Monday, October 15, 2018

No. 289: The Age 100 Problem—Our Personal Dilemma

In 2000 I received a letter out of the blue from an individual who owned two traditional participating whole life policies in different companies with a combined face amount of more than $5 million. He was in his 80s and in good health. He wanted his beneficiaries to receive the face amount after his death, but feared he would incur a large income tax obligation if he survived to the policies' terminal age of 100 and received the face amount himself. He wrote the companies asking how to avoid the potential income tax problem. He did not receive straight answers.

I wrote to the chief executive officers of 20 life insurance companies inquiring about the problem. I received responses from only three companies, and those three did not provide straight answers. I became convinced that life insurance companies did not want to discuss the subject. I wrote articles in the January 2001 and May 2001 issues of The Insurance Forum about what I called "the age 100 problem." Later, on my blog, I wrote five posts about the problem: No. 141 (February 1, 2016), No. 226 (July 20, 2017), No. 241 (November 17, 2017), No. 269 (June 6, 2018), and No. 277 (July 17, 2018).

Recent Developments
In June 2018 I conducted another survey by writing to the chief executive officers of 22 life insurance companies. I received responses from nine companies, but none responded to the heart of the survey. It involved a request from a hypothetical 93-year-old policyholder named Jones, who had purchased a $100,000 traditional participating whole life policy in 1975 at age 50. He had paid all annual premiums and had taken all dividends in cash. He had written to the company recently asking for assistance with a potential income tax problem should he survive to the policy's terminal age of 100. None of the responding companies provided information about the Jones policy. The survey and its results are described in No. 277 mentioned above.

Our Personal Policies
My wife and I have nine old traditional participating whole life policies issued many years ago by four life insurance companies. We have paid all premiums annually, have taken all dividends in cash, and, although we borrowed on the policies from time to time many years ago, we now have no policy loans outstanding. We are in our 80s. The cash values are getting close to the face amounts. Therefore, because the protection component of each policy (the face amount minus the cash value) is small, we now have little protection. We no longer need the protection, but we need to plan for the disposition of the policies. We do not identify the companies here because that is our private information.

Given the lack of adequate responses to the 2000 and 2018 surveys, I decided as a last resort to write to the four companies about our own policies. We knew they would have to respond, and we could complain to state insurance regulators if they did not. Our letters went out on July 9, 2018. Here I report on the progress thus far.

Company A
Company A has a small paid-up policy on my wife. We inquired about the current cash value and the amount of taxable gain that will be reported on a 1099 if she surrenders the policy in 2019. We also asked for a sample of the letter the company will send her as she nears the terminal age of 100 if she has not surrendered the policy. We think the letter will offer an option to keep the policy beyond the terminal age. The company provided the cash value figure and the amount of taxable gain, but declined to provide the sample letter.

On August 20 we filed a regulatory complaint. To date we have not received a reply from the insurance department or the company. At present we plan to surrender the policy in 2019 and pay the tax on the gain.

Company B
Company B has two small policies on my life. We inquired about the current cash values and the amounts of taxable gains if the policies are surrendered in 2019. We also asked for the sample letter.

Initially the company provided the current cash values, but did not indicate the taxable gains. Also, the company did not provide the sample letter. In response to our follow-up, the company still did not provide the sample letter. Also, instead of indicating the taxable gains on surrender in 2019, the company said this about each policy and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS):
The values in this policy do not meet [the company's] guidelines for tax reporting at this time, if the policy is surrendered for its cash value. The IRS does not require life insurance companies to calculate taxable amounts on policies that meet certain guidelines. This contract falls within those guidelines and [the company] will not send a tax notification to you or the IRS. Details of this transaction will be shown on your annual report, which you should receive after your next policy anniversary. If any changes are made to the policy between the calculation date and the transaction processing date, the values could change. If you should have additional questions regarding tax regulations, please contact your Tax Advisor.
We asked again for the sample letter, and requested the IRS guidelines. In response, the company again ignored our request for a sample letter, but provided these guidelines:
  1. Policy must be a nonqualified plan.
  2. Issue date must be before August 13, 1982.
  3. Gross cash value must be less than or equal to $5,000. Gross cash value equals the policy cash value including loans. Dividends are not factored into the equation.
  4. The rule only applies to surrenders and maturities.
The company cited "Treas.Reg.Sec.35.3405-1." I found that section, but do not fully understand it. The company again suggested contacting our tax advisor, and made this surprising comment:
It is the responsibility of the policy owner to determine "what," "if," and "how" to report the transaction to the IRS as part of their returns. We can only advise that the contract falls under the guidelines, which do not require us to review or report the transaction.
At present we plan to surrender the policies in 2019. We will follow our tax advisor's recommendation on how to report the transactions in our 2019 tax return.

