American Financial Group - 10-K annual report 2017

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(513) 579-2121

________________________________

Documents Incorporated by Reference:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

AMERICAN FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

INDEX TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

The disclosures in this Form 10-K contain certain forward-looking statements that are subject to numerous assumptions, risks or uncertainties. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements. Some of the forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “anticipates”, “believes”, “expects”, “projects”, “estimates”, “intends”, “plans”, “seeks”, “could”, “may”, “should”, “will” or the negative version of those words or other comparable terminology. Such forward-looking statements include statements relating to: expectations concerning market and other conditions and their effect on future premiums, revenues, earnings, investment activities, and the amount and timing of share repurchases; recoverability of asset values; expected losses and the adequacy of reserves for asbestos, environmental pollution and mass tort claims; rate changes; and improved loss experience.

PART I

Introduction

American Financial Group, Inc. (“AFG” or the “Company”) is a holding company that, through the operations of Great American Insurance Group, is engaged primarily in property and casualty insurance, focusing on specialized commercial products for businesses, and in the sale of fixed and fixed-indexed annuities in the retail, financial institutions and education markets. Its address is 301 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202; its phone number is (513) 579-2121. SEC filings, news releases, AFG’s Code of Ethics applicable to directors, officers and employees and other information may be accessed free of charge through AFG’s Internet site at: www.AFGinc.com. (Information on AFG’s Internet site is not part of this Form 10-K.)

The primary objectives of AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations are to achieve solid underwriting profitability and provide excellent service to its policyholders and agents. Underwriting profitability is measured by the combined ratio, which is a sum of the ratios of losses, loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”), underwriting expenses and policyholder dividends to premiums. A combined ratio under 100% indicates an underwriting profit. The combined ratio does not reflect investment income, other income or federal income taxes.

While many costs included in underwriting are readily determined (commissions, administrative expenses and many of the losses on claims reported), the process of determining overall underwriting results is highly dependent upon the use of estimates in the case of losses incurred or expected but not yet reported or developed. Actuarial procedures and projections are

used to obtain “point estimates” of ultimate losses. While the process is imprecise and develops amounts which are subject to change over time, management believes that the liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses are adequate.

Financial information is reported in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) for shareholder and other investor-related purposes and reported on a statutory basis for U.S. insurance regulatory purposes. Unless indicated otherwise, the financial information presented in the Form 10-K for AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations is presented based on GAAP. Statutory information is only prepared for AFG’s U.S.-based subsidiaries, which represented approximately 94% of AFG’s direct written premiums in 2017, and is provided for industry comparisons or where comparable GAAP information is not readily available.

Major differences for statutory accounting include charging policy acquisition costs to expense as incurred rather than spreading the costs over the periods covered by the policies; reporting investment grade bonds and redeemable preferred stocks at amortized cost rather than fair value; netting of reinsurance recoverables and prepaid reinsurance premiums against the corresponding liabilities rather than reporting such items separately; and charging to surplus certain GAAP assets, such as furniture and fixtures and agents’ balances over 90 days old.

The following table shows the performance of AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations (dollars in millions):

AFG generally seeks to reduce its exposure to catastrophes through individual risk selection, including minimizing coastal and known fault-line exposures, and the purchase of reinsurance. AFG’s net exposure to a catastrophic earthquake or windstorm that industry models indicate could occur once in every 500 years (a “500-year event”) is expected to be less than 4% of AFG’s Shareholders’ Equity.

AFG is focused on growth opportunities in what it believes to be more profitable specialty businesses where AFG personnel are experts in particular lines of business or customer groups. The following are examples of AFG’s specialty businesses:

Management believes specialization is the key element to the underwriting success of these business units. These specialty businesses are opportunistic and their premium volume will vary based on prevailing market conditions. AFG continually evaluates expansion in existing markets and opportunities in new specialty markets that meet its profitability objectives. Likewise, AFG will withdraw from markets that do not meet its profit objectives or business strategy.

Consistent with standard practice of most insurance companies, AFG reinsures a portion of its property and casualty business with other insurance companies and assumes a relatively small amount of business from other insurers. AFG uses reinsurance for two primary purposes: (i) to provide higher limits of coverage than it would otherwise be willing to provide (i.e. large line capacity) and (ii) to protect its business by reducing the impact of catastrophes. The availability and cost of reinsurance are subject to prevailing market conditions, which may affect the volume and profitability of business that is written. AFG is subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers, as the ceding of risk to reinsurers does not relieve AFG of its liability to its insureds until claims are fully settled.

Reinsurance is provided on one of two bases, facultative or treaty. Facultative reinsurance is generally provided on a risk-by-risk basis. Individual risks are ceded and assumed based on an offer and acceptance of risk by each party to the transaction. AFG purchases facultative reinsurance, both pro rata and excess of loss, depending on the risk and available reinsurance markets. Treaty reinsurance provides for risks meeting prescribed criteria to be automatically ceded and assumed according to contract provisions.

