Our insurance products primarily include commercial property and casualty coverages, including surety. Our services include risk management, information services, warranty and claims administration. Our products and services are primarily marketed through independent agents, brokers and managing general underwriters to a wide variety of customers, including small, medium and large businesses, insurance companies, associations, professionals and other groups.

The property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive both as to rate and service. We compete with a large number of stock and mutual insurance companies and other entities for both distributors and customers. Insurers compete on the basis of factors including products, price, services, ratings and financial strength. We must continuously allocate resources to refine and improve our insurance products and services.

The insurance industry is subject to comprehensive and detailed regulation and supervision. Regulatory oversight by applicable agencies is exercised through review of submitted filings and information, examinations (both financial and market conduct), direct inquiries and interviews. Each domestic and foreign jurisdiction has established supervisory agencies with broad administrative powers relative to licensing insurers and agents, approving policy forms, establishing reserve requirements, prescribing the form and content of statutory financial reports and regulating capital adequacy and the type, quality and amount of investments permitted. Such regulatory powers also extend to premium rate regulations, which require that rates not be excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory.discriminatory, governance requirements and risk assessment practice and disclosure. In addition to regulation of dividends by insurance subsidiaries, intercompany transfers of assets may be subject to prior notice or approval by insurance regulators, depending on the size of such transfers and payments in relation to the financial position of the insurance subsidiaries making the transfer or payment.

Hardy, a specialized Lloyd's of London (Lloyd's) underwriter, is also supervised by the Council of Lloyd's, which is the franchisor for all Lloyd's operations. The Council of Lloyd's has wide discretionary powers to regulate Lloyd's underwriting, such as establishing the capital requirements for syndicate participation. In addition, the annual business plans of each syndicate are subject to the review and approval of the Lloyd's Franchise Board, which is responsible for business planning and monitoring for all syndicates.

The Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 was enacted on January 12, 2015. The reauthorization provides for a federal government backstop for insured terrorism risks for another six years with increases to the insurer co-payment and program trigger. The existence of the mitigating effects of such law is part of the analysis of our overall risk posture for terrorism and, accordingly, our risk positioning may change if such law were modified. We also continue to invest in the security network of our systems on an enterprise-wide basis, especially considering the implications of data and privacy breaches. This requires an investment of a significant amount of resources by us on an ongoing basis. Potential implications of possible cybersecurity legislation on such current investment, if any, are uncertain. The foregoing proposals, either separately or in the aggregate, create a regulatory and legal environment that may require changes in our business plan or significant investment of resources in order to operate in an effective and compliant manner.

Additionally, various legislative and regulatory efforts to reform the tort liability system have, and will continue to, impact our industry. Although there has been some tort reform with positive impact to the insurance industry, new causes of action and theories of damages continue to be proposed in state court actions or by federal or state legislatures that continue to expand liability for insurers and their policyholders.

The following loss reserve development table illustrates the change over time of reserves established for property and casualty claim and claim adjustment expenses at the end of the preceding ten calendar years for our property and casualty insurance companies. The December 31, 2013 claim and claim adjustment expense reserves in the Consolidated Balance Sheet under Item 8 include amounts related to our life insurance subsidiary, therefore the reserves in this table as of that date do not agree to the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The first section shows the reserves as originally reported at the end of the stated year. The second section, reading down, shows the cumulative amounts paid as of the end of successive years with respect to the originally reported reserve liability. The third section, reading down, shows re-estimates of the originally recorded reserves as of the end of each successive year, which is the result of our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries' expanded awareness of additional facts and circumstances that pertain to the unsettled claims. The last section compares the latest re-estimated reserves to the reserves originally established, and indicates whether the original reserves were adequate or inadequate to cover the estimated costs of unsettled claims. The loss reserve development table is cumulative and, therefore, ending balances should not be added since the amount at the end of each calendar year includes activity for both the current and prior years.

Our business faces many risks. Each of the risks and uncertainties described below could lead to events or circumstances that have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, equity, business and insurer financial strength and corporate debt ratings. You should carefully consider and evaluate all of the information included in this report and any subsequent reports we may file with the SEC or make available to the public before investing in any securities we issue.

We maintain insurance reserves to cover our estimated ultimate unpaid liability for claim and claim adjustment expenses, including the estimated cost of the claims adjudication process, for reported and unreported claims. Insurance reserves are not an exact calculation of liability but instead are complex management estimates derived by us, generallydeveloped utilizing a variety of actuarial reserve estimation techniques from numerous assumptionsas of a given reporting date. The reserve estimation process involves a high degree of judgment and expectations about future events, manyvariability and is subject to a number of variables which are highly uncertain, such as estimates ofuncertain. These variables can be affected by both changes in internal processes and external events. Key variables include claims severity, frequency of claims, mortality, morbidity, discount rates, inflation, claims handling case reserving policies and procedures, case reserving approach, underwriting and pricing policies, changes in the legal and regulatory environment and the lag time between the occurrence of an insured event and the time of its ultimate settlement. Mortality is the relative incidence of death. Morbidity is the frequency and severity of injury, illness, sickness and diseases contracted. Many

There is generally a higher degree of these uncertaintiesvariability in estimating required reserves for long-tail coverages, such as general liability and workers' compensation, as they require a relatively longer period of time for claims to be reported and settled. The impact of changes in inflation and medical costs are not precisely quantifiable and require significant judgment on our part. As trends in underlying claims develop, particularly inmore pronounced for long-tail and long duration coverages we are sometimes requireddue to add to our reserves. This is called unfavorable net prior year development and results in a charge to our earnings in the amount of the added reserves, recorded in the period the change in estimate is made. These charges can be substantial.longer settlement period.

