
Interest Rate Risk
Investments
The fair value of our fixed maturity securities portfolio is exposed to interest rate risk, the risk of
loss in fair value resulting from changes in prevailing interest rates, which we strive to limit by
managing duration. Our investments (excluding cash and cash equivalents) had a duration of 4.2 at
December 31, 2012. To minimize interest rate risk, our portfolio is weighted toward short-term and
intermediate-term bonds; however, our investment strategy balances consideration of duration, yield
and credit risk. We continually monitor the impact of interest rate changes on our liquidity obligations.
Sensitivity Analysis
The fair values or cash flows of market sensitive instruments are subject to potential losses in
future earnings resulting from changes in interest rates and other market rates or prices. Our sensitivity
analysis model uses a hypothetical change in market rates that reflects what we believe are reasonably
possible near-term changes in those rates (covering a period of time going forward up to one year from
the date of the consolidated financial statements). Actual results may differ from the hypothetical
change in market rates assumed in this disclosure. This sensitivity analysis does not reflect the results of
any action that we may take to mitigate such hypothetical losses in fair value.
We use fair values to measure our potential loss in this model, which includes fixed maturity
securities and short-term investments. For invested assets, we use modified duration modeling to
calculate changes in fair values. Durations on invested assets are adjusted for call, put, and interest rate
reset features. Invested asset portfolio durations are calculated on a market value weighted basis,
excluding accrued investment income, using holdings as of December 31, 2012. The estimated changes
in fair values on our fixed maturity securities including short-term investments, valued at $2.1 billion as
of December 31, 2012, based on specific changes in interest rates are as follows:
Changes in Interest Rates
300 basis point rise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
200 basis point rise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100 basis point rise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
50 basis point decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
100 basis point decline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Estimated
Increase (Decrease)
in Fair Value
(in thousands, except percentages)
$(221,280)
(151,972)
(77,681)
37,576
64,108
(10.9)%
(7.5)
(3.8)
1.9
3.2
The most significant assessment of the effects of hypothetical changes in interest rates on
investment income would be based on FASB guidance related to “Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees
and Costs Associated with Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases,” which
requires amortization adjustments for mortgage-backed securities. The rates at which the mortgages
underlying mortgage-backed securities are prepaid, and therefore the average life of mortgage-backed
securities, can vary depending on changes in interest rates (for example, mortgages are prepaid faster
57
13561
and the average life of mortgage-backed securities falls when interest rates decline). Adjustments for
changes in amortization are based on revised average life assumptions and would have an impact on
investment income if a significant portion of our residential mortgage-backed securities were purchased
at significant discounts or premiums to par value. As of December 31, 2012, the par value of our
residential mortgage-backed securities holdings was $233.9 million. Amortized cost is 101.1% of par
value. Since a majority of our mortgage-backed securities were purchased at a premium or discount that
is significant as a percentage of par, an adjustment could have a significant effect on investment income;
however, given the current economic conditions and prevailing interest rate environment, the rate of
prepayments is unlikely to accelerate. The residential mortgage-backed securities portion of the
investments as of December 31, 2012. Agency-backed residential
portfolio totaled 11.8% of total
mortgage pass-throughs totaled $250.6 million, or 99.1%, of the residential mortgage-backed securities
portion of the portfolio, and 11.7% of the total portfolio as of December 31, 2012.
Equity Price Risk
Equity price risk is the risk that we may incur losses in the fair value of the equity securities we
hold in our available-for-sale investment portfolio. Adverse changes in the market prices of the equity
securities we hold in our investment portfolio would result in decreases in the fair value of our total
assets. We minimize our exposure to equity price risk by investing primarily in the equity securities of
mid-to-large capitalization issuers and by diversifying our equity holdings across several
industry
sectors.
The table below shows the sensitivity of our equity securities to price changes as of December 31,
2012:
Cost
Fair Value
10% Fair
Value
Decrease
Pre-tax
Impact on
Total Equity
Securities
(in thousands)
10% Fair
Value
Increase
Pre-tax
Impact on
Total Equity
Securities
Total domestic equities . . . .
$81,067
$125,086
$112,577
$(12,509)
$137,595
$12,509
Effects of Inflation
Inflation could impact our financial statements and results of operations. Our estimates for losses
and LAE include assumptions about the timing of closure and future payment of claims and claims
handling expenses, such as medical treatments and litigation costs. To the extent inflation causes these
costs to increase above established reserves, we will be required to increase those reserves for losses and
LAE, reducing our earnings in the period in which the deficiency is identified. We consider inflation in
the reserving process by reviewing cost trends and our historical reserving results. We also consider an
estimate of increased costs in determining the adequacy of our rates, particularly as it relates to medical
and hospital rates where historical inflation rates have exceeded general inflation rates.
Fluctuations in rates of inflation also influence interest rates, which in turn impact the market value
of our investment portfolio and yields on new investments. Operating expenses, including payrolls, are
also impacted to a certain degree by inflation.
58
56900
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income for each of the three years
ended December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for each of the three years ended
December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for each of the three years ended December 31, 2012 .
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The following financial statement schedules are filed in Item 15 of Part IV of this report:
Financial Statement Schedules:
Schedule II. Condensed Financial Information of Registrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schedule VI. Supplemental Information Concerning Property-Casualty Insurance Operations . . .
Pursuant to Rule 7-05 of Regulation S-X, Schedules I, III, IV and V have been omitted as
the information to be set forth therein is included in the notes to the audited consolidated
financial statements.
Page
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
109
111
59
02249
MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the Company) is responsible for
establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting and for the assessment
of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. As defined by the Securities and
Exchange Commission, internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the
supervision of, the Company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, and effected by
the Company’s Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).
The Company’s internal control over financial reporting includes policies and procedures that: (a)
in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
pertain to the maintenance of records that,
transactions and dispositions of
(b) provide reasonable assurance that
transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance
with GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance
with authorizations of its management and Board of Directors; and (c) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of
the
Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
the Company’s assets;
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect all misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to
the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of
compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Management conducted an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2012 based on criteria established in Internal Control—
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway
Commission (COSO Framework).
Based on this assessment, management did not identify any material weaknesses in the internal
control over financial reporting and management has concluded that the Company’s internal control
over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2012.
The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, has
independently assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
A copy of their report is included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
March 1, 2013
60
22613
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM ON INTERNAL
CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
We have audited Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ (the Company) internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control—
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway
Commission (the COSO criteria). The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective
internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained
in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and
operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal
control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the
maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and
dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only
in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or
disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject
to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of
compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects,
effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited,
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements of Employers Holdings, Inc. and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2012 and our report dated March 1, 2013 expressed an unqualified
opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Los Angeles, California
March 1, 2013
61
92856
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Employers Holdings, Inc. and
Subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements
of income and comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years
in the period ended December 31, 2012. Our audits also included the financial statement schedules
listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedules are the responsibility of the
Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and
schedules based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An
audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the
consolidated financial position of Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries at December 31, 2012 and
2011, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2012, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedules, when considered in relation to the basic
financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly in all material respects the information set forth
therein.
As discussed in Note 5 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company changed its method
of accounting for deferred acquisition costs effective January 1, 2012.
We also have audited,
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control—
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway
Commission and our report dated March 1, 2013 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Los Angeles, California
March 1, 2013
62
52967
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Balance Sheets
As of December 31,
2011
As Restated
2012
(in thousands, except
share data)
Assets
Available for sale:
Fixed maturity securities at fair value (amortized cost $1,869,142 at
December 31, 2012 and $1,706,216 at December 31, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$2,024,428
$1,852,699
Equity securities at fair value (amortized cost $81,067 at December 31,
2012 and $64,962 at December 31, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash and cash equivalents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued investment income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Premiums receivable, less bad debt allowance of $5,957 at December 31,
2012 and $5,546 at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reinsurance recoverable for:
Paid losses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unpaid losses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Funds held by or deposited with reinsureds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred policy acquisition costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Federal income taxes recoverable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income taxes, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Property and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goodwill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingent commission receivable–LPT Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Claims and policy liabilities:
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unearned premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholders’ dividends accrued. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total claims and policy liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commissions and premium taxes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable and accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commitments and contingencies (Note 14)
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 150,000,000 shares authorized;
54,144,453 and 53,948,442 shares issued and 30,771,479 and 32,996,809
shares outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively . . . . . . .
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 25,000,000 shares authorized; none
issued . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additional paid-in capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Retained earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Treasury stock, at cost (23,372,974 shares at December 31, 2012 and
125,086
2,149,514
140,661
5,353
19,356
98,046
1,950,745
252,300
6,299
19,537
223,011
160,443
9,467
805,386
1,838
38,852
1,893
26,231
14,680
10,558
36,192
19,141
9,206
$3,511,339
$2,231,540
265,149
2,942
2,499,631
40,825
19,522
281,043
112,000
18,937
$2,971,958
10,729
940,840
1,102
37,524
1,993
22,140
11,360
11,728
36,192
4,127
15,251
$3,482,310
$2,272,363
194,933
3,838
2,471,134
28,905
14,994
365,963
122,000
17,331
$3,020,327
$
542
$
540
—
325,990
445,850
129,549
—
318,989
346,490
116,719
20,951,633 shares at December 31, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(362,550)
539,381
$3,511,339
(320,755)
461,983
$3,482,310
See accompanying notes.
63
53462
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income
Years Ended December 31,
2011
As Restated
2012
(in thousands, except per share data)
2010
As Restated
Revenues
Net premiums earned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$501,464
72,363
5,048
307
$363,424
80,117
20,161
452
$321,786
83,032
10,137
649
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
579,182
464,154
415,604
Expenses
Losses and loss adjustment expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commission expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
287,910
65,580
3,204
121,440
3,504
481,638
262,511
47,344
3,423
100,717
3,642
417,637
Net income before income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
97,544
(9,347)
46,517
(2,106)
193,297
39,280
4,316
106,026
5,693
348,612
66,992
3,523
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$106,891
$ 48,623
$ 63,469
Comprehensive income
Unrealized gains during the period (net of taxes of $8,675,
$24,602, and $4,292 for the years ended December 31, 2012,
2011, and 2010, respectively). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less: reclassification adjustment for realized gains in net income
(net of taxes of $1,767, $7,056, and $3,548 for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively). . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 16,111
$ 45,691
$
6,910
3,281
13,105
6,589
Other comprehensive income, net of tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total comprehensive income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12,830
$119,721
32,586
$ 81,209
321
$ 63,790
Earnings per common share (Note 20):
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash dividends declared per common share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
$
$
3.40
3.37
0.24
$
$
$
1.30
1.30
0.24
$
$
$
1.53
1.53
0.24
Realized gains on investments, net
Net realized gains on investments before credit related
impairments on fixed maturity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 5,700
$ 20,255
$ 10,182
Other than temporary impairment, credit losses recognized in
earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Portion of impairment recognized in other comprehensive
income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(652)
—
(94)
—
(45)
—
$ 5,048
$ 20,161
$ 10,137
See accompanying notes.
64
13649
Treasury
Stock
at Cost
Total
Stockholders’
Equity
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity
Additional
Paid In
Capital
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income, Net
(in thousands, except share data)
Retained
Earnings
—
14
—
—
—
18
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Common Stock
Shares Amount
Balance, January 1, 2010
(As Previously Reported). . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,563,299
—
Adjustment (Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Balance, January 1, 2010 (As Restated) 53,563,299
—
7,783
Stock-based compensation (Note 16) .
Stock options exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vesting of restricted and
performance
stock units, net of shares withheld
to satisfy minimum tax
withholding (Note 16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acquisition of treasury stock
(Note 15). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend to common stockholders. . . .
Net income for the year (As
Restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in net unrealized gains on
investments, net of taxes of $744 . . .
Balance, December 31, 2010
208,036
—
—
$536
—
536
—
—
2
—
—
—
—
$311,282
$266,491
— (13,183)
$ 83,812
—
$(163,722)
—
$498,399
(13,183)
311,282
4,053
94
253,308
—
—
83,812
—
—
(163,722)
485,216
— $ 4,053
94
—
(1,231)
—
—
(9,949)
63,469
—
321
—
(1,229)
(64,386)
—
(64,386)
(9,935)
—
—
63,469
321
(As Restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,779,118
$538
$314,212
$306,828
$ 84,133
$(228,108)
$477,603
Balance, January 1, 2011 (As Restated) 53,779,118
—
92,646
Stock-based compensation (Note 16) .
Stock options exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vesting of restricted stock units, net
$538
—
1
$314,212
3,742
1,530
$306,828
—
—
$ 84,133
—
—
$(228,108)
—
—
$477,603
3,742
1,531
of shares withheld to satisfy
minimum
tax withholding (Note 16) . . . . . . . . . .
Acquisition of treasury stock
(Note 15). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend to common stockholders. . . .
Net income for the year (As
Restated). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in net unrealized gains on
investments, net of taxes of $17,546
Balance, December 31, 2011
76,678
—
—
1
—
—
—
—
(513)
—
—
(8,961)
48,623
—
32,586
—
(512)
(92,647)
—
(92,647)
(8,943)
—
—
48,623
32,586
(As Restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,948,442
$540
$318,989
$346,490
$116,719
$(320,755)
$461,983
Balance, January 1, 2012 (As Restated) 53,948,442
—
101,261
Stock-based compensation (Note 16) .
Stock options exercised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vesting of restricted stock units, net
$540
—
1
$318,989
6,141
1,430
$346,490
—
—
$116,719
—
—
$(320,755)
—
—
$461,983
6,141
1,431
of shares withheld to satisfy
minimum tax withholding
(Note 16). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acquisition of treasury stock
(Note 15). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend to common stockholders. . . .
Net income for the year . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in net unrealized gains on
investments, net of taxes of $6,908 .
94,750
—
—
1
—
—
—
—
(593)
—
—
—
(7,531)
23
— 106,891
—
—
—
—
—
(592)
(41,795)
—
—
(41,795)
(7,508)
106,891
—
—
12,830
—
12,830
Balance, December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,144,453
$542
$325,990
$445,850
$129,549
$(362,550)
$539,381
See accompanying notes.
65
78213
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
Years Ended December 31,
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
2012
Operating activities
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 106,891
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
(in thousands)
$ 48,623
$ 63,469
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of premium on investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Allowance for doubtful accounts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized losses (gains) on retirement of assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
Accrued investment income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Premiums receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reinsurance recoverable on paid and unpaid losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Funds held by or deposited with reinsureds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Federal income taxes recoverable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unearned premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contingent commission receivable—LPT Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash provided by operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Investing activities
Purchase of fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purchase of equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from sale of fixed maturity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from sale of equity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from maturities and redemptions of investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from sale of fixed assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Capital expenditures and other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash and cash equivalents provided by (used in) investing
activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5,601
6,141
7,019
411
(10,999)
(5,048)
245
181
(62,979)
136,716
(736)
100
(40,823)
70,216
3,028
(84,920)
—
(15,014)
15,741
131,771
6,388
3,742
7,242
(2,057)
(1,608)
(20,161)
(155)
3,485
(48,399)
18,889
2,599
2,055
(7,366)
45,448
(4,265)
(17,436)
—
(1,863)
8,054
43,215
(455,221)
(31,478)
139,792
16,646
149,259
226
(5,116)
(236,633)
(21,310)
317,365
6,476
126,902
396
(4,687)
946
(184,946)
10,650
199,159
Financing activities
(41,795)
Acquisition of treasury stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
839
Cash transactions related to stock-based compensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(7,508)
Dividends paid to stockholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(10,000)
Payments on notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(58,464)
Net cash used in financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(111,639)
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
252,300
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 140,661
(91,975)
1,019
(8,943)
(10,000)
(109,899)
132,475
119,825
$ 252,300
Cash paid (received) for income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
1,819
$ (2,697)
7,098
4,053
6,105
(3,611)
4,680
(10,137)
420
33
12,265
95,720
78,638
44
(145,929)
(9,092)
(10,455)
(18,953)
(12,210)
(762)
(4,395)
56,981
(273,833)
(17,673)
102,659
17,753
123,672
—
(1,905)
(2,000)
(51,327)
(63,592)
(1,135)
(9,935)
—
(74,662)
(69,008)
188,833
$ 119,825
$
$
1,007
6,000
Cash paid for interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
3,375
Schedule of non-cash transactions
Financed property and equipment purchases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
3,106
$
$
See accompanying notes.
