DOCSLIB.ORG

Designation and De-Designation of Systemically Important Financial Institutions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Designation and De-Designation of Systemically Important Financial Institutions 470 REVIEW OF BANKING & FINANCIAL LAW VOL. 38 II. Designation and De-designation of Systemically Important Financial Institutions A. Introduction After the financial crisis of 2008, Congress responded with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd- Frank).1 Dodd-Frank revamped the regulation of the financial sector in the United States in a number of ways.2 One of the most important changes was the creation of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC).3 FSOC is an interagency group made up of the heads of the U.S. financial regulators and is led by the Secretary of the Treasury (Treasury Secretary).4 FSOC’s purpose is to coordinate the regulators’ efforts in promoting the stability of the financial system.5 The exis- tence of FSOC itself has been controversial, but one of its most controversial powers has been its ability to designate nonbanking institutions as systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) and subject them to more stringent prudential regulation under the oversight of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Fed).6 Proponents of this power argue that it is necessary in order to regulate the risks posed by “shadow banking,” which consists of banking activities carried out by entities that do not come under federal regulation.7 Opponents argue that this is unnecessary and over burdensome to the nonbank institutions that are labeled as SIFIs.8 1 Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (codified as amended in scat- tered sections of the U.S. Code); Jeremy C. Kress, The Last SIFI: The Unwise and Illegal Deregulation of Prudential Financial, 71 STAN. L. REV. ONLINE 171, 172 (2018). 2 George W. Madison et al., FSOC Designation Treasury Report: A Funda- mental Shift, DAILY BLOOMBERG BNA: DAILY REP. FOR EXECUTIVES (Jan. 18, 2018). 3 Id. 4 Id. (stating the composition of FSOC). 5 Id. 6 Id. (“[I]t is important to note that numerous critics—including many members of Congress—have pushed for a wholesale repeal of the FSOC designation authority.”). 7 Id. (discussing how the formation of FSOC was in part a response to the growing concern over shadow banking). 8 Kress, supra note 1, at 173 (discussing the view that SIFI designation creates unnecessary regulation at a high cost). 2018-2019 DEVELOPMENTS IN BANKING LAW 471 In 2013 and 2014, FSOC designated four companies as SIFIs: Prudential Financial, Inc. (Prudential); American International Group (AIG); General Electric Capital Corporation (GE Capital); MetLife, Inc. (MetLife).9 Since then all four have shed their SIFI labels.10 The de-designation of Prudential came last, and came after the Department of the Treasury (Treasury Department) indicated they would change the process for making SIFI designations.11 This article provides an overview of the SIFI designation and de-designation decisions and how the Treasury Department under the Trump Administration has changed the designation. Part B overviews the legal framework for SIFI designations put in place by Dodd-Frank after the financial crisis of 2008. Part C examines the initial process FSOC used to determine which, if any, nonbank financial institutions should be designated SIFIs. Part D describes FSOC’s initial designa- tions of AIG, GE Capital, MetLife, and Prudential. Part E discusses the initial de-designations of AIG and GE Capital. Part F looks at the changes in FSOC’s approach to SIFI designations during the Trump Administration, and the resulting de-designations of MetLife and Prudential. Part G summarizes some of the implications these changes will have on the future of SIFI designations. B. Relevant Dodd-Frank Provisions Under Dodd-Frank, Congress directed FSOC to designate a nonbank financial institution a SIFI if it determined that “financial distress at the U.S. nonbank financial company, or the nature, scope, size, scale, concentration, interconnectedness, or mix of the activities of the U.S. nonbank financial company, could pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States.”12 For FSOC to designate a nonbank entity a SIFI, two-thirds of the members of FSOC—including the Treasury Secretary—must vote in favor of the designation.13 If 9 Id. (listing the firms that FSOC designated as SIFIs). 10 Id. at 174–75 (stating that all four companies have since had their SIFI designations removed). 11 Id. at 174 (“Trump selected nominees drawn from the financial sector and conservative legal circles, which had long criticized nonbank SIFI designations as burdensome and inequitable.”) 