Item 8.01 Other Events.
The following risk factors that could affect MetLife, Inc.'s business,
financial condition, operating results and cash flows are being added to the
disclosures in its Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-147180). The
risk factors listed below should be read in conjunction with the risk factors
disclosed in MetLife, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2008. The risk factors, in substantially the form to be included
in any prospectus supplement in connection with the remarketing of MetLife,
Inc.'s 4.91% Junior Subordinated Debt Securities, Series B, due 2040, are set
forth below.
This Current Report on Form 8-K does not constitute an offer of any
securities for sale.
RISK FACTORS
Unless otherwise stated or the context otherwise requires, references in the
following risk factors to "MetLife," "we," "our," or "us" refer to MetLife,
Inc., together with Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MLIC"), and their
respective direct and indirect subsidiaries, while references to "MetLife, Inc."
refer only to the holding company.
Our Participation in a Securities Lending Program Subjects Us to Potential
Liquidity and Other Risks
We participate in a securities lending program whereby blocks of securities,
which are included in fixed maturity securities and short-term investments, are
loaned to third parties, primarily major brokerage firms and commercial banks.
We require collateral equal to 102% of the current market value of the loaned
securities to be obtained at the inception of a loan, and maintained at a level
greater than or equal to 100% for the duration of the loan. During the
extraordinary market events occurring in the fourth quarter of 2008, we, in
limited instances, accepted collateral less than 102% at the inception of
certain loans, but never less than 100%, of the market value of such loaned
securities. These loans involved U.S. Government Treasury Bills which we
considered to have limited variation in their market value during the term of
the loan. Securities with a cost or amortized cost of $20.8 billion and
$41.1 billion and an estimated fair value of $22.9 billion and $42.1 billion
were on loan under the program at December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007,
respectively. Securities loaned under such transactions may be sold or repledged
by the transferee. We were liable for cash collateral under our control of
$23.3 billion and $43.3 billion at December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007,
respectively.
Returns of loaned securities by the third parties would require us to return
the cash collateral associated with such loaned securities. In addition, in some
cases, the maturity of the securities held as invested collateral (i.e.,
securities that we have purchased with cash received from the third parties) may
exceed the term of the related securities on loan and the market value may fall
below the amount of cash received as collateral and invested. If we are required
to return significant amounts of cash collateral on short notice and we are
forced to sell securities to meet the return obligation, we may have difficulty
selling such collateral that is invested in securities in a timely manner, be
forced to sell securities in a volatile or illiquid market for less than we
otherwise would have been able to realize under normal market conditions, or
both. In addition, under stressful capital market and economic conditions, such
as those conditions we have experienced recently, liquidity broadly
deteriorates, which may further restrict our ability to sell securities.
Of this $23.3 billion of cash collateral at December 31, 2008, approximately
$5.1 billion was on open terms, meaning that the related loaned security could
be returned to us on the next business day requiring return of cash collateral
and the following amounts are due within 30 days, and 60 days - $14.7 billion
and $3.5 billion, respectively. The estimated fair value of the securities
related to the cash collateral on open at December 31, 2008 has been reduced to
$5.0 billion from $15.8 billion as of November 30, 2008. Of the $5.0 billion of
estimated fair value of the securities related to the cash collateral on open at
December 31, 2008, $4.4 billion were U.S. Treasury and agency securities which,
if put to us, can be immediately sold to satisfy the cash requirements. The
remainder of the securities on loan are primarily U.S. Treasury and agency
securities, and very liquid residential mortgage-backed securities. Within the
U. S. Treasury securities on loan, they are primarily holdings of on-the-run
U.S. Treasury securities, the most liquid U.S. Treasury securities available. If
these high quality securities that are on loan are put back to us, the proceeds
from immediately selling these securities can be used to satisfy the related
cash requirements. The estimated fair value of the reinvestment portfolio
acquired with the cash collateral was $19.5 billion at December 31, 2008, and
consisted principally of fixed maturity securities (including residential
mortgage-backed, asset-backed, U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities).
If the on loan securities or the reinvestment portfolio become less liquid, we
have the liquidity resources of most of our general account available to meet
any potential cash demand when securities are put back to us.
If we decrease the amount of our securities lending activities over time, the
amount of income generated by these activities will also likely decline.