Company C
Company C has three fairly large policies on my life and one small policy on my wife's life. We asked for a sample of the letter that would be sent to us if we should maintain the policies and approach the terminal age of 100. We also asked for estimates of the surrender values and estimates of the taxable gains that would be shown on the 1099s if we surrender the policies in 2019. On July 19 the company provided the surrender values but ignored our request for the sample letter and the estimates of the taxable gains.

On August 20 we asked again for the sample letter and the estimates of the taxable gains. On August 31 the company provided the face amounts and the surrender values, but again ignored our request for the sample letter and the estimates of the taxable gains.

On September 4 we filed a regulatory complaint. On September 10 the company provided the estimates of the taxable gains. Instead of providing the sample letter, the company provided copies of all four policies in their entirety and made these comments:
Please note that the policies in question do not have a stated maturity date; therefore, these contracts do not mature or terminate at age 100. These policies are not affected by the insured reaching age 100, and we don't have a sample letter to share with you.
Although the policies may not have a stated maturity date, they are based on mortality tables with a terminal age of 100. At this moment we do not know what will happen if we reach the terminal age; that is, we do not know whether the face amount will grow, whether premiums will continue to be charged, whether cash values will continue to grow, or whether dividends will continue to be paid. We do know that at present the amounts of life insurance protection in the policies are small, and the estimated taxable gains if we surrender the policies are substantial. At present we plan to surrender the small policy in 2019, but we do not know what to do with the three large policies.

Company D
Company D has one fairly large policy on my life and one fairly large policy on my wife's life. We asked for a sample of the letter that would be sent to us if we should maintain the policies and approach the terminal age of 100. We also asked for estimates of the surrender values and estimates of the taxable gains that would be shown on the 1099s if we surrender the policies in 2019. We received no reply.

On August 27 we filed a regulatory complaint. We received replies dated September 20 from the company and from the department. The company told the department and us that responses to our July 9 letter had been mailed to us on July 17, that we must not have received them, and that the company was now sending a more detailed response. The company's September 20 letter is signed by an officer who is a fellow of the Society of Actuaries. Here is the bulk of the letter:
You asked what will happen when the Insured reaches age 100. Your contracts do not specifically identify a maturity provision when the Insured reaches age 100. You can choose to leave the policies in force until death when the proceeds would be paid to your beneficiaries. Please note that under these contracts you would not receive any dividends beyond age 100 nor would any premiums be due. Alternatively, you could choose to access the cash surrender value via the options stated in your policy. It is not possible to accurately predict what the tax rules will be on your policy anniversary in 2034. [We] do not offer tax advice. You may want to consult your personal tax advisor regarding your particular situation.
The actuary's letter goes on to provide the projected surrender value in 2019 for each policy, along with the estimated taxable gain for each policy. We were astounded that, for each policy, the projected surrender value in 2019 and the estimated taxable gain in 2019 are identical.

On October 8 we asked the actuary how the company determined that the surrender values and the estimated taxable gains are identical. We also asked for confirmation of our understanding that, if we survive to the terminal age and leave the funds with the company, we would receive no interest on those funds. We also asked for the July 17 letters we did not receive. At present we do not know what to do with the two policies.