12 12 U.S.C. § 5323(a)(1) (2012). 13 Id. (“The Council, on a nondelegable basis and by a vote of not fewer than 2/3 of the voting members then serving, including an affirmative vote by the 472 REVIEW OF BANKING & FINANCIAL LAW VOL. 38 FSOC designates a nonbank entity as a SIFI then the nonbank entity will be placed under Fed regulation.14 Dodd-Frank requires the Fed to promulgate prudential standards for these entities that, “are more stringent than the standards and requirements applicable to nonbank financial companies and bank holding companies,” that are not super- vised by the Fed.15 Among others, these higher standards include larger capital and liquidity requirements, stricter leverage limits, and increased risk management.16 Entities that FSOC is considering desig- nating a SIFI can appeal the designation through a hearing with FSOC.17 If FSOC denies the appeal, then the entity can bring an action to prevent the designation in a United States district court.18 FSOC can also de-designate a nonbank SIFI and remove Fed supervision through a two-thirds vote, including the Treasury Secretary.19 C. FSOC’s Original Process After FSOC was established, it set out to determine how it would decide which, if any, nonbank entities should be designated SIFIs.20 FSOC developed a three-step process.21 The first step applied quantitative thresholds to nonbank entities in order to narrow the pool Chairperson, may determine that a U.S. nonbank financial company shall be supervised by the Board of Governors . .”); see Madison et al., supra note 2. 14 12 U.S.C. § 5365(a)(1) (2010) (“[T]the Board of Governors shall, on its own or pursuant to recommendations by the Council under section 5325 of this title, establish prudential standards for nonbank financial companies supervised by the Board of Governors and bank holding companies with total consolidated assets equal to or greater than $250,000,000,000 . .”). 15 Id. § 5365(a)(1)(A). 16 Id. § 5365(b)(1)(A). 17 Id. § 5323(e)(2) (“[T]he nonbank financial company may request, in writing, an opportunity for a written or oral hearing before the Council to contest the proposed determination.”). 18 Id. § 5323(h). 19 Id. § 5323(d)(2). 20 Kress, supra note 1, at 173 (“At least initially, the FSOC embraced its mission to identify nonbank SIFIs. The Council promulgated, through notice- and-comment rulemaking, formal procedures for evaluating a nonbank’s systemic importance.”). 21 Authority to Require Supervision and Regulation of Certain Nonbank Financial Companies, 77 Fed. Reg. 21,637, 21,641–46 (Apr. 11, 2012) (to be codified at 12 C.F.R. pt. 1320) (describing the three-stage process for SIFI designations developed by FSOC). 2018-2019 DEVELOPMENTS IN BANKING LAW 473 of possible designees.22 If an entity surpassed the consolidated assets threshold, which was $50, billion and any one of the additional thresholds, then the entity would be considered under step two.23 There are six thresholds, including the consolidated assets threshold.24 If a firm moves on to stage two, FSOC will conduct a “robust analysis of the potential threat that each of those nonbank financial companies could pose to U.S. financial stability.”25 Firms are not notified if they are under review in stage two, and FSOC conducts the stage two review primarily through information obtained by the firm’s primary regulator and information that is publicly available.26 Evalua- tion of this information will vary from company to company and from industry to industry, but it will use six basic characteristics as a guide: “(i) size, (ii) interconnectedness; (iii) substitutability, (iv) leverage, (v) liquidity risk and maturity mismatch, and (vi) existing regulatory scru- tiny.”27 Size, interconnectedness, and substitutability are used to assess the firm’s potential “distress to the broader economy.”28 Leverage, liquidity risk and maturity mismatch, and existing regulatory scrutiny are used to assess to how likely it is a firm will experience financial distress.29 After stage two, if FSOC believes it may be necessary to designate a nonbank entity as a SIFI, then the nonbank entity moves to 22 Id. at 21641–42 (explaining that the purpose of stage-one is to “narrow the universe” of possible designees by applying “uniform quantitative thresholds”). 23 Id. at 21642 (stating that if an entity exceeds the requisite thresholds in stage-one then they will move on to consideration under stage-two); Financial Stability Oversight Council: Nonbank Designations—FAQs, U.S. DEP’T TREASURY, https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/designations/ Pages/ nonbank-faq.aspx [https://perma.cc/4HNA-NKP7] (last visited May 30, 2019). 24 77 Fed. Reg. at 21,643 (identifying the other five thresholds as (i) $30 billion in gross notional credit default swaps outstanding; (ii) $3.5 billion of derivative liabilities; (iii) $20 billion in total debt outstanding; (iv) fifteen-to- one leverage ratio of total consolidated assets to total equity; and (v) ten percent short-term debt ratio of total debt outstanding with a maturity of less than twelve months to total consolidated assets). 25 Id. at 21645. 26 Id. (describing the information that is used to conduct the review process in stage two).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pension Risk Strategy Summit Supplement