We Are Exposed to Significant Financial and Capital Markets Risk which May
Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity,
and Our Net Investment Income Can Vary from Period to Period
We are exposed to significant financial and capital markets risk, including
changes in interest rates, credit spreads, equity prices, real estate markets,
foreign currency exchange rates, market volatility, the performance of the
economy in general, the performance of the specific obligors included in our
portfolio and other factors outside our control. Our exposure to interest rate
risk relates primarily to the market price and cash flow variability associated
with changes in interest rates. A rise in interest rates will increase the net
unrealized loss position of our fixed income investment portfolio and, if
long-term interest rates rise dramatically within a six to twelve month time
period, certain of our life insurance businesses may be exposed to
disintermediation risk. Disintermediation risk refers to the risk that our
policyholders may surrender their contracts in a rising interest rate
environment, requiring us to liquidate fixed income investments in an unrealized
loss position. Due to the long-term nature of the liabilities associated with
certain of our life insurance businesses, guaranteed benefits on variable
annuities, and structured settlements, sustained declines in long-term interest
rates may subject us to reinvestment risks and increased hedging costs. In other
situations, declines in interest rates may result in increasing the duration of
certain life insurance liabilities, creating asset liability duration
mismatches. Our investment portfolio also contains interest rate sensitive
instruments, such as fixed income securities, which may be adversely affected by
changes in interest rates from governmental monetary policies, domestic and
international economic and political conditions and other factors beyond our
control. A rise in interest rates would increase the net unrealized loss
position of our fixed income investment portfolio, offset by our ability to earn
higher rates of return on funds reinvested. Conversely, a decline in interest
rates would decrease the net unrealized loss position of our fixed income
investment portfolio, offset by lower rates of return on funds reinvested. Our
mitigation efforts with respect to interest rate risk are primarily focused
towards maintaining an investment portfolio with diversified maturities that has
a weighted average duration that is approximately equal to the duration of our
estimated liability cash flow profile. However, our estimate of the liability
cash flow profile may be inaccurate and we may be forced to liquidate fixed
income investments prior to maturity at a loss in order to cover the liability.
Although we take measures to manage the economic risks of investing in a
changing interest rate environment, we may not be able to mitigate the interest
rate risk of our fixed income investments relative to our liabilities.
Our exposure to credit spreads primarily relates to market price and cash
flow variability associated with changes in credit spreads. A widening of credit
spreads will increase the net unrealized loss position of the fixed income
investment portfolio, will increase losses associated with credit based
non-qualifying derivatives where we assume credit exposure, and, if issuer
credit spreads increase significantly or for an extended period of time, would
likely result in higher other-than-temporary impairments. Credit spread
tightening will reduce net investment income associated with new purchases of
fixed maturity securities. In addition, market volatility can make it difficult
to value certain of our securities if trading becomes less frequent. As such,
valuations may include assumptions or estimates that may have significant period
to period changes which could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
results of operations or financial condition. Credit spreads on both corporate
and structured securities widened during 2008, resulting in continuing depressed
pricing. Continuing challenges include continued weakness in the U.S. real
estate market and increased mortgage delinquencies, investor anxiety over the
U.S. economy, rating agency downgrades of various structured products and
financial issuers, unresolved issues with structured investment vehicles and
monoline financial guarantee insurers, deleveraging of financial institutions
and hedge funds and a serious dislocation in the inter-bank market. If
significant, continued volatility, changes in interest rates, changes in credit
spreads and defaults, a lack of pricing transparency, market liquidity, declines
in equity prices, and the strengthening or weakening of foreign currencies
against the U.S. dollar, individually or in tandem, could have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial condition or
cash flows through realized losses, impairments, and changes in unrealized
positions.
Our primary exposure to equity risk relates to the potential for lower
earnings associated with certain of our insurance businesses, such as variable
annuities, where fee income is earned based upon the fair value of the assets
under management. In addition, certain of our annuity products offer guaranteed
benefits which increase our potential benefit exposure should equity markets
decline. We are also exposed to interest rate and equity risk based upon the
discount rate and expected long-term rate of return assumptions associated with
our pension and other post-retirement benefit obligations. Sustained declines in
long-term interest rates or equity returns likely would have a negative effect
on the funded status of these plans.