We are subject to the uncertain effects of emerging or potential claims and coverage issues that arise as industry practices and legal, judicial, social, economic and other environmental conditions change. These issues have had, and may continue to have, a negative effect on our business by either extending coverage beyond the original underwriting intent or by increasing the number or size of claims, resulting in further increases in our reserves. The effects of these and other unforeseen emerging claim and coverage issues are extremely difficult to predict. Examples of emerging

Emerging or potential claims and coverage issues include:

In light of the many uncertainties associated with establishing the estimates and making the assumptionsjudgments necessary to establish reserve levels, we continually review and change our reserve estimates in a regular and ongoing process as experience develops from the actual reporting and furthersettlement of claims are reported and settled.as the legal, regulatory and economic environment evolves. If estimatedour recorded reserves are insufficient for any reason, the required increase in reserves would be recorded as a charge against our earnings in the period in which reserves are determined to be insufficient. These charges could be substantial.

Our active life reserves for long term care policies are based on keyour best estimate assumptions includingas of December 31, 2015 with no margin for adverse deviation. Key assumptions include morbidity, persistency (the percentage of policies remaining in force), discount rate and future premium rate increases. These assumptions, which are critical bases for our reserve estimates, are inherently uncertain. If actual experience varies from these assumptions or the future outlook for these assumptions changes, we may be required to increase our reserves. See the Life & Group Non-Core Policyholder Reserves portion of Reserves - Estimates and Uncertainties section of MD&A in Item 7 for more information.

Estimating future experience for long term care policies is highly uncertain because the required projection period is very long and there is limited historical data and industry data available to us, as only a small portion of the long term care policies which have been written to date are in claims paying status. Morbidity and persistency trends can be volatile and may be negatively affected by many factors including, but not limited to, overall population mortalitypolicyholder behavior, socioeconomic factors, changes in health trends and advances in medical care and voluntary lapse experience.care.

A prolonged period during which interest rates remain at levels lower than those anticipated in our reserving would result in shortfalls in investment income on assets supporting our obligations under long term care policies, which may require changes to our reserves. This risk is more significant for our long term care products because the long potential duration of the policy obligations exceeds the duration of the supporting investment assets. In addition, we may not receive regulatory approval for the level of premium rate increases we request. Any adverse deviation between the level of future premium rate increases approved relative toand the level included in our reserving assumptions may require an increase to our reserves.

If our estimated reserves are insufficient for any reason, including changes in assumptions, the required increase in reserves would be recorded as a charge against our earnings in the period in which reserves are determined to be insufficient. These charges could be substantial.

Catastrophe losses are an inevitable part of our business. Various events can cause catastrophe losses. These events can be natural or man-made, and may include hurricanes, windstorms, earthquakes, hail, severe winter weather, fires, floods, riots, strikes, civil commotion and acts of terrorism. The frequency and severity of these catastrophe events are inherently unpredictable. In addition, longer-term natural catastrophe trends may be changing and new types of catastrophe losses may be developing due to climate change, a phenomenon that has been associated with extreme weather events linked to rising temperatures and includes effects on global weather patterns, greenhouse gases, sea, land and air temperatures, sea levels, rain, hail and snow.

The extent of our losses from catastrophes is a function of the total amount of our insured exposures in the affected areas, the frequency and severity of the events themselves, the level of reinsurance assumed and ceded, and reinsurance reinstatement premiums and state residual market assessments, if any. As in the case of catastrophe losses generally, it can take a long time for the ultimate cost to us to be finally determined, as a multitude of factors contribute to such costs, including evaluation of general liability and pollution exposures, additional living expenses, infrastructure disruption, business interruption and reinsurance collectibility. Reinsurance coverage for terrorism events is provided only in limited circumstances, especially in regard to “unconventional” terrorism acts, such as nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological attacks. As a result of the items discussed above, catastrophe losses are particularly difficult to estimate. The Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act

Additionally, claim frequency and severity for some lines of 2015 was enacted on January 12, 2015. The reauthorization provides for a federal government backstop forbusiness can be correlated to an external factor such as economic activity, financial market volatility, increasing health care costs or changes in the legal or regulatory environment. Claim frequency and severity can also be correlated to insureds' use of common business practices, equipment, vendors or software. This can result in multiple insured terrorism risks for another six years with increases to the insurer co-payment and program trigger. The existencelosses emanating out of the mitigating effectssame underlying cause. In these instances, we may be subject to increased claim frequency and severity across multiple policies or lines of business concurrently. While we do not define such law is partinstances as catastrophes for financial reporting purposes, they are similar to catastrophes in terms of the analysis ofuncertainty and potential impact on our overall risk posture for terrorism and, accordingly, our risk positioning may change if such law were modified.results.