General Observations
When we purchased life insurance many years ago, it did not occur to us that we would encounter income tax problems if we were fortunate enough to survive into our 80s. Now that we are there, we have decided to surrender the four small policies and pay the taxes. We have not yet figured out what to do with the other five policies. Many of our readers are life insurance experts, and we would welcome any thoughts they might have on how we should dispose of the five policies.

Available Material
I offered complimentary packages in each of the five posts identified in the second paragraph of this post. The packages remain available. If you want to receive any of them, email and ask for the ones you want using the language we used at the end of each post to describe the packages.

Tuesday, October 2, 2018

No. 288: Edwin Sutherland: A Censorship Case

In No. 283 (August 23, 2018), in a review of Jesse Eisinger's 2017 book entitled The Chickenshit Club: Why the Justice Department Fails to Prosecute Executives, I said he attributes the expression "white-collar crime" to the late Edwin Sutherland, a sociology professor at Indiana University (IU). Eisinger also says Sutherland's classic 1949 book entitled White Collar Crime was censored for many years. I was startled by the reference to censorship because, during my 56-year association with IU, I have considered the school a bastion of academic freedom. Here I discuss the Sutherland censorship case.

The 1939 Talk and the 1940 Paper
Sutherland was a prominent sociologist. Among the schools at which he taught were University of Illinois, University of Minnesota, and University of Chicago. Later, at IU, he chaired the sociology department. In 1939 he served as president of the American Sociological Society. On December 27, 1939, he delivered his Presidential Address at a joint meeting with the American Economic Association. The paper was published in the February 1940 issue of the American Sociological Review under the title "White-Collar Criminality."

The First Version of the Book
In 1949 Dryden Press published the first version of Sutherland's book. The original manuscript included citations to court rulings and regulatory commission findings, thereby identifying many prominent corporations as "criminals." Dryden, fearing lawsuits for damages, demanded deletion of names. The IU administration also pressured Sutherland, because it feared alienating major contributors. Sutherland agonized over the issue, and eventually agreed to make the deletions. He explained his decision in two paragraphs of a preface in the first version of the book:
The corporations, whose records before the courts and commissions are presented in this book, are designated by numbers and letters rather than by names. The identity of the corporations is thus concealed for two reasons. First, the identity of criminals is frequently concealed in scientific writings about living offenders. Second, the objective of the book, which is the theory of criminal behavior, can be better attained without directing attention in an invidious manner to the behavior of particular corporations.
Although these reasons for concealing the identity of the corporations which are discussed are convincing, certain losses result. First, it is not possible to present citations to decisions of courts and commissions, since these citations would reveal the identity of the corporations. Even if such citations were to be presented, they could be presented only in illustrative cases. The list of citations for all decisions used would occupy approximately one-fourth of the number of pages in this book. Anyone who is interested in the general principles stated in this book or in the statistical records of the large corporations can make his own statistical analysis from the sources which are described in Chapters II and XII. Second, although illustrative incidents have been presented without names of corporations and with some alterations in unimportant details, these do not give the impression of reality that would be given by documented descriptions of the decisions against well-known corporations. Finally, a person can get a vivid realization that the behavior of these corporations is criminal behavior only by reading many reports of decisions against them. Something is lost, in this sense, since many detailed and documented cases could not be presented without revealing the identity of the corporations. In spite of these losses which result from concealing the identity of the corporations, no essential part of the logic of the book is affected by the policy which has been adopted. [Blogger's note: In the first version of the book, Chapter II is entitled "The Statistical Record," and Chapter XII is entitled "Records of Fifteen Power and Light Corporations."]
Sutherland died the following year, on October 11, 1950, at age 67. While walking to his office, he suffered a stroke, fell, hit his head on a concrete walkway, and died on the way to the hospital.