Our exposure to real estate risk relates to market price and cash flow
variability associated with changes in real estate markets, default and
bankruptcy rates, geographic and sector concentration as well as illiquidity of
real estate investments. The current economic environment has led to significant
weakening of the residential and commercial real estate markets, increases in
foreclosures, bankruptcies and unsuccessful development projects as well as
limited access to credit. Our real estate investments, including those held by
joint ventures and real estate funds, may be negatively impacted by weakened
local real estate conditions, such as oversupply, reduced demand and the
availability and creditworthiness of current and prospective tenants and
borrowers. In addition, real estate investments are relatively illiquid, and
could limit our ability, and that of our joint ventures partners and real estate
fund managers, to sell assets to respond to changing economic, financial and
investment conditions. Also, these factors could impact mortgage and consumer
loan fundamentals. These factors and others beyond our control could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial
condition or cash flows through net investment income, realized losses and
impairments.
Significant declines in equity prices, changes in U.S. interest rates,
changes in credit spreads, and changes in foreign currency exchange rates could
have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations,
financial condition or liquidity. Changes in these factors, which are
significant risks to us, can affect our net investment income in any period, and
such changes can be substantial.
We invest a portion of our invested assets in leveraged buy-out funds, hedge
funds and other private equity funds reported within Other Limited Partnerships,
many of which make private equity investments. The amount and timing of net
investment income from such investment funds tends to be uneven as a result of
the performance of the underlying investments, including private equity
investments. The timing of distributions from the funds, which depends on
particular events relating to the underlying investments, as well as the funds'
schedules for making distributions and their needs for cash, can be difficult to
predict. As a result, the amount of net investment income that we record from
these investments can vary substantially from quarter to quarter. Recent equity,
real estate and credit market volatility have further reduced net investment
income and related yields for these types of investments and we may continue to
experience reduced net investment income due to continued volatility in the
equity, real estate and credit markets in 2009. In addition, due to the normal
lag in the preparation of and then receipt of periodic financial statements from
other limited partnership interests and real estate joint ventures and funds,
results from late 2008 during periods of volatility will be reported to us in
2009.
Consolidation of Distributors of Insurance Products May Adversely Affect the
Insurance Industry and the Profitability of Our Business
The insurance industry distributes many of its individual products through
other financial institutions such as banks and broker-dealers. As capital,
credit and equity markets continue to experience volatility, bank and
broker-dealer consolidation activity may increase and negatively impact the
industry's sales, and such consolidation could increase competition for access
to distributors, result in greater distribution expenses and impair our ability
to market insurance products to our current customer base or to expand our
customer base.
Industry Trends Could Adversely Affect the Profitability of Our Businesses
Our business segments continue to be influenced by a variety of trends that
affect the insurance industry, including intense competition with respect to
product features, price, distribution capability, customer service and
information technology. The impact on our business and on the life insurance
industry generally of the volatility and instability of the financial markets is
difficult to predict, and our business plans, financial condition and results of
operations may be negatively impacted or affected in other unexpected ways. In
addition, the life insurance industry is subject to state regulation, and, as
complex products are introduced, regulators may refine capital requirements and
introduce new reserving standards. Furthermore, regulators have undertaken
market and sales practices reviews of several markets or products, including
equity-indexed annuities, variable annuities and group products. The current
market environment may also lead to changes in regulation that may benefit or
disadvantage us relative to some of our competitors.
Change in Our Discount Rate, Expected Rate of Return and Expected
Compensation Increase Assumptions for Our Pension and Other Postretirement
Benefit Plans May Result in Increased Expenses and Reduce Our Profitability
We determine our pension and other postretirement benefit plan costs based on
our best estimates of future plan experience. These assumptions are reviewed
regularly and include discount rates, expected rates of return on plan assets
and expected increases in compensation levels and expected medical inflation.
Changes in these assumptions may result in increased expenses and reduce our
profitability.
A Downgrade or a Potential Downgrade in Our Financial Strength or Credit
Ratings Could Result in a Loss of Business and Materially Adversely Affect Our
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Financial strength ratings, which various Nationally Recognized Statistical
Rating Organizations ("NRSROs") publish as indicators of an insurance company's
ability to meet contractholder and policyholder obligations, are important to
maintaining public confidence in our products, our ability to market our
products and our competitive position.