Our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries have exposures related to A&EP claims. Our experience has been that establishing claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for casualty coverages relating to A&EP claims is subject to uncertainties that are greater than those presented by other claims. Additionally, traditional actuarial methods and techniques employed to estimate the ultimate cost of claims for more traditional property and casualty exposures are less precise in estimating claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for A&EP. As a result, estimating the ultimate cost of both reported and unreported A&EP claims is subject to a higher degree of variability.

On August 31, 2010, we completed a retroactive reinsurance transaction under which substantially all of our legacy A&EP liabilities were ceded to National Indemnity Company (NICO), a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., subject to an aggregate limit of $4 billion (Loss Portfolio Transfer). The cumulative amount ceded under the Loss Portfolio Transfer atas of December 31, 20142015 is $2.5$2.6 billion. If the other parties to the Loss Portfolio Transfer do not fully perform their obligations, our liabilities fornet losses incurred on A&EP claims covered by the Loss Portfolio Transfer exceed the aggregate limit of $4 billion, or we determine we have exposures to A&EP claims not covered by the Loss Portfolio Transfer, we may need to increase our recorded net reserves which would result in a charge against our earnings. These charges could be substantial.

All aspects of the insurance industry are highly competitive and we must continuously allocate resources to refine and improve our insurance products and services. We compete with a large number of stock and mutual insurance companies and other entities for both distributors and customers. Insurers compete on the basis of factors including products, price, services, ratings and financial strength. The competitor insurer landscape has evolved substantially in recent years, with significant consolidation and new market entrants, resulting in increased pressures on our ability to remain competitive, particularly in implementing pricing that is both attractive to our customer base and risk-appropriate to the Company. In addition, the property and casualty market is cyclical and has experienced periods characterized by relatively high levels of price competition, resulting in less restrictive underwriting standards and relatively low premium rates, followed by periods of relatively lower levels of competition, more selective underwriting standards and relatively high premium rates. During periods in which price competition is high, we may lose business to competitors offering competitive insurance products at lower prices. As a result, our premium levels and expense ratio could be materially adversely impacted.

Additionally, we purchase reinsurance to help manage our exposure to risk. Under our ceded reinsurance arrangements, another insurer assumes a specified portion of our exposure in exchange for a specified portion of policy premiums. Market conditions determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance protection we purchase, which affects the level of our business and profitability, as well as the level and types of risk we retain. If we are unable to obtain sufficient reinsurance at a cost we deem acceptable, we may be unwilling to bear the increased risk and would reduce the level of our underwriting commitments.

We have significant amounts recoverable from reinsurers which are reported as receivables on our Consolidated Balance Sheets and are estimated in a manner consistent with claim and claim adjustment expense reserves or future policy benefits reserves. The ceding of insurance does not, however, discharge our primary liability for claims. As a result, we are subject to credit risk relating to our ability to recover amounts due from reinsurers. Certain of our reinsurance carriers have experienced credit downgrades by rating agencies within the term of our contractual relationship. Such actionrelationship, which increases the likelihood that we will not be able to recover amounts due. In addition, reinsurers could dispute amounts which we believe are due to us. If the amounts we collect from reinsurers are less than the amount recorded for any of the foregoing reasons, our net incurred losses will be higher.

A portion of our business is written under deductible policies. Under these policies, we are obligated to pay the related insurance claims and are reimbursed by the policyholder to the extent of the deductible, which may be significant. As a result, we are exposed to credit risk to the policyholder. If the amounts we collect from policyholders are less than the amounts recorded, our incurred losses will be higher.

Our investment portfolio is exposed to various risks, such as interest rate, credit spread, issuer default, equity prices and foreign currency, many of which are unpredictable. Financial markets are highly sensitive to changes in economic conditions, monetary policies, domestic and international geopolitical issues and many other factors. Changes in financial markets including fluctuations in interest rates, credit, equity prices and foreign currency prices and many other factors beyond our control can adversely affect the value of our investments, the realization of investment income and the rate at which we discount certain liabilities.

We have significant holdings in fixed maturity investments that are sensitive to changes in interest rates. A decline in interest rates may reduce the returns earned on new fixed maturity investments, thereby reducing our net investment income, while an increase in interest rates may reduce the value of our existing fixed maturity investments. The value of our fixed maturity investments is also subject to risk that certain investments may default or become impaired due to deterioration in the financial condition of issuers of the investments we hold. Any such impairments which we deem to be other-than-temporary would result in a charge to our earnings.

In addition, we invest a portion of our assets in equity securities and limited partnerships which are subject to greater market volatility than our fixed maturity investments. Limited partnership investments generally provide a lower level of liquidity than fixed maturity or equity investments and therefore may also limit our ability to withdraw assets.

As a result of all of these factors, we may not earn an adequate return on our investments, may incur losses on the disposition of our investments and may be required to write down the value of our investments.