66
3,561
— $
2,009
77192
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
1. Basis of Presentation and Summary of Operations
Nature of Operations and Organization
Employers Holdings, Inc. (EHI) is a Nevada holding company. Through its wholly owned
insurance subsidiaries, Employers Insurance Company of Nevada (EICN), Employers Compensation
Insurance Company (ECIC), Employers Preferred Insurance Company (EPIC), and Employers
Assurance Company (EAC), EHI is engaged in the commercial property and casualty insurance
industry, specializing in workers’ compensation products and services. Unless otherwise indicated, all
references to the “Company” refer to EHI, together with its subsidiaries.
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). All intercompany transactions and balances have
been eliminated in consolidation.
The Company considers an operating segment to be any component of its business whose operating
results are regularly reviewed by the Company’s chief operating decision makers to make decisions
about resources to be allocated to the segment and assess its performance based on discrete financial
information. Currently, the Company has one operating segment, workers’ compensation insurance and
related services.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. As a result,
actual results could differ from these estimates. The most significant areas that require management
judgment are the estimate of unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE), evaluation of
reinsurance recoverables, recognition of premium revenue, deferred income taxes, investments, and the
valuation of goodwill and intangible assets.
Reclassifications
Certain prior period information has been reclassified to conform to the current period
presentation.
2. Revision of Previously Issued Consolidated Financial Statements
The Company is revising its historical consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2011
and for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. These revisions correct the manner in which
the Company account
for the contingent profit commission under the Loss Portfolio Transfer
Agreement (LPT Agreement). The Company concluded that a modification was necessary in order to
properly apply reinsurance accounting principles to the contingent profit commission under the LPT
Agreement. This revision resulted in an increase to the contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets, which impacts the Deferred reinsurance
gain—LPT Agreement (Deferred Gain) and is reflected in losses and LAE incurred in its consolidated
statements of income and comprehensive income over the life of the contingent profit commission. The
revision did not impact the total estimated amount of contingent commission expected to be received
over the life of the contingent profit commission (See Note 4). The Company assessed the impact of the
revisions on its prior interim and annual consolidated financial statements and concluded that they were
67
54294
not material to any individual quarters or annual period of those consolidated financial statements.
Although the effect of these revisions was not material to those previously issued financial statements,
the cumulative effect of reflecting these revisions in the current year would have been material for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. Since these revisions are treated as corrections to the Company’s
the revisions are considered to be a restatement under GAAP.
prior period financial results,
Accordingly, the revised financial information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K has been
identified as “restated.”
The revisions to the consolidated statements of cash flows did not have a material impact on any
amounts previously reported for net cash from operating activities, investing activities, or financing
activities. As a result, there was no impact to net change in cash and cash equivalents for any previously
reported periods.
The impact of the revisions to the previously issued consolidated statements of income and
comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 was to increase the commission
expense and decrease the losses and LAE, with the net effect of increasing net income and earnings per
share.
The following table presents the summary impacts of the restatement adjustment to the previously
reported consolidated retained earnings at December 31, 2009:
Retained earnings at December 31, 2009 (previously reported) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Retained earnings at December 31, 2009 (as restated) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31,
2009
(in thousands)
$266,491
(13,183)
$253,308
Restated Consolidated Financial Statements
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued consolidated
balance sheet as of December 31, 2011:
Assets
Contingent commission receivable—LPT Agreement . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stockholders’ equity:
Retained earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
December 31, 2011
As Reported As Restated
(in thousands)
$
— $
18,812
3,481,744
4,127
15,251
3,482,310
353,194
3,007,558
365,963
3,020,327
358,693
474,186
3,481,744
346,490
461,983
3,482,310
68
46135
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued consolidated
statements of income and comprehensive income for fiscal years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010:
Revenues
Net premiums earned. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total revenues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expenses
Losses and loss adjustment expenses. . . . . . . . . .
Commission expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other operating expenses. . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income before income taxes. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2010
As Reported As Restated As Reported As Restated
(in thousands, except per share data)
$363,424
80,117
20,161
452
464,154
264,663
45,502
3,423
100,717
3,642
417,947
46,207
(2,106)
$363,424
80,117
20,161
452
464,154
262,511
47,344
3,423
100,717
3,642
417,637
46,517
(2,106)
$321,786
83,032
10,137
649
415,604
194,779
38,468
4,316
106,026
5,693
349,282
66,322
3,523
$321,786
83,032
10,137
649
415,604
193,297
39,280
4,316
106,026
5,693
348,612
66,992
3,523
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 48,313
$ 48,623
$ 62,799
$ 63,469
Comprehensive income
Unrealized gains during the period . . . . . . . . . . .
Less: reclassification adjustment for realized
gains in net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other comprehensive income, net of tax . . . . .
Total comprehensive income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Earnings per common share:
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash dividends declared per common share . .
Realized gains on investments, net
Net realized gains on investments before
credit related impairments on fixed
maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other than temporary impairment, credit
losses recognized in earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Portion of impairment recognized in other
comprehensive income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 45,691
$ 45,691
$ 6,910
$
6,910
13,105
32,586
$ 80,899
$
$
$
1.30
1.29
0.24
13,105
32,586
$ 81,209
$
$
$
1.30
1.30
0.24
6,589
321
$ 63,120
$
$
$
1.52
1.51
0.24
6,589
321
$ 63,790
$
$
$
1.53
1.53
0.24
$ 20,255
$ 20,255
$ 10,182
$ 10,182
(94)
—
(94)
—
(45)
—
(45)
—
$ 20,161
$ 20,161
$ 10,137
$ 10,137
69
16651
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued consolidated
statements of cash flows for fiscal years 2011 and 2010:
Year Ended December 31,
2011
Year Ended December 31,
2010
As Reported As Restated As Reported As Restated
(in thousands)
$ 48,313
$ 48,623
$ 62,799
$ 63,469
Operating activities
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net
cash provided by operating activities:
Change in operating assets and
liabilities:
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT
Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(17,147)
(17,436)
18,233
(18,953)
Contingent commission receivable—
LPT Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash provided by operating activities . . . . .
Investing activities
Net cash (used in) provided by investing
activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financing activities
Net cash used in financing activities . . . . . . . . . .
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash
equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning
of the period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. Changes in Estimates
—
6,212
43,215
(1,863)
8,054
43,215
—
(5,207)
56,981
(762)
(4,395)
56,981
199,159
199,159
(51,327)
(51,327)
(109,899)
(109,899)
(74,662)
(74,662)
132,475
132,475
(69,008)
(69,008)
119,825
119,825
188,833
188,833
252,300
252,300
119,825
119,825
During the fourth quarter of 2012, the Company reduced its estimated reserves ceded under the
LPT Agreement by $100.0 million. This change in estimate resulted in a $73.3 million cumulative
adjustment to the deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement (Deferred Gain), which was also
recognized in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and comprehensive
income, so that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised reserves
been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement (LPT Reserve Adjustment). This change in
estimate was the result of the determination in the fourth quarter of 2012 that an adjustment was
necessary to reflect observed favorable paid loss trends. This change in estimate increased net income
by $73.3 million, or $2.33 and $2.31 per basic and diluted share, respectively.
During the fourth quarter of 2012, the Company increased its estimate of contingent commission
receivable—LPT Agreement as a result of the determination in the fourth quarter of 2012 that an
adjustment was necessary to reflect observed favorable paid loss trends. This change in estimate
resulted in a $8.6 million cumulative adjustment to the deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement,
which was also recognized in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and
comprehensive income, so that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the
revised reserves been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement (LPT Contingent Commission
Adjustment). This change in estimate also resulted in an additional $0.6 million bonus accrual that
increased the income tax benefit by $0.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. This change
in estimate increased net income by $8.2 million, or $0.26 per basic and diluted share.
During the third quarter of 2012, the Company changed the estimate of its guaranty fund
assessment liability as a result of the application of new information related to historical payment trends
and reflected this change in its financial statements. This change in estimate resulted in a $2.9 million
reduction of the accrued liability for guaranty fund assessments, offset by a $0.7 million reduction in the
70
32296
corresponding premium tax asset and a $0.8 million reduction in deferred acquisition costs (DAC) that
reduced the Company’s underwriting and other operating expense by a total of $1.4 million and reduced
the income tax benefit by $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. This change in estimate
increased net income by $1.2 million, or $0.04 per basic and diluted share, for the year ended December
31, 2012.
During the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company reduced its estimate of certain administrative fees
due under its joint marketing agreements, which reduced its accrual for commission expense by $3.0
million. This change in estimate was the result of new information that materially impacted conditions
that existed as of December 31, 2010 and is reflected in the financial statements for the period ended
December 31, 2010. This change in estimate increased net income by $3.0 million, or $0.07 per basic and
diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2010.
4. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid investments with an initial maturity of three months or
less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents.
Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents
Restricted cash and cash equivalents is primarily related to funds held in trust to secure the
Company’s line of credit and for Clarendon National Insurance Company (Clarendon). As of
December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company held $30.8 million and $35.2 million, respectively, in trust
for the benefit of Clarendon to support liabilities under the reinsurance agreement, of which $2.5
million and $1.7 million was classified as restricted cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2012
and 2011, respectively.
Investments
The Company’s investments in fixed maturity securities and equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale and are reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings
and reported as a separate component of equity, net of deferred taxes,
in accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Investment income consists primarily of interest and dividends. Interest is recognized on an accrual
basis, and dividends are recorded as earned at the ex-dividend date. Interest income on mortgage-
backed and asset-backed securities is determined using the effective-yield method based on estimated
principal repayments. Mortgage-backed securities are adjusted for the effects of changes in prepayment
assumptions on the related accretion of discount or amortization of premium of such securities using the
retrospective method.
Realized capital gains and losses on investments are determined on a specific-identification basis.
When, in the opinion of management, a decline in the fair value of an equity security below its cost
is considered to be “other-than-temporary,” the equity security’s cost is written down to its fair value at
the time the other-than-temporary decline is identified. The determination of an other-than-temporary
decline for debt securities includes, in addition to other relevant factors, a presumption that if the
market value is below cost by a significant amount for a period of time, a bifurcation of the write-down
may be necessary. If management has the intent to sell the debt security or more likely than not will be
required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery, the investment is written down to its
fair value and the entire impairment is recorded as a realized loss due to credit in the accompanying
consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income. If management does not have the intent
to sell or will not be required to sell the debt security but does not expect to recover the amortized cost
basis of the debt security, the amount of the other-than-temporary impairment is bifurcated between
credit loss and other loss and recorded as a component of realized gains and losses and to other
comprehensive income, respectively,
in the consolidated statements of income and comprehensive
income. The amount of any write-down is determined by the difference between the cost or amortized
71
54017
cost of the debt security and its fair value at the time the other-than-temporary decline is identified (see
Note 8).
Recognition of Revenue and Expense
Revenue Recognition
Premium revenue is recognized over the period of the contract in proportion to the amount of time
insurance protection is provided. At the end of the policy term, payroll-based premium audits are
performed on substantially all policyholder accounts to determine net premiums earned for the policy
year. Earned but unbilled premiums include estimated future audit premiums based on the Company’s
historical experience. These estimates are subject to changes in policyholders’ payrolls, economic
conditions, and seasonality, and are continually reviewed and adjusted as experience develops or new
information becomes known. Any such adjustments are included in current operations; however, they
are partially offset by the resulting changes in losses and LAE, commission expenses, and premium
taxes. The Company’s premiums receivable on the consolidated balance sheet included $19.6 million
and $6.9 million of additional premiums expected to be received from policyholders for final audits at
December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The Company establishes a bad debt allowance on its premiums receivable through a charge
included in underwriting and other operating expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of
income and comprehensive income. This bad debt allowance is determined based on estimates and
assumptions to project future experience. After all collection efforts have been exhausted, the Company
reduces the bad debt allowance for write-offs of premiums receivable that have been deemed
uncollectible. The Company had write-offs, net of recoveries of amounts previously written off, of $1.9
million, $2.2 million, and $3.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010,
respectively.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs
Policy acquisition costs, consisting of commissions, premium taxes, and certain other underwriting
costs that vary with, and are primarily related to, the successful production of new or renewal business
are deferred and amortized as the related premiums are earned. Amortization of deferred policy
acquisition costs for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, was $85.9 million, $74.5
million, and $72.1 million, respectively.
A premium deficiency would exist if expected future losses and LAE, expected policyholder
dividends, deferred policy acquisition costs, and expected policy maintenance costs, offset by
anticipated investment income, exceed the related unearned premiums. A premium deficiency would
reduce the value of deferred policy acquisition costs. If the deficiency exceeded the deferred policy
acquisition costs, a separate liability would be accrued for the excess deficiency. There was no premium
deficiency at December 31, 2012 or 2011.
Unpaid Loss and LAE Reserves
Loss and LAE reserves represent management’s best estimate of the ultimate net cost of all
reported and unreported losses incurred for the applicable periods. The estimated reserves for losses
and LAE include the accumulation of estimates for all claims reported prior to the balance sheet date,
estimates (based on projections of relevant historical data) of claims incurred but not reported, and
estimates of expenses for investigating and adjusting all incurred and unadjusted claims. Amounts
reported are necessarily subject to the impact of future changes in economic, regulatory and social
conditions. Management believes that, subject to the inherent variability in any such estimate, the
reserves are within a reasonable and acceptable range of adequacy. Estimates for claims reported prior
to the balance sheet date are continually monitored and reviewed, and as settlements are made or
reserves adjusted, the differences are reported in current operations. Salvage and subrogation recoveries
are estimated based on a review of the level of historical salvage and subrogation recoveries.
72
70357
Reinsurance
In the ordinary course of business and in accordance with general insurance industry practices, the
Company purchases excess of loss reinsurance to protect the Company against the impact of large and/or
catastrophic losses in its workers’ compensation business. Additionally, the Company is a party to a 100%
quota share retroactive reinsurance agreement, (see Note 12). This reinsurance reduces the financial
impact of such losses on current operations and the equity of the Company. Reinsurance makes the
assuming reinsurer liable to the ceding company to the extent of the reinsurance coverage provided. It
does not, however, discharge the Company from its liability to its policyholders in the event the reinsurer
is unable or unwilling to meet its obligations under its reinsurance agreement with the Company.
Net premiums earned and losses and LAE incurred are stated in the accompanying consolidated
statements of income and comprehensive income after deduction of amounts ceded to reinsurers.
Balances due from reinsurers on unpaid losses, including an estimate of such recoverables related to
reserves for incurred but not reported losses, are reported as assets and are included in reinsurance
recoverables even though amounts due on unpaid losses and LAE are not recoverable from the
reinsurer until such losses are paid. Recoverables from reinsurers on unpaid losses and LAE amounted
to $0.8 billion and $0.9 billion at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Ceded losses and LAE are accounted for on a basis consistent with those used in accounting for the
original policies issued and the terms of the relevant reinsurance agreement.