In June 2017, AFG’s property and casualty insurance subsidiaries entered into a reinsurance agreement to obtain supplemental catastrophe protection through a catastrophe bond structure with Riverfront Re Ltd. (“Riverfront”). The reinsurance agreement provides supplemental reinsurance coverage up to 95% of $200 million (fully collateralized) for catastrophe losses in excess of $100 million (per occurrence and annual aggregate) occurring between June 1, 2017 and December 31, 2020. In connection with the reinsurance agreement, Riverfront issued notes to unrelated investors for the full amount of coverage provided under the reinsurance agreement. Riverfront is a variable interest entity in which AFG does not have a variable interest because the variability in Riverfront’s results will be absorbed entirely by the investors in Riverfront. Accordingly, Riverfront is not

consolidated in AFG’s financial statements and the reinsurance agreement is accounted for as ceded reinsurance. AFG’s cost for this coverage is approximately $11 million per year.

In January 2018, Neon launched NCM Re (UK PCC) Ltd. (“NCM Re”), the first insurance-linked securities (“ILS”) vehicle in the United Kingdom (“UK”). NCM Re utilizes recently approved UK regulations to provide Neon with the ability to further enhance its global reinsurance offering to clients. NCM Re plans to use a range of catastrophe modeling and pricing techniques to make use of Neon’s underwriting and risk selection skills to source business for third-party ILS investors in the capital markets. In early 2018, NCM Re completed its first ILS transaction, which provides $72 million in collateralized quota share reinsurance that will assume 20% of the Neon Lloyd’s syndicate’s property treaty reinsurance and direct and facultative portfolios. Losses are recovered from NCM Re before Neon’s catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage applies. In addition to NCM Re, Neon also placed a 35% quota share reinsurance treaty covering its property insurance (but not assumed reinsurance) lines.

Also in January 2018, AFG’s property and casualty insurance subsidiaries renewed their catastrophe reinsurance coverages. For AFG’s U.S. based operations, the Company continued to place $85 million of coverage in excess of a $15 million per event primary retention in the traditional reinsurance markets but as part of the placement, eliminated its 5% participation from previous treaty years. Neon placed $200 million of coverage in excess of a $15 million per event primary retention (extending to $225 million for U.S. risks only) with a 7.5% participation. For the catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage, recoveries from NCM Re and Neon’s property insurance quota share apply before calculating losses recoverable from the catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance treaty. In addition to Neon’s catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage, Neon has placed a quota share treaty which covers 12.5% of Neon’s gross property losses with a $400 million event limit (maximum $50 million recoverable) which supplements its catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage and property quota share coverages up to the event limit.

The commercial marketplace requires large policy limits ($25 million or more) in several of AFG’s lines of business, including certain executive and professional liability, umbrella and excess liability, and fidelity and surety coverages. Since these limits exceed management’s desired exposure to an individual risk, AFG generally enters into reinsurance agreements to reduce its net exposure under such policies to an acceptable level. Reinsurance continues to be available for this large line capacity exposure with satisfactory pricing and terms.

The following table presents (by type of coverage) the amount of each loss above the specified retention covered by treaty reinsurance programs in AFG’s U.S.-based property and casualty insurance operations (in millions) as of January 1, 2018:

Reinsurance premiums ceded and assumed are presented in the following table (in millions):

The property and casualty insurance group directs its sales efforts primarily through independent insurance agents and brokers, although small portions are written through employee agents. Independent agents and brokers generally receive a commission on the sale of each policy. Some agents and brokers are eligible for a bonus commission based on the overall profitability of policies placed with AFG by the broker or agent in a particular year. The property and casualty insurance group writes insurance through several thousand agents and brokers.

Annuity Segment

AFG believes that the ratings assigned by independent insurance rating agencies are an important competitive factor because agents, potential policyholders and financial institutions often use a company’s rating as an initial screening device in considering annuity products. AFG believes that a rating in the “A” category by at least one rating agency is necessary to successfully compete in its primary annuity markets.

Statutory premiums of AFG’s annuity operations for the last three years were as follows (in millions):

Annuities are long-term retirement saving instruments that benefit from income accruing on a tax-deferred basis. The issuer of the annuity collects premiums, credits interest or earnings on the policy and pays out a benefit upon death, surrender or annuitization. Single premium annuities are generally issued in exchange for a one-time lump-sum premium payment. Certain annuities, primarily in the education market, have premium payments that are flexible in both amount and timing as determined by the policyholder and are generally made through payroll deductions.

Annuity contracts are generally classified as either fixed rate (including fixed-indexed) or variable. With a traditional fixed rate annuity, AFG seeks to maintain a desired spread between the yield on its investment portfolio and the rate it credits to policyholders. AFG accomplishes this by: (i) offering crediting rates that it has the option to change after any initial guarantee period (subject to minimum interest rate and other contractual guarantees); (ii) designing annuity products that encourage persistency; and (iii) maintaining an appropriate matching of assets and liabilities.