A significant breach of our data security infrastructure, resulting from actions by our employees, vendors, third-party administrators or by unknown third parties, that impacts our data framework or causes a failure to protect

personal information of our customers, claimants or employees may result in operational impairments and financial losses, as well as significant harm to our reputation.

The foregoing risks relating to disruption of service, interruption of operations and data loss could expose us to monetary and reputational damages. In addition, potential exposure includes substantially increased compliance costs and requires computer system upgradingupgrades and security-related investments. The breach of confidential information also could give rise to legal liability and regulatory action under data protection and privacy laws and regulations, both in the U.S. and foreign jurisdictions. Any such legal or regulatory action could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Insurance companies such as ours are subject to capital adequacy standards set by regulators to help identify companies that merit further regulatory attention. These standards apply specified risk factors to various asset, premium and reserve components of statutory capital and surplus reported in our legal entity statutory basis of accounting financial statements. Current rules, including those promulgated by insurance regulators and specialized markets, such as Lloyd's, require companies to maintain statutory capital and surplus at a specified minimum level determined using the applicable jurisdiction's regulatory capital adequacy formula. If we do not meet these minimum requirements, we may be restricted or prohibited from operating our business. If we are required to record a material charge against earnings in connection with a change in estimate or the occurrence of an event, or if we incur significant losses related to our investment portfolio, we may violate these minimum capital adequacy requirements unless we are able to raise sufficient additional capital. We may be limited in our ability to raise significant amounts of capital on favorable terms or at all.

We are a holding company and are dependent upon dividends, loans and other sources of cash from our subsidiaries in order to meet our obligations. Ordinary dividend payments, or dividends that do not require prior approval by

the insurance subsidiaries' domiciliary insurance regulator, are generally limited to amounts determined by formula which varies by jurisdiction. If we are restricted, by regulatory rule or otherwise, from paying or receiving intercompany dividends, we may not be able to fund our working capital needs and debt service requirements from available cash. As a result, we would need to look to other sources of capital which may be more expensive or may not be available at all.

Ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies. Our insurance company subsidiaries, as well as our public debt, are rated by rating agencies, namely, A.M. Best Company (A.M. Best), Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (Moody's) and Standard & Poor's (S&P). Ratings reflect the rating agency's opinions of an insurance company's or insurance holding company's financial strength, capital adequacy, operating performance, strategic position and ability to meet its obligations to policyholders and debt holders.

The rating agencies may take action to lower our ratings in the future as a result of any significant financial loss or possible changes in the methodology or criteria applied by the rating agencies. The severity of the impact on our business is dependent on the level of downgrade and, for certain products, which rating agency takes the rating action. Among the adverse effects in the event of such downgrades would be the inability to obtain a material volume of business from certain major insurance brokers, the inability to sell a material volume of our insurance products to certain markets and the required collateralization of certain future payment obligations or reserves.

In addition, it is possible that a lowering of the corporate debt ratings of Loews by certain of the rating agencies could result in an adverse impact on our ratings, independent of any change in our circumstances.

The insurance industry is subject to comprehensive and detailed regulation and supervision. Most insurance regulations are designed to protect the interests of our policyholders and third-party claimants, rather than our investors. Each jurisdiction in which we do business has established supervisory agencies that regulate the manner in which we do business, generally at the state level. Any changes in federal regulation could also impose significant burdens on us. In addition, the Lloyd's marketplace sets rules under which its members, including our Hardy syndicate, operate.

These rules and regulations relate to, among other things, the following:

Regulatory powers also extend to premium rate regulations which require that rates not be excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory. The jurisdictions in which we do business may also require us to provide coverage to persons whom we would not otherwise consider eligible.eligible or restrict us from withdrawing from unprofitable lines of business or unprofitable market areas. Each jurisdiction dictates the types of insurance and the level of coverage that must be provided to such involuntary risks. Our share of these involuntary risks is mandatory and generally a function of our respective share of the voluntary market by line of insurance in each jurisdiction.

None.

Not applicable.

Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the Chicago Stock Exchange under the symbol CNA.

As of February 18, 2015,12, 2016, we had 270,015,043270,274,361 shares of common stock outstanding. Approximatelyoutstanding and approximately 90% of our outstanding common stock iswas owned by Loews. We had 1,1551,090 stockholders of record as of February 18, 201512, 2016 according to the records maintained by our transfer agent.

The table below shows the high and low salesclosing prices for our common stock based on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Transactions.

The following table presents selected financial data. On July 2, 2012, we acquired Hardy. The results of Hardy are included from the date of acquisition. The table should be read in conjunction with Item 7.7 Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8.8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Form 10-K. Consistent with the Consolidated Balance Sheet presentation, theThe comparative period Financial Condition data continues to reflectthrough 2013 includes CAC assets and liabilities.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with Item 1A.1A Risk Factors, Item 6.6 Selected Financial Data and Item 8.8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Form 10-K.

On August 1, 2014, we closed the previously announced sale of the common stock of CAC, our life insurance subsidiary. In connection with the sale, we recorded an after-tax loss on sale of $211 million, which is reflected in (Loss) income from discontinued operations. Further information is provided in Notes A and QP to the Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.

