Communications & Public Relations Obstacles in the P/C Insurance Industry Containing the Collateral Damage for Government Affairs October 23, 2007 Robert P. Hartwig, Ph.D., CPCU, President Insurance Information Institute 110 William Street New York, NY 10038 Tel: (212) 346-5520 Fax: (212) 732-1916 bobh@iii.org www.iii.org Presentation Outline • Favorability Ratings of Insurers • Profitability: Egregious or Reasonable? • Underwriting Trends: Paying Less of the Premium Dollar? • Prices: Too High, Too Low or Just Right? • Catastrophic Loss: Are Insurers Exaggerating the Risk to Raise Rates? Post-Katrina Litigation • Regulatory & Legislative Environment: Too Lax or Burdensome and Anti-Consumer • Q&A INSURANCE INFORMATION INSTITUTE PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY INSURANCE PULSE FAVORABILITY BY INDUSTRY 100% 90% 80% 70% Banking Auto and home insurance The electric power company Consumer finance companies 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 19 68 19 72 19 78 19 81 19 83 19 85 19 86 19 88 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03 20 04 20 05 20 05 (1) 20 06 20 07 0% (1) December 2005. Source: Insurance Information Institute Annual Pulse Survey. INSURANCE PULSE KEY FINDINGS 2007 The percentage of Americans with a favorable attitude toward auto and home insurers basically held steady in 2007 at 57 percent, up two points from 2006. Favorability improved significantly in the West, up nine points, and was unchanged in the South. The percentage of people who say that auto insurance is somewhat of a financial burden fell 7 points in 2007 to 56 percent. The percentage of people who say home insurance is somewhat of a financial burden fell 5 points in 2007 to 43 percent. INSURANCE INFORMATION INSTITUTE I.I.I. MEDIA INDEX G lo ba lW ar m Source: Lexis/Nexis search. Ch e to Si li c a an g Au m e M ol d 12,000 11,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 To Cr ed rt it Sc or in g Te M rro ed ic ris al m M al pr ac tic e in g/ Cl im at e Ho Hu rri M ar ca ke ne tC s on di tio W ns or ke rs Co m p As be st In os ve st ig at io ns MEDIA INDEX FIRST HALF 2006 vs. FIRST HALF 2007 2006 2007 MEDIA INDEX 250% 225% 200% 175% 150% 125% 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% -25% -50% 213% 157% 104% 40% 39% 33% 20% 22% 2% 5% 6% -8% tS ol d M co rin g To rt C re di pr a ct ic e m al M al ca Te rr or is ed ic M at e g/ C lim ar m in lW lo ba G Si li ge tio ig a st C ha n H om e ns os es t In ve rs A sb C om p ns W or ke tC on di tio an M ar ke H ur ric Source: Lexis/Nexis search. A ut o -27% -26% es Percent FIRST HALF 2006 vs. FIRST HALF 2007 (percent increase/decrease) #1. Profits Critics: Egregious Profits Insurers: Inadequate Profits Reality: Critics Fail to Understand Cyclicality, Catastrophe Impacts & Relative Profitability of Industry $63,695 $65,192 07F $44,155 $38,501 $30,029 $20,559 $30,773 $21,865 $10,870 $3,046 $10,000 $19,316 $20,000 $5,840 $30,000 $14,178 $40,000 Insurer profits peaked in 2006/7. “Normal” CAT year, average investment gain imply flattening $36,819 $50,000 $24,404 $60,000 $20,598 $70,000 2001 ROE = -1.2% 2002 ROE = 2.2% 2003 ROE = 8.9% 2004 ROE = 9.4% 2005 ROE= 9.4% 2006 ROAS1 = 14.0% 2007F ROAS = 13.1%** 06 P/C Net Income After Taxes 1991-2007F ($ Millions)* 05 04 03 01 -$6,970 00 99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 -$10,000 02 $0 *ROE figures are GAAP; 1Return on avg. surplus. 2007F figure is annualized actual first half net income of $32.596B **Actual first half 2007 result. Sources: A.M. Best, ISO, Insurance Information Inst. ROE: P/C vs. All Industries 1987–2008E 20% P/C profitability is cyclical, volatile and vulnerable 15% 10% Sept. 11 5% US P/C Insurers All US Industries *2007 is actual first half ROAS of 13.1%. 2008 P/C insurer ROE is I.I.I. estimate. Source: Insurance Information Institute; Fortune 07 F 08 F 06 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 4 Hurricanes 97 96 93 92 91 90 89 88 95 Northridge -5% 05 Andrew 87 Katrina, Rita, Wilma Lowest CAT losses in 15 years 94 0% Hugo Profitability Peaks & Troughs in the P/C Insurance Industry, 1975 – 2008F 25% 1977:19.0% 1987:17.3% 2006:14.0% 20% 1997:11.6% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1975: 2.4% 1984: 1.8% 1992: 4.5% 2001: -1.2% 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07F 08F -5% *2007 is actual first half ROAS of 13.1%. 