    Advertising Supplement PENSION RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES Understanding All the Derisking Possibilities PS001_PI_20170612.pdf RunDate: 06/12/17 pi Pension Risk Strategies supp 8 x 10.875 Color: 4?C Advertising Supplement SPONSORS Fidelity Institutional Asset Management 900 Salem Street Smitheld, RI 02917 Daniel Tremblay Senior Vice President and Director of Institutional Fixed Income Solutions 603.791.6599 [email protected] www.institutional.delity.com MetLife 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 Asif Mohamed Director, U.S. Pensions 212.578.8624 [email protected] www.metlife.com/pensions NISA Investment Advisors, LLC 101 South Hanley Road, Suite 1700 St. Louis, MO 63105 Gregory J. Yess Managing Director, Client Services 314.721.1900 [email protected] www.nisa.com Prudential Retirement 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 Scott Gaul, FSA Senior Vice President and Head of Distribution, Pension Risk Transfer 860.534.4263 [email protected] www.pensionrisk.prudential.com Schroders 7 Bryant Park New York, NY 10018-3706 Jennifer Horne, CFA Head of U.S. Institutional Clients 212.641.3800 [email protected] www.schroders.com/us This special advertising supplement is not created, written or produced by the editors of Pensions & Investments and does not represent the views or opinions of the publication or its parent company, Crain Communications Inc. 2 Pension Risk Management Strategies PS002_PI_20170612.pdf RunDate: 06/12/17 pi Pension Risk Strategies supp 8 x 10.875 Color: 4?C Advertising Supplement CONTENTS 4 Taking a Journey Along the Derisking Spectrum Corporate plan sponsors wishing to mitigate pension risk have a myriad of possible strategies at their disposal 12 Underfunded? Taking the LDI Path to Full Funding Most plan sponsors looking to dial down funded status volatility turn to liability-driven investing.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum from the Division of Investment Management Regarding
    MEMORANDUM TO: Proposed Rule: Updated Disclosure Requirements and Summary Prospectus for Variable Annuity and Variable Life Insurance Contracts (Release No. IC-33286; File No. S7-23-18) FROM: Dan Chang Senior Counsel, Division of Investment Management RE: Meeting with Representatives of the Committee of Annuity Insurers DATE: May 31, 2019 On May 29, 2019, Sarah G. ten Siethoff (Associate Director, Division of Investment Management (“IM”)), Brian M. Johnson (Assistant Director, IM); William J. Kotapish (Assistant Director, IM); Naseem Nixon (Senior Special Counsel, IM), Michael Kosoff (Senior Special Counsel, IM), Keith Carpenter (Senior Special Counsel, IM), Harry Eisenstein (Senior Special Counsel, IM), Michael Pawluk (Senior Special Counsel, IM), Sumeera Younis (Branch Chief, IM), Dan Chang (Senior Counsel, IM), Amy Miller (Senior Counsel, IM), Sonny Oh (Senior Counsel, IM), Alberto H. Zapata (Senior Counsel, IM), Patrick F. Scott (Senior Counsel, IM), DeCarlo McLaren (Special Counsel, IM), Daniel Deli (Financial Economist, Division of Economic and Risk Analysis (“DERA”)), Walter Hamscher (Senior IT Program Manager, DERA), and PJ Hamidi (Senior Counsel, DERA) met with the following representatives from the Committee of Annuity Insurers: Shane Daly, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, AXA Equitable Scott Durocher, Assistant Vice President & Senior Counsel, Lincoln Financial Jamie Castro, Managing Counsel, Nationwide Financial Bill Evers, Vice President & Chief Counsel, Prudential Financial Jordan Thomsen, Vice President & Corporate Counsel, Prudential Financial Steve Roth, Partner, Eversheds Sutherland Dodie Kent, Partner, Eversheds Sutherland Ron Coenen, Associate, Eversheds Sutherland Among other things, the participants discussed the SEC’s proposal relating to updated disclosure requirements and a summary prospectus for variable annuity and variable life insurance contracts.