Form over Matter: Differences in the Incentives to Convert Using Full versus Partial Demutualization in the U.S. Life Insurance Industry

By Erhemjamts, Otgontsetseg; Phillips, Richard D. | Journal of Risk and Insurance, June 2012 | Go to article overview

Form over Matter: Differences in the Incentives to Convert Using Full versus Partial Demutualization in the U.S. Life Insurance Industry


Erhemjamts, Otgontsetseg, Phillips, Richard D., Journal of Risk and Insurance


ABSTRACT

We explore the recent wave of demutualizations in the U.S. life insurance industry and analyze if the motives were similar for mutual life insurers that fully demutualized versus those that converted to mutual holding company (MHC) form. We find that fully demutualizing insurers were primarily motivated by a desire to gain access to external capital markets while those that chose MHC were motivated by other incentives including a tax-based incentive. We also document that after conversion, fully demutualizing insurers more aggressively increase their exposure to risks they have a comparative advantage to bear than do firms that convert to MHC.

INTRODUCTION

Recent experience suggests the mutual form of ownership in the U.S. life insurance industry is in doubt. Consider, in 1986, insurers organized in the mutual form of ownership, where the insurers' policyholders were also residual claimants, held 49 percent of total industry assets. By 2006, this percentage dropped to less than 10 percent with the stock form ownership now dominating the industry (1) (A.M. Best, 2007). The majority of the change can be explained by the wave of demutualizations that occurred during the 1990s and into the 21st century as a number of large and historically successful life insurers became attracted by the relative advantages of being organized as a stock company.

Given the dramatic change in industry structure, a number of papers have investigated the motivations behind demutualizations in the life insurance industry. However, there exists an interesting aspect of the demutualization story that has, until now, garnered little attention in the academic literature. In all of the previous empirical work, researchers have only considered the decision of whether an insurer converted from the mutual to the stock form of ownership. In reality, however, not only did the managers of a mutual life insurance company have to decide whether to demutualize, they also had to choose from different types of demutualization, including a full (or traditional) demutualization (2) and a mutual holding company (MHC) conversion. (3)

This article adds to the literature in at least four important ways. First, we improve on the existing literature by considering the method of conversion in an effort to gain additional insight into what motivated insurers to demutualize generally and then to explore if the motivations were similar across the firms that chose to fully demutualize versus those that chose to adopt the MHC form.

A second way that we improve upon the previous literature is by hypothesizing that the federal tax code provided mutual insurers an incentive to demutualize after Congress passed Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 809 in 1984. This section was a compromise in the Deficit Reduction Act (DEFRA) of 1984 that sought to create a level playing field between the stock and mutual segments of the industry by limiting the mutual companies' dividend deduction against pretax income. The reduction in the deduction was equal to the difference in average earnings between stocks and mutuals multiplied by the equity base of the mutual company. (4) Thus, mutual companies with larger equity bases are hypothesized to have had greater incentives to demutualize. To our knowledge, this tax hypothesis has not previously been tested.

Our third contribution to the literature on life insurer demutualizations is our analysis of the risk taking incentives of converting firms both before and after their conversion to the stock organizational form. Drawing on the coordinated risk management hypothesis of Stulz (1996) and Schrand and Unal (1998), we argue that the managers of demutualizing insurers have a stronger incentive to maximize firm value. Therefore, they will increase exposure to risks more likely to generate positive economic rents and will minimize, or at least not increase, exposure to risks expected to generate zero economic rents.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Form over Matter: Differences in the Incentives to Convert Using Full versus Partial Demutualization in the U.S. Life Insurance Industry
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.