FORM 10-K
Table of Contents

 
 
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
 
Form 10-K
     
(Mark One)
   
þ
  ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
    For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
 
or
 
o
  TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
    For the transition period from                  to
Commission file number 1-8787
 
American International Group, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
     
Delaware
  13-2592361
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
  (I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
70 Pine Street, New York, New York
(Address of principal executive offices)
  10270
(Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (212) 770-7000
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
     
    Name of each exchange
Title of each class   on which registered
     
Common Stock, Par Value $2.50 Per Share
  New York Stock Exchange
5.75% Series A-2 Junior Subordinated Debentures
  New York Stock Exchange
4.875% Series A-3 Junior Subordinated Debentures
  New York Stock Exchange
6.45% Series A-4 Junior Subordinated Debentures
  New York Stock Exchange
7.70% Series A-5 Junior Subordinated Debentures
  New York Stock Exchange
NIKKEI 225® Index Market Index Target-Term Securities®
due January 5, 2011
  American Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
     
Title of each class    
     
None
   
 
    Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes o         No þ
    Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes o         No þ
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes þ         No o
    Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.     o
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
             
Large Accelerated Filer þ
  Accelerated Filer o   Non-Accelerated Filer o   Smaller Reporting Company o
        (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)    
    Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes o                  No þ
    The aggregate market value of the voting and nonvoting common equity held by nonaffiliates of the registrant computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold as of June 29, 2007 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), was approximately $152,287,000,000.
  As of January 31, 2008, there were outstanding 2,522,336,771 shares of Common Stock, $2.50 par value per share, of the registrant.
Documents Incorporated by Reference:
    Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement filed or to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A involving the election of directors at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders of the registrant scheduled to be held on May 14, 2008 are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K.
 
 
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         1


 

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Table of Contents
 
               
Index       Page
 
 Part I
     Business     3  
     Risk Factors     16  
     Unresolved Staff Comments     19  
     Properties     20  
     Legal Proceedings     20  
     Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders     25  
 Part II
     Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities     26  
     Selected Financial Data     28  
     Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations     29  
     Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk     128  
     Financial Statements and Supplementary Data     128  
     Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure     202  
     Controls and Procedures     202  
     Other Information     204  
 Part III*
     Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance     205  
     Executive Compensation     205  
     Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters     205  
     Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence     205  
     Principal Accountant Fees and Services     205  
 Part IV
     Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules     205  
        206  
 EX-12: STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIOS
 EX-21: SUBSIDIARIES
 EX-23: CONSENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
 EX-31: CERTIFICATIONS
 EX-32: CERTIFICATIONS
 
Except for the information provided in Part I under the heading “Directors and Executive Officers of AIG,” Part III Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 are included in AIG’s Definitive Proxy Statement to be used in connection with AIG’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders scheduled to be held on May 14, 2008.
2        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Part I
 
Item 1.
Business
American International Group, Inc. (AIG), a Delaware corporation, is a holding company which, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in a broad range of insurance and insurance-related activities in the United States and abroad. AIG’s primary activities include both General Insurance and Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations. Other significant activities include Financial Services and Asset Management. The principal business units in each of AIG’s operating segments are as follows*:
General Insurance
  American Home Assurance Company (American Home)
 
  National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. (National Union)
 
  New Hampshire Insurance Company (New Hampshire)
 
  Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington)
 
  The Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection and Insurance Company (HSB)
 
  Transatlantic Reinsurance Company
 
  United Guaranty Residential Insurance Company
 
  American International Underwriters Overseas, Ltd. (AIUO)
 
  AIU Insurance Company (AIUI)
Life Insurance & Retirement Services
  Domestic:
 
  American General Life Insurance Company (AIG American General)
 
  American General Life and Accident Insurance Company (AGLA)
 
  The United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York (USLIFE)
 
  The Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company (VALIC)
 
  AIG Annuity Insurance Company (AIG Annuity)
 
  AIG SunAmerica Life Assurance Company (AIG SunAmerica)
 
  Foreign:
 
  American Life Insurance Company (ALICO)
 
  AIG Star Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (AIG Star Life)
 
  AIG Edison Life Insurance Company (AIG Edison Life)
 
  American International Assurance Company, Limited, together with American International Assurance Company (Bermuda) Limited (AIA)
 
  American International Reinsurance Company Limited (AIRCO)
 
  Nan Shan Life Insurance Company, Ltd. (Nan Shan)
 
  The Philippine American Life and General Insurance Company (Philamlife)
Financial Services
  International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC)
 
  AIG Financial Products Corp. and AIG Trading Group Inc. and their respective subsidiaries (collectively, AIGFP)
 
  American General Finance, Inc. (AGF)
 
  AIG Consumer Finance Group, Inc. (AIGCFG)
 
  Imperial A.I. Credit Companies (A.I. Credit)
Asset Management
  AIG SunAmerica Asset Management Corp. (SAAMCo)
 
  AIG Global Asset Management Holdings Corp. and its subsidiaries and affiliated companies (collectively, AIG Investments)
 
  AIG Private Bank Ltd. (AIG Private Bank)
 
  AIG Global Real Estate Investment Corp. (AIG Global Real Estate)
    At December 31, 2007, AIG and its subsidiaries had approximately 116,000 employees.
    AIG’s Internet address for its corporate website is www.aigcorporate.com. AIG makes available free of charge, through the Investor Information section of AIG’s corporate website, Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and Proxy Statements on Schedule 14A and amendments to those reports or statements filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a), 14(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). AIG also makes available on its corporate website copies of the charters for its Audit, Nominating and Corporate Governance and Compensation and Management Resources Committees, as well as its Corporate Governance Guidelines (which include Director Independence Standards), Director, Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officer Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Employee Code of Conduct and Related-Party Transactions Approval Policy. Except for the documents specifically incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K, information contained on AIG’s website or that can be accessed through its website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
    Throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K, AIG presents its operations in the way it believes will be most meaningful, as well as most transparent. Certain of the measurements used by AIG management are “non-GAAP financial measures” under SEC rules and regulations. Statutory underwriting profit (loss) and combined ratios are determined in accordance with accounting principles prescribed by insurance regulatory authorities. For an explanation of why AIG management considers these “non-GAAP measures” useful to investors, see Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
 
*For information on AIG’s business segments, see Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         3


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
The following table presents the general development of the business of AIG on a consolidated basis, the contributions made to AIG’s consolidated revenues and operating income and the assets held, in the periods indicated, by its General Insurance, Life Insurance & Retirement Services, Financial Services and Asset Management operations and Other operations. For additional information, see Item 6. Selected Financial Data, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Notes 1 and 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
                                             
 
Years Ended December 31,
(in millions)   2007   2006(a)   2005(a)   2004(a)   2003(a)
 
General Insurance operations:
                                       
 
Gross premiums written
  $ 58,798     $ 56,280     $ 52,725     $ 52,046     $ 46,938  
 
Net premiums written
    47,067       44,866       41,872       40,623       35,031  
 
Net premiums earned
    45,682       43,451       40,809       38,537       31,306  
 
Net investment income(b)
    6,132       5,696       4,031       3,196       2,566  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    (106 )     59       334       228       (39 )
 
Operating income(b)(c)(d)
    10,526       10,412       2,315       3,177       4,502  
 
Year-end identifiable assets
    181,708       167,004       150,667       131,658       117,511  
Statutory measures(e):
                                       
 
Statutory underwriting profit (loss)(c)(d)
    4,073       4,408       (2,165 )     (564 )     1,559  
 
Loss ratio
    65.6       64.6       81.1       78.8       73.1  
 
Expense ratio
    24.7       24.5       23.6       21.5       19.6  
 
 
Combined ratio(d)
    90.3       89.1       104.7       100.3       92.7  
 
Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations:
                                       
 
Premiums and other considerations
    33,627       30,766       29,501       28,167       23,568  
 
Net investment income(b)
    22,341       20,024       18,677       15,654       13,278  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)(f)
    (2,398 )     88       (158 )     45       362  
 
Operating income(b)(f)
    8,186       10,121       8,965       7,968       6,970  
 
Year-end identifiable assets
    615,386       550,957       489,331       457,071       380,126  
 
Gross insurance in force at end of year
    2,312,045       2,070,600       1,852,833       1,858,094       1,583,031  
 
Financial Services operations:
                                       
 
Interest, lease and finance charges(g)(h)
    (1,209 )     7,910       10,523       7,495       6,241  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    (100 )     (133 )     154       (45 )     123  
 
Operating income (loss)(g)(h)
    (9,515 )     383       4,424       2,131       1,302  
 
Year-end identifiable assets
    203,894       202,485       161,919       161,929       138,613  
 
Asset Management operations:
                                       
 
Investment income from spread-based products and management, advisory and incentive fees
    6,625       4,668       4,500       4,179       3,379  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    (1,000 )     (125 )     82       60       (754 )
 
Operating income
    1,164       1,538       1,963       1,947       521  
 
Year-end identifiable assets
    77,274       78,275       69,584       68,503       56,047  
 
Other operations:
                                       
   
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    12       217       (71 )     (244 )     (134 )
   
All other(i)
    (1,430 )     (984 )     (2,383 )     (134 )     (1,254 )
 
Consolidated:
                                       
 
Total revenues(j)(k)
    110,064       113,387       108,781       97,823       79,601  
 
Operating income(b)(j)(k)
    8,943       21,687       15,213       14,845       11,907  
 
Year-end total assets
    1,060,505       979,410       853,048       801,007       675,602  
 
(a) Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts to conform to the current period presentation.
 
(b) In 2006, includes the effect of out of period adjustments related to the accounting for certain interests in unit investment trusts (UCITS). The effect was an increase of $490 million in both revenues and operating income for General Insurance and an increase of $240 million and $169 million in revenues and operating income, respectively, for Life Insurance & Retirement Services.
 
(c) Includes current year catastrophe-related losses of $276 million, $2.89 billion and $1.05 billion in 2007, 2005 and 2004, respectively. There were no significant catastrophe-related losses in 2006 or 2003.
(d) Operating income was reduced by fourth quarter charges of $1.8 billion and $850 million in 2005 and 2004, respectively, resulting from the annual review of General Insurance loss and loss adjustment reserves. In 2006, 2005 and 2004, changes in estimates for asbestos and environmental reserves were $198 million, $873 million and $850 million, respectively.
 
(e) Calculated on the basis under which the U.S.-domiciled general insurance companies are required to report such measurements to regulatory authorities.
4        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
(f) In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of $2.8 billion, $641 million, $425 million, $441 million and $1.2 billion. See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Invested Assets — Other-than-temporary impairments.
 
(g) Includes gains (losses) from hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (FAS) No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (FAS 133), including the related foreign exchange gains and losses. In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, the effect was $211 million, $(1.82) billion, $2.01 billion, $(122) million and $(1.01) billion in both revenues and operating income for Capital Markets. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are effective economic hedges of investments and borrowings. These gains (losses) in 2007 include a $380 million out of period charge to reverse net gains recognized on transfers of available for sale securities among legal entities consolidated within AIGFP. In 2006, includes an out of period charge of $223 million related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over the accounting for certain derivative transactions under FAS 133. In the first quarter of 2007, AIGFP began applying hedge accounting for certain of its interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts hedging its investments and borrowings.
(h) In 2007, both revenues and operating income (loss) include an unrealized market valuation loss of $11.5 billion on AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio and an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $643 million on AIGFP’s available for sale investment securities. See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Invested Assets — Other-than- temporary impairments.
(i) In 2005, includes $1.6 billion of regulatory settlement costs as described under Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
 
(j) In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of $4.7 billion, $944 million, $598 million, $684 million and $1.5 billion. Also includes gains (losses) from hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, including the related foreign exchange gains and losses. In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, the effect was $(1.44) billion, $(1.87) billion, $2.02 billion, $385 million and $(1.50) billion in revenues and $(1.44) billion, $(1.87) billion, $2.02 billion, $671 million and $(1.22) billion in operating income. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are effective economic hedges of investments and borrowings.
 