The 100% quota share retroactive reinsurance agreement was entered into in 1999 by the Nevada
State Industrial Insurance System (the Fund) and assumed by EICN, which the Company refers to as
the LPT Agreement (see Note 12). Loss expenses are deemed to be 7% of total losses paid and are paid
to the Company as compensation for management of the claims under the LPT Agreement. The
Company accounts for this transaction as retroactive reinsurance, whereby the initial deferred gain was
recorded as a liability in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as Deferred reinsurance gain—
LPT Agreement. This gain is amortized using the recovery method, whereby the amortization is
determined by the proportion of actual reinsurance recoveries to total estimated recoveries through the
life of the LPT Agreement, and is recorded in losses and LAE incurred in the accompanying
consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income. Any adjustment to the estimated
reserves ceded under the LPT Agreement results in a cumulative adjustment to the Deferred Gain,
which is also recognized in losses and LAE incurred in the consolidated statement of income and
comprehensive income, such that the Deferred Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had
the revised reserves been recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement.
Additionally, the Company is entitled to receive a contingent profit commission under the LPT
Agreement. The contingent profit is equal to 30% of the favorable difference between actual paid losses
and LAE and expected paid losses and LAE as established in the LPT Agreement based on losses paid
through June 30, 2024. The contingent profit commission is paid every five years beginning June 30,
2004 for the first twenty-five years of the agreement. The Company is paid 30%the favorable difference
between the actual and expected losses and LAE paid at each calculation point. 7%The Company could
be required to return any previously received contingent profit commission, plus interest, in the event of
unfavorable differences through June 30, 2024. The Company records its estimate of contingent profit
commission in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as Contingent commission receivable—
LPT Agreement and a corresponding liability is recorded on the accompanying consolidated balance
sheets in Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement. The Contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement is reduced as amounts are received from participating reinsurers. The related Deferred
reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement is amortized using the recovery method. The amortization of the
contingent profit commission is determined by the proportion of actual reinsurance recoveries to total
estimated recoveries over the life of the contingent profit commission (through June 30, 2024), and is
recorded in losses and LAE incurred in the accompanying consolidated statements of income and
comprehensive income. Any adjustment to the contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement
results in a cumulative adjustment to the Deferred Gain, which is also recognized in losses and LAE
incurred in the consolidated statement of income and comprehensive income, such that the Deferred
Gain reflects the balance that would have existed had the revised contingent profit commission been
recognized at the inception of the LPT Agreement.
73
63553
Property and Equipment
Property and equipment are stated at cost
less accumulated depreciation (see Note 9).
Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are charged against operations as incurred.
Electronic data processing equipment, software, furniture and equipment, and automobiles are
depreciated using the straight-line method over three to seven years. Leasehold improvements are
carried at cost less accumulated amortization. The Company amortizes leasehold improvements using
the straight-line method over the lesser of the useful life of the asset or the remaining original lease
term, excluding options or renewal periods. Leasehold improvements are generally amortized over
three to five years.
Obligations Held Under Capital Leases
Leased property and equipment meeting capital lease criteria are capitalized at the lower of the
present value of the related lease payments or the fair value of the leased asset at the inception of the
lease. Amortization is calculated using the straight-line method based on the term of the lease and is
included in the depreciation expense of property and equipment. See Note 14 for additional disclosures
related to capital leases.
Policyholder Dividends
Certain policyholders may qualify for policyholder dividends. Dividends are accrued on such
policies based on specific dividend provisions and the policies’ earned premiums and loss ratios.
Additionally, dividend plans also allow the Company to reduce the amount to be paid at the Company’s
discretion. Should management choose to reduce the ultimate dividends to be paid, once the amount of
the total dividend that will be paid for a policy year is determined, the dividend accrued would be
reduced to the level determined by the Company. The reduced dividend amount would be allocated
ratably to the participating policies, based on the dividend amount calculated prior to the reduction.
Approximately 2.8%, 4.3%, and 5.2% of direct written premiums were subject to dividend participation
during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Policyholder dividends are
ultimately paid at the sole discretion of the operating companies’ Board of Directors and must be
approved by the Board prior to payment. Board-approved dividends accrued for 2012, 2011, and 2010
policies reflect the full potential amount allowed under the respective policies.
Income Taxes
The Company’s accounting for income taxes considers the current and deferred tax consequences
of all transactions that have been recognized in its consolidated financial statements using the provisions
of enacted tax laws. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between the
financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using the enacted tax rates
and laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. The effect on deferred tax
assets and liabilities resulting from a tax rate change affects net income or loss in the period that
includes the enactment date of the tax rate change. The Company’s income tax returns are subject to
audit by the Internal Revenue Service and various state tax authorities. Significant disputes may arise
with these tax authorities involving issues of the timing and amount of deductions and allocations of
income among various tax jurisdictions because of differing interpretations of tax laws and regulations.
The Company periodically evaluates exposures associated with tax filing positions. Although we believe
our positions comply with applicable laws, liabilities are recorded based upon estimates of the ultimate
outcomes of these matters.
In assessing whether our deferred tax assets will be realized, the Company considers whether it is
more likely than not that it will generate future taxable income during the periods in which those
temporary differences become deductible. The Company considers the scheduled reversal of deferred
tax liabilities, tax planning strategies, and projected future taxable income in making this assessment. If
necessary, a valuation allowance is established to reduce the deferred tax assets to the amounts that are
more likely than not to be realized.
74
68418
Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk are
primarily cash and cash equivalents, investments, premiums receivable, and reinsurance recoverable
balances.
Cash equivalents include investments in commercial paper of companies with high credit ratings,
investments in money market securities and securities backed by the U.S. government. Investments are
diversified throughout many industries and geographic regions. The Company limits the amount of
credit exposure with any one financial institution and believes that no significant concentration of credit
risk exists with respect to cash and cash equivalents and investments.
At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the outstanding premiums receivable balance was generally
diversified due to the large number of entities composing the Company’s policyholder base and their
dispersion across many different industries. The Company also has recoverables from its reinsurers.
Reinsurance contracts do not relieve the Company of its obligations to claimants or policyholders.
Failure of reinsurers to honor their obligations could result in losses to the Company. The Company
evaluates the financial condition of its reinsurers to minimize its exposure to significant losses from
reinsurer insolvencies. The Company obtains collateral to mitigate the risks related to reinsurance
insolvencies. At December 31, 2012, $5.8 million was collateralized by cash or letters of credit and an
additional $1.0 billion was in trust accounts for reinsurance related to the LPT Agreement.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
Estimated fair value amounts have been determined using available market information and other
appropriate valuation methodologies. Judgment is required in developing the estimates of fair value
where quoted market prices are not available. Accordingly, these estimates are not necessarily indicative
of the amounts that could be realized in a current market exchange. The use of different market
assumptions or estimating methodologies may have an effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
The following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating the fair value for
financial instruments in the accompanying consolidated financial statements and in these notes for the
years ended 2012 and 2011:
Cash and cash equivalents, premiums receivable, and accrued expenses and other liabilities. The
carrying amounts for these financial instruments as reported in the accompanying consolidated balance
sheets approximate their fair values.
Investments. The estimated fair values for available-for-sale securities generally represent quoted
market prices for securities traded in the public marketplace or estimated values for securities not
traded in the public marketplace. Additional data with respect to fair values of the Company’s
investment securities is disclosed in Note 7.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
The Company tests for impairment of goodwill and non-amortizable intangible assets in the fourth
quarter of each year. At the end of each quarter, management considers the results of the previous
analysis as well as any recent developments that may constitute triggering events requiring the
impairment analysis of goodwill and other intangible assets to be updated. The Company has assessed
the effects of current economic conditions on the Company’s financial condition and results of
operations and changes in the Company’s stock price and determined that there were no impairments
as of December 31, 2012 and 2011.
Intangible assets related to state licenses are not subject to amortization. Intangibles related to
insurance relationships will be amortized in proportion to the expected period of benefit over the next
six years.
75
69698
The gross carrying value, accumulated amortization, and net carrying value for the Company’s
intangible assets, by major class, as of December 31, were as follows:
2012
Gross
Carrying
Value
Accumulated
Amortization
State licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Insurance relationships . . . . . . . . . .
$ 7,700
9,400
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$17,100
$(6,542)
$(6,542)
Net
Carrying
Value
Gross
Carrying
Value
(in thousands)
$ 7,700
2,858
$ 7,700
9,400
$10,558
$17,100
2011
Accumulated
Amortization
$(5,372)
$(5,372)
Net
Carrying
Value
$ 7,700
4,028
$11,728
During the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, the Company recognized $1.2 million,
$1.6 million, and $2.2 million in amortization expenses, respectively. These amortization expenses are
included in the accompanying consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income in
underwriting and other operating expenses. Amortization expense is expected to be as follows:
Year
2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amount
(in thousands)
$ 873
651
489
371
285
189
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$2,858
Stock-Based Compensation
The Company issues stock-based payments, which are recognized in the consolidated statements of
income and comprehensive income based on their estimated fair values over the employees’ service
period (see Note 16).
5. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs
In October 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standard
Update (ASU) Number 2010-26, Accounting for Costs Associated with Acquiring or Renewing
Insurance Contracts that became effective in 2012. This guidance changed the definition of acquisition
costs which may be capitalized to specify costs that relate directly to the successful acquisition of new or
renewal
including underwriting, policy issuance and processing, medical and
inspection, and sales force contract selling. It also defines incremental direct costs that must be
capitalized as costs that result directly from contract transactions that are essential to contract issuance,
which would not have been incurred had the contract transaction not occurred. All other costs are
expensed as incurred. Capitalized costs are amortized over the life of the contract.
insurance contracts,
The Company adopted this standard on a prospective basis on January 1, 2012. Under the new
guidance, the Company capitalized acquisition costs totaling $87.2 million for the year ended December
31, 2012. Under the previous guidance, the amount capitalized would have been $102.5 million for the
same period. The total effect of implementing this guidance was a $15.3 million decrease in the amount
capitalized and a $8.2 million decrease in the amortization expense for the year ended December 31,
2012. The total amortization expense was $85.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. The net
effect of implementing this guidance was a $7.1 million increase in underwriting and other operating
expense for the year ended December 31, 2012.
6. New Accounting Standards
In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU Number 2012-02, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic
350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment. This update simplifies the guidance for
76
03276
impairment testing of indefinite-lived intangible assets other than goodwill and provides the option to
assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative impairment test.
Companies electing to perform a qualitative assessment will no longer be required to calculate the fair
value of an indefinite-lived intangible asset unless the company determines, based on a qualitative
assessment, that it is more likely than not that the asset is impaired. This update became effective for
annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012;
however, early adoption is permitted. The Company elected to adopt this update for annual and interim
impairment tests performed beginning in the third quarter of 2012. The adoption of this new guidance
did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
7. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The carrying value and the estimated fair value of the Company’s financial instruments as of
December 31, were as follows:
Financial assets
Investments (Note 8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash and cash equivalents. . . .
Financial liabilities
Notes payable (Note 13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2012
2011
Carrying
Value
Estimated
Fair Value
Carrying
Value
Estimated
Fair Value
(in thousands)
$2,149,514
140,661
5,353
$2,149,514
140,661
5,353
$1,950,745
252,300
6,299
$1,950,745
252,300
6,299
$ 112,000
$ 118,207
$ 122,000
$ 130,447
The Company’s estimates of fair value for financial liabilities are based on the variable interest rate
for the Company’s existing line of credit to discount future payments on notes payable, and have been
determined to be Level 2 fair value measurements, as defined below.
Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on the consolidated balance sheets are categorized
based upon the levels of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair value. Level
inputs are defined as follows:
• Level 1—Inputs are unadjusted quoted market prices for identical assets or liabilities in active
markets at the measurement date.
• Level 2—Inputs other than Level 1 prices that are observable for similar assets or liabilities
through corroboration with market data at the measurement date.
• Level 3—Inputs that are unobservable that reflect management’s best estimate of what market
participants would use in pricing the assets or liabilities at the measurement date.
The following methods and assumptions were used to determine the fair value of each class of
assets and liabilities recorded at fair value in the consolidated balance sheets:
Fair values of available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities are based on quoted market
prices, where available. These fair values are obtained primarily from third party pricing services, which
generally use Level 1 or Level 2 inputs. The Company obtains a quoted price for each security from
third party pricing services, which are derived through recently reported trades for identical or similar
securities. For securities not actively traded, the third party pricing services may use quoted market
prices of similar instruments or discounted cash flow analyses, incorporating inputs that are currently
observable in the markets for similar securities. Inputs that are often used in the valuation
methodologies include, but are not limited to, broker quotes, benchmark yields, credit spreads, default
rates, and prepayment speeds. The Company also performs a quarterly analysis on the prices received
from third parties to determine whether the prices are reasonable estimates of fair value, including
confirming the fair values of these securities through observable market prices using an alternative
pricing source. If differences are noted in this review, the Company may obtain additional information
from other pricing services to validate the quoted price. There were no adjustments to prices obtained
from third party pricing services during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010 that were
material to the consolidated financial statements.
77
86678
If quoted market prices and an estimate determined by using objectively verifiable information are
unavailable, the Company produces an estimate of fair value based on internally developed valuation
techniques, which, depending on the level of observable market inputs, will render the fair value
estimate as Level 2 or Level 3. The Company bases all of its estimates of fair value for assets on the bid
price as it represents what a third party market participant would be willing to pay in an arm’s length
transaction.
These methods of valuation will only produce an estimate of fair value if there is objectively
verifiable information to produce a valuation. If objectively verifiable information is not available, the
the same
Company would be required to produce an estimate of
methodologies, making assumptions for market based inputs that are unavailable.
fair value using some of
Estimates of fair value for fixed maturity securities are based on estimates using objectively
verifiable information and are included in the amount disclosed in Level 2 of the hierarchy. The fair
value estimates for determining Level 3 fair value include the Company’s assumptions about risk
assessments and market participant assumptions based on the best information available, including
quotes from market makers and other broker/dealers recognized as market participants, using standard
or trade derived inputs, new issue data, monthly payment
information, cash flow generation,
prepayment speeds, spread adjustments, or rating updates.
The following table presents the items in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets that are
stated at fair value and the fair value measurements.
December 31, 2012
Level 2
Level 1
Level 3
Level 1
December 31, 2011
Level 2
Level 3
(in thousands)
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities. . . . . . . . . . . .
$
— $ 152,490
93,967
—
758,516
—
676,243
—
$— $ — $ 137,365
108,448
—
789,636
—
501,669
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
252,852
56,120
34,240
—
—
—
—
—
—
281,511
21,665
12,405
$—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Total fixed maturity securities. . . . . . .
$
— $2,024,428
$— $ — $1,852,699
$—
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$125,086
$
— $— $98,046
$
— $—
The Company had no Level 3 investment activity during the years ended December 31, 2012 and
2011.
78
80044
8. Investments
The cost or amortized cost, gross unrealized gains, gross unrealized losses, and estimated fair value
of the Company’s investments were as follows:
At December 31, 2012
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total investments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At December 31, 2011
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Corporate securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-backed
securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total investments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cost or
Amortized
Cost
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
Estimated
Fair Value
(in thousands)
$ 138,839
88,202
689,776
627,047
$ 13,651
5,765
68,740
49,461
$ — $ 152,490
93,967
758,516
676,243
—
—
(265)
236,461
16,488
(97)
252,852
54,755
34,062
1,869,142
81,067
1,410
211
155,726
45,399
(45)
(33)
(440)
56,120
34,240
2,024,428
(1,380)
125,086
$1,950,209
$201,125
$(1,820)
$2,149,514
$ 122,144
101,520
719,431
467,470
$ 15,222
6,942
70,391
35,745
$
(1)
(14)
(186)
(1,546)
$ 137,365
108,448
789,636
501,669
262,961
19,154
(604)
281,511
20,756
11,934
1,706,216
910
471
148,835
(1)
—
(2,352)
21,665
12,405
1,852,699
64,962
$1,771,178
34,639
$183,474
(1,555)
$(3,907)
98,046
$1,950,745
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2012, by
contractual maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities differ from contractual maturities because
borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
Due in one year or less. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after one year through five years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after five years through ten years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after ten years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Mortgage and asset-backed securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortized
Cost
Estimated
Fair Value
(in thousands)
$ 113,909
641,161
587,349
201,445
325,278
$ 115,939
684,751
655,031
225,495
343,212
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,869,142
$2,024,428
79
20052
The following is a summary of investments that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position
for less than 12 months and those that have been in a continuous unrealized loss position for 12 months
or greater as of December 31, 2012 and 2011.