A fixed-indexed annuity provides policyholders with the opportunity to receive a crediting rate tied, in part, to the performance of an existing market index (generally the S&P 500) while protecting against the related downside risk through a guarantee of principal (excluding surrender charges, market value adjustments, and certain benefit charges). AFG purchases call options designed to substantially offset the effect of the index participation in the liabilities associated with fixed-indexed annuities.

As an accommodation in its education market, AFG offers a limited amount of variable annuities. With a variable annuity, the earnings credited to the policy vary based on the investment results of the underlying investment options chosen by the policyholder, generally without any guarantee of principal except in the case of death of the insured. Premiums directed to the underlying investment options maintained in separate accounts are invested in funds managed by various independent investment managers. AFG earns a fee on amounts deposited into separate accounts. Subject to contractual provisions, policyholders may also choose to direct all or a portion of their premiums to various fixed-rate options, in which case AFG earns a spread on amounts deposited.

The profitability of a fixed annuity business is largely dependent on the ability of a company to earn income on the assets supporting the business in excess of the amounts credited to policyholder accounts plus expenses incurred (earning a “spread”). Performance measures such as net spread earned are often presented by annuity businesses to help users of their financial statements better understand the company’s performance. The following table shows the earnings before income taxes, as well as the net spread earned on fixed annuities, for the annuity segment both before and after the impact of fair value accounting for derivatives related to fixed-indexed annuities (“FIAs”) (dollars in millions):

AFG sells its single premium annuities, excluding financial institution production (discussed below), primarily through a retail network of approximately 65 national marketing organizations (“NMOs”) and managing general agents (“MGAs”) who, in turn, direct nearly 1,100 actively producing agents.

In the education market, schools may allow employees to save for retirement through contributions made on a before-tax basis. Federal income taxes are not payable on pretax contributions or earnings until amounts are withdrawn. AFG sells its education market annuities directly through writing agents rather than through NMOs and MGAs.

AFG’s annuity businesses operate in highly competitive markets. They compete with other insurers and financial institutions based on many factors, including: (i) ratings; (ii) financial strength; (iii) reputation; (iv) service to policyholders and agents; (v) product design (including interest rates credited, bonus features and index participation); and (vi) commissions. Since most policies are marketed and distributed through independent agents, the insurance companies must also compete for agents.

Sales of annuities, including renewal premiums, are affected by many factors, including: (i) competitive annuity products and rates; (ii) the general level and volatility of interest rates, including the slope of the yield curve; (iii) the favorable tax treatment of annuities; (iv) commissions paid to agents; (v) services offered; (vi) ratings from independent insurance rating agencies; (vii) other alternative investments; (viii) performance and volatility of the equity markets; (ix) media coverage of annuities; (x) regulatory developments regarding suitability and the sales process; and (xi) general economic conditions.

Run-off Long-term Care and Life Segment

Investment Portfolio

The table below compares total returns, which include changes in fair value, on AFG’s fixed maturities and equity securities to comparable public indices. While there are no directly comparable indices to AFG’s portfolio, the two shown below are widely used benchmarks in the financial services industry.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”), among other things, established a Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) within the U.S. Treasury. Under this law, regulations will need to be created for the FIO to carry out its mandate to focus on systemic risk oversight. Since its formation, the FIO has worked with the NAIC and other stakeholders to explore a hybrid approach to regulation of the insurance industry; however, the state-based system of regulation has largely been retained. AFG cannot predict the future role of the FIO and its role in regulation of the insurance industry and how that might ultimately affect AFG’s operations.

Neon, AFG’s UK-based Lloyd’s insurer, is subject to regulation by the European Union’s executive body, the European Commission. On January 1, 2016, Neon adopted new capital adequacy and risk management regulations known as Solvency II. Because Lloyd’s insurers were already operating under the proposed Solvency II guidelines, implementation was not material to AFG.

Most states have created insurance guaranty associations that assess solvent insurers to pay claims of insurance companies that become insolvent. Annual guaranty assessments for AFG’s insurance companies have not been material.

Disclosure of Certain Activities Under Section 13(r) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Section 13(r) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Section 13(r)”), requires a registrant to disclose in its annual or quarterly reports whether it or an affiliate knowingly engaged in certain activities, transactions or dealings related to Iran during the period covered by the report. Many of the activities, transactions and dealings that are required to be reported under Section 13(r) were previously subject to U.S. sanctions or prohibited by applicable local law. On January 16, 2016, the United States and the European Union eased sanctions against Iran pursuant to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and many of the reportable activities, transactions and dealings under Section 13(r) are no longer subject to U.S. sanctions and no longer prohibited by applicable local law.