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Date of report (Date of earliest event reported): March 8, 2006 THE ALLSTATE CORPORATION (Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Charter) Delaware 1-11840 36-3871531 (State or other (Commission (IRS Employer jurisdiction of File Number) Identification No.) organization) 2775 Sanders Road Northbrook, Illinois 60062 (Address of Principal Executive Offices) Zip Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (847) 402-5000 Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions: o Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) o Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) o Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) Section 8 – Other Events Item 8.01. Other Events. On March 8, 2006, the Registrant issued a press release announcing that it and its subsidiaries Allstate Life Insurance Company (“ALIC”) and Allstate Life Insurance Company of New York (“ALNY”) had entered into a definitive agreement (“Agreement”) with Prudential Financial, Inc. and its subsidiary The Prudential Insurance Company of America (collectively “Prudential”) for the sale pursuant to a combination of coinsurance and modified coinsurance reinsurance of substantially all of its variable annuity business.
    [Show full text]
  • Demutualization Details
    Demutualization Details 1. American Mutual Life – AmerUs- Indianapolis Life Insurance Company - Central Life Assurance - Central Life Assurance merged with American Mutual in 1994. American Mutual Life was renamed AmerUs Life Insurance Company in 1995. On September 20, 2000, it demutualized to become AmerUs Group. In 2001, the company merged with Indianapolis Life, which had also undergone a demutualization. Approximately 300,000 policyholders and heirs became entitled to receive $452 million in AmerUs Group common stock and $340 million in cash and policy credits. Distribution began on July 31, 2001. Eligible policyholders received a fixed component of 20 AmerUS common shares, as well as a variable component based on policy value. Those who elected to receive cash were compensate $26 per share entitlement. In the first year after the initial public offering, the price of an AmerUS common share increased 99%. The current value of AmerUS Group stock is approximately $45 per share. 2. Anthem Insurance - On July 31, 2002 Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc. completed its conversion from a mutual insurance company to a stock company, and became a wholly owned subsidiary of Anthem, Inc. Eligible policyholders and heirs became entitled to approximately 48 million shares of Anthem, Inc. common stock and cash totaling $2.06 billion. Compensation consisted of a fixed component of 21 Anthem common shares, as well as a variable component based on policy value. The shares were offered to the public at $36. In the first year after the initial public offering, the price of an Anthem common share increased 54%. 3. Equitable Life – Axa - In 1992 the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States demutualized and a new parent holding company, the Equitable Companies, was listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
    [Show full text]
  • Prudential Financial, Inc. Group / NAIC Code
    CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE 2014 GOVERNING BOARD DIVERSITY SURVEY Report Type: Group Group / NAIC Code: 304 Group / Company Name: Prudential Financial, Inc. 1. Please provide the name of the public, U.S. - based Board of Directors that represents the ultimate controlling party of the insurance group: Prudential Financial, Inc. 2. How many people: a) Serve on this Board of Directors? 12 b) Of those in "a)", how many identify as: i. Women 3 ii. Men 9 c) Of those in "a)", how many: i. Are Disabled Veterans? 0 ii. Publicly Identify as LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, 0 Bisexual, and / or Transgender)? d) Of those in "a)", how many identify as: i. American Indian? 0 v. Multi-Ethnic? 0 ii. African American? 1 vi. Caucasian? 9 iii. Asian Pacific Islander? 1 vii. Other? 0 iv. Hispanic / Latino? 1 3. Of the board members identified in "b) i; c) i-ii, and d) i-v", how many: a) Currently serve as an officer of the corporation? 0 b) List of all positions currently held by these board members (i.e. chair, vice chair, secretary). c) Currently serve as an chair of a board committee? 3 d) List of all committees currently chaired by these board members (i.e. nomination committee, governance committee). Finance Committee - Christine A. Poon Governance Committee - Constance J. Horner Investment Committee - Thomas J. Baltimore 2014 Governing Board Survey | 1 Governing Board Diversity Survey 4. Do governing board members serve under term limits? NO If yes, description of the term limits (including the number of years per term and if there is a maximum number of terms one can serve on the board).