December 31, 2012
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
Estimated
Fair
Value
Estimated
Fair
Value
Number
of Issues
(dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2011
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
Number
of Issues
Less than 12 months:
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . .
Corporate securities. . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-
backed securities. . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-
backed securities. . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities.
$ —
—
—
36,338
14,629
10,432
16,714
78,113
$ —
—
—
(265)
(28)
(45)
(33)
(371)
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total less than 12 months . . . . . . .
11,645
$89,758
(1,207)
$(1,578)
Greater than 12 months:
Fixed maturity securities
States and municipalities . . . .
Corporate securities. . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-
backed securities. . . . . . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities.
$ —
—
$ —
—
2,341
2,341
(69)
(69)
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total Greater than 12 months . . .
456
$ 2,797
(173)
$ (242)
Total available-for-sale:
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. Treasuries . . . . . . . . . . . . .
U.S. Agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and municipalities . . . .
Corporate securities. . . . . . . . .
Residential mortgage-
backed securities. . . . . . . . . .
Commercial mortgage-
backed securities. . . . . . . . . .
Asset-backed securities . . . . .
Total fixed maturity securities.
$ —
—
—
36,338
16,970
10,432
16,714
80,454
Equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total available-for-sale . . . . . . . . . .
12,101
$92,555
$ —
—
—
(265)
(97)
(45)
(33)
(440)
(1,380)
$(1,820)
—
—
—
12
6
4
5
27
35
62
—
—
17
17
4
21
—
—
—
12
23
4
5
44
39
83
$
5,076
11,124
5,094
64,846
$
(1)
(14)
(185)
(1,481)
4,916
(20)
(1)
—
(1,702)
(1,462)
$(3,164)
$
(1)
(65)
(584)
(650)
(93)
$ (743)
1,464
—
92,520
12,443
$104,963
1,049
1,024
2,692
4,765
452
5,217
$
$
$
5,076
11,124
6,143
65,870
$
(1)
(14)
(186)
(1,546)
7,608
(604)
1,464
—
97,285
12,895
$110,180
(1)
—
(2,352)
(1,555)
$(3,907)
2
3
1
30
14
1
—
51
57
108
1
1
5
7
4
11
2
3
2
31
19
1
—
58
61
119
Based on reviews of the fixed maturity securities, the Company determined that unrealized losses
as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 were primarily the result of changes in prevailing interest rates and
not the credit quality of the issuers. The fixed maturity securities whose fair value was less than
amortized cost were not determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired given the severity and
duration of the impairment, the credit quality of the issuers, the Company’s intent on not selling the
securities, and a determination that it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to
sell the securities until fair value recovers to above cost, or to maturity.
80
04330
Based on reviews of the equity securities as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company
recognized total impairments of $0.7 million and $0.1 million in the fair values of eleven and four equity
securities as a result of the severity and duration of the change in fair values of those securities as of
December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Realized gains on investments, net and the change in unrealized gains (losses) on fixed maturity
and equity securities are determined on a specific-identification basis and were as follows:
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2012
2010
(in thousands)
Realized gains on investments, net
Fixed maturity securities
Gross gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 3,779
(5)
$19,463
(148)
Realized gains on fixed maturity securities, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 3,774
$19,315
$
$
756
(46)
710
Equity securities
Gross gains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross losses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 2,156
(882)
$ 1,169
(323)
$ 9,448
(21)
Realized gains on equity securities, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 1,274
$
846
$ 9,427
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in unrealized gains (losses)
Fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 5,048
$20,161
$10,137
$ 8,803
10,935
$47,897
2,235
$ (2,632)
1,517
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$19,738
$50,132
$ (1,115)
Net investment income was as follows:
Fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash equivalents and restricted cash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Investment expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2012
2010
(in thousands)
$80,361
1,885
279
82,525
(2,408)
$71,293
3,248
351
74,892
(2,529)
$83,817
1,399
240
85,456
(2,424)
Net investment income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$72,363
$80,117
$83,032
The Company is required by various state laws and regulations to keep securities or letters of credit
in depository accounts with the states in which it does business. As of December 31, 2012 and 2011,
securities having a fair value of $530.6 million and $522.6 million, respectively, were on deposit. These
laws and regulations govern not only the amount, but also the type of security that is eligible for
deposit. The deposits are limited to fixed maturity securities in all states. Additionally, certain
reinsurance contracts require Company funds to be held in trust for the benefit of the ceding reinsurer
to secure the outstanding liabilities assumed by the Company. The fair value of securities held in trust
for reinsurance at December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $35.0 million and $40.3 million, respectively. The
Company’s debt was secured by fixed maturity securities and restricted cash and cash equivalents that
had a fair value of $110.4 million and $126.7 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
81
12854
9. Property and Equipment
Property and equipment consists of the following:
As of December 31,
2012
2011
(in thousands)
Furniture and equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Leasehold improvements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Computers and software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Automobiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 2,896
4,309
33,477
1,369
$ 2,327
4,386
29,839
1,727
Accumulated amortization and depreciation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
42,051
(27,371)
38,279
(26,919)
Property and equipment, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 14,680
$ 11,360
Depreciation and amortization expenses related to property and equipment for the years ended
December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010 were $4.4 million, $4.8 million, and $4.8 million, respectively.
Internally developed software costs of $0.9 million and $0.2 million were capitalized during the years
ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
10. Income Taxes
The Company files a consolidated federal
income tax return. The insurance subsidiaries pay
premium taxes on gross premiums written in lieu of some states’ income or franchise taxes.
The provision for income taxes consisted of the following:
Years Ended December 31,
2010
2011
2012
(in thousands)
Current tax (benefit) expense:
Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 1,964
(312)
$ (652) $(1,228)
71
154
Total current tax expense (benefit) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred federal tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,652
(10,999)
(498)
(1,608)
(1,157)
4,680
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ (9,347) $(2,106) $ 3,523
The difference between the statutory federal tax rate of 35% and the Company’s effective tax rate
on net income before income taxes as reflected in the consolidated statements of income and
comprehensive income was as follows:
Expense computed at statutory rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividends received deduction and tax-exempt interest . . . . . . . . . .
Pre-Privatization reserve adjustments, excluding LPT . . . . . . . . . . .
LPT deferred gain amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LPT Reserve Adjustment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2012
$ 34,140
(9,304)
—
(9,305)
(25,672)
794
$ (9,347)
2011
As Restated
(in thousands)
$ 16,281
(11,409)
(1,602)
(6,755)
—
1,379
$ (2,106)
2010
As Restated
$ 23,448
(12,039)
(1,358)
(6,900)
—
372
$ 3,523
On January 1, 2000, EICN assumed the assets, liabilities, and operations of the Fund pursuant to
legislation passed in the 1999 Nevada Legislature (the Privatization). Prior to the Privatization, the
Fund was a part of the State of Nevada and therefore was not subject to federal
income tax;
accordingly, it did not take an income tax deduction with respect to the establishment of its unpaid loss
and LAE reserves. Due to favorable loss experience after the Privatization, it was determined that
82
96162
certain of the pre-Privatization unpaid loss and LAE reserves assumed by EICN as part of the
Privatization were no longer necessary and the unpaid loss and LAE reserves were reduced accordingly.
Such downward adjustments of pre-Privatization unpaid loss reserves increases GAAP net income, but
does not increase taxable income. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 there were
downward adjustments of pre-Privatization unpaid loss reserves of $4.6 million and $3.9 million,
respectively.
The LPT Reserve Adjustment for the year ended December 31, 2012 increased GAAP net income
by $73.3 million but did not increase taxable income. The LPT Contingent Commission Adjustment
increased net income by $8.6 million during the fourth quarter of 2012, but did not increase taxable
income.
As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company had no unrecognized tax benefits.
Tax years 2008 through 2012 are subject to full examination by the federal taxing authority. Tax
year 2006 is open to examination by the federal taxing authority only to the extent of benefits from the
carry-back of certain capital losses from tax years 2008 and 2009. Currently, tax years 2006 through 2011
are under review.
The significant components of deferred income taxes, net, were as follows as of December 31:
2012
Deferred Tax
2011
Deferred Tax
Assets
Liabilities
Assets
Liabilities
(in thousands)
Unrealized capital gains, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred policy acquisition costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intangible assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Loss reserve discounting for tax reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unearned premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Allowance for bad debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accrued liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Minimum tax credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net operating loss carryforward. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
— $69,756
13,692
—
3,695
—
—
57,722
—
18,119
—
2,085
—
4,339
—
5,095
—
13,090
15,111
—
3,588
1,401
$
— $62,848
13,244
—
4,105
—
—
59,860
—
13,331
—
1,943
—
3,310
—
5,253
—
12,015
9,289
—
4,316
1,652
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income taxes, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$116,962
$ 26,231
$90,731
$106,653
$ 22,140
$84,513
At December 31, 2012, the Company had a $43.2 million net operating loss carryforward. This is
due to expire beginning 2029 through 2032.
Deferred tax assets are required to be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not
that all or some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. Realization of the deferred
income tax asset is dependent on the Company generating sufficient taxable income in future years as
the deferred income tax charges become currently deductible for tax reporting purposes. Although
realization is not assured, management believes that it is more likely than not that the net deferred
income tax asset will be realized.
83
79030
11. Liability for Unpaid Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses
The following table represents a reconciliation of changes in the liability for unpaid losses and
LAE.
2012
Years Ended December 31,
2011
(in thousands)
2010
Unpaid losses and LAE, gross of reinsurance, at beginning of
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less reinsurance recoverable, excluding bad debt allowance, on
unpaid losses and LAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net unpaid losses and LAE at beginning of period . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Losses and LAE, net of reinsurance, incurred in:
Current year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prior years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total net losses and LAE incurred during the period. . . . . . . . . . .
Deduct payments for losses and LAE, net of reinsurance,
related to:
Current year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Prior years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total net payments for losses and LAE during the period. . . . . .
Ending unpaid losses and LAE, net of reinsurance . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reinsurance recoverable, excluding bad debt allowance, on
unpaid losse and LAE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unpaid losses and LAE, gross of reinsurance, at end of period
$2,272,363
$2,279,729
$2,425,658
940,840
1,331,523
956,043
1,323,686
1,052,505
1,373,153
386,044
1,800
387,844
67,672
225,541
293,213
280,683
1,127
281,810
55,405
218,568
273,973
227,142
(14,130)
213,012
55,826
206,653
262,479
1,426,154
1,331,523
1,323,686
805,386
$2,231,540
940,840
$2,272,363
956,043
$2,279,729
Total net losses and LAE included in the above table excludes the impact of the amortization of
the Deferred Gain and the LPT Reserve Adjustment (Note 12).
In 2012 and 2011, the increase in the estimate of incurred losses and LAE attributable to insured
events in prior years was primarily related to the Company’s assigned risk business, while the decrease
in 2010 was due to favorable development in such prior accident years. The major sources of favorable
development in 2010 include actual paid losses that were less than expected and the impact of new
information on selected patterns of claims emergence and payment used in the projection of future loss
payments.
In California, where the Company’s operations began on July 1, 2002,
the actuaries’ and
management’s initial expectations of ultimate losses and patterns of loss emergence and payment were
based on benchmarks derived from analyses of historical insurance industry data in California. No
historical data from the Company’s California insurance subsidiary existed prior to July 1, 2002;
however, some historical data was available for the prior years for some of the market segments the
Company entered in California, but was limited as to the number of loss reserve evaluation points
available. The industry-based benchmarks were judgmentally adjusted for the anticipated impact of
significant environmental changes, specifically the enactment of major changes to the statutory workers’
compensation benefit structure and the manner in which claims are administered and adjudicated in
California. The actual emergence and payment of claims by the Company’s California insurance
subsidiary has been more favorable than those initial expectations through 2009, due at least in part to
the enactment of the major changes in the California workers’ compensation environment; however, our
recent loss experience, beginning in 2010, indicates an upward trend in medical costs that is reflected in
our loss reserves. The Company’s estimates assume that increasing medical cost trends will continue and
will impact our long-term claims costs and loss reserves.
In Nevada, the Company has compiled a lengthy history of workers’ compensation claims payment
patterns based on the business of the Fund and EICN, but the emergence and payment of claims in
recent years has been more favorable than in the long-term history in Nevada with the Fund. The
expected patterns of claim payments and emergence used in the projection of the Company’s ultimate
84
12485
claim payments are based on both the long and short-term historical paid data. In recent evaluations,
claim patterns have continued to emerge in a manner consistent with short-term historical data.
Consequently, the Company’s selection of claim projection patterns has relied more heavily on
patterns observed in recent years.
The Company continues to develop its own loss experience in California and will rely more on its
experience and less on historical industry data in projecting its reserve requirements as such data
becomes available. As the actual experience of the Company emerges, it will continue to evaluate prior
estimates, which may result in additional adjustments in reserves.
A $1.6 million expense related to the commutation of certain reinsurance treaties, and a $0.9
million expense related to the write- off of certain reinsurance recoverables that had previously been
accounted for as an allowance for bad debt, increased losses and LAE incurred in prior periods for the
year ended December 31, 2010, which are included in the $(14.1) million prior period development.
Loss reserves shown in the consolidated balance sheets are net of $21.0 million and $18.1 million
for anticipated subrogation recoveries as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
12. Reinsurance
The Company is involved in the cession and assumption of reinsurance with non-affiliated
companies. Risks are reinsured with other companies on both a quota share and excess of loss basis.
Reinsurance transactions reflected in the accompanying consolidated statements of income and
comprehensive income were as follows:
2012
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2010
Written
Earned
Written
Earned
Written
Earned
(in thousands)
Direct premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Assumed premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Gross premiums. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ceded premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$575,373
4,954
580,327
(10,651)
$507,770
4,345
512,115
(10,651)
$416,106
2,406
418,512
(8,474)
$369,365
2,533
371,898
(8,474)
$319,773
2,504
322,277
(9,179)
$328,165
2,800
330,965
(9,179)
Net premiums . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$569,676
$501,464
$410,038
$363,424
$313,098
$321,786
Ceded losses and LAE incurred
(As Restated for years ended
2011 and 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
2,544
$ 46,327
$ (13,629)
Ceded losses and LAE incurred includes the amortization of the Deferred Gain and the LPT
Reserve Adjustment.
Excess of Loss Reinsurance
The Company maintains reinsurance for losses from a single occurrence or event in excess of $5.0
million and up to $200.0 million, subject to a $2.0 million annual aggregate deductible and certain
exclusions. The reinsurance coverage includes coverage for acts of terrorism, excluding nuclear,
biological, chemical, and radiological events. Any liability outside the coverage limits of the reinsurance
program is retained by the Company.