2008 P/C insurer ROE is I.I.I. estimate. Source: Insurance Information Institute; Fortune ROE vs. Equity Cost of Capital: US P/C Insurance:1991-2007E 18% The p/c insurance industry achieved its cost of capital in 2005/6 for the first time in many years 16% 12% 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% The cost of capital is the rate of return insurers need to attract and retain capital to the business US P/C insurers missed their cost of capital by an average 6.7 points from 1991 to 2002, but on target or better 2003-07 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Source: The Geneva Association, Ins. Information Inst. -0.1 pts 6% +0.2 pts -13.2 pts 8% -9.0 pts 10% +3.1 pts +3.5 pts 14% 00 01 02 ROE 03 04 05 06 07E Cost of Capital US Reinsurer Net Income & ROE, 1985-2006 $12 $9.68 Reinsurer profitability has rebounded $0 ($2) Net Income ($4) 0% -5% ROE ($2.98) 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 Source: Reinsurance Association of America. 5% ROE 10% $2.51 $3.41 $3.17 $1.31 $1.99 $1.47 $5.43 $3.71 $1.95 $1.79 $2.52 $1.17 $1.87 $2.03 $2 $1.38 $4 $1.22 $6 $1.95 $1.94 $8 $4.53 15% $0.12 Net Income ($ Bill) $10 20% -10% Insurance & Reinsurance Stocks: Lagging Behind in 2007 Total YTD Returns Through October 19, 2007 5.81% Mortgage* -42.27% 6.53% P/C insurance, reinsurance stocks lagging on soft market concerns, subprime selloff 0.48% 2.71% -0.34% -30.0% -20.0% -10.0% Reinsurers P/C Multiline 1.37% -40.0% Life/Health All Insurers -5.53% -50.0% S&P 500 0.0% Brokers 10.0% Source: SNL Securities, Standard & Poor’s, Insurance Information Inst. *Includes Financial Guarantee Top Industries by ROE: P/C Insurers Still Underperformed in 2006* Oil & Gas Equip., Services Petroleum Refining Metals Food Services Household & Pers. Products Pharmaceuticals Industrial & Farm Equipment Mining & Crude Oil Prod. Aerospace & Defense Chemicals Securities Food Consumer Prod. Medical Prod. & Equip. Specialty Retailers Homebuilders 31.8% 30.7% P/C insurer 30.3% profitability in 2006 26.4% th ranked 30 out of 50 24.6% 24.2% industry groups 22.6% despite renewed 21.8% 21.5% profitability 20.9% P/C insurers 20.9% underperformed 20.5% the All Industry 19.6% 19.4% median for the 19.1% 19th consecutive 0% year 14.9% 15.4% P/C Insurers (Stock) All Industries: 500 Median 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% *Excludes #1 ranked Airline category at 65.1% due to special one-time bankruptcy-related factors. Source: Fortune, April 30, 2007 edition; Insurance Information Institute Advertising Expenditures by P/C Insurance Industry, 1999-2006 $ Billions $4.0 $3.5 Ad spending by P/C insurers is at a record high, signaling increased competition $3.695 $2.975 $3.0 $2.5 $2.0 $1.736 $1.737 $1.803 $1.708 $1.882 $2.111 $1.5 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 Source: Insurance Information Institute from consolidated P/C Annual Statement data. 06E FINANCIAL STRENGTH & RATINGS A Weak Insurance Industry is in Nobody’s Best Interest Cumulative Average Impairment Rates by Best Financial Strength Rating* 60% 50% Insurers with strong ratings are far less likely to become impaired over long periods of time. Especially important in long-tailed lines. D C/C- 40% C++/C+ 30% B/BB++/B+ 20% A/A- 10% A++/A+ 0% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Average Years to Impairment *US P/C and L/H companies, 1977-2002 Sources: A.M. Best: Best’s Impairment Rate and Rating Transition Study—1977-2002, March 1, 2004. P/C Insurer Impairment Frequency vs. Combined Ratio, 1969-2006 Combined Ratio 115 Combined Ratio after Div P/C Impairment Frequency 110 105 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 100 95 2006 impairment rate was 0.43%, or 1-in-233 companies, half the 0.86% average since 1969 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 90 2 1.8 Source: A.M. Best; Insurance Information Institute 0.2 0 Impairment Rate 120 Impairment rates are highly correlated underwriting performance #2: Underwriting Critics: Insurers Paying Out Smaller Share of Premiums Insurers: Underwriting Profits are Justified Reality: Lower Investment Returns Imply Profits Must Come from Underwriting P/C Insurance Combined Ratio, 1970-2008F* Combined Ratios 120 1970s: 100.3 1980s: 109.2 115 1990s: 107.8 2000s: 102.2** 110 105 100 95 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07* 08F 90 Sources: A.M. Best; ISO, III *Actual figure of 92.7 through first half 2007. **Through 2007:H1. P/C Insurance Combined Ratio, 2001-2008F 120 115.8 110 As recently as 2001, insurers were paying out nearly $1.16 for every dollar they earned in premiums 107.4 2006 produced the best underwriting result since the 87.6 combined ratio in 1949 100.7 100.1 100 2007/8 deterioration due primarily to falling rates, but results still strong assuming normal CAT activity 98.3 97.0 2005 figure benefited from heavy use of reinsurance which lowered net losses 92.5 92.7 06 07:H1 93.5 90 01 02 03 04 Sources: A.M. Best; ISO, III. *III estimates for 2007/8. 