2017 Vermont Report

Vermont Eyes Agency Captives

An agricultural consortium is one group taking a serious look at forming an agency captive in Vermont.
By: | April 7, 2017 • 6 min read

Agency captives have become increasingly popular in recent years, with more and more large associations with hundreds or even thousands of members looking to insure themselves.

Advertisement




Vermont, the leading domestic captive domicile, is currently working on legislation to allow them and could see it approved in a month.

An agency captive is essentially a reinsurance company owned by an insurance agency or brokerage that works through an agreement with a fronting carrier, whereby the captive receives a share of all premiums written and retains any investment income, but in return it has to pay a portion of the claims.

Most agency captives write business owner policy, package, general liability, errors and omissions, workers’ compensation and auto liability.

The concept of an agency captive or producer-owned reinsurance company (PORC) is nothing new; they have been around for several years, but few domiciles were willing to register them after they came under scrutiny from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other regulators.

The problem was that under the PORC structure, producers could recommend a particular policy to a client because it generated an underwriting profit for its company rather than being the most suitable policy for that client.

David Provost. deputy commissioner, Captive Insurance Division, Vermont

It also allowed the producer to cherry-pick the best risks for its own PORC and offload the poorer risks to other carriers, as well as the model being used in fraudulent schemes.

“That’s why we will have a clear preference for an agency/producer that is working with program business and/or is owned or affiliated with the ultimate buyers, such as an association or other homogenous group of risks,” said David Provost, deputy commissioner for Vermont’s Captive Insurance Division, who tabled a proposal to register agency captives in a captive bill in January.

“Our proposal limits this to commercial insurance business — we are not likely to see heterogeneous risk being placed.”

Vermont Launch

The bill has already received the green light from the House Committee on Commerce and Economic Development, but it is still awaiting approval for a tax credit included within the bill from the Ways and Means Committee. Provost, for one, doesn’t anticipate any problems.

“I don’t anticipate that we’ll have any trouble getting it passed before the legislative session ends in May.” — David Provost. deputy commissioner, Captive Insurance Division, Vermont

“This year we decided to put forward a proposal to make it law in order to open the door to potential business,” he said.

“I don’t anticipate that we’ll have any trouble getting it passed before the legislative session ends in May.”

Similar to a group captive, instead of being owned by the group members, it is owned by an insurance agency such as an MGA or a program administrator, and the group business is placed with an insurer backed up by the captive as a reinsurance company, said Provost.

Advertisement




“That is exactly the kind of business that we are looking for — a group program with a captive to share and participate in the risk, and potentially the profits, as well as sharing best practices and other risk mitigation strategies,” he said.

“This should achieve a virtuous cycle where the group drives down costs, in turn generating profits which can then be returned to its members in the form of either a dividend or put back into cost control.”

“Working closely with our members we are able to better understand and mitigate against the risk, which ultimately helps control claims costs.” — Jan Klodowski, vice president at Agri-Services Agency

Provost said that, if granted approval, an agency captive would also be regulated in the same way as a group captive; required to provide an annual statement, actuarial review and audited financials, as well as undergoing a thorough review of its forms and contracts to ensure the policy is fit for purpose.

“The key to an agency captive is to ensure that there is full disclosure of all business placed to the members that are paying the premiums, and that they get the full benefit of the captive,” he said.
“In the case of the group captive, if it is generating a profit it is important that this is applied to the captive’s risk management strategy to drive down costs.”

Provost said that since announcing the proposal, Vermont started receiving an uptick in interest in agency captives.

“I don’t expect it will be a flood of applications, but we are probably going to see one or two a year.”

Provost added that an agency captive was perfect for large associations with difficult to place risks such as agricultural risks.

“It’s a lot easier to place that kind of risk if you have 500 or 1,000 policyholders than one or two,” he said.

“If you have got volume and a premium and it can be turned into something that is mutually beneficial and profitable for both the members and the insurer.”

Association Application

Agri-Services Agency (ASA), a wholly owned subsidiary of Dairy Farmers of America, formed more than 30 years ago to provide affordable insurance programs to its thousands of members and affiliated agricultural producers before being changed to a sponsored cell captive, similar to the agency captive model.

ASA started the Agrisurance Inc. captive in Vermont to provide consistent workers’ compensation for agricultural production companies that were struggling to secure coverage and was quickly extended to supporting businesses.

It’s considering moving to the agency captive model if and when Vermont legislators approve the structure.