Certain of the Company’s subsidiaries located outside the United States subscribe to insurance policies that provide insurance coverage to vessels owned by international shipping and marine entities with vessels that travel worldwide. As a result, the insurance policies may be called upon to respond to claims involving or that have exposure to Iranian petroleum resources, refined petroleum, and petrochemical industries. For example, certain of the Company’s non-U.S. subsidiaries participate in global marine hull and war policies that provide coverage for damage to vessels navigating into and out of ports worldwide, which could include Iran.

ITEM 1A

Risk Factors

Worldwide financial markets have, from time to time, experienced significant and unpredictable disruption. For example, during the financial crisis that started approximately ten years ago, the United States and many other economies experienced a prolonged economic downturn, resulting in heightened credit risk, reduced valuation of certain investments and decreased economic activity. Financial markets may again experience significant and prolonged disruption, including disruption from unanticipated events. In the years following the financial crisis, the federal government has taken steps to stabilize financial markets, but such steps may not be effective.

Changes in financial markets including fluctuations in interest rates, credit conditions, equity prices and many other factors that are unpredictable and beyond AFG’s control can adversely affect the value of investments and the realization of investment income.

Interest rates have remained at historical lows for an extended period. In addition, central banks in some countries have recently pursued largely unprecedented negative interest rate policies, the consequences of which are uncertain. The continuation of the current low interest rate environment or a deflationary environment with negative interest rates could affect business behavior in ways that are adverse to AFG and could constrict AFG’s net investment income.

The profitability of AFG’s annuity segment is largely dependent on the spread between what it earns on its investments and the crediting rate it pays on its annuity contracts plus expenses incurred.

Both rising and declining interest rates can negatively affect the Company’s annuity results. Most of AFG’s annuity products have guaranteed minimum crediting rates. Although AFG could reduce the average crediting rate on a substantial portion of its traditional fixed and fixed-indexed deferred annuities during periods of low or falling interest rates, AFG may not be able to fully offset the decline in investment earnings with lower crediting rates.

During periods of rising interest rates, the Company may experience competitive pressure to increase crediting rates to avoid a decline in sales or increased surrenders, thus resulting in lower spreads. In addition, an increase in surrenders could require the sale of investments at a time when the prices of those assets are lower due to the increase in market rates, which may result in realized investment losses.

The property and casualty insurance segment operates in a highly competitive industry that is affected by many factors that can cause significant fluctuations in its results of operations. The lines of business in this segment compete with other individual insurers, state funds and insurance groups of varying sizes, some of which are mutual insurance companies possessing competitive advantages in that all their profits inure to their policyholders. In addition, certain foreign insurers may be taxed at lower rates, which may result in a competitive advantage over AFG. The property and casualty insurance segment also competes with self-insurance plans, captive programs and risk retention groups. Competition is based on many factors, including service to policyholders and agents, product design, reputation for claims handling, price, commissions, ratings and financial strength. Peer companies and competitors in some or all of AFG’s specialty lines include the following companies and/or their subsidiaries: Alleghany Corp., American International Group Inc., American National Insurance Company, AmTrust Financial Services, Inc., Arch Capital Group Ltd., Baldwin & Lyons, Inc., Chubb Ltd., Cincinnati Financial Corp., CNA Financial Corp., Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. (Zenith National), The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., Lancer Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual, Markel Corp., Munich Re Group (American Modern Insurance), RLI Corp., The Travelers Companies, Inc., Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc. (HCC Insurance, Philadelphia Consolidated), W.R. Berkley Corp., XL Group Ltd. and Zurich Insurance Group Ltd.

AFG’s annuity segment competes with individual insurers and insurance groups, mutual funds and other financial institutions. In addition, in recent years, offshore and/or hedge fund companies have made significant acquisitions of annuity businesses. Competition is based on numerous factors including reputation, product design, interest crediting rates, performance, scope of distribution, price and perceived financial strength and credit ratings. Peer companies and competitors for AFG’s annuity segment include the following companies and/or their subsidiaries: Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America, American Equity Investment Life Holding Company (Eagle Life Insurance Company), American International Group Inc., Athene Holding Ltd, Global Atlantic Financial Group Ltd. (Forethought Life Insurance Company), Lincoln National Corp., MetLife, Inc., Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Pacific Life Insurance Company, Sumitomo Life Insurance Company (Symetra Financial Corp.) and Voya Financial, Inc.

Some of AFG’s competitors have more capital and greater resources than AFG, and may offer a broader range of products and lower prices than AFG offers. If competition limits AFG’s ability to write new or renewal business at adequate rates, its results of operations will be adversely affected.

Annuity premiums generated through financial institutions represented 54% of AFG’s annuity premiums in 2017 and have been a key driver in the growth of AFG’s annuity business. In 2017, two large financial institutions accounted for 32% of AFG’s total sales through financial institutions and 17% of AFG’s overall annuity sales. In the financial institutions annuity market, AFG competes directly against competitors’ annuities, certificates of deposit and other investment alternatives at the point of sale. Loss of a substantial portion of this business coupled with a failure to replace these financial institutions if they significantly reduce sales of AFG annuities could reduce AFG’s future growth.