Downgrades in our financial strength ratings could have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways,
including:
• reducing new sales of insurance products, annuities and other investment
products;
• adversely affecting our relationships with our sales force and independent
sales intermediaries;
• materially increasing the number or amount of policy surrenders and
withdrawals by contractholders and policyholders;
• requiring us to reduce prices for many of our products and services to remain
competitive; and
• adversely affecting our ability to obtain reinsurance at reasonable prices or
at all.
In addition to the financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries,
various NRSROs also publish credit ratings for MetLife, Inc. and several of its
subsidiaries. Credit ratings are indicators of a debt issuer's ability to meet
the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner and are important factors in
our overall funding profile and ability to access certain types of liquidity.
Downgrades in our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition and results of operations in many ways, including adversely
limiting our access to capital markets, potentially increasing the cost of debt,
and requiring us to post collateral. A two-notch decrease in the financial
strength ratings of our insurance company subsidiaries would require us to post
less than $200 million of collateral in connection with derivative collateral
arrangements, to which we are a party and would have allowed holders of
approximately $500 million aggregate account value of our funding agreements to
terminate such funding agreements on 90 days' notice.
On September 18, 2008, September 29, 2008, October 2, 2008 and October 10,
2008, A.M. Best Company, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd., Moody's Investors Service
("Moody's") and Standard & Poor's ("S&P"), respectively, each revised its
outlook for the U.S. life insurance sector to negative from stable, citing,
among other things, the significant deterioration and volatility in the credit
and equity markets, economic and political uncertainty, and the expected impact
of realized and unrealized investment losses on life insurers' capital levels
and profitability. On January 12, 2009, S&P maintained its negative outlook on
the U.S. life insurance sector.
In view of the difficulties experienced recently by many financial
institutions, including our competitors in the insurance industry, we believe it
is possible that the NRSROs will heighten the level of scrutiny that they apply
to such institutions, will increase the frequency and scope of their credit
reviews, will request additional information from the companies that they rate,
and may adjust upward the capital and other requirements employed in the NRSRO
models for maintenance of certain ratings levels, such as the AA (S&P) and Aa2
(Moody's) insurer financial strength ratings currently held by our life
insurance subsidiaries. In this regard, on February 9, 2009, Moody's affirmed
our credit ratings and the insurance financial strength ratings of our insurance
subsidiaries, but changed the outlook for us and our subsidiaries to negative
from stable. We do not believe this action will have a material adverse impact
on our results of operations and financial condition. However, it is possible
that any future adverse ratings consequences, including any downgrade, could
have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial
condition.
We cannot predict what actions rating agencies may take, or what actions we
may take in response to the actions of rating agencies, which could adversely
affect our business. As with other companies in the financial services industry,
our ratings could be downgraded at any time and without any notice by any NRSRO.
An Inability to Access Our Credit Facilities Could Result in a Reduction in
Our Liquidity and Lead to Downgrades in Our Credit and Financial Strength
Ratings
We have a $2.85 billion five-year revolving credit facility that matures in
June 2012, as well as other facilities that we enter into in the ordinary course
of business.
We rely on our credit facilities as a potential source of liquidity. The
availability of these facilities could be critical to our credit and financial
strength ratings and our ability to meet our obligations as they come due,
particularly in the current market when alternative sources of credit are tight.
The credit facilities contain certain administrative, reporting, legal and
financial covenants. We must comply with certain covenants under our credit
facilities (including the $2.85 billion five-year revolving credit facility)
that require us to maintain a specified minimum consolidated net worth.