Jan Klodowski, vice president, Agri-Services Agency

“We knew that we had to reach a broad group of people and we wanted to be able to stabilize the pricing as well as have a consistent workers’ compensation program available for agricultural production and agricultural types of business,” said Jan Klodowski, vice president at Agri-Services Agency.

“To our members our program looks like a traditional insured’s, but we don’t have the same fluctuation in pricing even though we follow the state recommendations.

“And because we have that pricing flexibility we have been able to work with our members more effectively in investing the money back into developing safety programs.”

Klodowski said that at the time of setting up the captive, Dairy Farmers of America opted for a model that it could understand and favorably predict where its losses were going to be and price accordingly.

During the good years, any profits made were plowed back into value-added services for the program and into expanding the captive’s loss control team of agricultural experts, she added.

Advertisement




The captive, which had an underwriting combined ratio of 87 percent at the end of 2016, also has a claims manager and analyst onsite, said Klodowski. “When we have catastrophic losses as a result of serious accidents, we work closely with the employer and employee concerned to provide them with access to the best medical care.”

“Working closely with our members we are able to better understand and mitigate against the risk, which ultimately helps control claims costs.”

Gary Osborne, president of USA Risk Group, whose company has managed many agency captives and who advocated for agency captives for Vermont more than 10 years ago, said that from his experience, the most successful ones were individual agencies with a niche that allows for customization and specialized cover that forms a market.

“Specialized programs should be the target,” he said. &

__________________________________________________

2017 Vermont Report

A Perfect Fit

Life Time Fitness finds a captive home in Vermont.

Eight Questions for Dan Towle  

Risk & Insurance® speaks with Dan Towle as he departs from his long tenure as director of financial services for the State of Vermont.

 

 

Alex Wright is a U.K.-based business journalist, who previously was deputy business editor at The Royal Gazette in Bermuda. You can reach him at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Exclusive | Hank Greenberg on China Trade, Starr’s Rapid Growth and 100th, Spitzer, Schneiderman and More

In a robust and frank conversation, the insurance legend provides unique insights into global trade, his past battles and what the future holds for the industry and his company.
By: | October 12, 2018 • 12 min read

In 1960, Maurice “Hank” Greenberg was hired as a vice president of C.V. Starr & Co. At age 35, he had already accomplished a great deal.

He served his country as part of the Allied Forces that stormed the beaches at Normandy and liberated the Nazi death camps. He fought again during the Korean War, earning a Bronze Star. He held a law degree from New York Law School.

Advertisement




Now he was ready to make his mark on the business world.

Even C.V. Starr himself — who hired Mr. Greenberg and later hand-picked him as the successor to the company he founded in Shanghai in 1919 — could not have imagined what a mark it would be.

Mr. Greenberg began to build AIG as a Starr subsidiary, then in 1969, he took it public. The company would, at its peak, achieve a market cap of some $180 billion and cement its place as the largest insurance and financial services company in history.

This month, Mr. Greenberg travels to China to celebrate the 100th anniversary of C.V. Starr & Co. That visit occurs at a prickly time in U.S.-Sino relations, as the Trump administration levies tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars in Chinese goods and China retaliates.

In September, Risk & Insurance® sat down with Mr. Greenberg in his Park Avenue office to hear his thoughts on the centennial of C.V. Starr, the dynamics of U.S. trade relationships with China and the future of the U.S. insurance industry as it faces the challenges of technology development and talent recruitment and retention, among many others. What follows is an edited transcript of that discussion.


R&I: One hundred years is quite an impressive milestone for any company. Celebrating the anniversary in China signifies the importance and longevity of that relationship. Can you tell us more about C.V. Starr’s history with China?

Hank Greenberg: We have a long history in China. I first went there in 1975. There was little there, but I had business throughout Asia, and I stopped there all the time. I’d stop there a couple of times a year and build relationships.

When I first started visiting China, there was only one state-owned insurance company there, PICC (the People’s Insurance Company of China); it was tiny at the time. We helped them to grow.

I also received the first foreign life insurance license in China, for AIA (The American International Assurance Co.). To date, there has been no other foreign life insurance company in China. It took me 20 years of hard work to get that license.

We also introduced an agency system in China. They had none. Their life company employees would get a salary whether they sold something or not. With the agency system of course you get paid a commission if you sell something. Once that agency system was installed, it went on to create more than a million jobs.

R&I: So Starr’s success has meant success for the Chinese insurance industry as well.