AFG’s reliance on the independent agency market makes it vulnerable to a reduction in the amount of business written by agents. Many of AFG’s competitors also rely significantly on the independent agency market. Accordingly, AFG must compete with other insurance carriers for independent agents’ business. Some of its competitors offer a wider variety of products, lower price for insurance coverage or higher commissions. A reduction in the number of independent agencies marketing AFG’s products, the failure of agencies to successfully market AFG’s products, changes in the strategy or operations of agencies (including agency consolidation) or the choice of agencies to reduce their writings of AFG products could adversely affect AFG’s revenues and profitability.

AFG is subject to comprehensive regulation by government agencies in the states and countries where its insurance company subsidiaries are domiciled and where these subsidiaries issue policies and handle claims. In addition, the Lloyd’s marketplace sets rules under which its members operate, including Neon (AFG’s Lloyd’s syndicate). Most insurance regulations are designed to protect the interests of AFG’s policyholders and third party claimants as opposed to its investors.

The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in June 2010, mandates changes to the regulation of the financial services industry. Implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act is ongoing. The potential impacts of the Act on the U.S. insurance industry are not clear, but may affect AFG’s operations and governance in ways that could adversely affect AFG’s financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in domestic or foreign tax laws or interpretations of such laws could increase AFG’s corporate taxes and reduce earnings. On December 22, 2017, the U.S. enacted The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“TCJA”), which significantly reforms the U.S. tax code. AFG’s deferred tax assets and liabilities have been revalued as of December 31, 2017 to reflect the newly enacted corporate tax rate. The U.S. Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service are expected to issue implementation guidance for the TCJA in 2018. Clarifications and interpretations of the TCJA may adversely affect our expected effective tax rate and the realization of deferred taxes.

As a participant in the federal crop insurance program, AFG could also be impacted by regulatory and legislative changes affecting that program. For example, the reinsurance levels that the federal government provides to authorized carriers could be reduced by future legislation. AFG will continue to monitor new and changing federal regulations and their potential impact, if any, on its insurance company subsidiaries.

On April 6, 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) released a final regulation that substantially expands the range of activities that will be considered fiduciary advice under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The regulation’s scheduled effective date was April 10, 2017. This regulation deems advisers, including

insurance agents, who sell annuities to IRAs, IRA rollovers or 401(k) plans to be fiduciaries and prohibits them from receiving compensation unless they comply with a prohibited transaction exemption requiring, among other things, advisers to comply with impartial conduct standards of acting in the customer’s best interest, making no misleading statements and receiving reasonable compensation. On February 3, 2017, President Trump issued a presidential memorandum directing the DOL to examine the regulation, and on April 4, 2017, the DOL announced “the delay rule” that deferred the effective date of the regulation until June 9, 2017, as it continued its examination as mandated by the President’s executive order. The rule further delayed certain requirements associated with prohibited transaction exemptions, other than the impartial conduct standards, under the final regulation until January 1, 2018. On November 29, 2017, the DOL extended this transition period another 18 months. As a result, insurance agents can continue selling fixed-indexed annuities through July 1, 2019, provided the agent complies with the impartial conduct standards. Regardless, during this transition period, the increased regulatory burdens and compensation changes required of agents to comply with the prohibited transaction exemptions may negatively impact AFG’s business, results of operations or financial condition. If the final regulation is fully implemented on July 1, 2019, compliance with the prohibited transaction exemptions will likely result in additional regulatory burdens, changes to AFG’s product offerings and increased litigation risk, which could negatively impact AFG’s business, results of operations or financial condition. Management cannot currently predict the effect on AFG’s business if the DOL’s examination mandated by the President results in the proposal of significant changes to the final regulation (or a further delay of the July 1, 2019 implementation date).

Existing insurance-related laws and regulations may become more restrictive in the future or new restrictive laws may be enacted; it is not possible to predict the potential effects of these laws and regulations. The costs of compliance or the failure to comply with existing or future regulations could impose significant burdens on the Company.

Financial strength ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies and may have an effect on an insurance company’s sales. A downgrade out of the “A” category in AFG’s insurers’ claims-paying and financial strength ratings could significantly reduce AFG’s business volumes in certain lines of business, adversely impact AFG’s ability to access the capital markets and increase AFG’s borrowing costs.

In addition to the financial strength ratings of AFG’s principal insurance company subsidiaries, various rating agencies also publish credit ratings for AFG. Credit ratings are indicators of a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner, are part of AFG’s overall financial profile and affect AFG’s ability to access certain types of capital. A downgrade in AFG’s credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on AFG’s financial condition and results of operations and cash flows in a number of ways, including adversely limiting access to capital markets, potentially increasing the cost of debt or increasing borrowing costs under AFG’s current revolving credit facility.