Our right to make borrowings under these facilities is subject to the
fulfillment of certain important conditions, including our compliance with all
covenants, and our ability to borrow is also subject to the continued
willingness and ability of the lenders that are parties to the facilities to
provide funds. Our failure to comply with the covenants in the credit facilities
or fulfill the conditions to borrowings, or the failure of lenders to fund their
lending commitments (whether due to insolvency, illiquidity or other reasons) in
the amounts provided for under the terms of the facilities, would restrict our
ability to access these credit facilities when needed and, consequently, could
have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Defaults, Downgrades or Other Events Impairing the Value of Our Fixed
Maturity Securities Portfolio May Reduce Our Earnings
We are subject to the risk that the issuers, or guarantors, of fixed maturity
securities we own may default on principal and interest payments they owe us. We
are also subject to the risk that the underlying collateral within loan-backed
securities, including mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities, may default
on principal and interest payments causing an adverse change in cash flows paid
to our investment. At December 31, 2008, the fixed maturity securities of
$188.3 billion in our investment portfolio represented 58.4% of our total cash
and invested assets. The occurrence of a major economic downturn (such as the
current downturn in the economy), acts of corporate malfeasance, widening risk
spreads, or other events that adversely affect the issuers, guarantors or
underlying collateral of these securities could cause the value of our fixed
maturity securities portfolio and our net income to decline and the default rate
of the fixed maturity securities in our investment portfolio to increase. A
ratings downgrade affecting issuers or guarantors of particular securities, or
similar trends that could worsen the credit quality of issuers, such as the
corporate issuers of securities in our investment portfolio, could also have a
similar effect. With economic uncertainty, credit quality of issuers or
guarantors could be adversely affected. Similarly, a ratings downgrade affecting
a loan-backed security we hold could indicate the credit quality of that
security has deteriorated. Any event reducing the value of these securities
other than on a temporary basis could have a material adverse effect on our
business, results of operations and financial condition. Levels of write down or
impairment are impacted by our assessment of the intent and ability to hold
securities which have declined in value until recovery. If we determine to
reposition or realign portions of the portfolio so as not to hold certain
securities in an unrealized loss position to recovery, then we will incur an
other than temporary impairment charge in the period that the decision was made
not to hold the security to recovery. In addition, in January, 2009, Moody's
revised its loss projections for U.S. Alt-A residential mortgage-backed
securities (RMBS), and it is anticipated that Moody's will be downgrading
virtually all 2006 and 2007 Alt-A securities to below investment grade, which
will increase the percentage of our portfolio that will be rated below
investment grade.
We Face Unforeseen Liabilities or Asset Impairments Arising from Possible
Acquisitions and Dispositions of Businesses or Difficulties Integrating Such
Businesses
We have engaged in dispositions and acquisitions of businesses in the past,
and expect to continue to do so in the future. There could be unforeseen
liabilities or asset impairments, including goodwill impairments, that arise in
connection with the businesses that we may sell or the businesses that we may
acquire in the future. In addition, there may be liabilities or asset
impairments that we fail, or are unable, to discover in the course of performing
due diligence investigations on each business that we have acquired or may
acquire. Furthermore, the use of our own funds as consideration in any
acquisition would consume capital resources that would no longer be available
for other corporate purposes.
Our ability to achieve certain benefits we anticipate from any acquisitions
of businesses will depend in large part upon our ability to successfully
integrate such businesses in an efficient and effective manner. We may not be
able to integrate such businesses smoothly or successfully, and the process may
take longer than expected. The integration of operations may require the
dedication of significant management resources, which may distract management's
attention from day-to-day business. If we are unable to successfully integrate
the operations of such acquired businesses, we may be unable to realize the
benefits we expect to achieve as a result of such acquisitions and our business
and results of operations may be less than expected.
Guarantees Within Certain of Our Variable Annuity Guarantee Riders that
Protect Policyholders Against Significant Downturns in Equity Markets May
Increase the Volatility of Our Results Related to the Inclusion of an Own Credit
Adjustment in the Fair Value of the Liability for These Riders
In determining the valuation of certain variable annuity guarantee rider
liabilities that are carried at fair value, we must consider our own credit
standing, which is not hedged. A decrease in our own credit spread could cause
the value of these liabilities to increase, resulting in a reduction to net
income. An increase in our own credit spread could cause the value of these
liabilities to decrease, resulting in an increase to net income. Because this
credit adjustment is determined, at least in part, by taking into consideration
publicly available information relating to our publicly traded debt (including
related credit default swap spreads), the overall condition of fixed income
markets may impact this adjustment. The credit premium implied in our publicly
traded debt instruments may not always necessarily reflect our actual credit
rating or our claims paying ability. Recently, the fixed-income markets have
experienced a period of extreme volatility which negatively impacted market
liquidity and increased credit spreads. The increase in credit default swap
spreads has at times been even more pronounced than in the fixed income cash
markets. In a broad based market downturn, this increase in our own credit
spread could result in net income being relatively flat when a deterioration in
other market inputs required for the estimate of fair value would otherwise
result in a significant reduction in net income. The inclusion of our own credit
standing in this case has the effect of muting the actual net income losses
recognized. In subsequent periods, if our credit spreads improve relative to the
. . .