(k) Represents income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         5


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
General Insurance Operations
AIG’s General Insurance subsidiaries write substantially all lines of commercial property and casualty insurance and various personal lines both domestically and abroad. Domestic General Insurance operations are comprised of the Domestic Brokerage Group (DBG), Reinsurance, Personal Lines and Mortgage Guaranty.
    AIG is diversified both in terms of classes of business and geographic locations. In General Insurance, workers compensation business is the largest class of business written and represented approximately 15 percent of net premiums written for the year ended December 31, 2007. During 2007, 10 percent and 7 percent of the direct General Insurance premiums written (gross premiums less return premiums and cancellations, excluding reinsurance assumed and before deducting reinsurance ceded) were written in California and New York, respectively. No other state or foreign country accounted for more than five percent of such premiums.
    The majority of AIG’s General Insurance business is in the casualty classes, which tend to involve longer periods of time for the reporting and settling of claims. This may increase the risk and uncertainty with respect to AIG’s loss reserve development.
DBG
AIG’s primary Domestic General Insurance division is DBG. DBG’s business in the United States and Canada is conducted through American Home, National Union, Lexington, HSB and certain other General Insurance company subsidiaries of AIG. During 2007, DBG accounted for 51 percent of AIG’s General Insurance net premiums written.
    DBG writes substantially all classes of business insurance, accepting such business mainly from insurance brokers. This provides DBG the opportunity to select specialized markets and retain underwriting control. Any licensed broker is able to submit business to DBG without the traditional agent-company contractual relationship, but such broker usually has no authority to commit DBG to accept a risk.
    In addition to writing substantially all classes of business insurance, including large commercial or industrial property insurance, excess liability, inland marine, environmental, workers compensation and excess and umbrella coverages, DBG offers many specialized forms of insurance such as aviation, accident and health, equipment breakdown, directors and officers liability (D&O), difference-in-conditions, kidnap-ransom, export credit and political risk, and various types of professional errors and omissions coverages. Also included in DBG are the operations of AIG Risk Management, which provides insurance and risk management programs for large corporate customers and is a leading provider of customized structured insurance products, and AIG Environmental, which focuses specifically on providing specialty products to clients with environmental exposures. Lexington writes surplus lines for risks on which conventional insurance companies do not readily provide insurance coverage, either because of complexity or because the coverage does not lend itself to conventional contracts. The AIG Worldsource Division introduces and coordinates AIG’s products and services to U.S.-based multinational clients and foreign corporations doing business in the U.S.
Reinsurance
The subsidiaries of Transatlantic Holdings, Inc. (Transatlantic) offer reinsurance on both a treaty and facultative basis to insurers in the United States and abroad. Transatlantic structures programs for a full range of property and casualty products with an emphasis on specialty risk. Transatlantic is a public company owned 59.0 percent by AIG and therefore is included in AIG’s consolidated financial statements.
Personal Lines
AIG’s Personal Lines operations provide automobile insurance through aigdirect.com, the newly formed operation resulting from the 2007 combination of AIG Direct and 21st Century Insurance Group (21st Century) operations, and the Agency Auto Division, as well as a broad range of coverages for high net worth individuals through the AIG Private Client Group.
Mortgage Guaranty
The main business of the subsidiaries of United Guaranty Corporation (UGC) is the issuance of residential mortgage guaranty insurance, both domestically and internationally, that covers the first loss for credit defaults on high loan-to-value conventional first-lien mortgages for the purchase or refinance of one to four family residences. UGC subsidiaries also write second-lien and private student loan guaranty insurance.
Foreign General Insurance
AIG’s Foreign General Insurance group accepts risks primarily underwritten through American International Underwriters (AIU), a marketing unit consisting of wholly owned agencies and insurance companies. The Foreign General Insurance group also includes business written by AIG’s foreign-based insurance subsidiaries. The Foreign General Insurance group uses various marketing methods and multiple distribution channels to write both commercial and consumer lines insurance with certain refinements for local laws, customs and needs. AIU operates in Asia, the Pacific Rim, Europe, the U.K., Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. During 2007, the Foreign General Insurance group accounted for 28 percent of AIG’s General Insurance net premiums written.
Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Net Losses and Loss Expense Reserve Development
The reserve for net losses and loss expenses represents the accumulation of estimates for reported losses (case basis reserves) and provisions for losses incurred but not reported (IBNR), both reduced by applicable reinsurance recoverable and the discount for future investment income, where permitted. Net losses and loss expenses are charged to income as incurred.
    Loss reserves established with respect to foreign business are set and monitored in terms of the currency in which payment is expected to be made. Therefore, no assumption is included for
6        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
changes in currency rates. See also Note 1(ff) to Consolidated Financial Statements.
    Management reviews the adequacy of established loss reserves utilizing a number of analytical reserve development techniques. Through the use of these techniques, management is able to monitor the adequacy of AIG’s established reserves and determine appropriate assumptions for inflation. Also, analysis of emerging specific development patterns, such as case reserve redundancies or deficiencies and IBNR emergence, allows management to determine any required adjustments.
    The “Analysis of Consolidated Losses and Loss Expense Reserve Development” table presents the development of net losses and loss expense reserves for calendar years 1997 through 2007. Immediately following this table is a second table that presents all data on a basis that excludes asbestos and environmental net losses and loss expense reserve development. The opening reserves held are shown at the top of the table for each year end date. The amount of loss reserve discount included in the opening reserve at each date is shown immediately below the reserves held for each year. The undiscounted reserve at each date is thus the sum of the discount and the reserve held.
    The upper half of the table presents the cumulative amounts paid during successive years related to the undiscounted opening loss reserves. For example, in the table that excludes asbestos and environmental losses, with respect to the net losses and loss expense reserve of $24.83 billion as of December 31, 2000, by the end of 2007 (seven years later) $33.05 billion had actually been paid in settlement of these net loss reserves. In addition, as reflected in the lower section of the table, the original undiscounted reserve of $26.12 billion was reestimated to be $41.21 billion at December 31, 2007. This increase from the original estimate would generally result from a combination of a number of factors, including reserves being settled for larger amounts than originally estimated. The original estimates will also be increased or decreased as more information becomes known about the individual claims and overall claim frequency and severity patterns. The redundancy (deficiency) depicted in the table, for any particular calendar year, presents the aggregate change in estimates over the period of years subsequent to the calendar year reflected at the top of the respective column heading. For example, the redundancy of $672 million at December 31, 2007 related to December 31, 2006 net losses and loss expense reserves of $62.72 billion represents the cumulative amount by which reserves in 2006 and prior years have developed favorably during 2007.
    The bottom of each table below presents the remaining undiscounted and discounted net loss reserve for each year. For example, in the table that excludes asbestos and environmental losses, for the 2002 year end, the remaining undiscounted reserves held as of December 31, 2007 are $13.57 billion, with a corresponding discounted net reserve of $12.57 billion.
    The reserves for net losses and loss expenses with respect to Transatlantic and 21st Century are included only in consolidated net losses and loss expenses commencing with the year ended December 31, 1998, the year they were first consolidated in AIG’s financial statements. Reserve development for these operations is included only for 1998 and subsequent periods. Thus, the presentation for 1997 and prior year ends is not fully comparable to that for 1998 and subsequent years in the tables below.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         7


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Analysis of Consolidated Losses and Loss Expense Reserve Development
The following table presents for each calendar year the losses and loss expense reserves and the development thereof including those with respect to asbestos and environmental claims. See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Operating Review — General Insurance Operations — Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses.
                                                                                           
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Net Reserves Held
  $ 20,901     $ 25,418     $ 25,636     $ 25,684     $ 26,005     $ 29,347     $ 36,228     $ 47,254     $ 57,476     $ 62,630     $ 69,288  
Discount (in Reserves Held)
    619       897       1,075       1,287       1,423       1,499       1,516       1,553       2,110       2,264       2,429  
Net Reserves Held (Undiscounted)
    21,520       26,315       26,711       26,971       27,428       30,846       37,744       48,807       59,586       64,894       71,717  
Paid (Cumulative) as of:
                                                                                       
 
One year later
    5,607       7,205       8,266       9,709       11,007       10,775       12,163       14,910       15,326       14,862          
 
Two years later
    9,754       12,382       14,640       17,149       18,091       18,589       21,773       24,377       25,152                  
 
Three years later
    12,939       16,599       19,901       21,930       23,881       25,513       28,763       31,296                          
 
Four years later
    15,484       20,263       23,074       26,090       28,717       30,757       33,825                                  
 
Five years later
    17,637       22,303       25,829       29,473       32,685       34,627                                          
 
Six years later
    18,806       24,114       28,165       32,421       35,656                                                  
 
Seven years later
    19,919       25,770       30,336       34,660                                                          
 
Eight years later
    21,089       27,309       31,956                                                                  
 
Nine years later
    22,177       28,626                                                                          
 
Ten years later
    23,096                                                                                  
 
                                                                                           
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Net Reserves Held (undiscounted)
  $ 21,520     $ 26,315     $ 26,711     $ 26,971     $ 27,428     $ 30,846     $ 37,744     $ 48,807     $ 59,586     $ 64,894     $ 71,717  
Undiscounted Liability as of:
                                                                                       
 
One year later
    21,563       25,897       26,358       26,979       31,112       32,913       40,931       53,486       59,533       64,238          
 
Two years later
    21,500       25,638       27,023       30,696       33,363       37,583       49,463       55,009       60,126                  
 
Three years later
    21,264       26,169       29,994       32,732       37,964       46,179       51,497       56,047                          
 
Four years later
    21,485       28,021       31,192       36,210       45,203       48,427       52,964                                  
 
Five years later
    22,405       28,607       33,910       41,699       47,078       49,855                                          
 
Six years later
    22,720       30,632       38,087       43,543       48,273                                                  
 
Seven years later
    24,209       33,861       39,597       44,475                                                          
 
Eight years later
    26,747       34,986       40,217                                                                  
 
Nine years later
    27,765       35,556                                                                          
 
Ten years later
    28,104                                                                                  
Net Redundancy/(Deficiency)
    (6,584 )     (9,241 )     (13,506 )     (17,504 )     (20,845 )     (19,009 )     (15,220 )     (7,240 )     (540 )     656          
Remaining Reserves (Undiscounted)
    5,008       6,930       8,261       9,815       12,617       15,228       19,139       24,751       34,974       49,376          
Remaining Discount
    418       499       591       705       851       1,005       1,155       1,319       1,563       1,937          
Remaining Reserves
    4,590       6,431       7,670       9,110       11,766       14,223       17,984       23,432       33,411       47,439          
 
The following table presents the gross liability (before discount), reinsurance recoverable and net liability recorded at each year end and the reestimation of these amounts as of December 31, 2007:
                                                                                         
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Gross Liability, End of Year
  $ 32,049     $ 36,973     $ 37,278     $ 39,222     $ 42,629     $ 48,173     $ 53,387     $ 63,431     $ 79,279     $ 82,263     $ 87,929  
Reinsurance Recoverable, End of Year
    10,529       10,658       10,567       12,251       15,201       17,327       15,643       14,624       19,693       17,369       16,212  
Net Liability, End of Year
    21,520       26,315       26,711       26,971       27,428       30,846       37,744       48,807       59,586       64,894       71,717  
Reestimated Gross Liability
    44,844       54,284       60,212       66,308       70,680       72,234       72,944       74,434       80,941       81,695          
Reestimated Reinsurance Recoverable
    16,740       18,729       19,995       21,833       22,407       22,379       19,980       18,386       20,816       17,457          
Reestimated Net Liability
    28,104       35,555       40,217       44,475       48,273       49,855       52,964       56,048       60,125       64,238          
Cumulative Gross Redundancy/(Deficiency)
    (12,795 )     (17,311 )     (22,934 )     (27,086 )     (28,051 )     (24,061 )     (19,557 )     (11,003 )     (1,662 )     568          
 
8        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Analysis of Consolidated Losses and Loss Expense Reserve Development Excluding Asbestos and Environmental Losses and Loss Expense Reserve Development
The following table presents for each calendar year the losses and loss expense reserves and the development thereof excluding those with respect to asbestos and environmental claims. See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Operating Review — General Insurance Operations — Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses.
                                                                                           