LPT Agreement
Recoverables from reinsurers on unpaid losses and LAE amounted to $0.8 billion and $0.9 billion
at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. At each of December 31, 2012 and 2011, $0.7 billion and
$0.8 billion, respectively, of those recoverables was related to the LPT Agreement that was entered into
in 1999 by the Fund and assumed by EICN. Under the LPT Agreement, substantially all of the Fund’s
losses and LAE on claims incurred prior to July 1, 1995, have been ceded to three unaffiliated
reinsurers on a 100% quota share basis. Investments have been placed in trust by the three reinsurers as
security for payment of the reinsured claims. Under the LPT Agreement, initially $1.5 billion in
85
45901
liabilities for the incurred but unpaid losses and LAE related to claims incurred prior to July 1, 1995,
were reinsured for consideration of $775.0 million. The LPT Agreement provides coverage up to $2.0
billion. Through December 31, 2012, the Company has paid losses and LAE claims totaling $605.1
million related to the LPT Agreement.
The Company amortized $17.0 million, $18.2 million, and $19.3 million of the Deferred Gain for
the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Additionally, the Deferred Gain was
reduced by $73.3 million in 2012 due to the favorable LPT Reserve Adjustment (Note 3). There was no
LPT Reserve Adjustment in 2011 or 2010.
13. Notes Payable
Notes payable is comprised of the following:
December 31,
2012
2011
(in thousands)
Amended Credit Facility, due December 31, 2015 with variable interest, as
described below. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 80,000
$ 90,000
Dekania Surplus Note, due April 30, 2034 with variable interest of 425 basis
points above 90-day LIBOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10,000
10,000
ICONS Surplus Note, due May 26, 2034 with variable interest of 425 basis
points above 90-day LIBOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Alesco Surplus Note, due December 15, 2034 with variable interest of 405
12,000
12,000
basis points above 90-day LIBOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10,000
10,000
Balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$112,000
$122,000
On December 28, 2010, the Company entered into the Third Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement (Amended Credit Facility) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Wells Fargo),
under which the Company is provided with: (a) $100.0 million line of credit through December 31, 2011;
(b) $90.0 million line of credit from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012; (c) $80.0 million line
of credit from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013; (d) $70.0 million line of credit from January
1, 2014 through December 31, 2014; and (e) $60.0 million line of credit from January 1, 2015 through
December 31, 2015. Amounts outstanding bear interest at a rate equal to, at the Company’s option: (a)
a fluctuating rate of 1.75% above prime rate or (b) a fixed rate that is 1.75% above the LIBOR rate
then in effect. The Amended Credit Facility is secured by fixed maturity securities and cash and cash
equivalents that had a fair value of $110.4 million at December 31, 2012. The Amended Credit Facility
contains customary non-financial covenants and requires EHI to maintain $5.0 million of cash and cash
equivalents at all times. The Company is currently in compliance with all applicable covenants. Interest
paid during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, totaled $1.9 million, $2.0 million, and
$4.4 million, respectively. In accordance with the terms of the contract, a repayment of $10.0 million
was made toward the Amended Credit Facility on December 28, 2012.
EPIC has a $10.0 million surplus note to Dekania CDO II, Ltd. issued as part of a pooled
transaction. The note matures in 2034 and became callable by the Company in the second quarter of
2009. The terms of the note provide for quarterly interest payments at a rate 425 basis points in excess
of the 90-day LIBOR. Both the payment of interest and repayment of the principal under this note and
the surplus notes described in the succeeding two paragraphs are subject to the prior approval of the
Florida Department of Financial Services. Interest paid during each of the years ended December 31,
2012, 2011, and 2010 was $0.5 million. Interest accrued as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $0.1
million.
EPIC has a $12.0 million surplus note to ICONS, Inc. issued as part of a pooled transaction. The
note matures in 2034 and became callable by the Company in the second quarter of 2009. The terms of
the note provide for quarterly interest payments at a rate 425 basis points in excess of the 90-day
LIBOR. Interest paid during each of the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010 was $0.6
million. Interest accrued as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $0.1 million.
86
79816
EPIC has a $10.0 million surplus note to Alesco Preferred Funding V, LTD issued as part of a
pooled transaction. The note matures in 2034 and became callable by the Company in the fourth
quarter of 2009. The terms of the note provide for quarterly interest payments at a rate 405 basis points
in excess of the 90-day LIBOR. Interest paid during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010
was $0.5 million, $0.4 million, and $0.4 million, respectively. Interest accrued as of December 31, 2012
and 2011 was $0.1 million.
Principal payment obligations on notes payable outstanding at December 31, 2012, were as follows:
Year
2013. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2016. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Principal Due
(in thousands)
$ 10,000
10,000
60,000
—
—
32,000
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$112,000
14. Commitments and Contingencies
Leases
The Company leases office facilities and certain equipment under operating and capital leases.
Most leases have renewal options, typically with increased rental rates during the option period. Certain
of these leases contain options to purchase the property at amounts that approximate fair market value;
other leases contain options to purchase at a bargain purchase price. At December 31, 2012, the
remaining lease terms expire over the next six years.
The future lease payments for the next five years and thereafter on these non-cancelable operating
and capital leases at December 31, 2012, were as follows:
Year
Operating
Leases
Capital
Leases
(in thousands)
2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2015 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thereafter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 7,014
6,332
4,829
3,415
1,931
603
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$24,124
$1,130
1,039
341
—
—
—
$2,510
Included in the future minimum capital lease payments are future interest charges of $0.1 million.
Facilities rent expense was $5.2 million, $5.1 million, and $8.9 million for the years ended December 31,
2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
Property held under capital leases is included in property and equipment as follows:
Asset Class
2011
2012
(in thousands)
Furniture and equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Computers and software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Automobiles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
100
2,904
1,369
$
100
1,283
1,727
Accumulated amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4,373
(1,758)
3,110
(2,020)
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 2,615
$ 1,090
87
31211
Contingencies Surrounding Insurance Assessments
All of the states where the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are licensed to transact business
require property and casualty insurers doing business within the respective state to pay various
insurance assessments. The Company accrues a liability for estimated insurance assessments as direct
premiums are written, losses are recorded, or as other events occur in accordance with various states’
laws and regulations, and defers these costs and recognizes them as an expense as the related premiums
are earned. The Company had an accrued liability for guaranty fund assessments, second injury funds
assessments, and other insurance assessments totaling $8.5 million and $7.9 million as of December 31,
2012 and 2011, respectively. These liabilities are generally expected to be paid over one to eighty year
periods based on individual states’ regulations. The Company also recorded an asset of $1.7 million and
$4.0 million, as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, for prepaid policy charges still to be
collected in the future from policyholders, assessments that may be recovered through a reduction in
future premium taxes in certain states, and for expected refunds of certain prepaid assessments based
on a change in the Company’s premium between the time when the prepayment was made and when
the assessment becomes due. These assets are expected to be realized over two to ten year periods in
accordance with their type and individual states’ regulations.
15. Stockholders’ Equity
Stock Repurchase Programs
On November 3, 2010, the Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program of up to
$100.0 million of the Company’s common stock from November 8, 2010 through June 30, 2012 (the 2011
Program). In November 2011, the Board of Directors authorized a $100.0 million expansion of the 2011
Program, to $200.0 million, and extended the repurchase authority pursuant to the 2011 Program
through June 30, 2013. The Company expects that shares may be purchased at prevailing market prices
in accordance with
through a variety of methods,
applicable laws and regulations. The timing and actual number of shares repurchased will depend on a
variety of factors, including the share price, corporate and regulatory requirements, and other market
and economic conditions. Repurchases under the 2011 Program may be commenced or suspended from
time-to-time without prior notice, and the 2011 Program may be suspended or discontinued at any time.
Through December 31, 2012, the Company repurchased a total of 9,426,131 shares of common stock at
an average price of $15.79 per share, including commissions, for a total of $148.8 million.
including open market or private transactions,
Since the Company’s initial public offering in January 2007 through December 31, 2012, the
Company repurchased a total of 23,372,974 shares of common stock at an average cost per share of
$15.51, which is reported as treasury stock, at cost, on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
16. Stock-Based Compensation
The Employers Holdings, Inc. Amended and Restated Equity and Incentive Plan (the Plan) is
administered by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, which is authorized to grant,
at its discretion, awards to officers, employees, non-employee directors, consultants, and independent
contractors. The maximum number of common shares reserved for grants of awards under the Plan is
7,105,838 shares. The Plan provides for the grant of stock options (both incentive stock options and
nonqualified stock options), stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units (RSUs),
performance stock units (PSUs), and other stock- based awards.
As of December 31, 2012, nonqualified stock options, RSUs, and PSUs have been granted, but no
incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, or restricted stock have been granted under the Plan.
88
10123
Compensation costs are recognized net of any estimated forfeitures on a straight-line basis over the
employee requisite service periods. Forfeiture rates are based on historical experience and are adjusted
in subsequent periods for differences in actual forfeitures from those estimated. Net stock-based
compensation expense recognized in the accompanying consolidated statements of
income and
comprehensive income was as follows:
Stock-based compensation expense related to:
Nonqualified stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RSUs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PSUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Less: related tax benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2012
2010
(in thousands)
$1,958
2,435
1,748
6,141
1,972
$1,648
2,094
—
3,742
1,220
$2,039
2,014
—
4,053
1,116
Net stock-based compensation expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$4,169
$2,522
$2,937
Nonqualified Stock Options
The Company awarded “Founders’ grants” to employees, excluding senior officers, in February
2007. The founders’ grants awards vested pro-rata on each of the first three anniversaries of the
effective date of the Company’s initial public offering. The options expire seven years from the date of
grant. Additional grants of nonqualified stock options awarded to certain officers of the Company have
service vesting periods of four years after the date awarded and vest 25% on each of the subsequent
four anniversaries of such date. The options are subject to accelerated vesting in certain limited
circumstances, such as: death or disability, or in connection with a change of control of the Company.
The options expire seven years from the date of grant.
The fair value of the stock options granted is estimated using a Black-Scholes option pricing model
that uses the assumptions noted in the following table. During the years ended December 31, 2012,
2011, and 2010, the expected stock price volatility used to value the options granted in 2012, 2011, and
2010 was based on the volatility of the Company’s historical stock price since February 2007. The
expected term of the options granted in 2012, 2011, and 2010 was calculated using the ’plain-vanilla’
calculation provided in the guidance of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107. The dividend yield was calculated using amounts authorized by the Board of
Directors. The risk-free interest rate is the yield on the grant date of the options of U.S. Treasury zero
coupon securities with a maturity comparable to the expected term of the options.
The Company anticipates issuing new shares upon exercise of stock options.
The fair value of the stock options granted during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and
2010 were calculated using the following weighted average assumptions:
Expected volatility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expected life (in years) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dividend yield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Risk-free interest rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2012
2011
2010
42.7% 43.6% 47.3%
4.8
4.8
1.4% 1.2% 1.6%
1.1% 1.9% 2.6%
4.8
Weighted average grant date fair values of options granted . . . . . . . . .
$5.64
$7.01
$5.80
89
Changes in outstanding stock options for the year ended December 31, 2012 were as follows:
89182
Number of
Options
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Options outstanding at December 31, 2009 . . . 1,512,706
406,020
(7,783)
(35,441)
(112,399)
Options outstanding at December 31, 2010 . . . 1,763,103
355,063
(92,646)
(49,445)
(187,369)
Options outstanding at December 31, 2011 . . . 1,788,706
242,300
(101,261)
(98,973)
Options outstanding at December 31, 2012 . . . 1,830,772
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercised. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exercisable at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,086,306
$16.30
15.31
12.03
17.94
15.03
16.14
19.81
16.53
17.32
15.36
16.90
17.02
14.13
18.78
16.97
16.97
Weighted Average
Remaining
Contractual Life
5.4 years
6.2 years
4.8 years
6.2 years
4.3 years
6.2 years
3.7 years
2.8 years
At December 31, 2012, the Company had yet to recognize $3.1 million in deferred compensation
related to nonqualified stock option grants and expects to recognize these costs on a straight-line basis
over the next 39 months. The fair value of options vested and the intrinsic value of outstanding and
exercisable options as of December 31, were as follows:
Fair value of options vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intrinsic value of outstanding options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intrinsic value of exercisable options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,948
6,616
3,918
2012
2010
2011
(in thousands)
$1,929
3,332
1,508
$2,041
3,561
750
RSUs
The Company has awarded RSUs to non-employee members of the Board of Directors and certain
officers of the Company. The RSUs awarded to non-employee members of the Board vest on the first
anniversary of the award date. RSU grants allow each non-employee Director to decide whether to
defer settlement of the RSUs until six months after termination of Board service or settle the RSUs at
vesting. Dividend equivalents are granted to Directors who elected to defer settlement of the RSUs
after the grants vested. RSUs awarded to officers of the Company have a service vesting period of four
years from the date awarded and vest 25% on each of the subsequent four anniversaries of such date.
These RSUs are subject to accelerated vesting in certain limited circumstances, such as: death or
disability of the holder, or in connection with a change of control of the Company.
90
68631
Changes in outstanding RSUs for the year ended December 31, 2012 were as follows:
RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Forfeited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Granted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Vested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Number of
RSUs
365,343
195,301
(38,837)
(93,292)
428,515
157,570
(62,618)
(105,278)
418,189
117,065
(128,992)
RSUs outstanding at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
406,262
Vested but unsettled RSUs at December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
106,510
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
$14.66
15.36
14.81
14.60
14.98
19.03
15.29
15.25
16.39
16.95
16.36
16.56
15.30
At December 31, 2012, the Company had yet to recognize $3.5 million in deferred compensation
related to RSU grants and expects to recognize these costs on a straight-line basis over the next 41
months. The fair value of RSUs vested and the intrinsic value of outstanding and vested RSUs as of
December 31, were as follows:
Fair value of RSUs vested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intrinsic value of outstanding RSUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intrinsic value of vested RSUs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$2,110
8,361
2,655
2012
2010
2011
(in thousands)
$1,605
7,565
1,904
$1,362
7,490
1,631
PSUs
The Company awarded PSUs to certain officers of the Company as follows:
March 2012
PSUs(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
158,900
$17.02
$2,704
Target Number
Awarded
Fair Value on
Date of Grant
Aggregate Fair Value
on Date of Grant
(in thousands)
(1) The PSUs have a performance period of three years and are subject to certain performance goals, based on the Company’s
statutory combined ratio, with payouts that range from 0% to 200% of the target awards.
At December 31, 2012, the Company had yet to recognize $3.6 million in deferred compensation
related to PSU grants and expects to recognize these costs on a straight-line basis over the next 24
months. This is based on the expectation of the Company achieving the 200% target rate.
17. Statutory Matters
Statutory Financial Data
The combined capital stock, surplus, and net income of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries
(EICN, ECIC, EPIC, and EAC), prepared in accordance with the statutory accounting practices (SAP)
91
66459
of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) as well as SAP permitted by the states
of California, Florida, and Nevada, were as follows:
December 31,
2012
2011
(in thousands)
Capital stock and unassigned surplus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Paid in capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Special surplus funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Surplus notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$292,337
134,900
42,463
32,000
$241,087
64,900
49,932
32,000
Total statutory surplus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$501,700
$387,919
Net income for the Company’s insurance subsidiaries prepared in accordance with SAP for the
years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $13.5 million, $13.8 million and $59.1 million,
respectively.
Treatment of the LPT Agreement and the surplus notes (see Notes 12 and 13) are the primary
differences in the SAP-basis capital stock and total surplus of the insurance subsidiaries of $501.7
million and $387.9 million, and the GAAP-basis equity of the Company of $539.4 million and $462.0
million as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Under SAP accounting, the retroactive
reinsurance gain resulting from the LPT Agreement is recorded as a special component of surplus
(special surplus funds) in the initial year of the contract, and not reported as unassigned surplus until
the Company has recovered amounts in excess of the original consideration paid. The special surplus
funds are also reduced by the amount of extraordinary dividends as approved by the Nevada Division
of Insurance. Under SAP, the surplus notes are recorded as a separate component of surplus. Under
SAP, changes to the estimated contingent profit commission under the LPT Agreement are reflected in
commission expense in the period that the estimate is revised.