The Second Version of the Book
In 1961 Holt Rinehart and Winston published the second version of Sutherland's book. It was identical to the first version, including Sutherland's preface. However, it also included a ten-page foreword by Donald R. Cressey. The foreword contained this footnote:
The original White Collar Crime manuscript contained court and commission citations and, thus, identified the various corporations involved. The original publisher's attorneys advised Sutherland that a corporation might sue the publisher and author on the ground that calling its behavior "criminal" is libelous. Sutherland withdrew the manuscript and prepared the present one. Had the original manuscript (which Mrs. Myrtle Sutherland still holds) been published, and had a libel suit been initiated, then Sutherland's contention that the listed offenses are in fact crimes might have been tested in a court of law—a corporation might have argued that the statement is libelous because its behavior is not crime, with Sutherland giving the arguments presented in this volume. I was one of Sutherland's research assistants at the time, and I urged that the manuscript be published for this reason, if for no other. However, my idealistic desire to see a scientific principle tested in a court of law was not tempered by any practical consideration such as having money riding on the legal validity of the scientific principle. This was not the case with either the publisher or Professor Sutherland.
On October 11, 1962, Mrs. Sutherland donated the original uncensored manuscript to the Lilly Library on the IU main campus in Bloomington. I looked at the manuscript there, and it is indeed the original 396-page double-spaced typewritten manuscript showing the names of the corporations. The manuscript includes no introduction, preface, foreword, or index. The title page, Mrs. Sutherland's letter, the table of contents, the list of tables, and Table 3 mentioned below are in the complimentary package offered at the end of this post.

The Third Version of the Book
In 1983 Yale University Press published the third version of Sutherland's book. It is not censored, omits Sutherland's unnecessary preface, includes a 25-page explanatory introduction by Gilbert Geis and Colin Goff, and remains in print today as a quality paperback.

The third version restores an entire chapter entitled "Three Case Histories," which was cut from the two earlier versions. That chapter discusses American Smelting and Refining Company, United States Rubber Company, and The Pittsburgh Coal Company. The chapter also identifies several other corporations related to those three.

The third version also restores the names of the many corporations whose names were previously deleted from various tables. Table 3, for example, is entitled "Decisions by Courts and Commissions against 70 Large Corporations by Types of Laws Violated." The column headings are "Corporation," "Restraint of trade," "Misrepresentation in advertising," "Infringement," "Unfair labor practices," "Rebates," "Other," and "Total." The corporations are listed alphabetically. Those with 25 or more decisions are American Tobacco, Armour & Company, Ford, General Electric, General Motors, Loew's, Montgomery Ward, Paramount, Sears Roebuck, Swift & Company, U.S. Steel, and Warner Brothers. In the first two versions of the book, the corporations listed in Table 3 were identified by numbers 1 to 70, and listed in declining order of "Total" decisions.

My Personal Kinsey Story
When I arrived at IU in 1962, I began work on a questionnaire to be sent to life insurance companies in connection with a research project. Professor J. Edward Hedges, who chaired the insurance area at the time, walked into my office one day and said he was headed to a meeting in the IU president's office. He said IU had received a complaint about me from a prominent alumnus in the insurance business. In response to my expression of concern, Hedges said: "Joe, you don't understand. IU is where Alfred Kinsey did his research." I was aware of the furor over Professor Kinsey's controversial research in the late 1940s and early 1950s on human sexual behavior and IU's staunch protection of him. After the meeting, the president's office asked for a copy of the questionnaire when I circulated it, and I never heard anything further on the matter.

My Personal Guest Lecture Story
A few years after I arrived in Bloomington, I received a call from a faculty member at a university in another state. He invited me to visit his school and give a guest lecture. He said his school might offer me a position. I accepted the invitation, gave the lecture, and met some people there. Shortly after my return to Bloomington, he called to thank me and said an expense check was in the mail. He also said he was embarrassed to tell me there would be no job offer. He said the chief executive officer of a major insurance company based in his state had learned of my visit and had told school officials there would be no further contributions to the school by the company if I was appointed to the faculty. My friend said the school had decided it could not afford to antagonize a major donor. I thanked him for telling me. I did not tell him my immediate thought: a financial threat by a donor to influence a faculty hiring decision is not tolerated by a great university, and I was grateful to have avoided a disastrous career move. That was the first and last time I considered leaving IU.

General Observations
Because of the nature of my research, over the years I learned first hand how IU protects its faculty against censorship. That is why I was surprised to learn about the Sutherland case. I am confident that, if a similar situation arose today, IU would stand behind its faculty member and would, if necessary, publish the research through the IU Press.