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Net Reserves Held
  $ 20,113     $ 24,554     $ 24,745     $ 24,829     $ 25,286     $ 28,650     $ 35,559     $ 45,742     $ 55,227     $ 60,451     $ 67,597  
Discount (in Reserves Held)
    619       897       1,075       1,287       1,423       1,499       1,516       1,553       2,110       2,264       2,429  
Net Reserves Held (Undiscounted)
    20,732       25,451       25,820       26,116       26,709       30,149       37,075       47,295       57,336       62,715       70,026  
Paid (Cumulative) as of:
                                                                                       
 
One year later
    5,467       7,084       8,195       9,515       10,861       10,632       11,999       14,718       15,047       14,356          
 
Two years later
    9,500       12,190       14,376       16,808       17,801       18,283       21,419       23,906       24,367                  
 
Three years later
    12,618       16,214       19,490       21,447       23,430       25,021       28,129       30,320                          
 
Four years later
    14,972       19,732       22,521       25,445       28,080       29,987       32,686                                  
 
Five years later
    16,983       21,630       25,116       28,643       31,771       33,353                                          
 
Six years later
    18,014       23,282       27,266       31,315       34,238                                                  
 
Seven years later
    18,972       24,753       29,162       33,051                                                          
 
Eight years later
    19,960       26,017       30,279                                                                  
 
Nine years later
    20,779       26,832                                                                          
 
Ten years later
    21,202                                                                                  
 
                                                                                           
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Net Reserves Held (undiscounted)
  $ 20,732     $ 25,451     $ 25,820     $ 26,116     $ 26,709     $ 30,149     $ 37,075     $ 47,295     $ 57,336     $ 62,715     $ 70,026  
Undiscounted Liability as of:
                                                                                       
 
One year later
    20,576       24,890       25,437       26,071       30,274       32,129       39,261       51,048       57,077       62,043          
 
Two years later
    20,385       24,602       26,053       29,670       32,438       35,803       46,865       52,364       57,653                  
 
Three years later
    20,120       25,084       28,902       31,619       36,043       43,467       48,691       53,385                          
 
Four years later
    20,301       26,813       30,014       34,102       42,348       45,510       50,140                                  
 
Five years later
    21,104       27,314       31,738       38,655       44,018       46,925                                          
 
Six years later
    21,336       28,345       34,978       40,294       45,201                                                  
 
Seven years later
    21,836       30,636       36,283       41,213                                                          
 
Eight years later
    23,441       31,556       36,889                                                                  
 
Nine years later
    24,261       32,113                                                                          
 
Ten years later
    24,588                                                                                  
Net Redundancy/(Deficiency)
    (3,856 )     (6,662 )     (11,069 )     (15,097 )     (18,492 )     (16,776 )     (13,065 )     (6,090 )     (317 )     672          
Remaining Reserves (undiscounted)
    3,386       5,281       6,610       8,162       10,963       13,572       17,454       23,065       33,286       47,687          
Remaining Discount
    418       499       591       705       851       1,005       1,155       1,319       1,563       1,937          
Remaining Reserves
    2,968       4,782       6,019       7,457       10,112       12,567       16,299       21,746       31,723       45,750          
 
The following table presents the gross liability (before discount), reinsurance recoverable and net liability recorded at each year end and the reestimation of these amounts as of December 31, 2007:
                                                                                         
 
(in millions)   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
 
Gross Liability, End of Year
  $ 29,740     $ 34,474     $ 34,666     $ 36,777     $ 40,400     $ 46,036     $ 51,363     $ 59,790     $ 73,808     $ 77,111     $ 83,551  
Reinsurance Recoverable, End of Year
    9,008       9,023       8,846       10,661       13,691       15,887       14,288       12,495       16,472       14,396       13,525  
Net Liability, End of Year
    20,732       25,451       25,820       26,116       26,709       30,149       37,075       47,295       57,336       62,715       70,026  
Reestimated Gross Liability
    35,712       45,467       51,801       58,420       63,320       65,217       66,320       68,100       75,028       76,439          
Reestimated Reinsurance Recoverable
    11,124       13,354       14,912       17,207       18,119       18,292       16,180       14,715       17,375       14,396          
Reestimated Net Liability
    24,588       32,113       36,889       41,213       45,201       46,925       50,140       53,385       57,653       62,043          
Cumulative Gross Redundancy/(Deficiency)
    (5,972 )     (10,993 )     (17,135 )     (21,643 )     (22,920 )     (19,181 )     (14,957 )     (8,310 )     (1,220 )     672          
 
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         9


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
    The reserve for losses and loss expenses as reported in AIG’s consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2007 differs from the total reserve reported in the Annual Statements filed with state insurance departments and, where appropriate, with foreign regulatory authorities. The differences at December 31, 2007 relate primarily to reserves for certain foreign operations not required to be reported in the United States for statutory reporting purposes. Further, statutory practices in the United States require reserves to be shown net of applicable reinsurance recoverable.
    The reserve for gross losses and loss expenses is prior to reinsurance and represents the accumulation for reported losses and IBNR. Management reviews the adequacy of established gross loss reserves in the manner previously described for net loss reserves.
    For further discussion regarding net reserves for losses and loss expenses, see Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Operating Review — General Insurance Operations — Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses.
Life Insurance & Retirement Services Operations
AIG’s Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations provide insurance, financial and investment-oriented products throughout the world. Insurance-oriented products consist of individual and group life, payout annuities (including structured settlements), endowment and accident and health policies. Retirement savings products consist generally of fixed and variable annuities.
Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services
In its Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services businesses, AIG operates principally through ALICO, AIG Star Life, AIG Edison Life, AIA, Nan Shan and Philamlife. ALICO is incorporated in Delaware and all of its business is written outside of the United States. ALICO has operations either directly or through subsidiaries in Europe, including the U.K., Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle East, South Asia and the Far East, with Japan being the largest territory. ALICO also conducts life insurance business through a joint venture in Brazil. AIA operates primarily in China (including Hong Kong), Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, Indonesia and India. The operations in India are conducted through a joint venture, Tata AIG Life Insurance Company Limited. Nan Shan operates in Taiwan. Philamlife is the largest life insurer in the Philippines. AIG Star Life and AIG Edison Life operate in Japan. Operations in foreign countries comprised 79 percent of Life Insurance & Retirement Services Premiums and other considerations and 76 percent of Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating income in 2007.
    The Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services companies have over 285,000 full and part-time agents, as well as independent producers, and sell their products largely to indigenous persons in local and foreign currencies. In addition to the agency outlets, these companies also distribute their products through direct marketing channels, such as mass marketing, and through brokers and other distribution outlets, such as financial institutions.
Domestic Life Insurance & Retirement Services
AIG’s principal Domestic Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations include AGLA, AIG American General, AIG Annuity, USLIFE, VALIC and AIG SunAmerica. These companies utilize multiple distribution channels including independent producers, brokerage, career agents and financial institutions to offer life insurance, annuity and accident and health products and services, as well as financial and other investment products. The Domestic Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations comprised 21 percent of total Life Insurance & Retirement Services Premiums and other considerations and 24 percent of Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating income in 2007.
Reinsurance
AIG’s General Insurance subsidiaries worldwide operate primarily by underwriting and accepting risks for their direct account and securing reinsurance on that portion of the risk in excess of the limit which they wish to retain. This operating policy differs from that of many insurance companies that will underwrite only up to their net retention limit, thereby requiring the broker or agent to secure commitments from other underwriters for the remainder of the gross risk amount.
    Various AIG profit centers, including DBG, AIU and AIG Risk Finance, as well as certain Life Insurance subsidiaries, use AIRCO as a reinsurer for certain of their businesses. In Bermuda, AIRCO discounts reserves attributable to certain classes of business assumed from other AIG subsidiaries.
    For a further discussion of reinsurance, see Item 1A. Risk Factors — Reinsurance; Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Risk Management — Reinsurance; and Note 5 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
10        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Insurance Investment Operations
A significant portion of AIG’s General Insurance and Life Insurance & Retirement Services revenues are derived from AIG’s insurance investment operations.
The following table summarizes the investment results of the insurance operations:
                                           
 
    Annual Average Cash and Invested Assets    
             
    Cash       Return on    
    (including       Average Cash   Return on
Years Ended December 31,   short-term   Invested       and Invested   Average Invested
(in millions)   investments)(a)   Assets(a)   Total   Assets(b)   Assets(c)
 
General Insurance:
                                       
 
2007
  $ 5,874     $ 117,050     $ 122,924       5.0 %     5.2 %
 
2006
    3,201       102,231       105,432       5.4       5.6  
 
2005
    2,450       86,211       88,661       4.5       4.7  
 
2004
    2,012       73,338       75,350       4.2       4.4  
 
2003
    1,818       59,855       61,673       4.2       4.3  
Life Insurance & Retirement Services:
                                       
 
2007
  $ 25,926     $ 423,473     $ 449,669       5.0 %     5.3 %
 
2006
    13,698       392,348       406,046       4.9       5.1  
 
2005
    11,137       356,839       367,976       5.1       5.2  
 
2004
    7,737       309,627       317,364       4.9       5.1  
 
2003
    4,680       247,608       252,288       5.3       5.4  
 
(a)  Including investment income due and accrued and real estate. Also, includes collateral assets invested under the global securities lending program.
 
(b)  Net investment income divided by the annual average sum of cash and invested assets.
 
(c)  Net investment income divided by the annual average invested assets.
    AIG’s worldwide insurance investment policy places primary emphasis on investments in government and other high quality, fixed income securities in all of its portfolios and, to a lesser extent, investments in high yield bonds, common stocks, real estate, hedge funds and partnerships, in order to enhance returns on policyholders’ funds and generate net investment income. The ability to implement this policy is somewhat limited in certain territories as there may be a lack of adequate long-term investments or investment restrictions may be imposed by the local regulatory authorities.
Financial Services Operations
AIG’s Financial Services subsidiaries engage in diversified activities including aircraft and equipment leasing, capital markets, consumer finance and insurance premium finance. Together, the Aircraft Leasing, Capital Markets and Consumer Finance operations generate the majority of the revenues produced by the Financial Services operations. A.I. Credit also contributes to Financial Services income principally by providing insurance premium financing for both AIG’s policyholders and those of other insurers.
Aircraft Leasing
Aircraft Leasing operations represent the operations of ILFC, which generates its revenues primarily from leasing new and used commercial jet aircraft to foreign and domestic airlines. Revenues also result from the remarketing of commercial jets for ILFC’s own account, and remarketing and fleet management services for airlines and financial institutions. See also Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Capital Markets
Capital Markets represents the operations of AIGFP, which engages as principal in a wide variety of financial transactions, including standard and customized financial products involving commodities, credit, currencies, energy, equities and rates. The credit products include credit protection written through credit default swaps on super senior risk tranches of diversified pools of loans and debt securities. AIGFP also invests in a diversified portfolio of securities and principal investments and engages in borrowing activities that include issuing standard and structured notes and other securities and entering into guaranteed investment agreements (GIAs).
Consumer Finance
Consumer Finance operations include AGF as well as AIGCFG. AGF provides a wide variety of consumer finance products, including real estate and non-real estate loans, retail sales finance and credit-related insurance to customers in the United States, the U.K., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. AGF’s finance receivables are primarily sourced through its branches, although many of AGF’s real estate loans are sourced through its centralized real estate operations, which include AGF’s mortgage banking activities. AIGCFG, through its subsidiaries, is engaged in developing a multi-product consumer finance business with an emphasis on emerging and developing markets.
Asset Management Operations
AIG’s Asset Management operations comprise a wide variety of investment-related services and investment products. These ser-
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         11