05 07F 08F 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 -20 -25 -30 -35 -40 -45 -50 -55 Insurers earned a record underwriting profit of $31.7 billion in 2006, the largest ever but only the second since 1978. Expect figure near $28 billion in 2007 assuming “normal” CAT losses. Cumulative underwriting deficit since 1975 is $412 billion. 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07F $ Billions Underwriting Gain (Loss) 1975-2007F* Source: A.M. Best, Insurance Information Institute *Actual 2007:H1 underwriting profit = $14.402B annualized to $28.8B. Private Passenger Auto (PPA) Combined Ratio 110 PPA is the profit juggernaut of the p/c insurance industry today 105 107.9 104.2 103.5 101.7101.3101.3 101.0 Auto insurers have shown significant improvement in PPA underwriting performance since mid-2002, but results are deteriorating. 109.5 101.1 99.5 100 98.4 96.5 95 Average Combined Ratio for 1993 to 2006: 101.0 94.3 95.1 95.5 90 93 94 95 Sources: A.M. Best; III 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07F RNW: Private Passenger Auto, United States, 1992-2006E Segmentation should help profitability 16% 14% 14%14% 12% 12% 13% 11% 12% 11% 12% 10% 10% 11% 9% 8% 6% 4% 8% Private passenger auto profitability deteriorated throughout the 1990s but has improved dramatically 4% 2% 2% 2% 0% 92 93 94 95 96 97 Source: NAIC; Insurance Information Institute 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06E Homeowners Insurance Combined Ratio 165 158.4 Average 1990 to 2006= 111.8 155 Insurers have paid out an average of $1.12 in losses for every dollar earned in premiums over the past 17 years 145 135 121.7 125 118.4 113.6 112.7 117.7 115 113.0 121.7 109.4108.2111.4 105 109.3 101.0 98.2 95 100.3 94.4 90.4 91 85 90 91 92 Sources: A.M. Best; III 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07F Rates of Return on Net Worth for Homeowners Ins: US Averages: 1993 to 2005 US HO Insurance = +2.5% (+3.3% through 2006E) 20% 14.0% 15% 12.4% 9.7% 10% 5% 2.5% 3.6% 5.4% 5.4% 3.6% 3.8% 1.4% 0% -2.8% -1.7% -5% -4.2% -7.2% -10% 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Source: NAIC; 2006 figure is Insurance Information Institute estimate. 02 03 04 05 06E Property/Casualty Insurance Industry Investment Gain1 $ Billions $57.9 $60 $52.3 $56.9 $51.9 $47.2 $50 $59.4 $44.4 $42.8 $55.7 $48.9 $36.0 $40 $35.4 $30 $45.3 $60.6 Investment gains fell in 2006 and even now are only marginally larger than in the late 1990s $20 $10 1Investment 07 ** 06 05 * 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 96 95 94 $0 gains consist primarily of interest, stock dividends and realized capital gains and losses. 2006 figure consists of $52.3B net investment income and $3.4B realized investment gain. *2005 figure includes special one-time dividend of $3.2B. **Annualized H1 result of $30.301B. Sources: ISO; Insurance Information Institute. #3. Prices/Rates Critics: Prices are Outrageous Insurers: Adequacy Varies Reality: Markets are Highly Competitive But Regulatory Rate Suppression Hurts Competition in Key States Strength of Recent Hard Markets by NWP Growth* 25% 1975-78 1984-87 2001-04 2006-2010 (post-Katrina) period could resemble 1993-97 (post-Andrew) 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% -5% 2005: biggest real drop in premium since early 1980s 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007F 2008F 2009F 2010F -10% Note: Shaded areas denote hard market periods. Source: A.M. Best, Insurance Information Institute *2007-10 figures are III forecasts/estimates. Growth in Net Written Premium, 2000-2008F 15.3% 10.0% 8.4% 5.0% P/C insurers will experience their slowest growth rates since the late 1990s…but underwriting results are expected to remain healthy 3.9% 2.7% 0.5% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 *2007 figure base on 2007 actual first half result of 0.1%. Source: A.M. Best; Forecasts from the Insurance Information Institute. 