Available Material
I am offering a complimentary 9-page PDF consisting of the front matter (6 pages) and Table 3 (3 pages) of the original manuscript. Email and ask for the October 2018 package about Sutherland.


Monday, September 24, 2018

No. 287: Executive Compensation in the Insurance Industry in 2017

The Insurance Forum began with the January 1974 issue. In 1975 I began publishing data on executive compensation in the insurance industry. Chapter 24 of my 2015 book, The Insurance Forum: A Memoir, describes the history of my executive compensation tabulations and the efforts made by the industry and by insurance regulators to block access to the data.

A few years after ending publication of the Forum with the December 2013 issue, I posted on my blog some executive compensation data for 2015. The data from my three sources—the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), and the Nebraska Department of Insurance (NDI)—are in No. 163 (May 23, 2016), No. 164 (May 31, 2016), and No. 165 (June 8, 2016). I have now assembled some executive compensation data for 2017.

During the final seven years of the Forum, I showed data for individuals who received at least $1 million in the year under study. For example, the final executive compensation tabulation in the Forum, showing data for 2012, was in the July 2013 issue. I am offering that tabulation on a complimentary basis at the end of this post. In the new tabulation in this post I show data for individuals who received at least $5 million in 2017. Where more than one individual in a company is shown, they are listed in descending order of compensation.

SEC Data for 2017
Each figure in the SEC data is the "Total" in the 2017 summary compensation table filed with the SEC by shareholder-owned public companies. The seven components of the "Total" are "Salary," "Stock Awards," "Option Awards," "Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation," "Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings," and "All Other Compensation."

The table for most companies is in the definitive proxy statement filed in advance of the company's 2018 annual meeting of shareholders. In a few instances, the table is in a 10-K annual report. For Canadian companies, the figures are in Canadian dollars, and the table is in a 6-K annual report. The documents referred to here are readily available to the public without charge at on the SEC website.