    [Show full text]
  • Prudential Financial to Acquire Allstate Financial's
    For Immediate Release Contact: Bob DeFillippo March 8, 2006 (973) 802-4149 PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL TO ACQUIRE ALLSTATE FINANCIAL’S VARIABLE ANNUITY BUSINESS Transaction Will Make Prudential the Third Largest Provider of Advisor-Sold* Variable Annuity Products NEWARK, N.J. – Prudential Financial, Inc. (NYSE: PRU) today announced it has signed an agreement to acquire Allstate Financial’s variable annuity business through a reinsurance transaction. Prudential’s initial investment in the business, reflecting total consideration to Allstate, related taxes, and capital requirements, is expected to be approximately $560 million. The payment to Allstate is subject to adjustment for market movements between signing and closing. Over the course of a transition period of up to 24 months from closing, Prudential will assume the administration of Allstate Financial’s in-force variable annuities, with account values of approximately $16 billion as of December 31, 2005, moving Prudential’s position in the advisor-sold variable annuity marketplace from fifth to third as measured by assets under administration and management and from seventh to fourth as measured by sales (Source: VARDS as of 12/31/05). As part of the transaction, Prudential will be granted exclusive distribution rights to sell variable annuity products through Allstate’s proprietary distribution force of approximately 13,700 independent contractors and financial professionals. The transaction will also enable Prudential to build and enhance its relationships with Allstate’s non-proprietary channel including a number of major, national wirehouses and regional securities firms, the most productive of which is Morgan Stanley with whom Allstate has a 21-year variable annuity sales relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • American International Group, Inc. (Exact Name of Registrant As Specified in Its Charter)
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 ________________ FORM 10-Q QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2015 Commission File Number 1-8787 American International Group, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 13-2592361 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 175 Water Street, New York, New York 10038 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (212) 770-7000 ________________ 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 No 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 No 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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Insurance Fact Book
    2019 Insurance Fact Book TO THE READER Imagine a world without insurance. Some might say, “So what?” or “Yes to that!” when reading the sentence above. And that’s understandable, given that often the best experience one can have with insurance is not to receive the benefits of the product at all, after a disaster or other loss. And others—who already have some understanding or even appreciation for insurance—might say it provides protection against financial aspects of a premature death, injury, loss of property, loss of earning power, legal liability or other unexpected expenses. All that is true. We are the financial first responders. But there is so much more. Insurance drives economic growth. It provides stability against risks. It encourages resilience. Recent disasters have demonstrated the vital role the industry plays in recovery—and that without insurance, the impact on individuals, businesses and communities can be devastating. As insurers, we know that even with all that we protect now, the coverage gap is still too big. We want to close that gap. That desire is reflected in changes to this year’s Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.)Insurance Fact Book. We have added new information on coastal storm surge risk and hail as well as reinsurance and the growing problem of marijuana and impaired driving. We have updated the section on litigiousness to include tort costs and compensation by state, and assignment of benefits litigation, a growing problem in Florida. As always, the book provides valuable information on: • World and U.S. catastrophes • Property/casualty and life/health insurance results and investments • Personal expenditures on auto and homeowners insurance • Major types of insurance losses, including vehicle accidents, homeowners claims, crime and workplace accidents • State auto insurance laws The I.I.I.
