Life Insurers Testify Before Congress On Industry Response To Tragedy

September 30, 2001 at 08:00 PM
Share & Print

Life Insurers Testify Before Congress On Industry Response To Tragedy

By Steven Brostoff

Washington

Life insurers will be able to withstand the losses arising from the Sept. 11 terrorist tragedy, but there could be some solvency concerns in the future, says one top life insurance executive.

Sy Sternberg, chairman and president of New York Life, says that claims resulting from the terrorist attack could be in the range of $2 billion to $6 billion. While the amount of these claims is staggering, he says, it is a fraction of the $52 billion in death claims paid by the life insurance industry last year.

Thus, Sternberg says, the losses will not have a materially adverse impact on the industry.

Sternberg spoke at a House Financial Services Committee hearing on insurance issues arising out of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

But there are concerns, Sternberg says, since life insurers are major investors in corporate America.

"If the economy worsens, and the quality of assets deteriorates, life insurers could have problems on the asset side of the balance sheet," he says. "This could have long-term solvency implications, especially for weaker companies."

Robert H. Benmosche, chairman of MetLife, adds that in the wake of the attack, it is understandable that concerns are raised about the long-term financial well-being of the insurance industry.

He estimates MetLifes after tax losses related to the disaster at $250 million to $300 million. These losses, Benmosche says, will reduce earnings by 35 cents to 40 cents per share for the third quarter of 2001.

But while MetLifes exposure is substantial, he says, it is more than capable of sustaining the losses.

MetLife, Benmosche notes, has some $255 billion in total assets.

During the hearing, Sternberg and Benmosche described the efforts of their companies to settle claims quickly and efficiently.

Sternberg notes that rather than requiring a death certificate, New York Life is using airline passenger manifests and employer certification as evidence of death.

The company is also relying on certification from its own agents, who in many cases knew the victims and their families and can personally attest to the loss.

Benmosche says that using the same types of evidence, MetLife has already approved more than $53 million in payments to beneficiaries, with the first payment being authorized three days after the tragedy.

Sternberg says he is gratified by the way the life insurance industry responded to the crisis.

"This is a time for the insurance industry to be visible," he says. "This is a time for us to be charitable. And this is a time for us to stand as a pillar of stability in a none-too-stable world."

In written testimony, Matthew Mosher, group vice president with A.M. Best of Oldwick, N.J., says life reinsurers will bear the brunt of the mortality risk losses from the event, since they assume the lions share of such risk from primary companies.

Because of the amount of reinsurance protection in place, Mosher says, Bests analysis suggests that individual life insurance company exposures are manageable and in most cases are a fraction of their annual earnings capacity.

He adds that Best does not expect any problems with life insurers meeting their claims obligations.

Most of the hearing focused on issues affecting the property-casualty industry, in particular whether the federal government should establish a reinsurance pool to help pay for terrorism losses, with the government acting as the "reinsurer of last resort."

When asked about the issue, Sternberg, who is chairman of the American Council of Life Insurers, said he can see a need for such a facility among p-c insurers.

As for life insurers, he says, there have been preliminary discussions at ACLI, but life insurers have reached no conclusions at this time.

One senior member of the Committee, Rep. Richard Baker, R-La., says that creating such a facility could have regulatory implications.

He says he would be very reluctant to put the taxpayers on the hook for this type of loss without federal oversight.

At the same time as the hearing, the Center for the Study of Health System Change, Washington, D.C., held a press conference to release a new study showing that hospital spendingnot prescription drugsaccounted for the largest share of health care cost increases in 2000.

Overall, the study says, inpatient and outpatient hospital care accounted for 47% of the overall 7.2% increase in health care costs last year.

Paul B. Ginsburg, president of Center, cites erosion of managed care as a possible reason for the increase.

"Hospital spending is back with a vengeance, and the likely causes are the retreat from tightly managed care, which has increased demand for hospital services, and rising labor costs," he says.

Karen Ignagni, president of the American Associaiton of Health Plans, says the study reflects what managed care plans are experiencing across the country; namely, requests from providers for substantial increases in reimbursements.

"On the one hand, employers and consumers are relying on plans to provide affordable coverage, while on the other hand, providers are asking for sizable increases," Ignagni says.


Reproduced from National Underwriter Life & Health/Financial Services Edition, October 1, 2001. Copyright 2001 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.


Copyright 2001 by The National Underwriter Company. All rights reserved. Contact Webmaster

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Related Stories

Resource Center