SEC Compensation Data for 2017
Aetna Inc
Mark T Bertolini
Gary W Loveman PhD
Richard M Jelinek
Karen S Lynch
Shawn M Guertin
Daniel P Amos
Frederick J. Crawford
Alleghany Corp
Weston M Hicks
Allstate Corp
Thomas J Wilson
John Dugenske
Matthew E Winter
Steven E Shebik
Don Civgin
American Financial Group Inc
Carl H Lindner III
S Craig Lindner
American International Group Inc
Brian Duperreault
Peter D Hancock
Peter Zaffino
Robert S Schimek
Peter Y Solmssen
Douglas A Dachille
Kevin T Hogan
Siddhartha Sankaran
Ameriprise Financial Inc
James M Cracchiolo
Walter S Berman
William F Truscott
Colin Moore
Anthem Inc
Joseph R Swedish
Gloria M McCarthy
John E Gallina
Peter D Haytaian
Brian T Griffin
Aon plc
Gregory C Case
Stephen P McGill
Christa Davies
Kristi Savacool
Arch Capital Group Ltd
Constantine Iordanou
Nicolas Papadopoulo
Marc Grandisson
Assurant Inc
Alan B Colberg
Gene E Mergelmeyer
Assured Guaranty Ltd
Dominic J Frederico
AXIS Capital Holdings Ltd
Albert A Benchimol
Centene Corp
Michael F Neidorff
Cynthia J Brinkley
Jeffrey A Schwaneke
Chubb Ltd
Evan G Greenberg
John W Keogh
Paul J Krump
John J Lupica
Philip V Bancroft
Cigna Corp
David M Cordani
CNA Financial Corp
Dino E Robusto
Jonathan D Kantor
CNO Financial Group Inc
Edward Bonach
Enstar Group Ltd
Dominic F Silvester
Paul J O'Shea
Orla M Gregory
Everest Re Group Ltd
Dominic J Addesso
Fidelity National Financial Inc
William P Foley II
Raymond R Quirk
Brent B Bickett
First American Financial Corp
Dennis J Gilmore
Genworth Financial Inc
Thomas J McInerney
Kevin D Schneider
Daniel J Sheehan IV
Hartford Financial Services Group
Christopher Swift
Douglas Elliot
Humana Inc
Bruce D Broussard
Brian A Kane
Lincoln National Corp
Dennis R Glass
Loews Corp
James S Tisch
David B Edelson
Jonathan M Tisch
Andrew H Tisch
Kenneth I Siegel
Manulife Financial Corp
Roy Gori
Donald Guloien
Warren Thomson
Steve Roder
Marianne Harrison
Marsh & McLennan Companies Inc
Daniel S Glaser
Julio A Portalatin
John Q Doyle
Peter J Beshar
MetLife Inc
Steven A Kandarian
Michel Khalaf
John C R Hele
Martin J Lippert
MGIC Investment Corp
Patrick Sinks
Molina Healthcare Inc
Joseph M Zubretsky
J Mario Molina MD
John C Molina
National Western Life Group Inc
Ross R Moody
Principal Financial Group Inc
Daniel J Houston
James P McCaughan
Progressive Corp
Susan Patricia Griffith
Protective Life Corp
John D Johns
Richard J Bielen
Carl S Thigpen
Prudential Financial Inc
John R Strangfeld
Mark B Grier
Stephen Pelletier
Charles F Lowrey
Robert M Falzon
Radian Group Inc
Richard G. Thornberry
Sanford A Ibrahim
Reinsurance Group of America Inc
Anna Manning
RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd
Kevin J O'Donnell
Sun Life Financial Inc
Dean A Connor
Stephen C Peacher
Torchmark Corp
Gary L Coleman
Larry M Hutchison
Travelers Companies Inc
Alan D Schnitzer
Brian W MacLean
William H Heyman
Jay S Benet
Avrohom J Kess
UnitedHealth Group Inc
Stephen J Hemsley
David S Wichmann
Larry C Renfro
John F Rex
Steven H Nelson
Marianne D Short
Universal Insurance Holdings Inc
Sean P Downes
Jon W Springer
Unum Group
Richard P McKenney
Voya Financial Inc
Rodney O Martin Jr
Alain M Karaoglan
Christine Hurtsellers
W R Berkley Corp
William R Berkley
W Robert Berkley Jr
WellCare Health Plans Inc
Kenneth A Burdick
White Mountains Insurance Group
Raymond Barrette
David T Foy
G Manning Rountree
Reid T Campbell
T Michael Miller

New York Data for 2017
The 2017 New York data are filed with DFS by life insurance companies doing business in New York, and by health insurance companies doing business there. The data are from a statutory annual statement exhibit called "Schedule G." The schedule for life companies differs from the schedule for health companies. Because the schedules are not readily available to the public, I obtained them through a public records request pursuant to the New York State Freedom of Information Law. The Life Bureau of DFS sent me the schedules for life companies, and the Health Bureau sent me the schedules for health companies.

The schedule for life companies shows one figure for each individual. The schedule for health companies shows four figures for each individual: (1) "Salary Paid by Company and All Other Companies in Holding Company System," (2) "Bonus & all other Compensation Deferred or Paid by Company and All Other Companies in Holding Company System," (3) "Total Amount Paid by Company and All Other Companies in Holding Company System," and (4) "Amount Paid by or Amount Allocated by Company." The figure I show in this tabulation is the third of the four figures. When I obtained the 2017 data, each bureau charged a fee of $1 for sending the schedules on a CD by regular mail.