AFG uses computer systems and services to store, retrieve, evaluate and utilize company and customer data and information. Systems failures or outages could compromise AFG’s ability to perform business functions in a timely manner, which could harm its ability to conduct business and hurt its relationships with business partners and customers. In the event of a disaster such as a natural catastrophe, an industrial accident, a blackout, a computer virus, a terrorist attack or war, AFG’s systems may

be inaccessible to employees, customers or business partners for an extended period of time. Even if AFG’s employees are able to report to work, they may be unable to perform their duties for an extended period of time if the Company’s data or systems are disabled or destroyed.

AFG’s computer systems are vulnerable to security breaches due to the sophistication of cyber-attacks, viruses, malware, hackers and other external hazards, as well as inadvertent errors, equipment and system failures, and employee misconduct. In addition, over time, and particularly recently, the sophistication of these threats continues to increase. AFG’s administrative and technical controls as well as other preventative actions used to reduce the risk of cyber incidents and protect AFG’s information may be insufficient to detect or prevent unauthorized access, other physical and electronic break-ins, cyber-attacks or other security breaches to AFG’s computer systems or those of third parties with whom AFG does business.

AFG has increasingly outsourced certain technology and business process functions to third parties and may continue to do so in the future. Outsourcing of certain technology and business process functions to third parties may expose AFG to increased risk related to data security or service disruptions. If AFG does not effectively develop, implement and monitor these relationships, third party providers do not perform as anticipated, technological or other problems are incurred with a transition, or outsourcing relationships relevant to AFG’s business process functions are terminated, AFG may not realize expected productivity improvements or cost efficiencies and may experience operational difficulties, increased costs and a loss of business.

The increased risks identified above could expose AFG to data loss, disruption of service, monetary and reputational damages, competitive disadvantage and significant increases in compliance costs and costs to improve the security and resiliency of AFG’s computer systems. The compromise of personal, confidential or proprietary information could also subject AFG to legal liability or regulatory action under evolving cyber-security, data protection and privacy laws and regulations enacted by the U.S. federal and state governments, Canada, the European Union (the “EU”) or other jurisdictions or by various regulatory organizations or exchanges. As a result, AFG’s ability to conduct business and its results of operations might be materially and adversely affected.

AFG receives and is required to protect certain confidential information from customers, vendors and other third parties that may include financial information and, in connection with AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations, medical information. In addition, AFG and certain of its third-party vendors receive and store personal information in connection with AFG’s human resources operations and other aspects of AFG’s business. AFG is subject to numerous federal, state and international laws regarding the privacy and security of personal information, which laws vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If any disruption or security breach results in a loss or damage to AFG’s data, or inappropriate disclosure of AFG’s confidential information or that of others, it could damage AFG’s reputation, affect its relationships with customers and clients, lead to claims against AFG, result in regulatory action and harm AFG’s business. In addition, AFG may be required to incur significant costs to mitigate the damage caused by any security breach or to protect against future damage.

Liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses do not represent an exact calculation of liability but instead represent management estimates of what the ultimate settlement and administration of claims will cost, supported by actuarial expertise and projection techniques, at a given accounting date. The process of estimating unpaid losses and loss adjustment expense reserves involves a high degree of judgment and is subject to a number of variables. These variables can be affected by both internal and external events, such as: changes in claims handling procedures, adverse changes in loss cost trends (including inflationary pressures on medical costs), economic conditions (including general inflation), legal trends and legislative changes, and varying judgments and viewpoints of the individuals involved in the estimation process, among others. The impact of many of these items on ultimate costs for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses is difficult to estimate. Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expense reserve estimation difficulties also differ significantly by product line due to differences in claim complexity, the volume of claims, the potential severity of individual claims, the determination of an occurrence date for a claim and lags in the time between damage, loss or injury and when a claim is actually reported to the insurer. In addition, the historic development of AFG’s liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses may not necessarily reflect future trends in the development of these amounts. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to extrapolate future redundancies or deficiencies based on historical information. To the extent that reserves are inadequate and are strengthened, AFG’s profitability would be adversely affected because the amount of any such increase would be treated as a charge to earnings in the period in which the deficiency is recognized.

Catastrophes can be caused by unpredictable natural events such as hurricanes, windstorms, severe storms, tornadoes, floods, hailstorms, severe winter weather, earthquakes, explosions and fire, and by man-made events, such as terrorist attacks. While not considered a catastrophe by insurance industry standards, droughts can have a significant adverse impact on AFG’s crop insurance results. In addition, extreme weather events that are linked to rising temperatures, changing global weather patterns and fluctuating rain, snow and sea levels could result in increased occurrence and severity of catastrophes. The extent of gross losses from a catastrophe event is a function of both the total amount of insured exposure in the area affected by the event and the severity of the event, potentially mitigated by any reinsurance coverage purchased by AFG’s insurance subsidiaries. In addition, certain catastrophes could result in both property and non-property claims from the same event. A severe catastrophe or a series of catastrophes could result in losses exceeding AFG’s reinsurance protection and may have a material adverse impact on its results of operations or financial condition.