2006 0.1% 0.3% 2007F* 2008F $650 $847 $851 $847 $838 $823 $724 $690 $668 $700 $651 $750 $685 $800 $703 $850 $705 $900 Countrywide auto insurance expenditures are expected to fall 0.5% in 2007, the first drop since 1999 $691 $950 $780 Average Expenditures on Auto Insurance Lower underlying frequency and modest severity are keeping auto insurance costs in check $600 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05* 06* 07* *Insurance Information Institute Estimates/Forecasts Source: NAIC, Insurance Information Institute Average Expenditures on Homeowners Insurance** Countrywide home insurance expenditures rose an estimated 6% in 2006 $900 $835 $850 $787 $800 Homeowners in non$729 $750 CAT zones will see $668 $700 smaller increases, but $650 $593 larger in CAT zones $600 $536 $550 $508 $488 $481 $500 $455 $440 $450 $418 $400 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05* 06* *Insurance Information Institute Estimates/Forecasts **Excludes cost of flood and earthquake coverage. Source: NAIC, Insurance Information Institute ($25,000) 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 0.41% 0.40% 0.39% 0.38% 0.37% 0.36% 0.35% 0.34% 0.33% 0.32% 02 03 04 05 06E 07F 08F 0.31% Median Existing Home Price Homeowners Insurance Expenditure as % Home Price Source: National Association of Realtors, NAIC; Insurance Info. Institute calculations and HO expenditure estimates/ forecasts for years 2005-2008. HO Ins. Expend. As % Home Price 0.398%$222,700 0.397% $218,800 $221,900 0.376% $219,000 0.359% 0.373% $180,200 0.371% $167,600 0.354% $156,600 0.342% $147,300 0.345% $141,200 $136,000 $129,000 $25,000 0.346% $75,000 0.354% $125,000 0.353% $175,000 0.359% $122,600 $225,000 0.357% $117,000 Median Existing Home Price $275,000 Record catastrophe losses and declining home prices are pushing HO insurance expenditures as a % of median home price up $195,200 Homeowners Insurance Expenditures as a % of Median Existing Home Prices, 1995-2008F Average Commercial Rate Change, All Lines, (1Q:2004 – 3Q:2007) 0% Magnitude of rate decreases diminished greatly after Katrina but have grown again -0.1% -2% -4% -2.7% -3.0% -4.6% -5.3% -3.2% -6% -5.9% -7.0% -8% -8.2% -9.4% -9.7% Source: Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers; Insurance Information Institute 3Q07 3Q06 2Q06 1Q06 4Q05 3Q05 2Q05 1Q05 4Q04 3Q04 2Q04 1Q04 -14% 2Q07 KRW Effect -11.3% -11.8% -13.3% 1Q07 -12% -9.6% 4Q06 -10% #4. CAT Losses Critics: Insurers Exaggerate Insurers: Worst is Yet to Come Reality: Catastrophic Loss Potential is Growing Rapidly Everywhere Most of US Population & Property Has Major CAT Exposure Is Anyplace Safe? U.S. Insured Catastrophe Losses* $8.3 $7.4 $2.6 $10.1 $8.3 $4.6 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 $100.0 $4.7 $5.5 $16.9 $9.2 $61.9 $4.7 91 92 93 94 $5.9 $7.5 $2.7 $20 89 90 $40 $26.5 $60 $22.9 $80 2006 was a welcome respite. 2005 was by far the worst year ever for insured catastrophe losses in the US, but the worst has yet to come. $12.9 $27.5 $120 $100 $100 Billion CAT year is coming soon $ Billions 07** 20?? 03 04 05 06 $0 *Excludes $4B-$6b offshore energy losses from Hurricanes Katrina & Rita. **Through 9/30/07. Note: 2001 figure includes $20.3B for 9/11 losses reported through 12/31/01. Includes only business and personal property claims, business interruption and auto claims. Non-prop/BI losses = $12.2B. Source: Property Claims Service/ISO; Insurance Information Institute Insured Coastal Exposure as a % of Statewid Insured Exposure (2004, $ Billions) Florida Connecticut New York Maine Massachusetts Louisiana New Jersey Delaware Rhode Island S. Carolina Texas NH Mississippi Alabama Virginia NC Georgia Maryland 79.3% 63.1% 60.9% 57.9% 54.2% 37.9% 33.6% 33.2% 28.0% 25.6% 25.6% 23.3% 13.5% 12.0% 11.4% 8.9% 5.9% 1.4% 0% Source: AIR Worldwide 10% 20% 30% 40% After FL, many Northeast states have among the highest coastal exposure as a share of all insured exposure in the state. 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Top 10 Most Costly Hurricanes in US History, (Insured Losses, $2005) $45 $40 Seven of the 10 most expensive hurricanes in US history impacted Florida: $41.1 $35 $ Billions $30 $25 $20 $15 Andrew, Katrina, Wilma, Charley, Ivan, Frances & Jeanne Hugo still ranks as the most expensive storm ever $10.3 $10 $5 $21.6 6th $3.5 $3.8 $4.8 $5.0 Georges (1998) Jeanne (2004) Frances (2004) Rita (2005) $6.6 $7.4 $7.7 Hugo (1989) Ivan (2004) Charley (2004) $0 Sources: ISO/PCS; Insurance Information Institute. Wilma (2005) Andrew (1992) Katrina (2005) Insured Losses from Top 10 Earthquakes Adjusted to 2005 Exposure Levels (Billions of 2005 Dollars) With development along major fault lines, the threat of $25B+ quakes looms large $120 $100 $ Billions $80 $60 $40 3 of the Top 10 are not West Coast events $11 $9 $11 $12 $88 $38 $25 $20 $108 $27 $16 Source: AIR Worldwide 2) (1 or -5 th -1 rid 84 ge 3; ,C 6. 5) A (1 H -1 ay 7w 19 ar 94 d, ;6 C A .7 (1 ) 0Ft 21 .T -1 86 ej on 8; ,C 6. 8) A C ( ha 19rl es 18 to 57 n, ;7 S N .9 C ew ) (8 -3 M -1 ad 88 ri 6; d, 7. M 3) O * ( 2Sa 7 n -1 Fr 81 an 2; cis 7. 