New York Compensation Data for 2017
Life Insurance Companies
Aetna Life Ins Co
Mark T Bertolini
Shawn M Guertin 9,239,174
Jean LaTorre 6,231,385
Thomas J Sabatino 5,588,469
Globe Life Ins Co of NY
Ben Walter Lutek 8,553,779
Guardian Life Ins Co of America
Deanna Mulligan 8,014,882
Lincoln Life & Annuity Co of NY
Dennis R Glass 34,666,432
Randal J Freitag 8,163,992
Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins Co
Roger Crandall 6,269,018
Paul Blanco 5,228,315
Metropolitan Life Ins Co
Steven A Kandarian 10,453,756
New York Life Ins Co
Theodore A Mathas 20,594,949
John Y Kim 12,868,332
Christopher O Blunt 9,394,343
John T Fleurant 5,022,387
Northwestern Mutual Life Ins Co
John E Schlifske 12,204,273
Penn Mutual Life Ins Co
Eileen McDonnell 5,337,340
Phoenix Life Ins Co
James D Wehr 6,749,750
Principal Life Ins Co
James P McCaughan 14,059,569
Daniel J Houston 10,667,049
Karen Elizabeth Shaff 7,362,154
Karl W Nolin 5,601,332
Luis E Valdes 5,351,845
Prudential Ins Co of America
John R Strangfeld 11,064,539
Charles F Lowrey 9,891,275
Mark B Grier 6,494,780
Stephen Pelletier 5,058,979
Teachers Ins & Annuity Assn
Roger Ferguson 6,685,814
Ronald R Pressman 5,372,878
Health Insurance Companies
Anthem Group
Joseph R Swedish 17,098,146
Peter D Haytaian 5,054,085
Brian T Griffin 5,043,082
Gloria M McCarthy 5,006,223
Eastern Vision Service Plan Inc
James M McGrann 5,024,315
HIP Ins Co of New York
William C Lamoreaux 5,496,012
Humana Ins Co of New York
Brian A Kane 7,678,628
UnitedHealth Group
Robert W Oberrender 7,705,596
WellCare Health Ins of New York
Kenneth A Burdick 8,688,648
Andrew L Asher 5,583,010

Nebraska Data for 2017
The 2017 Nebraska data are on a "Supplemental Compensation Exhibit" filed by all insurance companies doing business in Nebraska. The figure I show is the "Total" for each individual. Components of the "Total" are "Salary," "Bonus," "Stock Awards," "Option Awards," "Sign-on Payments," "Severance Payments," and "All Other Compensation." When I obtained the 2017 data, NDI charged a fee of $80 for sending the exhibits on a CD by regular mail.