Weather conditions, including too much moisture (flooding or excessive rain) or not enough moisture (droughts), and the level of crop prices in the commodities market heavily impact AFG’s crop insurance business. These factors are inherently unpredictable and could result in significant volatility in the results of the crop insurance business from one year to the next. AFG’s crop results could also be negatively impacted by pests and plant disease. A large decline in the commodity prices of one or more of the major crops that AFG insures could have a material adverse effect on AFG’s results of operations or financial condition.

AFG’s international operations expose AFG to a number of additional risks. These risks include restrictions such as price controls, capital controls, currency exchange limits, ownership limits and other restrictive or anti-competitive governmental actions or requirements, which could have an adverse effect on AFG’s business and reputation. AFG’s business activities outside the United States may also be subject to political and economic risks, including foreign currency and credit risk.

AFG’s business activities outside the United States subject AFG to additional domestic and foreign laws and regulations, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the UK Bribery Act and similar laws in other countries that prohibit the making of improper payments to foreign officials. Although AFG has policies and controls in place that are designed to ensure compliance with these laws, if those controls are ineffective and an employee or intermediary fails to comply with applicable laws and regulations, AFG could suffer civil and criminal penalties and AFG’s business and reputation could be adversely affected. Some countries have laws and regulations that lack clarity and, even with local expertise and effective controls, it can be difficult to determine the exact requirements of, and potential liability under, the local laws. Failure to comply with local laws in a particular market may result in substantial liability and could have a significant and negative effect not only on AFG’s business in that market but also on AFG’s reputation generally.

AFG has asbestos and environmental (“A&E”) exposures arising from its insurance operations and former railroad and manufacturing operations. Uncertainties surrounding the final resolution of these asbestos and environmental liabilities continue, and it is difficult to estimate AFG’s ultimate exposure to such liabilities and related litigation. Establishing A&E liabilities is subject to uncertainties that are significantly greater than those presented by other types of liabilities. Uncertainties include the long delays between exposure and manifestation of any bodily injury or property damage, difficulty in identifying the source of the asbestos or environmental contamination, long reporting delays, the risks inherent in complex litigation and difficulty in properly allocating liability for the asbestos or environmental damage. As a result, A&E liabilities are subject to revision as new information becomes available and as claims are made and develop. Claimants continue to assert new and novel theories of recovery, and from time to time, there is proposed state and federal legislation regarding A&E liability, which would also affect AFG’s exposure. If AFG has not established adequate reserves to cover future claims, AFG’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

The earnings on AFG’s annuity products depend significantly upon the extent to which actual experience is consistent with the assumptions used in setting reserves and establishing and amortizing deferred policy acquisition costs (“DPAC”). These assumptions relate to investment yields (and spreads over fixed annuity crediting rates), benefit utilization rates, equity market performance, the cost of call options used in the fixed-indexed annuity business, mortality, surrenders, annuitizations and other withdrawals. Developing such assumptions is complex and involves information obtained from company-specific and industry-wide data, as well as general economic information. These assumptions, and therefore AFG’s results of operations, could be negatively impacted by changes in any of the factors listed above.

As a U.S.-based SEC registrant, AFG prepares its financial statements in accordance with GAAP, as promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, subject to the accounting-related rules and interpretations of the SEC. Changes in accounting standards, particularly those that specifically apply to insurance company operations, may impact AFG’s reported financial results and could cause increased volatility in reported earnings, resulting in other adverse impacts on AFG’s ratings and cost of capital, and decrease the understandability of AFG’s financial results as well as the comparability of AFG’s reported results with other insurers.

AFG is a holding company and a legal entity separate and distinct from its insurance company subsidiaries. As a holding company without significant operations of its own, AFG’s principal sources of funds are dividends and other distributions from its insurance company subsidiaries. State insurance laws differ from state to state but, absent advance regulatory approval, restrict the maximum amount of dividends that may be paid by an insurer to its shareholders in any twelve-month period. AFG’s rights to participate in any distribution of assets of its insurance company subsidiaries are subject to prior claims of policyholders and creditors (except to the extent that its rights, if any, as a creditor are recognized). Consequently, AFG’s ability to pay its debts, expenses and dividends to its shareholders may be limited.

AFG, primarily in its property and casualty insurance operations and historical operations, is involved in litigation. Litigation by nature is unpredictable, and the outcome of any case is uncertain and could result in liabilities that vary from the amounts AFG has currently recorded. Pervasive or significant changes in the judicial environment relating to matters such as trends in the size of jury awards, developments in the law relating to the liability of insurers or tort defendants, and rulings concerning the availability or amount of certain types of damages could cause AFG’s ultimate liabilities to change from current expectations. Changes in federal or state tort litigation laws or other applicable law could have a similar effect. It is not possible to predict changes in the judicial and legislative environment, including in connection with asbestos and environmental claims. AFG’s business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity could also be adversely affected if judicial or legislative developments cause AFG’s ultimate liabilities to increase from current expectations.