In connection with the sale of CAC, we entered into a 100% coinsurance agreement on a separate small block of annuity business outside of CAC. As a result of the funds withheld basis used in this transaction, we recognized an after-tax operating loss of $34 million in 2014. Further information is provided in Note A to the Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.

The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the Consolidated Financial Statements and the amount of revenues and expenses reported during the period. Actual results may differ from those estimates.

Our Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in accordance with GAAP applied on a consistent basis. We continually evaluate the accounting policies and estimates used to prepare the Consolidated Financial Statements. In general, our estimates are based on historical experience, evaluation of current trends, information from third-party professionals and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the known facts and circumstances.

Insurance reserves are established for both short and long-duration insurance contracts. Short-duration contracts are primarily related to property and casualty insurance policies where the reserving process is based on actuarial estimates of the amount of loss, including amounts for known and unknown claims. Long-duration contracts are primarily related to long term care and are estimated using actuarial estimates about morbidity and persistency as well as assumptions about expected investment returns and future premium rate increases. The reserve for unearned premiums on property and casualty contracts represents the portion of premiums written related to the unexpired terms of coverage. The reserving process is discussed in further detail in the Reserves - Estimates and Uncertainties section below.

Additionally, an exposure exists with respect to the collectibility of amounts due from policyholders related to insurance contracts, including amounts due from insureds under high deductible policies and retrospectively rated policies. An allowance for uncollectible insurance receivables is recorded on the basis of periodic evaluations of balances currently due from insureds currently oras well as in the future, management's experience and current economic conditions.

If actual experience differs from the estimates made by management in determining the allowances for uncollectible reinsurance and insurance receivables, net receivables as reflected on our Consolidated Balance Sheets may not be collected. Therefore, our results of operations or equity could be materially adversely affected.

Our investment portfolio is subject to market declines below amortized cost that may be other-than-temporary and therefore result in the recognition of impairment losses in earnings. Factors considered in the determination of whether or not a decline is other-than-temporary include a current intention or need to sell the security or an indication that a credit loss exists. Significant judgment exists regarding the evaluation of the financial condition and expected near-term and long-term prospects of the issuer, the relevant industry conditions and trends and whether we expect to receive cash flows sufficient to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. We have an Impairment Committee which reviews the investment portfolio on at least a quarterly basis, with ongoing analysis as new information becomes available. Further information on our process for evaluating impairments is in Note A to the Consolidated Financial Statements.Statements included under Item 8.

Future policy benefitbenefits reserves for our long term care policies are based on certain assumptions including morbidity, persistency, discount rates and future premium rate increases. The adequacy of the reserves is contingent on actual experience related to these key assumptions, which were generally established at time of issue.assumptions. If actual experience differs from these assumptions, the reserves may not be adequate, requiring us to add to reserves.

These changes to our reserves could materially adversely impact our results of operations and equity. The reserving process is discussed in further detail in the Reserves - Estimates and Uncertainties section below.

We make a significant number of assumptions in estimating the liabilities and costs related to our pension and postretirement benefit obligations under our benefit plans. The assumptions that most affect these costs are the discount rate and the expected long term rate of return on plan assets. These assumptions are evaluated relative to current economic factors such as inflation, interest rates and fiscal and monetary policies.broader capital market expectations. Changes in these assumptions can have a material impact on pension obligations and pension expense.

To determine the discount rate assumption as of the year-end measurement date for our CNA Retirement Plan and CNA Health and Group Benefits Program, we considered the estimated timing of plan benefit payments and available yields on high quality fixed income debt securities. For this purpose, high quality is considered a rating of Aa or better by Moody's or a rating of AA or better from S&P. We reviewed several yield curves constructed using the cash flow characteristics of the plans as well as bond indices as of the measurement date. The year-over-year changetrend of those data points was also considered.

In determining the expected long term rate of return on plan assets assumption for our CNA Retirement Plan, we considered the historical performance of the investment portfolio as well as the long term market return expectations based on the investment mix of the portfolio.portfolio and the expected investment horizon.

We account for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred income taxes are recognized for temporary differences between the financial statement and tax return basis of assets and liabilities. Any resulting future tax benefits are recognized to the extent that realization of such benefits is more likely than not, and a valuation allowance is established for any portion of a deferred tax asset that management believes will not be realized. The assessment of the need for a valuation allowance requires management to make estimates and assumptions about future earnings, reversal of existing temporary differences and available tax planning strategies. If actual experience differs from these estimates and assumptions, the recorded deferred tax asset may not be fully realized resulting in an increase to income tax expense in our results of operations. In addition, the ability to record deferred tax assets in the future could be limited, resulting in a higher effective tax rate in that future period.

We are subject to the uncertain effects of emerging or potential claims and coverage issues that arise as industry practices and legal, judicial, social, economic and other environmental conditions change. These issues have had, and may continue to have, a negative effect on our business by either extending coverage beyond the original underwriting intent or by increasing the number or size of claims. Examples of emerging

Emerging or potential claims and coverage issues include:

The impact of these and other unforeseen emerging or potential claims and coverage issues is difficult to predict and could materially adversely affect the adequacy of our claim and claim adjustment expense reserves and could lead to future reserve additions.