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
vices and products are offered to individuals, pension funds and institutions globally through AIG’s Spread-Based Investment business, Institutional Asset Management, and Brokerage Services and Mutual Funds business. Also included in Asset Management operations are the results of certain SunAmerica sponsored partnership investments.
Spread-Based Investment Business
AIG’s Spread-Based Investment business includes the results of AIG’s proprietary spread-based investment operations, the Matched Investment Program (MIP), which was launched in September of 2005 to replace the Guaranteed Investment Contract (GIC) program, which is in runoff. The MIP is an investment strategy that involves investing in various asset classes with financing provided through third parties. This business uses various risk mitigating strategies designed to hedge interest rate and currency risk associated with underlying investments and related liabilities.
Institutional Asset Management
AIG’s Institutional Asset Management business, conducted through AIG Investments, provides an array of investment products and services globally to institutional investors, pension funds, AIG subsidiaries and high net worth investors. These products include traditional equity and fixed income investments, and a wide range of alternative asset classes. These services include investment advisory and subadvisory services, investment monitoring and investment transaction structuring. Within the fixed income and equity asset classes, AIG Investments offers various forms of structured investments aimed at achieving superior returns or capital preservation. Within the alternative asset class, AIG Investments offers hedge and private equity fund-of-funds, direct investments and distressed debt investments.
    AIG Global Real Estate provides a wide range of real estate investment and management services for AIG subsidiaries, as well as for third-party institutional investors, high net worth investors and pension funds. Through a strategic network of local real estate ventures, AIG Global Real Estate actively invests in and develops office, industrial, multi-family residential, retail, hotel and resort properties globally.
    AIG Private Bank offers banking, trading and investment management services to private clients and institutions globally.
    From time to time, AIG Investments acquires alternative investments, primarily consisting of direct controlling equity interests in private enterprises, with the intention of “warehousing” such investments until the investment or economic benefit thereof is transferred to a fund or other AIG-managed investment product. During the warehousing period, AIG bears the cost and risks associated with carrying these investments and consolidates them on its balance sheet and records the operating results until the investments are transferred, sold or otherwise divested. Changes in market conditions may negatively affect the fair value of these warehoused investments. Market conditions may impede AIG from launching new investment products for which these warehoused assets are being held, which could result in AIG not recovering its investment upon transfer or divestment. In the event that AIG is unable to transfer or otherwise divest its interest in the warehoused investment to third parties, AIG could be required to hold these investments indefinitely. In certain instances, the consolidated warehoused investments are not wholly owned by AIG. In such cases, AIG shares the risk associated with warehousing the asset with the minority interest investors.
Brokerage Services and Mutual Funds
AIG’s Brokerage Services and Mutual Funds business, conducted through AIG Advisor Group, Inc. and AIG SunAmerica Asset Management Corp., provides broker-dealer related services and mutual funds to retail investors, group trusts and corporate accounts through an independent network of financial advisors. AIG Advisor Group, Inc., a subsidiary of AIG Retirement Services, Inc., is comprised of several broker-dealer entities that provide these services to clients primarily in the U.S. marketplace. AIG SunAmerica Asset Management Corp. manages, advises and/or administers retail mutual funds, as well as the underlying assets of variable annuities sold by AIG SunAmerica and VALIC to individuals and groups throughout the United States.
Other Asset Management
Included in Other Asset Management is income or loss from certain AIG SunAmerica sponsored partnerships and partnership investments. Partnership assets consist of investments in a diversified portfolio of private equity funds, affordable housing partnerships and hedge fund investments.
Other Operations
Certain AIG subsidiaries provide insurance-related services such as adjusting claims and marketing specialized products. Several wholly owned foreign subsidiaries of AIG operating in countries or jurisdictions such as Ireland, Bermuda, Barbados and Gibraltar provide insurance and related administrative and back office services to affiliated and unaffiliated insurance and reinsurance companies, including captive insurance companies unaffiliated with AIG.
    AIG has several other subsidiaries that engage in various businesses. Mt. Mansfield Company, Inc. owns and operates the ski slopes, lifts, a school and an inn located in Stowe, Vermont. Also reported in AIG’s Other operations are interest expense, expenses of corporate staff not attributable to specific business segments, expenses related to efforts to improve internal controls, corporate initiatives, certain compensation plan expenses and the settlement costs more fully described in Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Note 12(a) to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Additional Investments
AIG’s significant investments in partially owned companies (which are accounted for under the equity method) include a 25.4 percent interest in The Fuji Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., a general insurance company in Japan, a 26.0 percent interest in Tata AIG Life Insurance Company, Ltd. and a 26.0 percent interest
12        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
in Tata AIG General Insurance Company, Ltd. in India. Substantially all of AIG’s equity interest in Allied World Assurance Holdings, Ltd. was sold by AIG in December 2007. For a discussion of AIG’s investments in partially owned companies, see Note 1(s) to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Locations of Certain Assets
As of December 31, 2007, approximately 37 percent of the consolidated assets of AIG were located in foreign countries (other than Canada), including $4.4 billion of cash and securities on deposit with foreign regulatory authorities. Foreign operations and assets held abroad may be adversely affected by political developments in foreign countries, including tax changes, nationalization and changes in regulatory policy, as well as by consequence of hostilities and unrest. The risks of such occurrences and their overall effect upon AIG vary from country to country and cannot easily be predicted. If expropriation or nationalization does occur, AIG’s policy is to take all appropriate measures to seek recovery of such assets. Certain of the countries in which AIG’s business is conducted have currency restrictions which generally cause a delay in a company’s ability to repatriate assets and profits. See also Notes 1 and 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements and Item 1A. Risk Factors — Foreign Operations.
Regulation
AIG’s operations around the world are subject to regulation by many different types of regulatory authorities, including insurance, securities, investment advisory, banking and thrift regulators in the United States and abroad. The regulatory environment can have a significant effect on AIG and its business. AIG’s operations have become more diverse and consumer-oriented, increasing the scope of regulatory supervision and the possibility of intervention. Although AIG cannot predict the scope or effect of such regulation on its business, AIG expects further regulation of its domestic consumer finance operations as a result of the current disruption of the U.S. residential mortgage market. In addition, the investigations into financial accounting practices that led to two restatements of AIG’s consolidated financial statements have heightened regulatory scrutiny of AIG worldwide.
    In 1999, AIG became a unitary thrift holding company within the meaning of the Home Owners’ Loan Act (HOLA) when the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) granted AIG approval to organize AIG Federal Savings Bank. AIG is subject to OTS regulation, examination, supervision and reporting requirements. In addition, the OTS has enforcement authority over AIG and its subsidiaries. Among other things, this permits the OTS to restrict or prohibit activities that are determined to be a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of AIG’s subsidiary savings association, AIG Federal Savings Bank.
    Under prior law, a unitary savings and loan holding company, such as AIG, was not restricted as to the types of business in which it could engage, provided that its savings association subsidiary continued to be a qualified thrift lender. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA) provides that no company may acquire control of an OTS regulated institution after May 4, 1999 unless it engages only in the financial activities permitted for financial holding companies under the law or for multiple savings and loan holding companies. The GLBA, however, grandfathered the unrestricted authority for activities with respect to a unitary savings and loan holding company existing prior to May 4, 1999, so long as its savings association subsidiary continues to be a qualified thrift lender under the HOLA. As a unitary savings and loan holding company whose application was pending as of May 4, 1999, AIG is grandfathered under the GLBA and generally is not restricted under existing laws as to the types of business activities in which it may engage, provided that AIG Federal Savings Bank continues to be a qualified thrift lender under the HOLA.
    Certain states require registration and periodic reporting by insurance companies that are licensed in such states and are controlled by other corporations. Applicable legislation typically requires periodic disclosure concerning the corporation that controls the registered insurer and the other companies in the holding company system and prior approval of intercorporate services and transfers of assets (including in some instances payment of dividends by the insurance subsidiary) within the holding company system. AIG’s subsidiaries are registered under such legislation in those states that have such requirements.
    AIG’s insurance subsidiaries, in common with other insurers, are subject to regulation and supervision by the states and by other jurisdictions in which they do business. Within the United States, the method of such regulation varies but generally has its source in statutes that delegate regulatory and supervisory powers to an insurance official. The regulation and supervision relate primarily to approval of policy forms and rates, the standards of solvency that must be met and maintained, including risk-based capital, the licensing of insurers and their agents, the nature of and limitations on investments, restrictions on the size of risks that may be insured under a single policy, deposits of securities for the benefit of policyholders, requirements for acceptability of reinsurers, periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies, the form and content of reports of financial condition required to be filed, and reserves for unearned premiums, losses and other purposes. In general, such regulation is for the protection of policyholders rather than the equity owners of these companies.
    AIG has taken various steps to enhance the capital positions of the Domestic General Insurance companies. AIG entered into capital maintenance agreements with the Domestic General Insurance companies that set forth procedures through which AIG will provide ongoing capital support. Also, in order to allow the Domestic General Insurance companies to record as an admitted asset at December 31, 2007 certain reinsurance ceded to non-U.S. reinsurers (which has the effect of increasing the statutory surplus of such Domestic General Insurance companies), AIG obtained and entered into reimbursement agreements for approximately $1.8 billion of letters of credit issued by several commercial banks in favor of certain Domestic General Insurance companies.
    In the U.S., Risk-Based Capital (RBC) is designed to measure the adequacy of an insurer’s statutory surplus in relation to the risks inherent in its business. Thus, inadequately capitalized general and life insurance companies may be identified. The U.S. RBC formula develops a risk-adjusted target level of statutory
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         13


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
surplus by applying certain factors to various asset, premium and reserve items. Higher factors are applied to more risky items and lower factors are applied to less risky items. Thus, the target level of statutory surplus varies not only as a result of the insurer’s size, but also based on the risk profile of the insurer’s operations.
    The RBC Model Law provides for four incremental levels of regulatory attention for insurers whose surplus is below the calculated RBC target. These levels of attention range in severity from requiring the insurer to submit a plan for corrective action to placing the insurer under regulatory control.
    The statutory surplus of each of AIG’s Domestic General Insurance and Life Insurance subsidiaries exceeded their RBC target levels as of December 31, 2007.
    To the extent that any of AIG’s insurance entities would fall below prescribed levels of statutory surplus, it would be AIG’s intention to provide appropriate capital or other types of support to that entity.
    A substantial portion of AIG’s General Insurance business and a majority of its Life Insurance business is carried on in foreign countries. The degree of regulation and supervision in foreign jurisdictions varies. Generally, AIG, as well as the underwriting companies operating in such jurisdictions, must satisfy local regulatory requirements. Licenses issued by foreign authorities to AIG subsidiaries are subject to modification or revocation by such authorities, and these subsidiaries could be prevented from conducting business in certain of the jurisdictions where they currently operate. In the past, AIG has been allowed to modify its operations to conform with new licensing requirements in most jurisdictions.
    In addition to licensing requirements, AIG’s foreign operations are also regulated in various jurisdictions with respect to currency, policy language and terms, advertising, amount and type of security deposits, amount and type of reserves, amount and type of capital to be held, amount and type of local investment and the share of profits to be returned to policyholders on participating policies. Some foreign countries regulate rates on various types of policies. Certain countries have established reinsurance institutions, wholly or partially owned by the local government, to which admitted insurers are obligated to cede a portion of their business on terms that may not always allow foreign insurers, including AIG subsidiaries, full compensation. In some countries, regulations governing constitution of technical reserves and remittance balances may hinder remittance of profits and repatriation of assets.
    See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources and Liquidity — Regulation and Supervision and Note 15 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Competition
AIG’s Insurance, Financial Services and Asset Management businesses operate in highly competitive environments, both domestically and overseas. Principal sources of competition are insurance companies, banks, investment banks and other non-bank financial institutions.
    The insurance industry in particular is highly competitive. Within the United States, AIG’s General Insurance subsidiaries compete with approximately 3,400 other stock companies, specialty insurance organizations, mutual companies and other underwriting organizations. AIG’s subsidiaries offering Life Insurance & Retirement Services compete in the United States with approximately 2,100 life insurance companies and other participants in related financial services fields. Overseas, AIG subsidiaries compete for business with foreign insurance operations of the larger U.S. insurers, global insurance groups and local companies in particular areas in which they are active.
Directors and Executive Officers of AIG
All directors of AIG are elected for one-year terms at the annual meeting of shareholders. All executive officers are elected to one-year terms, but serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors.
    Except as hereinafter noted, each of the executive officers has, for more than five years, occupied an executive position with AIG or companies that are now its subsidiaries. Other than the employment contracts between AIG and Messrs. Sullivan and Bensinger, there are no other arrangements or understandings between any executive officer and any other person pursuant to which the executive officer was elected to such position. From January 2000 until joining AIG in May 2004, Dr. Frenkel served as Chairman of Merrill Lynch International, Inc. Prior to joining AIG in September 2006, Ms. Kelly served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel of MCI/ WorldCom. Previously, she was Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Sears, Roebuck and Co. from 1999 to 2003. From June 2004 until joining AIG in May 2007, Mr. Kaslow was a managing partner of QuanStar Group, LLC (an advisory services firm), and, from January 2002 until May 2004, Mr. Kaslow was Senior Executive Vice President of Human Resources for Vivendi Universal (an entertainment and telecommunications company).
14        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Set forth below is information concerning the directors and executive officers of AIG as of February 28, 2008.
             