Hank Greenberg: That’s partly why we’re going to be celebrating that anniversary there next month. That celebration will occur alongside that of IBLAC (International Business Leaders’ Advisory Council), an international business advisory group that was put together when Zhu Rongji was the mayor of Shanghai [Zhu is since retired from public life]. He asked me to start that to attract foreign companies to invest in Shanghai.

“It turns out that it is harder [for China] to change, because they have one leader. My guess is that we’ll work it out sooner or later. Trump and Xi have to meet. That will result in some agreement that will get to them and they will have to finish the rest of the negotiations. I believe that will happen.” — Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, chairman and CEO, C.V. Starr & Co. Inc.

Shanghai and China in general were just coming out of the doldrums then; there was a lack of foreign investment. Zhu asked me to chair IBLAC and to help get it started, which I did. I served as chairman of that group for a couple of terms. I am still a part of that board, and it will be celebrating its 30th anniversary along with our 100th anniversary.

Advertisement




We have a good relationship with China, and we’re candid as you can tell from the op-ed I published in the Wall Street Journal. I’m told that my op-ed was received quite well in China, by both Chinese companies and foreign companies doing business there.

On August 29, Mr. Greenberg published an opinion piece in the WSJ reminding Chinese leaders of the productive history of U.S.-Sino relations and suggesting that Chinese leaders take pragmatic steps to ease trade tensions with the U.S.

R&I: What’s your outlook on current trade relations between the U.S. and China?

Hank Greenberg: As to the current environment, when you are in negotiations, every leader negotiates differently.

President Trump is negotiating based on his well-known approach. What’s different now is that President Xi (Jinping, General Secretary of the Communist Party of China) made himself the emperor. All the past presidents in China before the revolution had two terms. He’s there for life, which makes things much more difficult.

R&I: Sure does. You’ve got a one- or two-term president talking to somebody who can wait it out. It’s definitely unique.

Hank Greenberg: So, clearly a lot of change is going on in China. Some of it is good. But as I said in the op-ed, China needs to be treated like the second largest economy in the world, which it is. And it will be the number one economy in the world in not too many years. That means that you can’t use the same terms of trade that you did 25 or 30 years ago.

They want to have access to our market and other markets. Fine, but you have to have reciprocity, and they have not been very good at that.

R&I: What stands in the way of that happening?

Hank Greenberg: I think there are several substantial challenges. One, their structure makes it very difficult. They have a senior official, a regulator, who runs a division within the government for insurance. He keeps that job as long as he does what leadership wants him to do. He may not be sure what they want him to do.

For example, the president made a speech many months ago saying they are going to open up banking, insurance and a couple of additional sectors to foreign investment; nothing happened.

The reason was that the head of that division got changed. A new administrator came in who was not sure what the president wanted so he did nothing. Time went on and the international community said, “Wait a minute, you promised that you were going to do that and you didn’t do that.”

So the structure is such that it is very difficult. China can’t react as fast as it should. That will change, but it is going to take time.

R&I: That’s interesting, because during the financial crisis in 2008 there was talk that China, given their more centralized authority, could react more quickly, not less quickly.

Hank Greenberg: It turns out that it is harder to change, because they have one leader. My guess is that we’ll work it out sooner or later. Trump and Xi have to meet. That will result in some agreement that will get to them and they will have to finish the rest of the negotiations. I believe that will happen.

R&I: Obviously, you have a very unique perspective and experience in China. For American companies coming to China, what are some of the current challenges?

Advertisement




Hank Greenberg: Well, they very much want to do business in China. That’s due to the sheer size of the country, at 1.4 billion people. It’s a very big market and not just for insurance companies. It’s a whole range of companies that would like to have access to China as easily as Chinese companies have access to the United States. As I said previously, that has to be resolved.

It’s not going to be easy, because China has a history of not being treated well by other countries. The U.S. has been pretty good in that way. We haven’t taken advantage of China.

R&I: Your op-ed was very enlightening on that topic.

Hank Greenberg: President Xi wants to rebuild the “middle kingdom,” to what China was, a great country. Part of that was his takeover of the South China Sea rock islands during the Obama Administration; we did nothing. It’s a little late now to try and do something. They promised they would never militarize those islands. Then they did. That’s a real problem in Southern Asia. The other countries in that region are not happy about that.

R&I: One thing that has differentiated your company is that it is not a public company, and it is not a mutual company. We think you’re the only large insurance company with that structure at that scale. What advantages does that give you?