Insurance Company Dividends
The ability of EHI to pay dividends on the Company’s common stock and to pay other expenses
will be dependent to a significant extent upon the ability of the Nevada domiciled insurance company,
EICN, and the Florida domiciled insurance company, EPIC, to pay dividends to their immediate
holding company, Employers Group, Inc. (EGI) and, in turn, the ability of EGI to pay dividends to
EHI. ECIC and EAC have the ability to declare and pay dividends to EICN and EPIC, respectively,
subject to certain restrictions.
The amount of dividends each of the Company’s subsidiaries may pay to their immediate parent is
limited by the laws of their respective state of domicile.
Nevada law limits the payment of cash dividends by EICN to its parent by providing that payments
cannot be made except from available and accumulated surplus, otherwise unrestricted (unassigned),
and derived from realized net operating profits and realized and unrealized capital gains. A stock
dividend may be paid out of any available surplus. A cash or stock dividend prohibited by these
restrictions may only be declared and distributed as an extraordinary dividend upon the prior approval
of the Nevada Commissioner of Insurance (Nevada Commissioner). EICN may not pay such an
extraordinary dividend or make an extraordinary distribution until the Nevada Commissioner either
approves or does not disapprove the payment within 30 days after receiving notice of its declaration. An
extraordinary dividend or distribution is defined by statute to include any dividend or distribution of
cash or property whose fair market value, together with that of other dividends or distributions made
within the preceding 12 months, exceeds the greater of: (a) 10% of EICN’s statutory surplus as regards
to policyholders at the next preceding December 31; or (b) EICN’s statutory net income, not including
realized capital gains, for the 12-month period ending at the next preceding December 31. As of
December 31, 2012, EICN had positive unassigned surplus of $251.0 million. During 2012, EICN did not
pay any dividends. The maximum dividends that may be paid in 2013 by EICN without prior approval is
$29.5 million.
Under Florida law, without regulatory approval, EPIC may pay dividends if they do not exceed the
greater of: the lesser of 10% of surplus or net income, not including realized capital gains, plus a 2-year
92
00562
carry forward; 10% of surplus, with dividends payable limited to unassigned funds minus 25% of
unrealized capital gains; or, the lesser of 10% of surplus or net investment income plus a 3-year carry
forward with dividends payable limited to unassigned funds minus 25% of unrealized capital gains.
During 2012, EPIC did not pay any dividends. The maximum dividends that may be paid in 2013 by
EPIC without prior approval, is $20.6 million.
Regulatory Requirements and Restrictions
ECIC is subject to regulation by the California Department of Insurance (California DOI). The
ability of ECIC to pay dividends was further limited by restrictions imposed by the California DOI in
its approval of the Company’s October 1, 2008 reinsurance pooling agreement. Under that approval: (a)
ECIC must initiate discussions of its business plan with the California DOI if its premium to
policyholder surplus ratio exceeds 1.5 to 1; (b) ECIC will not exceed a ratio of premium to policyholder
surplus of 2 to 1 without approval of the California DOI; (c) if at any time ECIC’s policyholder surplus
decreases to 80% or less than the September 30, 2008 balance, ECIC shall cease issuing new policies in
California, but may continue to renew existing policies until it has (i) received a capital infusion to bring
its surplus position to the same level as that as of September 30, 2008 and (ii) submitted a new business
plan to the California DOI; (d) ECIC will maintain a risk based capital (RBC) level of at least 350%;
(e) should ECIC fail to comply with any commitments listed herein, ECIC will consent to any request
by the California DOI to cease issuing new policies in California, but may continue to renew existing
policies until such time that as ECIC is able to achieve full compliance with each commitment; and (f)
the obligations listed shall only terminate with the written consent of the California DOI. During the
years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, ECIC was in compliance with these statutes.
EPIC and EAC are subject to regulation by the Florida Department of Financial Services (FDFS).
Florida statute Section 624.408 requires EPIC and EAC to maintain minimum capital and surplus of the
greater of $4.0 million or 10% of total liabilities. Florida statute Section 624.4095 requires EPIC and
EAC to maintain a ratio of written premiums times 1.25 to surplus of no greater than 10-to-1 for gross
written premiums and 4-to-1 for net written premiums. During the years ended December 31, 2012,
2011, and 2010, EPIC and EAC were in compliance with these statutes.
Additionally, EICN, ECIC, EPIC, and EAC are required to comply with NAIC RBC
requirements. RBC is a method of measuring the amount of capital appropriate for an insurance
company to support its overall business operations in light of its size and risk profile. NAIC RBC
standards are used by regulators to determine appropriate regulatory actions relating to insurers that
show signs of weak or deteriorating conditions. As of December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, EICN, ECIC,
EPIC, and EAC each had total adjusted capital above all regulatory action levels.
18. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, Net
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net, is comprised of unrealized gains on investments
classified as available-for-sale, net of deferred tax expense. The following table summarizes the
components of accumulated other comprehensive income, net:
Net unrealized gain on investments, before taxes . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred tax expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total accumulated other comprehensive income, net . . . . . . .
Years Ended December 31,
2012
2011
(in thousands)
$199,305
(69,756)
$129,549
$179,567
(62,848)
$116,719
19. Employee Benefit and Retirement Plans
The Company maintained two 401(k) defined contribution plans covering all eligible Company
employees until April 2011. One plan covered eligible employees of the Company that existed prior to
the acquisition of AmCOMP Incorporated (AmCOMP) in 2008 (the Employers 401(k) Plan). The
second plan covered all eligible employees of the Company acquired in the AmCOMP acquisition (the
93
91391
AmCOMP 401(k) Plan). Effective April 1, 2011, the two plans merged and participants of the
AmCOMP 401(k) Plan transferred to the Employers 401(k) Plan. Under the Employers 401(k) Plan,
the Company’s safe harbor matching consists of 100% matching contribution on salary deferrals up to
3% of compensation and then 50% matching contribution on salary deferrals from 3% to 5% of
compensation. The Company’s contribution to the Employers 401(k) Plan was $1.5 million, $1.5 million,
and $1.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. Expenses relating
to the AmCOMP 401(k) Plan were $0.5 million for the year ended 2010.
20. Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share includes no dilution and is computed by dividing income applicable to
stockholders by the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per
share reflect the potential dilutive impact of all convertible securities on earnings per share. Diluted
earnings per share includes shares assumed issued under the “treasury stock method,” which reflects the
potential dilution that would occur if outstanding options were to be exercised.
The following table presents the net income and the weighted average shares outstanding used in
the earnings per share calculations.
Years Ended December 31,
2011
As Restated
(in thousands, except share data)
2010
As Restated
2012
Net income available to stockholders—basic
and diluted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
106,891
$
48,623
$
63,469
Weighted average number of shares
outstanding—basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31,476,056
37,284,425
41,390,984
Effect of dilutive securities:
Nonqualified stock options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PSUs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RSUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dilutive potential shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
93,966
46,681
86,723
227,370
61,048
—
78,592
139,640
7,490
—
66,768
74,258
Weighted average number of shares
outstanding—diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31,703,426
37,424,065
41,465,242
Diluted earnings per share exclude outstanding options and other common stock equivalents in
periods where the inclusion of such options and common stock equivalents would be anti-dilutive. The
following table presents options and RSUs that were excluded from diluted earnings per share.
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2010
2012
Options excluded as the exercise price was greater
than the average market price. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
900,180
1,095,920
909,611
Options and RSUs excluded under the treasury
method, as the potential proceeds on settlement or
exercise price was greater than the value of shares
acquired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
242,300
470,049
392,340
21. Selected Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
The information presented in the following tables has been restated as a result of the revised
manner in which the Company accounts for the contingent profit commission to which it is entitled
under the LPT Agreement. See Note 2.
94
08283
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited
consolidated quarterly balance sheet data for fiscal year 2012:
As of September 30, 2012
As of June 30, 2012
As of March 31, 2012
As
Reported
As
Restated
As
Reported
As
Restated
As
Reported
As
Restated
(in thousands)
Assets
Contingent commission
receivable—LPT Agreement $
— $
6,577 $
— $
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
16,933
3,587,886
10,795
3,588,325
13,576
3,540,279
4,724 $
9,254
3,540,681
17,621
3,506,091
— $
4,350
13,773
3,506,593
Liabilities and stockholders’
equity
Deferred reinsurance gain—
LPT Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stockholders’ equity:
Retained earnings . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . .
Total liabilities and
stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . .
341,564
3,114,670
354,462
3,127,568
345,210
3,085,628
357,687
3,098,105
349,038
3,040,371
361,625
3,052,958
372,390
473,216
359,931
460,757
366,089
454,651
354,014
442,576
362,972
465,720
350,887
453,635
3,587,886
3,588,325
3,540,279
3,540,681
3,506,091
3,506,593
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited
consolidated quarterly balance sheet data for fiscal year 2011:
As of September 30, 2011
As of June 30, 2011
As of March 31, 2011
As
Reported
As
Restated
As
Reported
As
Restated
As
Reported
As
Restated
(in thousands)
Assets
Contingent commission
receivable—LPT Agreement $
— $
3,532 $
— $
2,972 $
— $
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19,021
3,514,046
16,055
3,514,612
17,936
3,498,042
15,522
3,498,600
21,032
3,479,339
2,471
19,106
3,479,884
Liabilities and stockholders’
equity
Deferred reinsurance gain—
LPT Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stockholders’ equity:
Retained earnings . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . .
Total liabilities and
stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . .
357,357
3,007,950
370,154
3,020,747
361,560
2,999,329
374,389
3,012,158
365,822
2,993,581
378,699
3,006,458
340,823
506,096
328,592
493,865
331,316
498,713
319,045
486,442
325,372
485,758
313,040
473,426
3,514,046
3,514,612
3,498,042
3,498,600
3,479,339
3,479,884
95
95313
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited year to
date consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for fiscal years 2012 and 2011:
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2012
As
Reported
As
Restated
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2012
As
As
Restated
Reported
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011
As
Reported
As
Restated
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011
As
As
Restated
Reported
(in thousands, except per share data)
Revenues
Net premiums earned. . . . . . . . . $360,621 $360,621 $228,855 $228,855 $263,156 $263,156 $170,555 $170,555
Net investment income . . . . . . .
40,799
Realized gains on
60,383
36,682
54,188
40,799
36,682
60,383
54,188
investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4,561
225
4,561
225
2,723
195
2,723
195
1,983
205
1,983
205
1,336
123
1,336
123
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
419,595
419,595
268,455
268,455
325,727
325,727
212,813
212,813
Expenses
Losses and loss adjustment
expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commission expense . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other
operating expenses . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
267,471
44,541
2,517
265,150
47,118
2,517
169,216
29,676
1,650
168,327
30,437
1,650
191,009
32,368
2,766
189,480
33,615
2,766
123,571
21,400
1,926
122,634
22,095
1,926
90,935
2,656
90,935
2,656
61,655
1,760
61,655
1,760
77,212
2,731
77,212
2,731
51,878
1,825
51,878
1,825
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
408,120
408,376
263,957
263,829
306,086
305,804
200,600
200,358
Net income before income
taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax benefit. . . . . . . . . . . .
11,475
(7,903)
11,219
(7,903)
4,498
(6,730)
4,626
(6,730)
19,641
(8,738)
19,923
(8,738)
12,213
(4,383)
12,455
(4,383)
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 19,378 $ 19,122 $ 11,228 $ 11,356 $ 28,379 $ 28,661 $ 16,596 $ 16,838
Comprehensive income
Unrealized gains during the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 25,933 $ 25,933 $ 9,888 $ 9,888 $ 32,957 $ 32,957 $ 16,022 $ 16,022
Less: reclassification
adjustment for realized
gains in net income. . . . . . . . .
Other comprehensive income,
net of tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2,966
2,966
1,771
1,771
1,289
1,289
868
868
22,967
22,967
8,117
8,117
31,668
31,668
15,154
15,154
Total comprehensive income. . $ 42,345 $ 42,089 $ 19,345 $ 19,473 $ 60,047 $ 60,329 $ 31,750 $ 31,992
Earnings per common share:
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
0.61 $
0.60 $
0.35 $
0.35 $
0.74 $
0.75 $
0.43 $
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
0.61 $
0.60 $
0.35 $
0.35 $
0.74 $
0.75 $
0.43 $
0.44
0.43
Cash dividends declared
per common share . . . . . . . $
0.18 $
0.18 $
0.12 $
0.12 $
0.18 $
0.18 $
0.12 $
0.12
Realized gains on
investments, net
Net realized gains on
investments before credit
related impairments on
fixed maturity securities . . . . $ 5,090 $
5,090 $ 3,252 $ 3,252 $ 1,983 $ 1,983 $ 1,336 $ 1,336
Other than temporary
impairment, credit losses
recognized in earnings . . . . . .
Portion of impairment
recognized in other
comprehensive income. . . . . .
(529)
(529)
(529)
(529)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Realized gains on
investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 4,561 $
4,561 $ 2,723 $ 2,723 $ 1,983 $ 1,983 $ 1,336 $ 1,336
96
32143
The following table presents the unaudited results for the quarter ended December 31, 2012 and
the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited quarterly consolidated statements of
income and comprehensive income for first, second, and third quarters of 2012:
Quarter Ended
December 31,
2012
Revenues
Net premiums earned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net investment income . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$140,843
18,175
487
82
As
Reported
September 30, 2012
June 30, 2012
As
As
Restated
Reported
(in thousands, except per share data)
As
Restated
March 31, 2012
As
As
Restated
Reported
$131,766 $131,766 $118,955 $118,955 $109,900 $109,900
18,385
1,778
81
18,297
945
114
17,506
1,838
30
17,506
1,838
30
18,385
1,778
81
18,297
945
114
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
159,587
151,140
151,140
138,311
138,311
130,144
130,144
Expenses
Losses and loss adjustment expenses
Commission expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other operating
expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income before income taxes . . . .
Income tax benefit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
22,760
18,462
687
30,505
848
73,262
86,325
(1,444)
98,255
14,865
867
29,280
896
96,823
16,681
867
29,280
896
88,293
16,147
803
29,513
858
87,809
16,621
803
29,513
858
80,923
13,529
847
32,142
902
80,518
13,816
847
32,142
902
144,163
144,547
135,614
135,604
128,343
128,225
6,977
(1,173)
6,593
(1,173)
2,697
(2,309)
2,707
(2,309)
1,801
(4,421)
1,919
(4,421)
Net income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 87,769
$ 8,150 $ 7,766 $ 5,006 $ 5,016 $ 6,222 $ 6,340
Comprehensive income
Unrealized gains during the period . .
Less: reclassification adjustment for
realized gains in net income . . . . . .
Other comprehensive income, net of
tax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ (9,822)
$ 16,045 $ 16,045 $ 3,844 $ 3,844 $ 6,044 $ 6,044
316
1,195
1,195
614
614
1,156
1,156
(10,138)
14,850
14,850
3,230
3,230
4,888
4,888
Total comprehensive income . . . . . . . .
$ 77,631
$ 23,000 $ 22,616 $ 8,236 $ 8,246 $ 11,110 $ 11,228
Earnings per common share:
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash dividends declared per
common share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments, net
Net realized gains on investments
before credit related impairments
on fixed maturity securities . . . . . . .
Other than temporary impairment,
credit losses recognized in
earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Portion of impairment recognized in
other comprehensive income . . . . . .
$
$
$
2.85
2.82
0.06
$
$
$
0.26 $
0.25 $
0.16 $
0.16 $
0.19 $
0.26 $
0.25 $
0.16 $
0.16 $
0.19 $
0.19
0.19
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06
$
611
$ 1,838 $ 1,838 $ 1,005 $ 1,005 $ 2,246 $ 2,246
(124)
—
—
—
—
—
(60)
(60)
(468)
(468)
—
—
—
—
Realized gains on investments, net . .