7) co * (4 -1 819 06 ;7 .9 ) 7. R (6 -1 -1 83 8; N Tr ee ,A Fr an n Sa M ar ke d cis co (8 R rt la nd ,O Po Sa n Jo se ,C A (7 -1 -1 91 1; -1 218 77 ; 6. 6. 6) 3) $0 Percentage of California Homeowners with Earthquake Insurance, 1994-2004* The vast majority of California homeowners forego earthquake coverage & play Russian Roulette with their most valuable asset. 35% 32.9%33.2% 30% 25% 19.5% 17.4%16.8% 15.7% 15.8% 14.6% 13.3%13.8% 12.0% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 94 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 06** *Includes CEA policies beginning in 1996. **2006 estimate from Insurance Information Network of CA. Source: California Department of Insurance; Insurance Information Institute. Catastrophe Litigation • Insurers have won virtually every major case in postKatrina litigation environment Most cases centered on validity of flood exclusion and various wind vs. water theories • This came at a high PR cost as post-Katrina litigation was dragged out over a 2-year period accounting for the vast majority of negative press in the first 16 months after the storm FL significantly added to negative press in 2007 • While industry was successful at explaining the rational for pursuing most cases, we struggled with the classic David vs. Goliath story • Championed by personally affected politicians • Feeds “Insurance Hoax” genre of stories View that insurers systematically deny, delay and lowball • Exacerbated by hundreds of thousands of nonrenewals States Create Their Own Vulnerability and Try to Blame Insurers Underwriting Gain (Loss) in Florida Homeowners Insurance, 1992-2006E* $4 $2.75 $2 $0.69 $0.43 $0.86 $1.08 $1.23 $1.28 $1.43 $1.16 $1.47 $1.88 $0 ($0.21) $ Billions ($2) ($4) Florida’s homeowners insurance market produces small profits in most years and enormous losses in others ($6) ($8) ($3.73) ($10) ($12) ($10.39) ($10.60) 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05E 06F *2005 estimate by Insurance Information Institute based on historical loss and expense data for FL adjusted for estimated 2005 residential windstorm losses of $7.35B. 2006 estimate from Ins. Info. Inst. Cumulative Underwriting Gain (Loss) in Florida Homeowners Insurance, 1992-2006E* $2 $0 $ Billions ($2) ($4) ($6) Regulator under US law has duty to allow rates that are “fair,” “not excessive” and “not unduly discriminatory.” Reality is that regulators in CAT-prone states suppress rates. $0.7 -$1.2 -$2.7 -$3.8 -$5.2 -$6.5 ($8) -$7.7 ($10) -$9.7 -$10.1 -$10.8 ($12) -$10.6 ($14) ($16) 92 93 94 95 -$8.8 It took insurers 11 years (1993-2003) to erase the UW loss associated with Andrew, but the 4 hurricanes of 2004 erased the prior 7 years of profits & 2005 deepened the hole. 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 -$9.7 -$10.7 -$13.4 04 05E 06F *2005 estimate by Insurance Information Institute based on historical loss and expense data for FL adjusted for estimated 2005 residential windstorm losses of $7.35B. 2006 estimate from Ins. Info. Inst. Rates of Return on Net Worth for Homeowners Ins: US vs. Florida 1990 – 2006E US 100% Florida -2.8%36.0% 0% -100% -54.3% -200% -300% -53.4% Averages: 1990 to 2006E US HO Insurance = -0.9% FL HO Average = -36.5% -183.3% -400% -500% 4 Hurricanes -600% -700% Andrew -714.9% Wilma, Dennis, Katrina -800% 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 Source: NAIC; 200/6 US and FL estimates from the Insurance Information Institute. 03 04 05 06E Major Residual Market Plan Estimated Deficits 2004/2005 (Millions of Dollars) Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund (FHCF) $0 -$200 -$400 -$600 -$800 -$1,000 -$1,200 -$1,400 -$1,600 -$1,800 -$2,000 2004 Florida Citizens 2005 Louisiana Citizens Mississippi Windstorm Underwriting Association (MWUA) -$516 -$595 * -$954 -$1,425 Hurricane Katrina pushed all of the residual market property plans in affected states into deficits for 2005, following an already record -$1,770 hurricane loss year in 2004 * MWUA est. deficit for 2005 comprises $545m in assessments plus $50m in Federal Aid. Source: Insurance Information Institute Florida Citizens Exposure to Loss (Billions of Dollars) $700 $600 Exposure to loss in Florida Citizens nearly doubled in 2006 and was up another 50% during the first half of 2007 $600.0 $500 $408.8 $400 $300 $200 $154.6 $195.5 $206.7 $210.6 2003 2004 2005 $100 $0 2002 Source: PIPSO; Insurance Information Institute. *As of June 30. 