 
    Served as
    Director or
Name   Title   Age   Officer Since
 
Stephen F. Bollenbach
  Director   65   2008
Marshall A. Cohen
  Director   72   1992
Martin S. Feldstein
  Director   68   1987
Ellen V. Futter
  Director   58   1999
Stephen L. Hammerman
  Director   69   2005
Richard C. Holbrooke
  Director   66   2001
Fred H. Langhammer
  Director   64   2006
George L. Miles, Jr. 
  Director   66   2005
Morris W. Offit
  Director   71   2005
James F. Orr III
  Director   64   2006
Virginia M. Rometty
  Director   50   2006
Martin J. Sullivan
  Director, President and Chief Executive Officer   53   2002
Michael H. Sutton
  Director   67   2005
Edmund S. W. Tse
  Director, Senior Vice Chairman – Life Insurance   70   1996
Robert B. Willumstad
  Director and Chairman   62   2006
Frank G. Zarb
  Director   73   2001
Jacob A. Frenkel
  Vice Chairman – Global Economic Strategies   64   2004
Frank G. Wisner
  Vice Chairman – External Affairs   69   1997
Steven J. Bensinger
  Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   53   2002
Anastasia D. Kelly
  Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Senior Regulatory
and Compliance Officer
  58   2006
Rodney O. Martin, Jr. 
  Executive Vice President – Life Insurance   55   2002
Kristian P. Moor
  Executive Vice President – Domestic General Insurance   48   1998
Win J. Neuger
  Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer   58   1995
Robert M. Sandler
  Executive Vice President – Domestic Personal Lines   65   1980
Nicholas C. Walsh
  Executive Vice President – Foreign General Insurance   57   2005
Jay S. Wintrob
  Executive Vice President – Retirement Services   50   1999
William N. Dooley
  Senior Vice President – Financial Services   55   1992
David L. Herzog
  Senior Vice President and Comptroller   48   2005
Andrew J. Kaslow
  Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer   57   2007
Robert E. Lewis
  Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer   56   1993
Brian T. Schreiber
  Senior Vice President – Strategic Planning   42   2002
 
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         15


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
Casualty Insurance Underwriting and Reserves
Casualty insurance liabilities are difficult to predict and may exceed the related reserves for losses and loss expenses. Although AIG annually reviews the adequacy of the established reserve for losses and loss expenses, there can be no assurance that AIG’s loss reserves will not develop adversely and have a material effect on AIG’s results of operations. Estimation of ultimate net losses, loss expenses and loss reserves is a complex process for long-tail casualty lines of business, which include excess and umbrella liability, D&O, professional liability, medical malpractice, workers compensation, general liability, products liability and related classes, as well as for asbestos and environmental exposures. Generally, actual historical loss development factors are used to project future loss development. However, there can be no assurance that future loss development patterns will be the same as in the past. Moreover, any deviation in loss cost trends or in loss development factors might not be discernible for an extended period of time subsequent to the recording of the initial loss reserve estimates for any accident year. Thus, there is the potential for reserves with respect to a number of years to be significantly affected by changes in loss cost trends or loss development factors that were relied upon in setting the reserves. These changes in loss cost trends or loss development factors could be attributable to changes in inflation or in the judicial environment, or in other social or economic phenomena affecting claims, such as the effects that the recent disruption in the credit markets could have on reported claims under D&O or professional liability coverages. See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Operating Review — General Insurance Operations — Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses.
Credit Market Environment
AIG’s businesses may continue to be adversely affected by the current disruption in the global credit markets and repricing of credit risk. During the second half of 2007, disruption in the global credit markets, coupled with the repricing of credit risk, and the U.S. housing market deterioration created increasingly difficult conditions in the financial markets. These conditions have resulted in greater volatility, less liquidity, widening of credit spreads and a lack of price transparency in certain markets. These conditions continue to adversely affect Mortgage Guaranty’s results of operations and the fair value of the AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio and contribute to higher levels of finance receivables delinquencies at AGF and to the severe and rapid decline in the fair value of certain investment securities, particularly those backed by U.S. residential mortgage loans. It is difficult to predict how long these conditions will exist and how AIG’s markets, products and businesses will continue to be adversely affected. Accordingly, these conditions could adversely affect AIG’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations in future periods. In addition, litigation and regulatory or governmental investigations and inquiries have been commenced against AIG related to these events and AIG may become subject to further litigation and regulatory or governmental scrutiny as a result of these events.
Risk Management
AIG is exposed to a number of significant risks, and AIG’s risk management processes and controls may not be fully effective in mitigating AIG’s risk exposures in all market conditions and to all types of risk. The major risks to which AIG is exposed include: credit risk, market risk, operational risk, liquidity risk and insurance risk. AIG has devoted significant resources to the development and implementation of risk management processes and controls across AIG’s operations, including by establishing review and oversight committees to monitor risks, setting limits and identifying risk mitigating strategies and techniques. Nonetheless, these procedures may not be fully effective in mitigating risk exposure in all market conditions, some of which change rapidly and severely. A failure of AIG’s risk management processes or the ineffectiveness of AIG’s risk mitigating strategies and techniques could adversely affect, perhaps materially, AIG’s consolidated results of operations, liquidity or financial condition, result in regulatory action or litigation or damage AIG’s reputation. See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Risk Management.
Liquidity
AIG’s liquidity could be impaired by an inability to access the capital markets or by unforeseen significant outflows of cash. This situation may arise due to circumstances that AIG may be unable to control, such as a general market disruption or an operational problem that affects third parties or AIG. In addition, this situation may arise due to circumstances specific to AIG, such as a decline in its credit ratings. AIG depends on dividends, distributions and other payments from its subsidiaries to fund dividend payments and to fund payments on AIG’s obligations, including debt obligations. Regulatory and other legal restrictions may limit AIG’s ability to transfer funds freely, either to or from its subsidiaries. In particular, many of AIG’s subsidiaries, including AIG’s insurance subsidiaries, are subject to laws and regulations that authorize regulatory bodies to block or reduce the flow of funds to the parent holding company, or that prohibit such transfers altogether in certain circumstances. These laws and regulations may hinder AIG’s ability to access funds that AIG may need to make payments on its obligations. See also Item 1. Business — Regulation.
Some of AIG’s investments are relatively illiquid and would be difficult to sell, or to sell at acceptable prices, if AIG required cash in amounts greater than its customary needs. AIG’s investments in certain securities, including certain structured securities, direct private equities, limited partnerships, hedge funds, mortgage loans, flight equipment, finance receivables and real estate are relatively illiquid. These asset classes represented approximately 23 percent of the carrying value of AIG’s total cash and invested assets as of December 31, 2007. In addition, the current disruption in the credit markets has affected the liquidity of other AIG portfolios
16        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
including the residential mortgage-backed securities portfolio. If AIG requires significant amounts of cash on short notice in excess of normal cash requirements or is required to post or return collateral in connection with its investment portfolio, derivative transactions or securities lending activities, then AIG may have difficulty selling these investments or terminating these transactions in a timely manner or may be forced to sell or terminate them for less than what AIG might otherwise have been able to, or both. Although AIGFP has no current intent to do so, if AIGFP sells or closes out its derivative transactions prior to maturity, the effect could be significant to AIG’s overall liquidity.
AIG’s liquidity may be adversely affected by requirements to post collateral. Certain of the credit default swaps written by AIGFP contain collateral posting requirements. The amount of collateral required to be posted for most of these transactions is determined based on the value of the security or loan referenced in the documentation for the credit default swap. Continued declines in the values of these referenced securities or loans will increase the amount of collateral AIGFP must post which could impair AIG’s liquidity.
    See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources and Liquidity — Liquidity.
Investment Concentration
Concentration of AIG’s investment portfolios in any particular segment of the economy may have adverse effects. Any concentration of AIG’s investment portfolios in any particular industry, group of related industries, asset classes, such as residential mortgage-backed securities and other asset-backed securities, or geographic sector could have an adverse effect on the investment portfolios and consequently on AIG’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition. While AIG seeks to mitigate this risk by having a broadly diversified portfolio, events or developments that have a negative effect on any particular industry, asset class, group of related industries or geographic region may have a greater adverse effect on the investment portfolios to the extent that the portfolios are concentrated. Further, AIG’s ability to sell assets relating to such particular groups of related assets may be limited if other market participants are seeking to sell at the same time.
Credit Ratings
Ratings actions regarding AIG could adversely affect AIG’s business and its consolidated results of operations. Following AIG’s filing with the SEC on February 11, 2008 of a Current Report on Form 8-K regarding the valuation of AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio and reporting the conclusion by AIG’s independent auditors that AIG had a material weakness in internal control over financial reporting and oversight relating to this valuation, the following credit rating actions were taken:
  •  Standard & Poor’s, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. (S&P) affirmed its ‘AA’ counterparty credit ratings on AIG and its ‘AA+’ counterparty credit and financial strength ratings on AIG’s core subsidiaries, but revised the rating outlook to negative. In addition, S&P revised its rating outlook on ILFC’s corporate credit rating (AA-) to negative. A negative ratings outlook by S&P indicates that a rating may be lowered, but is not necessarily a precursor of a ratings change.
  •  Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) changed its rating outlook for AIG and its subsidiaries that have substantial exposure to the U.S. subprime mortgage market or whose ratings rely on significant explicit or implicit support from AIG to negative. Moody’s rates AIG ‘Aa2’ and nearly all of its insurance subsidiaries either ‘Aa1’ or ‘Aa2’. A negative ratings outlook by Moody’s indicates that a rating may be lowered, but is not necessarily a precursor of a ratings change.
  •  Fitch Ratings (Fitch) placed AIG’s and its subsidiaries’ long-term debt ratings (AA), including ILFC (A+) and AGF (A+), on Rating Watch Negative. Rating Watch Negative indicates that a rating has been placed on active rating watch status. Fitch indicated that it expects to resolve the Rating Watch after it reviews AIG’s 2007 audited financial statements.
  •  A.M. Best Company (A.M. Best) placed most of its financial strength and issuer credit ratings on AIG’s domestic Life Insurance and Retirement Services (A++) and Domestic General Insurance subsidiaries (including Transatlantic) (A+), as well as AIG’s issuer credit rating (AA), under review with negative implications. A.M. Best indicated that following a detailed review of AIG’s 2007 audited financial statements and further discussion with AIG management, it will re-evaluate the “under review” rating status.
    Financial strength and credit ratings by the major ratings agencies are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies and other financial institutions and affect the availability and cost of borrowings. Financial strength ratings measure an insurance company’s ability to meet its obligations to contract holders and policyholders, help to maintain public confidence in a company’s products, facilitate marketing of products and enhance a company’s competitive position. Credit ratings measure a company’s ability to repay its obligations and directly affect the cost and availability to that company of unsecured financing. AIG’s ratings have historically provided it with a competitive advantage. However, a ratings downgrade could adversely affect AIG’s business and its consolidated results of operations in a number of ways, including:
  •  increasing AIG’s interest expense;
  •  reducing AIGFP’s ability to compete in the structured products and derivatives businesses;
  •  reducing the competitive advantage of AIG’s insurance subsidiaries, which may result in reduced product sales;
  •  adversely affecting relationships with agents and sales representatives;
  •  in the case of a downgrade of AGF or ILFC, increasing their interest expense and reducing their ability to compete in their respective businesses; and
  •  triggering the application of a termination provision in certain of AIG’s contracts, principally agreements entered into by AIGFP and assumed reinsurance contracts entered into by Transatlantic.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         17