Nebraska Compensation Data for 2017
Accident Fund Ins Co of America
Elizabeth Haar
ACE American Ins Co
John J Lupica
Paul J Crump
Acuity, A Mutual Ins Co
Benjamin M Salzmann
Aetna Life Ins Co
Mark T Bertolini
Gary W Loveman PhD
Richard M Jelinek
Karen S Lynch
Thomas J Sabatino Jr
Shawn M Guertin
Allied World National Assur Co
Scott A Carmilani
Wesley Dupont
Allstate Ins Co
Thomas J Wilson
Matthew E Winter
Judith P Greffin
Sanjay Gupta
Surender Gupta
Steven E Shebik
Steven P Sorenson
Susan L Lees
American Family Life of Columbus
Daniel P Amos
Paul S Amos II
Frederick J Crawford
American Family Mutual Ins Co
Jack C Salzwedel
American General Life Ins Co
Kevin Hogan
Jay S Wintrob
American Income Life Ins Co
Roger C Smith
Ben W Lutek
Assured Guaranty Corp
Dominic Frederico
Atlantic Specialty Ins Co
Timothy M Miller
Chicago Title Ins Co
Raymond R Quirk
Anthony J Park
Michael J Nolan
Peter T Sadowski
Clearwater Select Ins Co
Brian D Young
Doctors Co Interinsurance Exchange
Richard Anderson MD
Essent Guaranty Inc
Mark Casale
Everest Reinsurance Co
Dominic J Addesso
Fidelity & Guaranty Life Ins Co
Christopher J Littlefield
First American Title Ins Co
Dennis Gilmore
GEICO Indemnity Co
Olza Minor Nicely
Great American Ins Co
S Craig Lindner
Carl H Lindner III
Guardian Life Ins Co of America
Deanna Mulligan
Hanover Ins Co
Joseph Zubretsky
Health Care Service Corp
Paula A Steiner
Patricia A Hemingway Hall
Colleen Foley Reitan
Humana Ins Co
Bruce D Broussard
Brian A Kane
Insurance Co of the West
Kevin Prior
Ernest Rady
Jackson National Life Ins Co
Barry Stowe
James R Sopha
Paul C Myers
Liberty Mutual Ins Co
David H Long
Timothy Sweeney
Neeti Bhalla
J Paul Condin III
Christopher L Peirce
Dennis J Langwell
Lincoln National Life Ins Co 
Dennis R Glass
Randal J Freitag
Wilford H Fuller
Magellan Behavioral Health
Jeffrey West
Dan Gregorie
Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins Co
Roger Crandall
Paul Blanco
Michael Fanning
Medical Protective Co
Timothy Kenesey
MEMIC Indemnity Co
John T Leonard
Metropolitan Life Ins Co
Steven A Kandarian
Mortgage Guaranty Ins Corp
Patrick Sinks
National Indemnity Co
Ajit Jain
New York Life Ins Co
Theodore A Mathas
John Y Kim
Christopher O Blunt
John T Fleurant
Northwestern Mutual Life Ins Co
John E Schlifske
Pacific Life Ins Co
James T Morris
Pan-American Life Ins Co
Jose Suarez Suquet
Penn Mutual Life Ins Co
Eileen McDonnell
Thomas E Daley
Pennsylvania Ins Co
Sidney Ferenc
Steven Menzies
Phoenix Life Ins Co
James D Wehr
Principal Life Ins Co
James P McCaughan
Daniel J Houston
Karen E Shaff
Karl W Nolin
Luis E Valdes
Prudential Ins Co of America
John R Strangfeld Jr
Mark B Grier
Charles F Lowrey
Radian Mortgage Guaranty Inc
Sanford A Ibrahim
Richard Thornberry
RGA Reinsurance Co
Albert Greig Woodring
RiverSource Life Ins Co
Lynn Ann Hopton
Yvonne E Stevens
Steven B Staver
John R Woerner
David K Stewart
SCOR Reinsurance Co
Mark Kociancic
Security Benefit Life Ins Co
Michael Patrick Kiley
Standard Ins Co
John Gregory Ness
State Farm Group
Michael Leon Tipsord
Michael Steven Wey
Teachers Ins & Annuity Assn
Roger Ferguson
Justin Kelly
William Adams
Jon Bosse
Clark Winslow
Robert Doll
Ronald Pressman
James Boothe
Gunther Stein
Virginia Wilson
Transatlantic Reinsurance Co
Michael C Sapnar
Javier E Vijil
Travelers Casualty & Surety Co
Alan D Schnitzer
Brian MacLean
Willaim H Heyman
Jay S Benet
United States Liability Ins Co
Thomas P Nerney
Western & Southern Life Ins Co
John Barrett

General Observations
There can be no assurance the data shown here are complete and accurate, for at least four reasons. First, with regard to the SEC data, I did not have a complete list of shareholder-owned public companies in the insurance business, and some therefore may have been omitted.

Second, with regard to DFS data, the Schedule G for life companies may show compensation attributable only to that one company. In other words, on the schedule for a company that is a member of a group of companies, the figure shown for an individual may be compensation from only that one company rather than from the entire group of companies.

Third, with regard to NDI data, some groups of companies allocate the compensation for individuals among the members of the group. Thus the figures for individuals need to be added. There can be no assurance that I found all the members of those groups. Indeed, in some instances members of the group may not be licensed in Nebraska and therefore do not file the exhibits.

Fourth, an individual's compensation may differ among my three sources. Aside from the third problem mentioned above, the three sources have differing rules about precisely what must be included in an individual's compensation. For example, see the differences between DFS data and NDI data for Teachers Insurance & Annuity Association. I asked DFS to comment on the differences, but received no reply.

Available Material
To provide a frame of reference beyond the three posts showing executive compensation data for 2015, I am offering a complimentary 10-page PDF containing the final executive compensation tabulation in the Forum. It appeared in the July 2013 issue and showed data for 2012. Email and ask for the executive compensation tabulation in the July 2013 issue of the Forum.