The United Kingdom (“UK”) held a referendum on June 23, 2016 in which a majority of voters voted for the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union (“Brexit”). Because of this vote, the terms of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU and the relationship between the UK and EU going forward will have to be negotiated, including the terms of trade between the UK and the EU. The ultimate impact of Brexit is uncertain and will depend on any agreements that the UK makes to retain access to EU markets. Brexit could also lead to legal uncertainty and potentially divergent national laws and regulations as the UK determines which EU laws to replace or replicate. These or other adverse consequences from Brexit could adversely affect the operations and business opportunities of AFG’s Ireland-based property and casualty subsidiary and Neon, AFG’s London-based Lloyd’s syndicate.

ITEM 2

AFG and its subsidiaries are involved in litigation from time to time, generally arising in the ordinary course of business. This litigation may include, but is not limited to, general commercial disputes, lawsuits brought by policyholders, employment matters, reinsurance collection matters and actions challenging certain business practices of insurance subsidiaries. Except for the following, management believes that none of the litigation meets the threshold for disclosure under this Item.

AFG’s insurance company subsidiaries and its 100%-owned subsidiary, American Premier Underwriters (including its subsidiaries, “American Premier”), are parties to litigation and receive claims alleging injuries and damages from asbestos, environmental and other substances and workplace hazards and have established loss accruals for such potential liabilities. None of such litigation or claims is individually material to AFG; however, the ultimate loss for these claims may vary materially from amounts currently recorded as the conditions surrounding resolution of these claims continue to change.

American Premier is a party or named as a potentially responsible party in a number of proceedings and claims by regulatory agencies and private parties under various environmental protection laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, seeking to impose responsibility on American Premier for hazardous waste or discharge remediation costs at certain railroad sites formerly owned by its predecessor, Penn Central Transportation Company (“PCTC”), and at certain other sites where hazardous waste or discharge allegedly generated by PCTC’s railroad operations and American Premier’s former manufacturing operations is present. It is difficult to estimate American Premier’s liability for remediation costs at these sites for a number of reasons, including the number and financial resources of other potentially responsible parties involved at a given site, the varying availability of evidence by which to allocate responsibility among such parties, the wide range of costs for possible remediation alternatives, changing technology and the period of time over which these matters develop. Nevertheless, American Premier believes that its accruals for potential environmental liabilities are adequate to cover the probable amount of such liabilities, based on American Premier’s estimates of remediation costs and related expenses and its estimates of the portions of such costs that will be borne by other parties. Such estimates are based on information currently available to American Premier and are subject to future change as additional information becomes available.

PART II

ITEM 5

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

ITEM 6

The following table sets forth certain data for the periods indicated (dollars in millions, except per share data).

Following is a discussion and analysis of the financial statements and other statistical data that management believes will enhance the understanding of AFG’s financial condition and results of operations. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the financial statements beginning on page F-1.

AFG is organized as a holding company with almost all of its operations being conducted by subsidiaries. AFG, however, has continuing cash needs for administrative expenses, the payment of principal and interest on borrowings, shareholder dividends, and taxes. Therefore, certain analyses are most meaningfully presented on a parent only basis while others are best done on a total enterprise basis. In addition, because most of its businesses are financial in nature, AFG does not prepare its consolidated financial statements using a current-noncurrent format. Consequently, certain traditional ratios and financial analysis tests are not meaningful.

Through the operations of its subsidiaries, AFG is engaged primarily in property and casualty insurance, focusing on specialized commercial products for businesses, and in the sale of fixed and fixed-indexed annuities in the retail, financial institutions and education markets.

 

The ratio of debt to total capital is a non-GAAP measure that management believes is useful for investors, analysts and independent ratings agencies to evaluate AFG’s financial strength and liquidity and to provide insight into how AFG finances its operations. In addition, maintaining a ratio of debt, excluding subordinated debt and debt secured by real estate (if any), to total capital of 35% or lower is a financial covenant in AFG’s bank credit facility. The ratio is calculated by dividing the principal amount of AFG’s long-term debt by its total capital, which includes long-term debt, noncontrolling interests and shareholders’ equity (excluding unrealized gains (losses) on fixed maturity investments).

Net cash used in investing activities was $2.98 billion in 2016 compared to $4.57 billion in 2015, a decrease of $1.59 billion. The $151 million decrease in net cash flows from annuity policyholders in 2016 as compared to 2015 decreased the amount of cash available for investment in 2016 compared to 2015. In addition, AFG’s cash on hand increased by $887 million during 2016, primarily in the property and casualty and annuity segments reflecting the timing of investing available cash in those segments. Net investment activity in the managed investment entities was a $364 million use of cash in 2016 compared to a $675 million use of cash in 2015, accounting for a $311 million decrease in net cash used in investing activities in 2016 compared to 2015.