Our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries also have actual and potential exposures related to A&EP claims. Our experience has been that establishing reserves for casualty coverages relating to A&EP claims and the related claim adjustment expenses are subject to uncertainties that are greater than those presented by other claims. Additionally, traditional actuarial methods and techniques employed to estimate the ultimate cost of claims for more traditional property and casualty exposures are less precise in estimating claim and claim adjustment reserves for A&EP. As a result, estimating the ultimate cost of both reported and unreported A&EP claims are subject to a higher degree of variability.

The Loss Portfolio Transfer is a retroactive reinsurance contract. During the fourth quarter of 2013 theThe cumulative amounts ceded under the Loss Portfolio Transfer exceededexceed the consideration paid, resulting intherefore we have recognized a $189 million deferred retroactive reinsurance gain. This deferred benefit will begain is recognized in earnings in future periods in proportion to actual recoveries under the Loss Portfolio Transfer. Over the life of the contract, there is no economic impact as long as any additional losses are within the limit underof the contract. The

Historically we performed our actuarial review of A&EP claims in the fourth quarter. In 2014 we were unable to complete the fourth quarter 2014 A&EP reserve review was not completed. Additionalbecause we determined that additional information and analysis onof inuring third-party reinsurance recoveries are needed to finalize the review. We expect to complete thewas required. The reserve review was completed in the first halfsecond quarter of 2015.2015 and management adopted the second quarter of the year as the timing for all future annual A&EP claims actuarial reviews.

In developing claim and claim adjustment expense (“loss” or “losses”) reserve estimates, our actuaries perform detailed reserve analyses that are staggered throughout the year. The data is organized at a “product”reserve group level. A productreserve group can be a line of business covering a subset of insureds such as commercial automobile liability for small or middle market customers, it can encompass several lines of business provided to a specific set of customers such as dentists, or it can be a particular type of claim such as construction defect. Every productreserve group is reviewed at least once during the year. The analyses generally review losses gross of ceded reinsurance and apply the ceded reinsurance terms to the gross estimates to establish estimates net of reinsurance. In addition to the detailed analyses, we review actual loss emergence for all products each quarter.

The detailed analyses use a variety of generally accepted actuarial methods and techniques to produce a number of estimates of ultimate loss. Our actuaries determine a point estimate of ultimate loss by reviewing the various estimates and assigning weight to each estimate given the characteristics of the productreserve group being reviewed. The reserve estimate is the difference between the estimated ultimate loss and the losses paid to date. The difference between the estimated ultimate loss and the case incurred loss (paid loss plus case reserve) is IBNR. IBNR calculated as such includes a provision for development on known cases (supplemental development) as well as a provision for claims that have occurred but have not yet been reported (pure IBNR).

Most of our business can be characterized as long-tail. For long-tail business, it will generally be several years between the time the business is written and the time when all claims are settled. Our long-tail exposures include commercial automobile liability, workers' compensation, general liability, medical professional liability, other professional liability and management liability coverages, assumed reinsurance run-off and products liability. Short-tail exposures include property, commercial automobile physical damage, marine, surety and warranty. Specialty, Commercial and International contain both long-tail and short-tail exposures. Corporate & Other Non-Core contains long-tail exposures.

Various methods are used to project ultimate loss for both long-tail and short-tail exposures including, but not limited to, the following:

The paid development method estimates ultimate losses by reviewing paid loss patterns and applying them to accident or policy years with further expected changes in paid loss. Selection of the paid loss pattern may require consideration of several factors including the impact of inflation on claims costs, the rate at which claims professionals make claim payments and close claims, the impact of judicial decisions, the impact of underwriting changes, the impact of large claim payments and other factors. Claim cost inflation itself may require evaluation of changes in the cost of repairing or replacing property, changes in the cost of medical care, changes in the cost of wage replacement, judicial decisions, legislative changes and other factors. Because this method assumes that

For many products,reserve groups, paid loss data for recent periods may be too immature or erratic for accurate predictions. This situation often exists for long-tail exposures. In addition, changes in the factors described above may result in inconsistent payment patterns. Finally, estimating the paid loss pattern subsequent to the most mature point available in the data analyzed often involves considerable uncertainty for long-tail products such as workers' compensation.

The incurred development method is similar to the paid development method, but it uses case incurred losses instead of paid losses.  Since the method uses more data (case reserves in addition to paid losses) than the paid development method, the incurred development patterns may be less variable than paid patterns. However, selection of the incurred loss pattern typically requires analysis of all of the same factors described above. In addition, the inclusion of case reserves can lead to distortions if changes in case reserving practices have taken place, and the use of case incurred losses may not eliminate the issues associated with estimating the incurred loss pattern subsequent to the most mature point available.