    [Show full text]
  • Basis of the Financial Stability Oversight Council's Final
    September 19, 2013 Basis for the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s Final Determination Regarding Prudential Financial, Inc. Introduction Pursuant to section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), the Financial Stability Oversight Council (Council) has made a final determination that material financial distress at Prudential Financial, Inc. (Prudential) could pose a threat to U.S. financial stability and that Prudential should be subject to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board of Governors) and enhanced prudential standards. In reaching this determination, the Council carefully considered a broad range of information in light of the statutory factors set forth in section 113(a)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act, both separately and in conjunction with each other. The Council has considered information available through existing public and regulatory sources, as well as information provided by Prudential. The Council also consulted with certain regulators of Prudential or its insurance subsidiaries. On June 3, 2013, the Council made a proposed determination under section 113 of the Dodd- Frank Act that material financial distress at Prudential could pose a threat to U.S. financial stability and that Prudential should be subject to Board of Governors supervision and enhanced prudential standards. The Council provided Prudential with an explanation of the basis for the Council’s proposed determination and informed the company of its right to request a hearing before the Council to contest the proposed determination. On July 2, 2013, Prudential requested a written and an oral hearing before the Council. Prudential subsequently submitted written hearing materials to the Council, and the Council held an oral hearing on July 23, 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • SUN LIFE FINANCIAL INC. Being a Sustainable Company Is Essential to Our Overall Business Success
    At Sun Life, we believe that being accountable for the impact of our operations on the environment is one part of building sustainable, healthier communities for life. The adoption of “Notice and Access” to deliver this circular to our shareholders has resulted in signifcant cost savings as well as the following environmental savings: 535 35 lbs 249,750 16,720 lbs 46,050 lbs 249 mil. BTUs Trees water gallons of solid waste greenhouse of total pollutants water gases energy This circular is printed on FSC® certifed paper. The fbre used in the manufacture of the paper stock comes from well-managed forests and controlled sources. The greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production, distribution and paper lifecycle of this circular have been calculated and offset by Carbonzero. 2020 SUN LIFE FINANCIAL INC. Being a sustainable company is essential to our overall business success. Learn more at sunlife.com/sustainability 1 York Street, Toronto Ontario Canada M5J 0B6 NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING sunlife.com OF COMMON SHAREHOLDERS MIC-01-2020 May 5, 2020 MANAGEMENT INFORMATION CIRCULAR M20-009_MIC_Covers_E_2020.indd All Pages 2020-03-10 10:25 AM Contents Letter to shareholders .................................................................................................1 Notice of our 2020 annual meeting ............................................................................2 Management Information Circular ..............................................................................3 Delivery of meeting materials ...........................................................................................3
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES SECURITIES and EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-Q (Mark One) QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010 OR 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 001-14905 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 47-0813844 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) incorporation or organization) 3555 Farnam Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68131 (Address of principal executive office) (Zip Code) (402) 346-1400 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report) 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 and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes No 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 No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company.
    [Show full text]
  • Industry Rankings
    11 INDUSTRY RANKINGS The U.S. life insurance industry in 2018 is made up of 773 companies with sales and operations across the country. Many of these companies are stand-alone entities, with no life insurer affiliate or subsidiary operating in the United States. Others are organized into groups or fleets of affiliates and subsidiaries. This chapter presents rankings of the 25 largest life insurance groups (counting stand-alone companies as a group of one) based on assets, premiums and annuity considerations, and life insurance coverage. Table 11.1 Largest Life Insurers, by Total Assets, 2018 (thousands) Prudential Financial $577,911,428 MetLife, Inc. 409,620,949 New York Life 324,780,964 TIAA-CREF 316,037,954 American International Group 284,995,635 Northwestern Mutual 272,266,151 Lincoln Financial 255,642,921 Massachusetts Mutual 254,871,959 Manulife Financial 247,572,347 Jackson National 236,988,672 Transamerica Corporation 201,204,255 AXA Financial 194,993,598 Voya Financial 189,367,712 Principal Financial 185,009,858 Brighthouse Holdings Group 179,295,297 Nationwide 170,472,992 Allianz 145,153,116 Pacific Life 135,579,228 Hopmeadow Holdings Group 117,913,970 Ameriprise Financial 104,112,139 Thrivent Financial For Lutherans 94,229,633 Sammons Financial 85,245,189 Athene Group 83,783,502 State Farm 78,026,036 Guardian 75,591,936 Source: ACLI tabulations of National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) data, used by permission. Notes: NAIC does not endorse any analysis or conclusions based on use of its data. Group totals represent a collection of life insurers based on organizational structure.
    [Show full text]