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
    In the event of a downgrade of AIG, AIG would be required to post additional collateral. It is estimated that, as of the close of business on February 14, 2008, based on AIG’s outstanding municipal GIAs and financial derivatives transactions as of such date, a further downgrade of AIG’s long-term senior debt ratings to Aa3 by Moody’s or AA- by S&P would permit counterparties to call for approximately $1.39 billion of additional collateral. Further, additional downgrades could result in requirements for substantial additional collateral, which could have a material effect on how AIG manages its liquidity. For a further discussion of AIG’s credit ratings and the potential effect of posting collateral on AIG’s liquidity, see Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Capital Resources and Liquidity — Credit Ratings and — Liquidity.
Catastrophe Exposures
The occurrence of catastrophic events could adversely affect AIG’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations. The occurrence of events such as hurricanes, earthquakes, pandemic disease, acts of terrorism and other catastrophes could adversely affect AIG’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations, including by exposing AIG’s businesses to the following:
  •  widespread claim costs associated with property, workers compensation, mortality and morbidity claims;
  •  loss resulting from the value of invested assets declining to below the amount required to meet the policy and contract liabilities; and
  •  loss resulting from actual policy experience emerging adversely in comparison to the assumptions made in the product pricing related to mortality, morbidity, termination and expenses.
Reinsurance
Reinsurance may not be available or affordable. AIG subsidiaries are major purchasers of reinsurance and utilize reinsurance as part of AIG’s overall risk management strategy. Reinsurance is an important risk management tool to manage transaction and insurance line risk retention, and to mitigate losses that may arise from catastrophes. Market conditions beyond AIG’s control determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance purchased by AIG subsidiaries. For example, reinsurance may be more difficult to obtain after a year with a large number of major catastrophes. Accordingly, AIG may be forced to incur additional expenses for reinsurance or may be unable to obtain sufficient reinsurance on acceptable terms, in which case AIG would have to accept an increase in exposure risk, reduce the amount of business written by its subsidiaries or seek alternatives.
Reinsurance subjects AIG to the credit risk of its reinsurers and may not be adequate to protect AIG against losses. Although reinsurance makes the reinsurer liable to the AIG subsidiary to the extent the risk is ceded subject to the terms and conditions of the reinsurance contracts in place, it does not relieve the AIG subsidiary of the primary liability to its policyholders. Accordingly, AIG bears credit risk with respect to its subsidiaries’ reinsurers to the extent not mitigated by collateral or other credit enhancements. A reinsurer’s insolvency or inability or refusal to make timely payments under the terms of its agreements with the AIG subsidiaries could have a material adverse effect on AIG’s results of operations and liquidity. See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Risk Management — Reinsurance.
Adjustments to Life Insurance & Retirement Services Deferred Policy
Acquisition Costs
Interest rate fluctuations and other events may require AIG subsidiaries to accelerate the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs (DAC) which could adversely affect AIG’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations. DAC represents the costs that vary with and are related primarily to the acquisition of new and renewal insurance and annuity contracts. When interest rates rise, policy loans and surrenders and withdrawals of life insurance policies and annuity contracts may increase as policyholders seek to buy products with perceived higher returns, requiring AIG subsidiaries to accelerate the amortization of DAC. To the extent such amortization exceeds surrender or other charges earned upon surrender and withdrawals of certain life insurance policies and annuity contracts, AIG’s results of operations could be negatively affected.
    DAC for both insurance-oriented and investment-oriented products as well as retirement services products is reviewed for recoverability, which involves estimating the future profitability of current business. This review involves significant management judgment. If the actual emergence of future profitability were to be substantially lower than estimated, AIG could be required to accelerate its DAC amortization and such acceleration could adversely affect AIG’s results of operations. See also Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Estimates and Notes 1 and 6 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Use of Estimates
If actual experience differs from management’s estimates used in the preparation of financial statements, AIG’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition could be adversely affected. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the application of accounting policies that often involve a significant degree of judgment. AIG considers that its accounting policies that are most dependent on the application of estimates and assumptions, and therefore viewed as critical accounting estimates, are those described in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Estimates. These accounting estimates require the use of assumptions, some of which are highly uncertain at the time of estimation. For example, recent market volatility and declines in liquidity have made it more difficult to value certain of AIG’s invested assets and the obligations and collateral relating to certain financial instruments issued or held by AIG, such as
18        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio. To the extent actual experience differs from the assumptions used, AIG’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition would be directly affected, perhaps materially.
Legal Proceedings
Significant legal proceedings may adversely affect AIG’s results of operations. AIG is party to numerous legal proceedings and regulatory or governmental investigations. It is possible that the effect of these unresolved matters could be material to AIG’s consolidated results of operations for an individual reporting period. For a discussion of these unresolved matters, see Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Foreign Operations
Foreign operations expose AIG to risks that may affect its operations, liquidity and financial condition. AIG provides insurance, investment and other financial products and services to both businesses and individuals in more than 130 countries and jurisdictions. A substantial portion of AIG’s General Insurance business and a majority of its Life Insurance & Retirement Services business is conducted outside the United States. Operations outside of the United States, particularly those in developing nations, may be affected by regional economic downturns, changes in foreign currency exchange rates, political upheaval, nationalization and other restrictive government actions, which could also affect other AIG operations.
    The degree of regulation and supervision in foreign jurisdictions varies. Generally, AIG, as well as its subsidiaries operating in such jurisdictions, must satisfy local regulatory requirements. Licenses issued by foreign authorities to AIG subsidiaries are subject to modification and revocation. Thus, AIG’s insurance subsidiaries could be prevented from conducting future business in certain of the jurisdictions where they currently operate. Adverse actions from any single country could adversely affect AIG’s results of operations, liquidity and financial condition depending on the magnitude of the event and AIG’s net financial exposure at that time in that country.
Regulation
AIG is subject to extensive regulation in the jurisdictions in which it conducts its businesses. AIG’s operations around the world are subject to regulation by different types of regulatory authorities, including insurance, securities, investment advisory, banking and thrift regulators in the United States and abroad. AIG’s operations have become more diverse and consumer-oriented, increasing the scope of regulatory supervision and the possibility of intervention. In particular, AIG’s consumer lending business is subject to a broad array of laws and regulations governing lending practices and permissible loan terms, and AIG would expect increased regulatory oversight relating to this business.
    The regulatory environment could have a significant effect on AIG and its businesses. Among other things, AIG could be fined, prohibited from engaging in some of its business activities or subject to limitations or conditions on its business activities. Significant regulatory action against AIG could have material adverse financial effects, cause significant reputational harm or harm business prospects. New laws or regulations or changes in the enforcement of existing laws or regulations applicable to clients may also adversely affect AIG and its businesses.
A Material Weakness
A material weakness in internal control over financial reporting and oversight relating to the AIGFP valuation of its super senior credit default swap portfolio could adversely affect the accuracy or timing of future regulatory filings. AIG’s management has concluded that a material weakness relating to the internal control over financial reporting and oversight relating to the fair value valuation of the AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio existed as of December 31, 2007. Until remediated, this weakness could adversely affect the accuracy or timing of future filings with the SEC and other regulatory authorities. A discussion of this material weakness and AIG’s remediation efforts can be found in Item 9A. Controls and Procedures — Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.
Employee Error and Misconduct
Employee error and misconduct may be difficult to detect and prevent and may result in significant losses. Losses may result from, among other things, fraud, errors, failure to document transactions properly or to obtain proper internal authorization or failure to comply with regulatory requirements.
    There have been a number of highly publicized cases involving fraud or other misconduct by employees in the financial services industry in recent years, and AIG runs the risk that employee misconduct could occur. It is not always possible to deter or prevent employee misconduct and the controls that AIG has in place to prevent and detect this activity may not be effective in all cases.
Aircraft Suppliers
There are limited suppliers of aircraft and engines. The supply of jet transport aircraft, which ILFC purchases and leases, is dominated by two airframe manufacturers, Boeing and Airbus, and a limited number of engine manufacturers. As a result, ILFC is dependent on the manufacturers’ success in remaining financially stable, producing aircraft and related components which meet the airlines’ demands, both in type and quantity, and fulfilling their contractual obligations to ILFC. Competition between the manufacturers for market share is intense and may lead to instances of deep discounting for certain aircraft types and could negatively affect ILFC’s competitive pricing.
Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments
There are no material unresolved written comments that were received from the SEC staff 180 days or more before the end of AIG’s fiscal year relating to AIG’s periodic or current reports under the Exchange Act.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         19