2006 2007E* Pre- vs. Post-Event in FL for 2007 Hurricane Season $43.8B $10.1 $10.4 $10.9 $12.4 $15.0 $17.6 1-in-20 1-in-30 1-in-50 1-in-70 1-in-85 1-in-100 $0 $25.8 $14.6 $10 Total = $25.0B $20.0 Billion $24.1 $35.0B $40 $20 $54.2 $49.5B $50 $30 $55.0B $37.4 $60 There is a very significant likelihood of major, multiyear assessments in 2007 $80.0B $9.9 Billions $70 Post-Event Funding (Assessments & Bonds) $34.5 $80 Pre-Event Funding $31.4 $90 1-in-250 Notes: Pre-event funding includes funds available to Citizens, FHCF and private carriers plus contingent funding available through private reinsurance to pay claims in 2007. Post-event funding is on a present value basis and does not include financing costs. Probabilities are expressed as “odds of a single storm of this magnitude or greater happening in 2007.” Source: Tillinghast Towers Perrin, Study of Recent Legislative Changes to Florida’s Property Insurance Mechanisms, 3/07. New Condo Construction in South Miami Beach, 2007-2009 • Number of New Developments: 15 • Number of Individual Units: 2,111 • Avg. Price of Cheapest Unit: $940,333 • Avg. Price of Most Expensive Unit: $6,460,000 • Range: $395,000 - $16,000,000 • Overall Average Price per Unit: $3,700,167* • Aggregate Property Value: At least $6 Billion *Based on average of high/low value for each of the 15 developments Source: Insurance Information Institute from www.miamicondolifestyle.com accessed April 5, 2007. Historical Hurricane Strikes in Galveston County, TX, 1900-2002 Source: NOAA Coastal Services Center, http://hurricane.csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/pop.jsp; Insurance Info. Institute. TWIA Growth In Exposure to Loss (Building & Contents Only, $ Billions) Exposure to Loss (Building & Contents Only) $50 $45 $40 $35 TWIA’s liability in-force for building & contents has surged by 260 percent in the last 7 years from $12.1bn in 2000 to $43.5bn as of 3/31/07 $43.5 $35.9 $30 $25 $20 $15 $12.1 $13.2 2000 2001 $16.0 $18.8 $20.8 $23.3 $10 $5 $0 2002 Source: TWIA; Insurance Information Institute; 2003 2004 2005 2006* 2007** *As of 11/30/06; **As of 3/31/07. ROE for Homeowners Insurance in Texas, 1992 - 2005 13.1% 10.2% 10% 14.7% 6.2% 20% 11.9% 30% 19.4% 40% 20.7% 50% 38.1% 14-Year Average: 92-05 Auto: +7.6% Home: -2.1% -10% -23.5% -20% -50% Despite recent improvements, TX is a very risky longrun proposition -38.8% -30% -40% -10.9% -6.0% 0% 1992 Source: NAIC 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 -42.4%-41.9% 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 New Construction in Galveston: Will Dreams be Blown Away? • More than $2.3 Billion Residential, Commercial and Public Construction is Under Way in 2007 • More than 6,500 Residential Units Under Construction Mostly condos, including several towers up to 27 stories high One development by Centex Homes will consist of 2,300 condos and houses on 1,000 acres • The Average Home Price Rose 89% to $232,800 over the 4 Years Ending Jan. 2007 • Typical Price Range for Newer Condos: $400,000 Up to $1.5 Million An undeveloped waterview lot can go for as much as $300,000 Most will be insured via TWIALimits up to $1.6 million + contents • Inconvenient Truth: Galveston is Site of the Deadliest Natural Disaster in US History At least 8,000 people were killed in a 1900 hurricane 3,600 homes were destroyed The current seawall is only 15.6 ft. high; Katrina’s storm surge was nearly 30 feet. • Insured Losses Today from Repeat of 1900 Storm Would Cost $21 - $33 Billion Would become the 3rd most expensive hurricane in US history (after Katrina and Andrew) Source: Insurance Information Institute from “A Texas-Sized Hunger for Gulf Coast Homes,” New York Times, March 18, 2007 and www.1900storm.com and www.twia.org accessed July 9, 2007. Percentage Increase in Estimated Housing Units for MA Counties, 2000 to 2006 Nantucket Dukes Plymouth Worcester Barnstable Hampshire Bristol Norfolk Essex Franklin Middlesex Berkshire Suffolk Hampden Massachusetts (State) 0% 13.8% 8.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.0% 3.5% 3.3% 3.1% 3.0% 2.8% 2.4% 2.1% 1.8% 1.3% 3.2% 2% 4% Source: Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau Coastal growth in housing construction in MA exceeds the state overall by a wide margin. Barnstable, Dukes, Plymouth and Nantucket counties are seeing large increases in housing units. 