The loss ratio method multiplies earned premiums by an expected loss ratio to produce ultimate loss estimates for each accident or policy year. This method may be useful for immature accident or policy periods or if loss development patterns are inconsistent, losses emerge very slowly, or there is relatively little loss history from which to estimate future losses. The selection of the expected loss ratio typically requires analysis of loss ratios from earlier accident or policy years or pricing studies and analysis of inflationary trends, frequency trends, rate changes, underwriting changes and other applicable factors.

The Bornhuetter-Ferguson method using paid loss is a combination of the paid development method and the loss ratio method. This method normally determines expected loss ratios similar to the approach used to estimate the expected loss ratio for the loss ratio method and typically requires analysis of the same factors described above. This method assumes that future losses will develop at the expected loss ratio level. The percent of paid loss to ultimate loss implied from the paid development method is used to determine what percentage of ultimate loss is yet to be paid. The use of the pattern from the paid development method typically requires consideration of the same factors listed in the description of the paid development method. The estimate of losses yet to be paid is added to current paid losses to estimate the ultimate loss for each year. For long-tail lines, this method will react very slowly if actual ultimate loss ratios are different from expectations due to changes not accounted for by the expected loss ratio calculation.

The Bornhuetter-Ferguson method using incurred loss is similar to the Bornhuetter-Ferguson method using paid loss except that it uses case incurred losses. The use of case incurred losses instead of paid losses can result in development patterns that are less variable than paid patterns. However, the inclusion of case reserves can lead to distortions if changes in case reserving have taken place, and the method typically requires analysis of the same factors that need to be reviewed for the loss ratio and incurred development methods.

The frequency times severity method multiplies a projected number of ultimate claims by an estimated ultimate average loss for each accident or policy year to produce ultimate loss estimates. Since projections of the ultimate number of claims are often less variable than projections of ultimate loss, this method can provide more reliable results for productsreserve groups where loss development patterns are inconsistent or too variable to be relied on exclusively. In addition, this method can more directly account for changes in coverage that impact the number and size of claims. However, this method can be difficult to apply to situations where very large claims or a substantial number of unusual claims result in volatile average claim sizes. Projecting the ultimate number of claims may require analysis of several factors including the rate at which policyholders report claims to us, the impact of judicial decisions, the impact of underwriting changes and other factors. Estimating the ultimate average loss may require analysis of the impact of large losses and claim cost trends based on changes in the cost of repairing or replacing property, changes in the cost of medical care, changes in the cost of wage replacement, judicial decisions, legislative changes and other factors.

Stochastic modeling produces a range of possible outcomes based on varying assumptions related to the particular productreserve group being modeled. For some products,reserve groups, we use models which rely on historical development patterns at an aggregate level, while other productsreserve groups are modeled using individual claim variability assumptions supplied by the claims department. In either case, multiple simulations are run and the results are analyzed to produce a range of

For many exposures, especially those that can be considered long-tail, a particular accident or policy year may not have a sufficient volume of paid losses to produce a statistically reliable estimate of ultimate losses. In such a case, our actuaries typically assign more weight to the incurred development method than to the paid development method. As claims continue to settle and the volume of paid loss increases, the actuaries may assign additional weight to the paid development method.  For most of our products, even the incurred losses for accident or policy years that are early in the claim settlement process will not be of sufficient volume to produce a reliable estimate of ultimate losses. In these cases, we will not assign any weight to the paid and incurred development methods. We will use the loss ratio, Bornhuetter-Ferguson and frequency times severity methods.  For short-tail exposures, the paid and incurred development methods can often be relied on sooner, primarily because our history includes a sufficient number of years to cover the entire period over which paid and incurred losses are expected to change. However, we may also use the loss ratio, Bornhuetter-Ferguson and frequency times severity methods for short-tail exposures.

For other more complex productsreserve groups where the above methods may not produce reliable indications, we use additional methods tailored to the characteristics of the specific situation.

The reserve analyses performed by our actuaries result in point estimates. Each quarter, the results of the detailed reserve reviews are summarized and discussed with our senior management to determine the best estimate of reserves. Senior management considers many factors in making this decision. The factors include, but are not limited to, the historical pattern and volatility of the actuarial indications, the sensitivity of the actuarial indications to changes in paid and incurred loss patterns, the consistency of claims handling processes, the consistency of case reserving practices, changes in our pricing and underwriting, pricing and underwriting trends in the insurance market and legal, judicial, social and economic trends.

Our recorded reserves reflect our best estimate as of a particular point in time based upon known facts, consideration of the factors cited above and our judgment. The carried reserve may differ from the actuarial point estimate as the result of our consideration of the factors noted above as well as the potential volatility of the projections associated with the specific productreserve group being analyzed and other factors affecting claims costs that may not be quantifiable through traditional actuarial analysis. This process results in management's best estimate which is then recorded as the loss reserve.

Currently, our recorded reserves are modestly higher than the actuarial point estimate. For Commercial, Specialty and International, the difference between our reserves and the actuarial point estimate is primarily driven by uncertainty with respect to immature accident years, claim cost inflation, changes in claims handling, changes to the tort environment which may adversely impact claim costs and the effects from the economy. For Corporate & Other Non-Core, the difference between our reserves and the actuarial point estimate is primarily driven by the potential tail volatility of run-off exposures.