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Item 2.
Properties
AIG and its subsidiaries operate from approximately 2,100 offices in the United States, 6 offices in Canada and numerous offices in approximately 100 foreign countries. The offices in Greensboro and Winston-Salem, North Carolina; Springfield, Illinois; Amarillo, Ft. Worth, Houston and Lewisville, Texas; Wilmington, Delaware; San Juan, Puerto Rico; Tampa, Florida; Livingston, New Jersey; Evansville, Indiana; Nashville, Tennessee; 70 Pine Street, 72 Wall Street and 175 Water Street in New York, New York; and offices in more than 30 foreign countries and jurisdictions including Bermuda, Chile, Hong Kong, the Philippines, Japan, the U.K., Singapore, Malaysia, Switzerland, Taiwan and Thailand are located in buildings owned by AIG and its subsidiaries. The remainder of the office space utilized by AIG subsidiaries is leased.
Item 3.
Legal Proceedings
General
AIG and its subsidiaries, in common with the insurance industry in general, are subject to litigation, including claims for punitive damages, in the normal course of their business. See also Note 12(a) to Consolidated Financial Statements, as well as the discussion and analysis of Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses under Operating Review — General Insurance Operations in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
Litigation Arising from Operations. AIG and its subsidiaries, in common with the insurance and financial services industries in general, are subject to litigation, including claims for punitive damages, in the normal course of their business. In AIG’s insurance operations, litigation arising from claims settlement activities is generally considered in the establishment of AIG’s reserve for losses and loss expenses. However, the potential for increasing jury awards and settlements makes it difficult to assess the ultimate outcome of such litigation.
Litigation Arising from Insurance Operations — Caremark. AIG and certain of its subsidiaries have been named defendants in two putative class actions in state court in Alabama that arise out of the 1999 settlement of class and derivative litigation involving Caremark Rx, Inc. (Caremark). The plaintiffs in the second-filed action have intervened in the first-filed action, and the second-filed action has been dismissed. An excess policy issued by a subsidiary of AIG with respect to the 1999 litigation was expressly stated to be without limit of liability. In the current actions, plaintiffs allege that the judge approving the 1999 settlement was misled as to the extent of available insurance coverage and would not have approved the settlement had he known of the existence and/or unlimited nature of the excess policy. They further allege that AIG, its subsidiaries, and Caremark are liable for fraud and suppression for misrepresenting and/or concealing the nature and extent of coverage. In addition, the intervenor-plaintiffs allege that various lawyers and law firms who represented parties in the underlying class and derivative litigation (the “Lawyer Defendants”) are also liable for fraud and suppression, misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty. The complaints filed by the plaintiffs and the intervenor-plaintiffs request compensatory damages for the 1999 class in the amount of $3.2 billion, plus punitive damages. AIG and its subsidiaries deny the allegations of fraud and suppression and have asserted that information concerning the excess policy was publicly disclosed months prior to the approval of the settlement. AIG and its subsidiaries further assert that the current claims are barred by the statute of limitations and that plaintiffs’ assertions that the statute was tolled cannot stand against the public disclosure of the excess coverage. The plaintiffs and intervenor-plaintiffs, in turn, have asserted that the disclosure was insufficient to inform them of the nature of the coverage and did not start the running of the statute of limitations. On November 26, 2007, the trial court issued an order that dismissed the intervenors’ complaint against the Lawyer Defendants and entered a final judgment in favor of the Lawyer Defendants. The intervenors are appealing the dismissal of the Lawyer Defendants and have requested a stay of all trial court proceedings pending the appeal. If the motion to stay is granted, no further proceedings at the trial court level will occur until the appeal is resolved. If the motion to stay is denied, the next step will be to proceed with class discovery so that the trial court can determine, under standards mandated by the Alabama Supreme Court, whether the action should proceed as a class action. AIG cannot reasonably estimate either the likelihood of its prevailing in these actions or the potential damages in the event liability is determined.
Litigation Arising from Insurance Operations — Gunderson. A subsidiary of AIG has been named as a defendant in a putative class action lawsuit in the 14th Judicial District Court for the State of Louisiana (Gunderson). The Gunderson complaint alleges failure to comply with certain provisions of the Louisiana Any Willing Provider Act (the Act) relating to discounts taken by defendants on bills submitted by Louisiana medical providers and hospitals that provided treatment or services to workers compensation claimants and seeks monetary penalties and injunctive relief. On July 20, 2006, the court denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment and granted plaintiffs’ partial motion for summary judgment, holding that the AIG subsidiary was a “group purchaser” and, therefore, potentially subject to liability under the Act. On November 28, 2006, the court issued an order certifying a class of providers and hospitals. In an unrelated action also arising under the Act, a Louisiana appellate court ruled that the district court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the claims at issue. In response, defendants in Gunderson filed an exception for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On January 19, 2007, the court denied the motion, holding that it has jurisdiction over the putative class claims. The AIG subsidiary appealed the class certification and jurisdictional rulings. While the appeal was pending, the AIG subsidiary settled the lawsuit. On January 25, 2008, plaintiffs and the AIG subsidiary agreed to resolve the lawsuit on a class-wide basis for approximately $29 million. The court has preliminarily approved the settlement and will hold a final approval hearing on May 29, 2008. In the event that the settlement is not finally approved, AIG believes that it has meritorious defenses to
20        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
plaintiffs’ claims and expects that the ultimate resolution of this matter will not have a material adverse effect on AIG’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations for any period.
2006 Regulatory Settlements. In February 2006, AIG reached a resolution of claims and matters under investigation with the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Office of the New York Attorney General (NYAG) and the New York State Department of Insurance (DOI). AIG recorded an after-tax charge of $1.15 billion relating to these settlements in the fourth quarter of 2005.
    The settlements resolved investigations conducted by the SEC, NYAG and DOI in connection with the accounting, financial reporting and insurance brokerage practices of AIG and its subsidiaries, as well as claims relating to the underpayment of certain workers compensation premium taxes and other assessments. These settlements did not, however, resolve investigations by regulators from other states into insurance brokerage practices related to contingent commissions and other broker-related conduct, such as alleged bid rigging. Nor did the settlements resolve any obligations that AIG may have to state guarantee funds in connection with any of these matters.
    As a result of these settlements, AIG made payments or placed amounts in escrow in 2006 totaling approximately $1.64 billion, $225 million of which represented fines and penalties. Amounts held in escrow totaling $347 million, including interest thereon, are included in other assets at December 31, 2007. At that date, approximately $330 million of the funds were escrowed for settlement of claims resulting from the underpayment by AIG of its residual market assessments for workers compensation. On May 24, 2007, The National Workers Compensation Reinsurance Pool, on behalf of its participant members, filed a lawsuit against AIG with respect to the underpayment of such assessments. On August 6, 2007, the court denied AIG’s motion seeking to dismiss or stay the complaint or in the alternative, to transfer to the Southern District of New York. On December 26, 2007, the court denied AIG’s motion to dismiss the complaint. AIG filed its answer on January 22, 2008. On February 5, 2008, following agreement of the parties, the court entered an order staying all proceedings through March 3, 2008. In addition, a similar lawsuit filed by the Minnesota Workers Compensation Reinsurance Association and the Minnesota Workers Compensation Insurers Association is pending. On August 6, 2007, AIG moved to dismiss the complaint and that motion is under review. A purported class action was filed in South Carolina Federal Court on January 25, 2008 against AIG and certain of its subsidiaries, on behalf of a class of employers that obtained workers compensation insurance from AIG companies and allegedly paid inflated premiums as a result of AIG’s alleged underreporting of workers compensation premiums. AIG cannot currently estimate whether the amount ultimately required to settle these claims will exceed the funds escrowed or otherwise accrued for this purpose.
    AIG has settled litigation that was filed by the Minnesota Attorney General with respect to claims by the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Minnesota Special Compensation Fund.
    The National Association of Insurance Commissioners has formed a Market Analysis Working Group directed by the State of Indiana, which has commenced its own investigation into the underreporting of workers compensation premiums. In early 2008, AIG was informed that the Market Analysis Working Group had been disbanded in favor of a multi-state targeted market conduct exam focusing on worker’s compensation insurance.
    The remaining escrowed funds, which amounted to $17 million at December 31, 2007, are set aside for settlements for certain specified AIG policyholders. As of February 20, 2008, eligible policyholders entitled to receive approximately $359 million (or 95 percent) of the excess casualty fund had opted to receive settlement payments in exchange for releasing AIG and its subsidiaries from liability relating to certain insurance brokerage practices. Amounts remaining in the excess casualty fund may be used by AIG to settle claims from other policyholders relating to such practices through February 29, 2008 (originally set for January 31, 2008 and later extended), after which they will be distributed pro rata to participating policyholders.
    In addition to the escrowed funds, $800 million was deposited into a fund under the supervision of the SEC as part of the settlements to be available to resolve claims asserted against AIG by investors, including the shareholder lawsuits described herein.
    Also, as part of the settlements, AIG agreed to retain, for a period of three years, an independent consultant to conduct a review that will include, among other things, the adequacy of AIG’s internal control over financial reporting, the policies, procedures and effectiveness of AIG’s regulatory, compliance and legal functions and the remediation plan that AIG has implemented as a result of its own internal review.
    Other than as described above, at the current time, AIG cannot predict the outcome of the matters described above, or estimate any potential additional costs related to these matters.
Private Litigation
Securities Actions. Beginning in October 2004, a number of putative securities fraud class action suits were filed against AIG and consolidated as In re American International Group, Inc. Securities Litigation. Subsequently, a separate, though similar, securities fraud action was also brought against AIG by certain Florida pension funds. The lead plaintiff in the class action is a group of public retirement systems and pension funds benefiting Ohio state employees, suing on behalf of themselves and all purchasers of AIG’s publicly traded securities between October 28, 1999 and April 1, 2005. The named defendants are AIG and a number of present and former AIG officers and directors, as well as C.V. Starr & Co., Inc. (Starr), Starr International Company, Inc. (SICO), General Reinsurance Corporation, and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC), among others. The lead plaintiff alleges, among other things, that AIG: (1) concealed that it engaged in anti-competitive conduct through alleged payment of contingent commissions to brokers and participation in illegal bid-rigging; (2) concealed that it used “income smoothing” products and other techniques to inflate its earnings; (3) concealed that it marketed and sold “income smoothing” insurance products to other companies; and (4) misled investors about the scope of
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         21