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% Barnstable County, Massachusetts* Last period of intense hurricane activity ran from the 1930s to 1960 *Barnstable County is mostly comprised of Cape Cod The population of Barnstable County is five times larger than it was during the last period of intense hurricane activity (19401960). Historical Hurricane Strikes in Dare County, NC, 1900-2002 Population in Dare County is 6 times what it was in the 1950s Source: NOAA Coastal Services Center, http://hurricane.csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/pop.jsp; Insurance Info. Institute. Historical Hurricane Strikes in Suffolk County, NY, 1900-2002 Population in Suffolk County is 4.5 times what it was in the 1940s Source: NOAA Coastal Services Center, http://hurricane.csc.noaa.gov/hurricanes/pop.jsp; Insurance Info. Institute. Hurricane Strikes vs. Population for Charleston County, South Carolina Source: NOAA Public Attitude Monitor 2006: Unfairness of Taxpayer Subsidies 70% 60% Most non-coastal dwellers believe taxpayer subsidies for coastal property owners are unfair Very unfair Somewhat Unfair 50% 40% 22% 34% 31% 29% 25% 30% Coastal Counties Interior Counties Noncoastal States 30% 20% 10% 0% Coastal States Source: Insurance Research Council #5. Regulation Critics: Regulation is Lax Insurers: Regulation is a Mess Reality: Insurance Regulation is Byzantine, Anachronistic, Expensive and Too Politicized Legal, Legislative & Regulatory Issues are Multiplying • • • Attacks on Underwriting: Perennial issue, with challenges to even longestablished underwriting criteria popping up; Will be a bigger problem with evolution of Predictive Modeling Credit-Based Insurance Scores: Remain the largest issue & became the subject of a US House O&I hearing Oct. 2 Education/Occupation Attacked (e.g., FL) CAT Models: Black box allegation, short vs. long-term model Any type of individual risk rating factor is subject to allegations of discrimination Allegations of Collusion via Ratings Agencies, Trades & Modelers: Novel theory espoused by Gov. Crist and OIR in FL that insurers collude indirectly via ratings agencies, trade associations and modeling firms Some insurers subpoenaed for documents Some discussion at recent NAIC meeting Proliferation of Insurance Regulators: Insurance Commissioner’s influence and power is waning in many states. There are 632 insurance regulators in the US (50 Commissioners, 50 AGs, 50 Governors, 50 Senators and 432 US) Attorneys General: Spitzer (and copycats) did serious damage to commissioner authority; Followed by AG Hood in MS Congress is exerting itself over a wide range of issues Governors like Crist not shy on insurance matters Source: Insurance Information Institute. Legal, Legislative & Regulatory Issues are Multiplying • • Claim Conspiracy Allegations: Bad faith litigation could mushroom based on allegations of systematic hardball, lowball, delay and denial tactics used by insurers beginning in early 1990s, mostly in personal lines Emergence of infamous “McKinsey Documents” viewed as Holy Grail; Fueling litigation & wild media stories Urban Legend in the Making “Hager” case won by Allstate in Lexington, KY on 10/10—jury deliberated for less than 2 hours. Was sued for $1.43 billion. Alleged claims were systematically dragged-out to force policyholder into low settlement Pre-Event CAT Reserving: NY Insurance Superintendent Dinallo promulgated draft regulations Oct. 4 requiring insurers to set aside reserves for hurricaneexposed personal and commercial lines property risks No tax recognition since IRS only recognizes as an expense after event Sets up several conflicts: Statutory Authority (e.g., are non-NY domiciled insurers subject?); Tax consequences will be challenged. Ties-Up Capital (e.g., 5% of HO premium = $250 million in NY annually) Could create another schism within industry on CAT issues Could get very expensive if other states follow Dinallo’s lead Source: Insurance Information Institute. Legal, Legislative & Regulatory Issues are Multiplying • Antitrust Allegations Against Reinsurance Broker: CT Attorney General Richard Blumenthal on Oct. 9 filed an antitrust action against Guy Carpenter in CT Superior Court accusing the reinsurance broker of “choreographing the reinsurance market to fix prices, stifle competitors and collect excessive profits at the expense of the entire industry.” Alleges 170 small/medium insurers over 50 years overpaid for reinsurance Blumenthal says policyholders consequently paid premiums that were up to 40% higher costing them potentially hundreds of millions of dollars Suit alleges “Guy Carpenter conspired with numerous reinsurers to exploit its position as a well-known and dominant reinsurance broker in order to fix prices and output, foreclose competitors from access, allocate markets, eliminate competition and substantially increase profits in the extremely lucrative market for reinsurance.” Suit