The key assumptions fundamental to the reserving process are often different for various productsreserve groups and accident or policy years. Some of these assumptions are explicit assumptions that are required of a particular method, but most of the assumptions are implicit and cannot be precisely quantified. An example of an explicit assumption is the pattern employed in the paid development method. However, the assumed pattern is itself based on several implicit assumptions such as the impact of inflation on medical costs and the rate at which claim professionals close claims. As a result, the effect on reserve estimates of a particular change in assumptions typically cannot be specifically quantified, and changes in these assumptions cannot be tracked over time.

Our recorded reserves are management's best estimate. In order to provide an indication of the variability associated with our net reserves, the following discussion provides a sensitivity analysis that shows the approximate estimated impact of variations in significant factors affecting our reserve estimates for particular types of business. These significant factors are the ones that we believe could most likely materially affect the reserves. This discussion covers the major types of business for which we believe a material deviation to our reserves is reasonably possible. There can be no assurance that actual experience will be consistent with the current assumptions or with the variation

The three areas for which we believe a materialsignificant deviation to our net reserves is reasonably possible forare (i) professional liability, management liability, and surety products; (ii) workers' compensation; and (iii) general liability.

Professional liability and management liability products and Surety products. This includessurety products include professional liability coverages provided to various professional firms, including architects, real estate agents, small and mid-sized accounting firms, law firms and other professional firms. ThisThey also includesinclude directors and officers (D&O), employment practices, fiduciary, fidelity and surety coverages, as well as insurance products serving the healthcare delivery system. The most significant factor affecting reserve estimates for these productsliability coverages is claim severity. Claim severity is driven by the cost of medical care, the cost of wage replacement, legal fees, judicial decisions, legislative changes and other factors. Underwriting and claim handling decisions such as the classes of business written and individual claim settlement decisions can also impact claim severity. If the estimated claim severity increases by 9%, we estimate that the net reserves would increase by approximately $500 million. If the estimated claim severity decreases by 3%, we estimate that net reserves would decrease by approximately $150 million. Our net reserves for these products were approximately $5.4 billion atas of December 31, 2014.2015.

Given the factors described above, it is not possible to quantify precisely the ultimate exposure represented by claims and related litigation. As a result, we regularly review the adequacy of our reserves and reassess our reserve estimates as historical loss experience develops, additional claims are reported and settled and additional information becomes available in subsequent periods.

We calculatemaintain both claim and maintainclaim adjustment expense reserves as well as future policy benefits reserves for policyholder benefits for our Life & Group Non-Core segment, which primarily includessegment. Claim and claim expense reserves consist of estimated reserves for long term care basedpolicyholders that are currently receiving benefits, including claims that have been incurred but are not yet reported. In developing the claim and claim adjustment expense reserve estimates for our long term care policies, our actuaries perform a detailed claim experience study on actuarial assumptions.an annual basis. The study reviews the sufficiency of existing reserves for policyholders currently on claim and includes an evaluation of expected benefit utilization and claim duration. Our recorded claim and claim adjustment expense reserves reflect our best estimate after incorporating the results of the most recent study. In addition, claim and claim adjustment reserves are also maintained for structured settlement obligations that are not funded by annuities related to certain property and casualty claimants. Future policy benefits reserves represent the active life reserves related

to our long term care policies and are the present value of expected future benefit payments and expenses less expected future premium. The determination of these reserves is fundamental to our financial results and requires management to make estimates and assumptions about expected investment and policyholder experience over the life of the contract. Since many of these contracts may be in force for several decades, these assumptions are subject to significant estimation risk.

Under GAAP, reserves for long term care future policy benefits and the unfunded structured settlement annuity claim and claim adjustment expense reserves were first established based on our actuarial best estimate assumptions at the date the contract was issued plus a margin for adverse deviation. Actuarial assumptions include estimates of morbidity, persistency, discount rates and expenses over the life of the contracts. Under GAAP, theseThese assumptions are locked in throughout the life of the contract unless a premium deficiency develops. The impact of differences between the actuarial assumptions and actual experience is reflected in results of operations each period.

Long term care policies provide benefits for nursing home,homes, assisted living and home health care subject to various daily and lifetime caps. Policyholders must continue to make periodic premium payments to keep the policy in force. Generally we have the ability to increase policy premiums, subject to state regulatory approval.

Annually, management assesses the adequacy of its GAAP long term care future policy benefits reserves by product groupas well as the claim and claim adjustment expense reserves for unfunded structured settlement obligations by performing a gross premium valuation (GPV) to determine if there is a premium deficiency. Under the GPV, management estimates required reserves using best estimate assumptions, including anticipated future premium rate increases, as of the date of the assessment without provisions for adverse deviation. The GPV reserves are then compared to the recorded reserves. If the GPV reserves are greater than the existing net GAAP reserves (i.e. reserves net of any deferred acquisition costs asset), the existing net GAAP reserves are unlocked and are increased to the greater amount. Any such increase would beis reflected in our results of operations in the period in which the need for such adjustment is determined, and could materially adversely affect our results of operations, equity and business and insurer financial strength and corporate debt ratings.