Hank Greenberg: Two things. First of all, we’re more than an insurance company. We have the traditional investment unit with the insurance company. Then we have a separate investment unit that we started, which is very successful. So we have a source of income that is diverse. We don’t have to underwrite business that is going to lose a lot of money. Not knowingly anyway.

R&I: And that’s because you are a private company?

Hank Greenberg: Yes. We attract a different type of person in a private company.

R&I: Do you think that enables you to react more quickly?

Hank Greenberg: Absolutely. When we left AIG there were three of us. Myself, Howie Smith and Ed Matthews. Howie used to run the internal financials and Ed Matthews was the investment guy coming out of Morgan Stanley when I was putting AIG together. We started with three people and now we have 3,500 and growing.

“I think technology can play a role in reducing operating expenses. In the last 70 years, you have seen the expense ratio of the industry rise, and I’m not sure the industry can afford a 35 percent expense ratio. But while technology can help, some additional fundamental changes will also be required.” — Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, chairman and CEO, C.V. Starr & Co. Inc.

R&I:  You being forced to leave AIG in 2005 really was an injustice, by the way. AIG wouldn’t have been in the position it was in 2008 if you had still been there.

Advertisement




Hank Greenberg: Absolutely not. We had all the right things in place. We met with the financial services division once a day every day to make sure they stuck to what they were supposed to do. Even Hank Paulson, the Secretary of Treasury, sat on the stand during my trial and said that if I’d been at the company, it would not have imploded the way it did.

R&I: And that fateful decision the AIG board made really affected the course of the country.

Hank Greenberg: So many people lost all of their net worth. The new management was taking on billions of dollars’ worth of risk with no collateral. They had decimated the internal risk management controls. And the government takeover of the company when the financial crisis blew up was grossly unfair.

From the time it went public, AIG’s value had increased from $300 million to $180 billion. Thanks to Eliot Spitzer, it’s now worth a fraction of that. His was a gross misuse of the Martin Act. It gives the Attorney General the power to investigate without probable cause and bring fraud charges without having to prove intent. Only in New York does the law grant the AG that much power.

R&I: It’s especially frustrating when you consider the quality of his own character, and the scandal he was involved in.

In early 2008, Spitzer was caught on a federal wiretap arranging a meeting with a prostitute at a Washington Hotel and resigned shortly thereafter.

Hank Greenberg: Yes. And it’s been successive. Look at Eric Schneiderman. He resigned earlier this year when it came out that he had abused several women. And this was after he came out so strongly against other men accused of the same thing. To me it demonstrates hypocrisy and abuse of power.

Schneiderman followed in Spitzer’s footsteps in leveraging the Martin Act against numerous corporations to generate multi-billion dollar settlements.

R&I: Starr, however, continues to thrive. You said you’re at 3,500 people and still growing. As you continue to expand, how do you deal with the challenge of attracting talent?

Hank Greenberg: We did something last week.

On September 16th, St. John’s University announced the largest gift in its 148-year history. The Starr Foundation donated $15 million to the school, establishing the Maurice R. Greenberg Leadership Initiative at St. John’s School of Risk Management, Insurance and Actuarial Science.

Hank Greenberg: We have recruited from St. John’s for many, many years. These are young people who want to be in the insurance industry. They don’t get into it by accident. They study to become proficient in this and we have recruited some very qualified individuals from that school. But we also recruit from many other universities. On the investment side, outside of the insurance industry, we also recruit from Wall Street.

R&I: We’re very interested in how you and other leaders in this industry view technology and how they’re going to use it.

Hank Greenberg: I think technology can play a role in reducing operating expenses. In the last 70 years, you have seen the expense ratio of the industry rise, and I’m not sure the industry can afford a 35 percent expense ratio. But while technology can help, some additional fundamental changes will also be required.

R&I: So as the pre-eminent leader of the insurance industry, what do you see in terms of where insurance is now an where it’s going?

Hank Greenberg: The country and the world will always need insurance. That doesn’t mean that what we have today is what we’re going to have 25 years from now.

How quickly the change comes and how far it will go will depend on individual companies and individual countries. Some will be more brave than others. But change will take place, there is no doubt about it.

Advertisement




More will go on in space, there is no question about that. We’re involved in it right now as an insurance company, and it will get broader.

One of the things you have to worry about is it’s now a nuclear world. It’s a more dangerous world. And again, we have to find some way to deal with that.

So, change is inevitable. You need people who can deal with change.

R&I:  Is there anything else, Mr. Greenberg, you want to comment on?

Hank Greenberg: I think I’ve covered it. &

The R&I Editorial Team can be reached at [email protected]