accuses Guy Carpenter of trading exclusive access to a lucrative book of business in exchange for “excessive fees and other benefits by creating a series of reinsurance ‘facilities’ aimed at a large block of its smallest clients.” and “by withholding critical information and leading them to believe that Guy Carpenter was acting in their best interests.” Legal, Legislative & Regulatory Issues are Multiplying • Guy Carpenter Rebuttal to Antitrust Allegations by CT AG Blumenthal: “The Connecticut Attorney General’s complaint is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of reinsurance facilities that have been in operation for the benefit of small- and mid-sized clients for as long as 50 years. As many of our clients have confirmed during this investigation, these facilities result in improved availability and terms of reinsurance and ultimately benefit insurance buyers. Simply put, there is no basis for the Attorney General's lawsuit and we intend to defend ourselves vigorously.” -Guy Carpenter Press Release, October 8, 2007 • OTHER ISSUES: Collateralization Requirement for Non-Domestic Reinsurers: Foreign reinsurers, NY Superintendent Dinallo want the requirement eliminated and to be replaced with sliding scale based on a reinsurer’s rating. Many domestic insurers oppose. Taxation of Premium Ceded to Bermuda Subsidiaries: Some domestic insurers/reinsurers oppose current tax treatment of premiums ceded to Bermuda reinsurers. Shifting Legal Liability & Tort Environment Is the Pendulum Swinging Against Insurers? Tort System Costs, 2000-2008F Tort System Costs $260 2.03% 1.82% $246 $233 $240 $220 $200 $180 $260 2.09% 2.05% $270 2.04% 2.03% 2.0% 1.5% $205 $179 After a period of rapid escalation, tort system costs as % of GDP are now falling $160 $140 $120 2.5% $100 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 00 01 02 03 Tort Sytem Costs 04 05 06E 07F Tort Costs as % of GDP Source: Tillinghast-Towers Perrin, 2006 Update on US Tort Cost Trends;2006 is III estimate. 08F Tort Costs as % of GDP $280 $295 $261 2.22% 2.24% 2.22% $261 $300 The Nation’s Judicial Hellholes (2006) Some improvement in “Judicial Hellholes” in 2006 Watch List Miller County, AR Los Angeles County, CA San Francisco, CA Philadelphia, PA Orleans Parish, LA Delaware ILLINOIS Cook County Madison County St. Clair County West Virginia Dishonorable Mentions Providence, RI MA Supreme Court LA Supreme Court New Jersey NE Supreme Court California TEXAS Rio Grande Valley and Gulf Coast Source: American Tort Reform Association; Insurance Information Institute South Florida Preventing/Limiting Erosion of Recent Tort Reform • • Tort Pendulum Likely to Swing Against Insurers as Political Environment Changes (WA referendum, FL No-Fault?) Insurers Must Remain Active Members of Tort Reform Coalitions at State and Federal Level • Pursuing Good Cases Can Set Precedent & Bring About Quantum Shifts in Judicial Philosophy • Campbell v. State Farm (limited punitives) Safeco v. Burr, Geico v. Edo (FCRA reporting violations) Asbestos: Class actions limited; no pre-pack bankruptcies Products Liability: Merck’s successful Vioxx defense Educate Policyholders About Link Between Tort Environment and Cost/Availability of Insurance • May have more success at the state level Businesses understand; Need facts to support local efforts Personal lines customers understand relationship, agents do Tighten Contract Language From 9/11 to Katrina, alleged “ambiguities” cost big bucks Summary • P/C insurance will never be the most beloved industry, but CEOs are wrong when they assert that we are among the most despised industry in America. CEO survey…?? • Most Americans have a favorable or very favorable view of their insurer and even the industry overall • Price is the principal determinant of public sentiment about insurers in the long-run Outside FL and Katrina areas, perception of industry is quite good • I.I.I. is investing heavily in direct-to-consumer messaging and tools; Companies can leverage off these. Customer service oriented approach to dealing with all stakeholders: media, general public, regulators, legislators and insurers Home inventory software (Business forthcoming) Video News Releases Testimonials offering lessons from actual claimants Web content • Putting out regional fires (e.g., credit) will always be a problem • Political opportunism is on the rise and is a major challenge Spitzer, Crist, Hood, Blumenthal are just the vanguard Insurance Information Institute On-Line If you would like a copy of this presentation, please give me your business card with e-mail address