$
487
$ 1,838 $ 1,838 $
945 $
945 $ 1,778 $ 1,778
97
74884
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited
quarterly consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for fiscal year 2011:
Quarter Ended
December 31, 2011
September 30, 2011
As
Reported
As
Restated
As
Reported
As
Restated
(in thousands, except per share data)
June 30, 2011
As
As
Restated
Reported
March 31, 2011
As
As
Restated
Reported
Revenues
Net premiums earned. . . . . . . . . $100,268 $100,268 $ 92,601 $ 92,601 $ 88,128 $ 88,128 $ 82,427 $ 82,427
Net investment income . . . . . . .
20,493
Realized gains on
20,306
19,734
20,493
20,306
19,584
19,584
19,734
investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18,178
247
18,178
247
647
82
647
82
1,102
3
1,102
3
234
120
234
120
138,427
138,427
112,914
112,914
109,539
109,539
103,274
103,274
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expenses
Losses and loss adjustment
expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Commission expense . . . . . . . . . .
Policyholder dividends . . . . . . . .
Underwriting and other
operating expenses . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
73,654
13,134
657
23,505
911
73,031
13,729
657
23,505
911
67,438
10,968
840
25,334
906
66,846
11,520
840
25,334
906
64,150
11,119
914
26,200
908
63,601
11,607
914
26,200
908
59,421
10,281
1,012
25,678
917
97,309
59,033
10,488
1,012
25,678
917
97,128
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
111,861
111,833
105,486
105,446
103,291
103,230
Net income before income
taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax expense (benefit) .
26,566
6,632
26,594
6,632
7,428
(4,355)
7,468
(4,355)
6,248
(2,003)
6,309
(2,003)
5,965
(2,380)
6,146
(2,380)
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 19,934 $ 19,962 $ 11,783 $ 11,823 $ 8,251 $ 8,312 $ 8,345 $ 8,526
Comprehensive income
Unrealized gains during the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 12,734 $ 12,734 $ 16,935 $ 16,935 $ 18,866 $ 18,866 $ (2,844) $ (2,844)
Less: reclassification
adjustment for realized
gains in net income. . . . . . . . .
Other comprehensive income,
net of tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11,816
11,816
421
421
716
716
152
152
918
918
16,514
16,514
18,150
18,150
(2,996)
(2,996)
Total comprehensive income. . $ 20,852 $ 20,880 $ 28,297 $ 28,337 $ 26,401 $ 26,462 $ 5,349 $ 5,530
Earnings per common share:
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
0.58 $
0.58 $
0.31 $
0.31 $
0.21 $
0.22 $
0.22 $
Diluted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
0.58 $
0.58 $
0.31 $
0.31 $
0.21 $
0.22 $
0.21 $
0.22
0.22
Cash dividends declared
per common share . . . . . . . $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06 $
0.06
Realized gains on
investments, net
Net realized gains on
investments before credit
related impairments on
fixed maturity securities . . . . $ 18,272 $ 18,272 $
647 $
647 $ 1,102 $ 1,102 $
234 $
234
Other than temporary
impairment, credit losses
recognized in earnings . . . . . .
Portion of impairment
recognized in other
comprehensive income. . . . . .
(94)
(94)
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Realized gains on
investments, net . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18,178 $ 18,178 $
647 $
647 $ 1,102 $ 1,102 $
234 $
234
98
49559
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited year to
date consolidated statements of cash flows for fiscal year 2012:
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2012
As
Reported
As
Restated
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2012
As
As
Restated
Reported
Three Months Ended
March 31, 2012
As
As
Restated
Reported
(in thousands)
Operating activities
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 19,378 $ 19,122 $ 11,228 $ 11,356 $ 6,222 $ 6,340
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement . .
Contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash provided by operating activities . . . . . . . . . .
Investing activities
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities .
Financing activities
Net cash used in financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash
equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(11,630)
(11,501)
(7,984)
(8,276)
(4,156)
(4,338)
—
8,167
90,882
(2,450)
10,744
90,882
—
7,893
54,361
(597)
8,654
54,361
—
2,211
24,440
(223)
2,498
24,440
(52,682)
(52,682)
(56,447)
(56,447)
(54,368)
(54,368)
(47,258)
(47,258)
(41,423)
(41,423)
(20,817)
(20,817)
(9,058)
(9,058)
(43,509)
(43,509)
(50,745)
(50,745)
252,300
252,300
252,300
252,300
252,300
252,300
243,242
243,242
208,791
208,791
201,555
201,555
The following table presents the impact of the revisions to the previously issued unaudited year to
date consolidated statements of cash flows for fiscal year 2011:
Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2011
As
Reported
As
Restated
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2011
As
As
Restated
Reported
Three Months Ended
March 31, 2011
As
As
Restated
Reported
(in thousands)
Operating activities
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 28,379 $ 28,661 $ 16,596 $ 16,838 $ 8,345 $ 8,526
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities:
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
Deferred reinsurance gain—LPT Agreement . .
Contingent commission receivable—LPT
Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash provided by operating activities . . . . . . . . . .
Investing activities
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities .
Financing activities
Net cash used in financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash
equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the
period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(12,984)
(13,245)
(8,781)
(9,010)
(4,519)
(4,700)
—
1,472
35,977
(1,268)
2,719
35,977
—
2,329
12,712
(708)
3,024
12,712
—
(1,252)
5,315
(207)
(1,045)
5,315
97,837
97,837
94,254
94,254
52,438
52,438
(46,805)
(46,805)
(24,909)
(24,909)
(10,347)
(10,347)
87,009
87,009
82,057
82,057
47,406
47,406
119,825
119,825
119,825
119,825
119,825
119,825
206,834
206,834
201,882
201,882
167,231
167,231
99
15838
Fourth Quarter Adjustments
The fourth quarter of 2012 was impacted by two changes in estimate, including: (1) a favorable
LPT Reserve Adjustment, which reduced our losses and LAE by $73.3 million, and increased net
income by $73.3 million, or $2.38 and $2.35 per basic and diluted share, respectively; and (2) an LPT
Contingent Commission Adjustment, which reduced our losses and LAE by $8.6 million, resulting in an
increase to net income of $8.2 million, or $0.26 per basic and diluted share. See Note 3.
The fourth quarter of 2011 was impacted by two adjustments which consisted of (1) a pretax $0.8
million decrease in underwriting and other operating expenses (after tax of $0.6 million) resulting from
an over-accrual of sales incentives throughout 2011, and (2) a $1.0 million increase in income tax
expense primarily related to the write off of a deferred tax asset related to the prior year.
These adjustments were not material to any individual prior period or the current period and,
accordingly, the prior period results have not been adjusted.
Net Premiums Earned
The increase in net premiums earned in 2012 and 2011was primarily due to increasing policy count
and rates.
Realized Gains on Investments, Net
The increase in realized gains on investments, net in the fourth quarter of 2011 resulted from a
strategic rebalancing of the Company’s investment portfolio in an effort to increase portfolio allocations
to taxable fixed income sectors, shorten portfolio duration following the decline in interest rates in the
second half of 2011, and increase the allocation in high dividend equity securities.
Losses and LAE
Losses and LAE increased in 2011 and through the first three quarters of 2012, primarily due to an
increase in net earned premiums. The decrease in losses and LAE during the fourth quarter of 2012 was
primarily due to the LPT Reserve Adjustment of $73.3 million and the LPT Contingent Commission
Adjustment of $8.6 million.
Commission Expense
The increased commission expense in the second quarter of 2012 was primarily due to higher
agency incentive commissions due to increased agent production during that quarter. The third quarter
of 2012 was impacted by higher net earned premiums, partially offset by a decrease in the accrual for
agency incentives. The increased commission expense in the fourth quarter of 2012 was primarily due to
higher net earned premiums and an increase in the accrual for agency incentives.
Commission expense increased in the first, second and fourth quarters of 2011, primarily due to
higher net earned premiums. Additionally, commission expenses were increased by $1.2 million in the
fourth quarter of 2011 due to a change in the accrual for agency incentive commissions.
Underwriting and Other Operating Expenses
Underwriting and other operating expenses increased by $3.0 million, $2.2 million, $1.3 million, and
$0.6 million in the first, second,
third, and fourth quarters of 2012, respectively, due to the
implementation of new accounting guidance for deferred policy acquisition costs. Additionally,
underwriting and other operating expenses increased throughout 2012 primarily due to increased
compensation expenses and increased premium taxes and assessments as net premiums earned
increased.
Income Taxes
Income tax expense (benefit) for interim periods is measured using an estimated effective tax rate
for the annual period based on projected net income and tax adjustments. On an interim basis, actual
100
01318
results to date replace the projections and the annual effective tax rate is updated. A cumulative change
is recorded in the quarter the effective tax rate changes.
The changes in estimate related to the LPT Reserve Adjustment and LPT Contingent Commission
Adjustment in the fourth quarter of 2012 were tax-exempt.
The increased income tax expense in the fourth quarter of 2011 was primarily related to the
increased realized gains on investments, net during that quarter.
101
75032
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) designed to provide reasonable
assurance that the information required to be reported in the Exchange Act filings is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified and pursuant to SEC regulations,
including controls and procedures designed to ensure that this information is accumulated and
communicated to management,
including its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as
appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding the required disclosure. It should be noted that,
because of inherent limitations, our disclosure controls and procedures, however well designed and
operated, can provide only reasonable, and not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure
controls and procedures are met.
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a
reasonable level of assurance as of December 31, 2012.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management’s report regarding internal control over financial reporting is set forth in Item 8 of
this Annual Report on Form 10- K under the caption “Management’s Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting” and incorporated herein by reference.
Attestation Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The attestation report of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm regarding
internal control over financial reporting is set forth in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K
under the caption “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control
Over Financial Reporting” and incorporated herein by reference.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as such term is
defined in Rules 13a-15(f) in the Exchange Act) during the fourth fiscal quarter of the year to which
this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.
102
02798
PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance
The information required by Item 10 with respect to our executive officers and key employees is
included under the caption “Executive Officers of the Registrant” in our Proxy Statement for the 2013
Annual Meeting and is incorporated herein by reference. We plan to file such Proxy Statement within
120 days after December 31, 2012, the end of our fiscal year.
The information required by Item 10 with respect to our Directors is included under the caption
“Election of Directors” in our Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is
incorporated herein by reference.
The information required by Item 10 with respect to compliance with Section 16 of the Exchange
Act is included under the caption “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” in our
Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
The information required by Item 10 with respect to our audit committee and our audit committee
financial expert is included under the caption “The Board of Directors and its Committees - Audit
Committee” in our Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated
herein by reference.
The information required by Item 10 with respect to our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and
our Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers is posted on our website at www.employers.com in the
Investors section under “Governance.” We will post information regarding any amendment to, or
waiver from, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics on our website in the Investor section under
Governance.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
The information required by Item 11 is included under the captions “Compensation Discussion and
Analysis,” “Compensation Committee Report” and “Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider
Participation” in our Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated
herein by reference.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
Certain information required by Item 12 is included under the captions “Security Ownership of
Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” and “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” in our
Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
Equity and Incentive Plan
The following table gives information about our common stock that may be issued upon the
exercise of options, warrants, and rights under all of our existing equity compensation plans as of
December 31, 2012. We do not have any plans not approved by our stockholders. Our equity
compensation plans are discussed further in Note 16 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial
Statements, which are included herein.
(a)
(b)
Number of securities
to be issued upon
exercise of outstanding
options, warrants, and
rights
Weighted-average
exercised price of
outstanding options,
warrants, and
rights
(c)
Number of securities
remaining available for
further issuance
under compensation
plans
(excluding securities
reflected in column (a))
Plan Category
Equity compensation plans approved by
stockholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity compensation plans not
approved by stockholders . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,830,772
—
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,830,772
$16.97
—
$16.97
3,934,458
—
3,934,458
103
30251
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence
The information required by Item 13 is included under the captions “Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions” and “Director Independence” in our Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The information required by Item 14 with respect to the fees and services of Ernst & Young LLP,
our independent registered public accounting firm, is included under the caption “Audit Matters” in our
Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
104
06819
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
The following consolidated financial statements are filed in Item 8 of Part II of this report:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Page
62
63
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income for each of the three years
ended December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
64
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for each of the three years ended
December 31, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for each of the three years ended December 31, 2012 .
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financial Statement Schedules:
Schedule II. Condensed Financial Information of Registrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Schedule VI. Supplemental Information Concerning Property-Casualty Insurance Operations . . .
Pursuant to Rule 7-05 of Regulation S-X, Schedules I, III, IV, and V have been omitted as
the information to be set forth therein is included in the notes to the audited consolidated
financial statements.
65
66
67
109
111
105
33786
Schedule II. Condensed Financial Information of Registrant
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Balance Sheets
December 31,
2011
As Restated
2012
(in thousands, except
share data)
Assets
Investments:
Investment in subsidiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Investment in securities available-for-sale (amortized cost $133,606 in
2012 and $183,017 in 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity Securities at fair value (amortized cost $30,678 in 2012 and
$ 382,985
$ 188,598
143,534
195,015
$14,990 in 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
32,256
15,275
Total investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intercompany receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Federal income taxes receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income taxes, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Accounts payable and accrued expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax payable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
558,775
40,149
200
4,390
5,649
11,595
2,817
$ 623,575
$
4,152
—
80,000
42
84,194
398,888
140,792
2,018
4,398
—
8,526
3,613
$ 558,235
$
2,239
3,987
90,000
26
96,252
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock, $0.01 par value; 150,000,000 shares authorized
54,144,453 and 53,948,442 shares issued and 30,771,479 and
32,996,809 shares outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011,
respectively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 25,000,000 shares authorized non-
issued . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Additional paid-in capital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Retained earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Treasury stock, at cost (23,372,974 shares at December 31, 2012 and
542
540
—
325,990
445,850
129,549
—
318,989
346,490
116,719
20,591,633 shares at December 31, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(362,550)
539,381
(320,755)
461,983
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 623,575
$ 558,235
See accompanying notes.
106
79061
Years Ended December 31,
2011
As Restated
2010
As Restated
(in thousands, except per share data)
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Statements of Income
2012
Revenues
Net investment income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Expenses
Other operating expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Interest expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income (loss) before income taxes and equity in earnings of
subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Income tax (benefit) expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net income before equity in earnings of subsidiary . . . . . . . . . .
Equity in net income of subsidiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 6,590
623
7,213
$10,284
7,769
18,053
13,889
1,880
15,769
(8,556)
(4,109)
(4,447)
111,338
12,662
2,040
14,702
3,351
279
3,072
45,551
$ 8,740
—
8,740
10,597
4,080
14,677
(5,937)
(6,836)
899
62,570
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$106,891
$48,623
$63,469
Earnings per common share for the stated periods (Note 20):
Basic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Diluted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash dividends declared per common share . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$
$
$
3.40
3.37
0.24
$ 1.30
$ 1.30
$ 0.24
$ 1.53
$ 1.53
$ 0.24
See accompanying notes.
107
82541
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Statement of Cash Flows
Years Ended December 31,
2011
2010
2012
Operating activities
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash (used in)
provided by operating activities:
As Restated As Restated
(in thousands)
$ 106,891
$ 48,623
$ 63,469
Equity in net income of subsidiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Realized gains on investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Stock-based compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Amortization of premium or investments, net. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Deferred income tax expense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
(111,338)
—
(623)
6,141
1,734
(2,511)
Accounts payable, accrued expense and other
liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Federal income taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intercompany payable/receivable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities . . . . . . . . . . . .
Investing activities
Purchase of fixed maturity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Purchase of equity securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from sale of fixed maturity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Proceeds from maturities and redemptions of investments . . . . .
Proceeds from sale of equity securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash dividends received from subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Capital contributions to subsidiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Restricted cash used in investing activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities . . . . . . . . . . . .
Financing activities
Acquisition of treasury stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cash transactions related to stock-based compensation . . . . . . . .
Dividends paid to stockholders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Payments on notes payable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Net cash used in financing activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1,929
(9,636)
796
9
(6,608)
(6,544)
(24,040)
6,544
47,677
8,974
—
(70,000)
1,818
(35,571)
(41,795)
839
(7,508)
(10,000)
(58,464)
(45,551)
—
(7,769)
3,742
4,056
(1,803)
(583)
3,731
2,126
3,087
9,659
(9,024)
(14,990)
147,256
22,420
—
67,380
—
(1)
213,041
(91,975)
1,019
(8,943)
(10,000)
(109,899)
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents . . . . . . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period . . . . .
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period . . . . . . . . . . .
(100,643)
140,792
$ 40,149
112,801
27,991
$ 140,792
(62,570)
94
—
4,053
3,794
(9,930)
(1,147)
8,637
(470)
(7,155)
(1,225)
—
—
—
12,319
—
38,383
—
(2,000)
48,702
(63,592)
(1,135)
(9,935)
—
(74,662)
(27,185)
55,176
$ 27,991
See accompanying notes.
108
41783
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Notes to Condensed Financial Statements
December 31, 2012
1. Nature of Operations and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Operations and Basis of Presentation
Employers Holdings, Inc. (EHI) is a Nevada holding company. Through its wholly owned
insurance subsidiaries, Employers Insurance Company of Nevada (EICN), Employers Compensation
Insurance Company (ECIC), Employers Preferred Insurance Company (EPIC), and Employers
Assurance Company (EAC), EHI is engaged in the commercial property and casualty insurance
industry, specializing in workers’ compensation products and services. Unless otherwise indicated, all
references to the “Company” refer to EHI, together with its subsidiaries.
EHI prepares its condensed financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP), using the equity method. Under the equity method, the investment in
subsidiary is stated at cost plus equity in earnings of its subsidiary. EHI receives dividends from its
insurance subsidiaries in the form of cash and securities. The book value for these securities is stated at
the fair market value at the date of transfer. These condensed financial statements should be read in
conjunction with EHI’s consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Estimates and Assumptions
The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure
of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of
revenue and expenses during the reporting period. As a result, actual results could differ from these
estimates.
2. Income Taxes
EHI files a consolidated federal income tax return with its subsidiaries and has a tax allocation
agreement with its subsidiaries. The equity in the undistributed earnings of subsidiaries included in the
accompanying condensed statements of income is net of income taxes.
3. Investments
EHI primarily holds fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2012 for purposes of securing the
Third and Amended and Restated Secured Revolving Credit Facility (Amended Credit Facility). The
amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2012, by
contractual maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities differ from contractual maturities because
borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
Amortized
Cost
Estimated
Fair Value
(in thousands)
Due in one year or less. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after one year through five years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after five years through ten years. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Due after 10 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 14,847
84,955
16,021
17,783
$133,606
$ 15,109
91,542
17,383
19,500
$143,534
At December 31, 2012, the fixed maturity securities had unrealized gains of $9.9 million which are
included in accumulated comprehensive income, net in the accompanying condensed balance sheets.
During 2012, EHI purchased equity securities and utilized market quotations to determine their
fair values.
109
11001
4. Notes Payable
On December 28, 2010, EHI and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (Wells Fargo) entered
into the Amended Credit Facility. See Note 13 of the Consolidated Financial Statements of Employers
Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries included herein for a description of the terms of the Amended Credit
Facility. Interest paid during the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010 totaled $1.9 million,
$2.0 million, and $4.4 million, respectively. In accordance with the terms of the contract, a repayment of
$10.0 million was made toward the Amended Credit Facility on December 28, 2012. The Amended
Credit Facility is secured by fixed maturity securities which had a fair value of $110.4 million at
December 31, 2012.
5. Stock-Based Compensation
During 2012, EHI awarded 242,300 non-qualified stock options to officers, 117,065 RSUs to non-
employee Directors and officers, and 158,900 PSUs to officers. During 2011, EHI awarded 355,063 non-
qualified stock options to officers and 157,570 RSUs to non-employee Directors and officers. See Note
16 of the Consolidated Financial Statements of Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries’ included
herein for a detailed description of the stock-based compensation.
110
05750
Schedule VI. Supplemental Information Concerning Property—Casualty Insurance Operations
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Supplemental Information Concerning Property and Casualty Insurance Operations
Deferred
Policy
Acquisition
Costs
$38,852
37,524
32,239
Year
Ended
2012
2011
2010
Exhibits:
Exhibit
No.
3.1
3.2
4.1
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
*10.5
Reserves For
Unpaid Losses
And LAE
Unearned
Premiums
Net
Premiums
Earned
Net
Investment
Income
Losses and
LAE
Related to
Current
Years
(in thousands)
Losses and
LAE
Related to
Prior Years
Amortization of
Deferred Policy
Acquisition
Costs
Paid Losses
And LAE
Net
Premiums
Written
$2,231,540 $265,149 $501,464 $72,363 $386,044 $ 1,800
2,272,363
1,127
(14,130)
2,279,729
363,424
321,786
280,683
227,142
194,933
149,485
80,117
83,032
$85,926
74,500
72,071
$293,213 $569,676
410,038
273,973
313,098
262,479
Description of Exhibit
Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation of Employers Holdings, Inc.
Amended and Restated Bylaws of
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Included
Herewith
Incorporated by Reference Herein
Form
Exhibit
Filing Date
10-K
3.1 March 30, 2007
10-Q
3.1
November 5, 2009
Form of Common Stock Certificate
S-1/A
4.1
January 18, 2007
Quota Share Reinsurance Agreement,
dated as of June 30, 1999, between State
Industrial Insurance System of Nevada,
D.B.A.: Employers Insurance Company of
Nevada and the various Reinsurers as
identified by the Interests and Liabilities
Agreements attached thereto(1)
Producer Agreement, dated as of May 1,
2005, between Employers Compensation
Insurance Company and Automatic Data
Processing Insurance Agency, Inc.(1)
Joint Marketing and Network Access
Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2006,
between Employers Insurance Company
of Nevada and Blue Cross of California,
BC Life & Health Insurance Company,
and Comprehensive Integrated Marketing
Services(1)
Joint Marketing and Network Access
Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2006,
between Employers Insurance Company
of Nevada and Blue Cross of California,
BC Life & Health Insurance Company,
and Comprehensive Integrated Marketing
Services(1)
Employers Holdings, Inc. Equity and
Incentive Plan Form of Restricted Stock
Unit Agreement for Non- Employee
Directors
S-1/A 10.1
January 18, 2007
S-1/A 10.2
January 18, 2007
S-1/A 10.3
January 18, 2007
S-1/A 10.4
January 18, 2007
10-Q
10.1 August 7, 2009
*10.6
Employers Holdings, Inc. Amended and
Restated Equity Incentive Plan
8-K
10.1 May 28, 2010
111
75885
Included
Herewith
Incorporated by Reference Herein
Form
Exhibit
Filing Date
10-Q
10.1 May 9, 2012
10-Q
10.2 May 9, 2012
10-Q
10.3 May 9, 2012
8-K
10.1 December 8, 2011
8-K
10.2 December 8, 2011
8-K
10.3 December 8, 2011
8-K
10.4 December 8, 2011
8-K
10.1 May 11, 2012
8-K
10.1 December 30, 2010
8-K
10.2 December 30, 2010
X
X
X
X
X
Exhibit
No.
*10.7
*10.8
*10.9
*10.10
*10.11
*10.12
*10.13
*10.14
10.15
10.16
21.1
23.1
31.1
31.2
32.1
Description of Exhibit
Employers Holdings, Inc. Equity and
Incentive Plan Form of Performance
Share Agreement
Employers Holdings, Inc. Equity and
Incentive Plan Form of Stock Option
Agreement
Employers Holdings, Inc. Equity and
Incentive Plan Form of Restricted Stock
Unit Agreement
Employment Agreement by and between
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Ann W.
Nelson, dated December 5, 2011 and
effective as of January 1, 2012
Employment Agreement by and between
Employers Holdings, Inc. and John P.
Nelson, dated December 5, 2011, and
effective as of January 1, 2012
Employment Agreement by and between
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Lenard T.
Ormsby, dated December 5, 2011 and
effective as of January 1, 2012
Employment Agreement by and between
Employers Holdings, Inc. and William E.
Yocke, dated December 5, 2011 and
effective as of January 1, 2012
Employment Agreement by and between
Employers Holdings, Inc. and Douglas D.
Dirks, dated and effective May 10, 2012
Third Amended and Restated Credit
Agreement, dated December 30, 2010,
between Employers Holdings, Inc. and
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
Third Amended and Restated Revolving
Line of Credit Note, dated December 30,
2010, between Employers Holdings Inc.
and Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association
Subsidiaries of Employers Holdings, Inc.
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP,
Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm
Certification of Douglas D. Dirks
Pursuant to Section 302
Certification of William E. Yocke
Pursuant to Section 302
Certification of Douglas D. Dirks
Pursuant to Section 906
112
15340
Included
Herewith
Incorporated by Reference Herein
Form
Exhibit
Filing Date
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Exhibit
No.
32.2
Description of Exhibit
Certification of William E. Yocke
Pursuant to Section 906
**101.INS
XBRL Instance Document
**101.SCH XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema
Document
**101.CAL XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation
Linkbase Document
**101.DEF XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase
Document
**101.LAB XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label
Linkbase Document
**101.PRE XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation
Linkbase Document
For purposes of the incorporation by reference of documents as Exhibits, all references to Forms S-
1 and S-1/A of Employers Holdings, Inc. refer to Forms S-1 and S-1/A filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission under Registration Number 333-139092.
* Identify management contracts and compensatory plans or arrangements.
** XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Sections 11 and 12
of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
(1) Confidential treatment has been requested for certain confidential portions of this exhibit; these confidential portions have
been omitted from this exhibit and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
113
72935
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934, the registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Date: March 1, 2013
EMPLOYERS HOLDINGS, INC.
SIGNATURES
By: /s/ Douglas D. Dirks
Name: Douglas D. Dirks
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed
by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
Title
Date
/s/ Robert J. Kolesar
Robert J. Kolesar
/s/ Douglas D. Dirks
Douglas D. Dirks
/s/ William E. Yocke
William E. Yocke
/s/ Richard W. Blakey
Richard W. Blakey
/s/ Valerie R. Glenn
Valerie R. Glenn
/s/ Rose E. McKinney-James
Rose E. McKinney-James
/s/ Ronald F. Mosher
Ronald F. Mosher
/s/ Katherine W. Ong
Katherine W. Ong
/s/ Michael D. Rumbolz
Michael D. Rumbolz
/s/ John P. Sande III
John P. Sande III
Chairman of the Board
March 1, 2013
President and Chief Executive Officer,
Director (Principal Executive Officer)
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
March 1, 2013
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial
and Accounting Officer)
Director
Director
Director
Director
Director
Director
Director
114
13140
Exhibit 21.1
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Subsidiaries As of December 31, 2012
Name
Jurisdiction of Organization
Employers Group, Inc.
Employers Insurance Company of Nevada
Employers Occupational Health, Inc.
Elite Insurance Services, Inc.
Employers Compensation Insurance Company
Employers Preferred Insurance Company
Employers Assurance Company
EIG Services, Inc.
Pinnacle Benefits, Inc.
AmSERV, Inc.
Nevada
Nevada
Nevada
Nevada
California
Florida
Florida
Florida
Florida
Florida
115
61272
Exhibit 23.1
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-
140395, 333-142135, 333-152900, and 333-168563) of our reports dated March 1, 2013, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedules of Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Employers Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries
included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2012.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Los Angeles, California
March 1, 2013
116
39710
Exhibit 31.1
I, Douglas D. Dirks, certify that:
1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Employers Holdings, Inc.;
CERTIFICATIONS
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and
internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of
the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of
the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 1, 2013
/s/ Douglas D. Dirks
Douglas D. Dirks
President and Chief Executive Officer
Employers Holdings, Inc.
117
32805
Exhibit 31.2
I, William E. Yocke, certify that:
1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Employers Holdings, Inc.;
CERTIFICATIONS
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this
report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and
internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over
financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance
regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for
external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of
the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of
the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have
a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 1, 2013
/s/ William E. Yocke
William E. Yocke
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
Employers Holdings, Inc.
118
50823
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Form 10-K of Employers Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended
December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned hereby, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date: March 1, 2013
/s/ Douglas D. Dirks
Douglas D. Dirks
President and Chief Executive Officer
Employers Holdings, Inc.
119
33983
Exhibit 32.2
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Form 10-K of Employers Holdings, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended
December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned hereby, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:
(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date: March 1, 2013
/s/ William E. Yocke
William E. Yocke
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Employers Holdings, Inc.
120
Employers Holdings, Inc.
Employers Holdings, Inc.
and Subsidiaries
Douglas D. Dirks
President & Chief Executive Officer
Ann W. Nelson
Executive Vice President, Corporate and
Public Affairs
John P. Nelson
Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer
Directors
Richard W. Blakey
Director
Douglas D. Dirks
President & Chief Executive Officer
Valerie R. Glenn
Director
Robert J. Kolesar
Chairman of the Board
Lenard T. Ormsby
Executive Vice President, General Counsel
Rose E. McKinney-James
Chair – Board Governance Committee
William E. (Ric) Yocke
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Ronald F. Mosher
Director
Cecelia M. Abraham
Senior Vice President, Chief Underwriting Officer
Stephen V. Festa
Senior Vice President, Chief Claims Officer
Katherine W. Ong
Chair – Finance Committee
Michael D. Rumbolz
Chair – Audit Committee
Richard P. Hallman
Senior Vice President, Chief Information Officer
John P. Sande, III
Chair – Compensation Committee
Bryan C. Ware
Senior Vice President, Chief Actuary
Mark R. Hogle
Senior Vice President, Regional Manager,
Eastern Region
T. Hale Johnston
Senior Vice President, Regional Manager,
Western Region
David M. Quezada
Senior Vice President, General Manager, Strategic
Partnerships and Alliances
Shareholder Inquiries
Vicki Erickson Mills
Vice President, Investor Relations
vericksonmills@employers.com
775-327-2794
Company Information
Employers Holdings, Inc.
10375 Professional Circle
Reno, NV 89521-4802
888-682-6671
Transfer Agent
Wells Fargo Shareowner Services
161 North Concord Exchange
So. St. Paul, MN 55075-1139
800-468-9716
Independent Auditors
Ernst & Young LLP
725 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Annual Meeting
Thursday, May 23, 2013 9:30 a.m.
Reno-Sparks Convention Center
4590 South Virginia Street
Reno, NV 89502
Corporate Headquarters
10375 Professional Circle
Reno, NV 89521-4802
www.employers.com
Employers Holdings, Inc. is a holding company with subsidiaries that are specialty providers of workers’ compensation insurance and services focused on
select, small businesses engaged in low-to-medium hazard industries. The company, through its subsidiaries, operates in 31 states. The company’s insurance
subsidiaries are rated A- (Excellent) by the A.M. Best Company.
Copyright © 2013 EMPLOYERS. All rights reserved. Insurance offered through Employers Compensation Insurance Company, Employers Insurance Company
of Nevada, Employers Preferred Insurance Company and Employers Assurance Company. Coverage not available in all jurisdictions.