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
government investigations. In addition, the lead plaintiff alleges that AIG’s former Chief Executive Officer manipulated AIG’s stock price. The lead plaintiff asserts claims for violations of Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Section 20A of the Exchange Act. In April 2006, the court denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss the second amended class action complaint and the Florida complaint. In December 2006, a third amended class action complaint was filed, which does not differ substantially from the prior complaint. Fact and class discovery is currently ongoing. On February 20, 2008, the lead plaintiff filed a motion for class certification.
ERISA Action. Between November 30, 2004 and July 1, 2005, several Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) actions were filed on behalf of purported class of participants and beneficiaries of three pension plans sponsored by AIG or its subsidiaries. A consolidated complaint filed on September 26, 2005 alleges a class period between September 30, 2000 and May 31, 2005 and names as defendants AIG, the members of AIG’s Retirement Board and the Administrative Boards of the plans at issue, and four present or former members of AIG’s Board of Directors. The factual allegations in the complaint are essentially identical to those in the securities actions described above. The parties have reached an agreement in principle to settle this matter for an amount within AIG’s insurance coverage limits.
Securities Action — Oregon State Court. On February 27, 2008, The State of Oregon, by and through the Oregon State Treasurer, and the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Board, on behalf of the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Fund, filed a lawsuit against American International Group, Inc. for damages arising out of plaintiffs’ purchase of AIG common stock at prices that allegedly were inflated. Plaintiffs allege, among other things, that AIG: (1) made false and misleading statements concerning its accounting for a $500 million transaction with General Re; (2) concealed that it marketed and misrepresented its control over off-shore entities in order to improve financial results; (3) improperly accounted for underwriting losses as investment losses in connection with transactions involving CAPCO Reinsurance Company, Ltd. and Union Excess; (4) misled investors about the scope of government investigations; and (5) engaged in market manipulation through its then Chairman and CEO Maurice R. Greenberg. The complaint asserts claims for violations of Oregon Securities Law, and seeks compensatory damages in an amount in excess of $15 million, and prejudgement interest and costs and fees.
Derivative Actions — Southern District of New York. On November 20, 2007, two purported shareholder derivative actions were filed in the Southern District of New York naming as defendants the then-current directors of AIG and certain senior officers of AIG and its subsidiaries. Plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment, as well as violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, among other things, in connection with AIG’s public disclosures regarding its exposure to what the lawsuits describe as the subprime market crisis. The actions were consolidated as In re American International Group, Inc. 2007 Derivative Litigation. On February 15, 2008, plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint alleging the same causes of action.
Between October 25, 2004 and July 14, 2005, seven separate derivative actions were filed in the Southern District of New York, five of which were consolidated into a single action. The New York derivative complaint contains nearly the same types of allegations made in the securities fraud and ERISA actions described above. The named defendants include current and former officers and directors of AIG, as well as Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (Marsh), SICO, Starr, ACE Limited and subsidiaries (ACE), General Reinsurance Corporation, PwC, and certain employees or officers of these entity defendants. Plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets, unjust enrichment, insider selling, auditor breach of contract, auditor professional negligence and disgorgement from AIG’s former Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of incentive-based compensation and AIG share proceeds under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, among others. Plaintiffs seek, among other things, compensatory damages, corporate governance reforms, and a voiding of the election of certain AIG directors. AIG’s Board of Directors has appointed a special committee of independent directors (special committee) to review the matters asserted in the operative consolidated derivative complaint. The court has entered an order staying the derivative case in the Southern District of New York pending resolution of the consolidated derivative action in the Delaware Chancery Court (discussed below). The court also has entered an order that termination of certain named defendants from the Delaware derivative action applies to the New York derivative action without further order of the court. On October 17, 2007, plaintiffs and those AIG officer and director defendants against whom the shareholder plaintiffs in the Delaware action are no longer pursuing claims filed a stipulation providing for all claims in the New York action against such defendants to be dismissed with prejudice. Former directors and officers Maurice R. Greenberg and Howard I. Smith have asked the court to refrain from so ordering this stipulation.
Derivative Actions — Delaware Chancery Court. From October 2004 to April 2005, AIG shareholders filed five derivative complaints in the Delaware Chancery Court. All of these derivative lawsuits were consolidated into a single action as In re American International Group, Inc. Consolidated Derivative Litigation. The amended consolidated complaint named 43 defendants (not including nominal defendant AIG) who, like the New York consolidated derivative litigation, were current and former officers and directors of AIG, as well as other entities and certain of their current and former employees and directors. The factual allegations, legal claims and relief sought in the Delaware action are similar to those alleged in the New York derivative actions, except that shareholder plaintiffs in the Delaware derivative action assert claims only under state law. Earlier in 2007, the Court approved an agreement that AIG be realigned as plaintiff, and, on June 13,
22        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
2007, acting on the direction of the special committee, AIG filed an amended complaint against former directors and officers Maurice R. Greenberg and Howard I. Smith, alleging breach of fiduciary duty and indemnification. Also on June 13, 2007, the special committee filed a motion to terminate the litigation as to certain defendants, while taking no action as to others. Defendants Greenberg and Smith filed answers to AIG’s complaint and brought third-party complaints against certain current and former AIG directors and officers, PwC and Regulatory Insurance Services, Inc. On September 28, 2007, AIG and the shareholder plaintiffs filed a combined amended complaint in which AIG continued to assert claims against defendants Greenberg and Smith and took no position as to the claims asserted by the shareholder plaintiffs in the remainder of the combined amended complaint. In that pleading, the shareholder plaintiffs are no longer pursuing claims against certain AIG officers and directors. In November 2007, the shareholder plaintiffs moved to sever their claims to a separate action. AIG joined the motion to the extent that, among other things, the claims against defendants Greenberg and Smith would remain in prosecution in the pending action. In addition, a number of parties, including AIG, filed motions to stay discovery. On February 12, 2008, the court granted AIG’s motion to stay discovery pending the resolution of claims against AIG in the New York consolidated securities action. The court also denied plaintiff’s motion to sever and directed the parties to coordinate a briefing schedule for the motions to dismiss.
    A separate derivative lawsuit was filed in December 2002 in the Delaware Chancery Court against twenty directors and executives of AIG as well as against AIG as a nominal defendant that alleges, among other things, that the directors of AIG breached the fiduciary duties of loyalty and care by approving the payment of commissions to Starr and of rental and service fees to SICO and the executives breached their duty of loyalty by causing AIG to enter into contracts with Starr and SICO and their fiduciary duties by usurping AIG’s corporate opportunity. The complaint further alleges that the Starr agencies did not provide any services that AIG was not capable of providing itself, and that the diversion of commissions to these entities was solely for the benefit of Starr’s owners. The complaint also alleged that the service fees and rental payments made to SICO and its subsidiaries were improper. Under the terms of a stipulation approved by the Court on February 16, 2006, the claims against the outside independent directors were dismissed with prejudice, while the claims against the other directors were dismissed without prejudice. On October 31, 2005, defendants Greenberg, Matthews, Smith, SICO and Starr filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint. In an opinion dated June 21, 2006, the Court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss, except with respect to plaintiff’s challenge to payments made to Starr before January 1, 2000. On July 21, 2006, plaintiff filed its second amended complaint, which alleges that, between January 1, 2000 and May 31, 2005, individual defendants breached their duty of loyalty by causing AIG to enter into contracts with Starr and SICO and breached their fiduciary duties by usurping AIG’s corporate opportunity. Starr is charged with aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment for its acceptance of the fees. SICO is no longer named as a defendant. On April 20, 2007, the individual defendants and Starr filed a motion seeking leave of the Court to assert a cross-claim against AIG and a third-party complaint against PwC and the directors previously dismissed from the action, as well as certain other AIG officers and employees. On June 13, 2007, the Court denied the individual defendants’ motion to file a third-party complaint, but granted the proposed cross-claim against AIG. On June 27, 2007, Starr filed its cross-claim against AIG, alleging one count that includes contribution, unjust enrichment and setoff. AIG has filed an answer and moved to dismiss Starr’s cross-claim to the extent it seeks affirmative relief, as opposed to a reduction in the judgment amount. On November 15, 2007, the court granted AIG’s motion to dismiss the cross-claim by Starr to the extent that it sought affirmative relief from AIG. On November 21, 2007, shareholder plaintiffs submitted a motion for leave to file their Third Amended Complaint in order to add Thomas Tizzio as a defendant. On February 14, 2008, the court granted this motion and allowed Mr. Tizzio until April 2008 to take additional discovery. Document discovery and depositions are otherwise complete.
Policyholder Actions. After the NYAG filed its complaint against insurance broker Marsh, policyholders brought multiple federal antitrust and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) class actions in jurisdictions across the nation against insurers and brokers, including AIG and a number of its subsidiaries, alleging that the insurers and brokers engaged in a broad conspiracy to allocate customers, steer business, and rig bids. These actions, including 24 complaints filed in different federal courts naming AIG or an AIG subsidiary as a defendant, were consolidated by the judicial panel on multi-district litigation and transferred to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The consolidated actions have proceeded in that court in two parallel actions, In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation (the First Commercial Complaint) and In re Employee Benefit Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation (the First Employee Benefits Complaint, and, together with the First Commercial Complaint, the multi-district litigation).
    The plaintiffs in the First Commercial Complaint are nineteen corporations, individuals and public entities that contracted with the broker defendants for the provision of insurance brokerage services for a variety of insurance needs. The broker defendants are alleged to have placed insurance coverage on the plaintiffs’ behalf with a number of insurance companies named as defendants, including AIG subsidiaries. The First Commercial Complaint also named ten brokers and fourteen other insurers as defendants (two of which have since settled). The First Commercial Complaint alleges that defendants engaged in a widespread conspiracy to allocate customers through “bid-rigging” and “steering” practices. The First Commercial Complaint also alleges that the insurer defendants permitted brokers to place business with AIG subsidiaries through wholesale intermediaries affiliated with or owned by those same brokers rather than placing the business with AIG subsidiaries directly. Finally, the First Commercial Complaint alleges that the insurer defendants entered into agreements with broker defendants that tied insurance placements to reinsurance placements in order to provide additional
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         23


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
compensation to each broker. Plaintiffs assert that the defendants violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, RICO, the antitrust laws of 48 states and the District of Columbia, and are liable under common law breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment theories. Plaintiffs seek treble damages plus interest and attorneys’ fees as a result of the alleged RICO and Sherman Antitrust Act violations.
    The plaintiffs in the First Employee Benefits Complaint are nine individual employees and corporate and municipal employers alleging claims on behalf of two separate nationwide purported classes: an employee class and an employer class that acquired insurance products from the defendants from August 26, 1994 to the date of any class certification. The First Employee Benefits Complaint names AIG, as well as eleven brokers and five other insurers, as defendants. The activities alleged in the First Employee Benefits Complaint, with certain exceptions, track the allegations of contingent commissions, bid-rigging and tying made in the First Commercial Complaint.
    On October 3, 2006, Judge Hochberg of the District of New Jersey reserved in part and denied in part motions filed by the insurer defendants and broker defendants to dismiss the multi-district litigation. The Court also ordered the plaintiffs in both actions to file supplemental statements of particularity to elaborate on the allegations in their complaints. Plaintiffs filed their supplemental statements on October 25, 2006, and the AIG defendants, along with other insurer and broker defendants in the two consolidated actions, filed renewed motions to dismiss on November 30, 2006. On February 16, 2007, the case was transferred to Judge Garrett E. Brown, Chief Judge of the District of New Jersey. On April 5, 2007, Chief Judge Brown granted the defendants’ renewed motions to dismiss the First Commercial Complaint and First Employee Benefits Complaint with respect to the antitrust and RICO claims. The claims were dismissed without prejudice and the plaintiffs were given 30 days, later extended to 45 days, to file amended complaints. On April 11, 2007, the Court stayed all proceedings, including all discovery, that are part of the multi-district litigation until any renewed motions to dismiss the amended complaints are resolved.
    A number of complaints making allegations similar to those in the First Commercial Complaint have been filed against AIG and other defendants in state and federal courts around the country. The defendants have thus far been successful in having the federal actions transferred to the District of New Jersey and consolidated into the multi-district litigation. The AIG defendants have also sought to have state court actions making similar allegations stayed pending resolution of the multi-district litigation proceeding. In one state court action pending in Florida, the trial court recently decided not to grant an additional stay, but instead to allow the case to proceed. Defendants filed their motions to dismiss, and on September 24, 2007, the court denied the motions with respect to the state antitrust, RICO, and common law claims and granted the motions with respect to both the Florida insurance bad faith claim against AIG (with prejudice) and the punitive damages claim (without prejudice). Discovery in this action is ongoing.
    Plaintiffs filed amended complaints in both In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation (the Second Commercial Complaint) and In re Employee Benefit Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation (the Second Employee Benefits Complaint) along with revised particularized statements in both actions on May 22, 2007. The allegations in the Second Commercial Complaint and the Second Employee Benefits Complaint are substantially similar to the allegations in the First Commercial Complaint and First Employee Benefits Complaint, respectively. The complaints also attempt to add several new parties and delete others; the Second Commercial Complaint adds two new plaintiffs and twenty seven new defendants (including three new AIG defendants), and the Second Employee Benefits Complaint adds eight new plaintiffs and nine new defendants (including two new AIG defendants). The defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaints and to strike the newly added parties. The Court granted (without leave to amend) defendants’ motions to dismiss the federal antitrust and RICO claims on August 31, 2007 and September 28, 2007, respectively. The Court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims in the Second Commercial Complaint and therefore dismissed it in its entirety. On January 14, 2008, the court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the ERISA claims in the Second Employee Benefits Complaint and subsequently dismissed the remaining state law claims without prejudice, thereby dismissing the Second Employee Benefits Complaint in its entirety. On February 12, 2008, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit with respect to the dismissal of the Second Employee Benefits Complaint. Plaintiffs previously appealed the dismissal of the Second Commercial Complaint to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on October 10, 2007. Several similar actions that were consolidated before Chief Judge Brown are still pending in the District Court. Those actions are currently stayed pending a decision by the court on whether they will proceed during the appeal of the dismissal of the Second Commercial Complaint and the Second Employee Benefits Complaint.
    On August 24, 2007, the Ohio Attorney General filed a complaint in the Ohio Court of Common Pleas against AIG and a number of its subsidiaries, as well as several other broker and insurer defendants, asserting violation of Ohio’s antitrust laws. The complaint, which is similar to the Second Commercial Complaint, alleges that AIG and the other broker and insurer defendants conspired to allocate customers, divide markets, and restrain competition in commercial lines of casualty insurance sold through the broker defendant. The complaint seeks treble damages on behalf of Ohio public purchasers of commercial casualty insurance, disgorgement on behalf of both public and private purchasers of commercial casualty insurance, as well as a $500 per day penalty for each day of conspiratorial conduct. AIG, along with other co-defendants, moved to dismiss the complaint on November 16, 2007. Discovery is stayed in the case pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss or until May 15, 2008, whichever occurs first.
SICO. In July, 2005, SICO filed a complaint against AIG in the Southern District of New York, claiming that AIG had refused to provide SICO access to certain artwork and asked the court to order AIG immediately to release the property to SICO. AIG filed
24        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
an answer denying SICO’s allegations and setting forth defenses to SICO’s claims. In addition, AIG filed counterclaims asserting breach of contract, unjust enrichment, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, a constructive trust and declaratory judgment, relating to SICO’s breach of its commitment to use its AIG shares only for the benefit of AIG and AIG employees. Fact and expert discovery has been concluded and SICO’s motion for summary judgment is pending.
Regulatory Investigations. Regulators from several states have commenced investigations into insurance brokerage practices related to contingent commissions and other industry wide practices as well as other broker-related conduct, such as alleged bid-rigging. In addition, various federal, state and foreign regulatory and governmental agencies are reviewing certain transactions and practices of AIG and its subsidiaries in connection with industry wide and other inquiries. AIG has cooperated, and will continue to cooperate, in producing documents and other information in response to subpoenas and other requests. On January 29, 2008, AIG reached settlement agreements with nine states and the District of Columbia. The settlement agreements call for AIG to pay a total of $12.5 million to be allocated among the ten jurisdictions and also require AIG to continue to maintain certain producer compensation disclosure and ongoing compliance initiatives. AIG will also continue to cooperate with these states in their ongoing investigations. AIG has not admitted liability under the settlement agreements and continues to deny the allegations. Nevertheless, AIG agreed to settle in order to avoid the expense and uncertainty of protracted litigation. The settlement agreements, which remain subject to court approvals, were reached with the Attorneys General of the States of Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Oregon, Texas and West Virginia, the Commonwealths of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, and the District of Columbia, the Florida Department of Financial Services, and the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation. The agreement with the Texas Attorney General also settles allegations of anticompetitive conduct relating to AIG’s relationship with Allied World Assurance Company and includes an additional settlement payment of $500,000 related thereto.
Wells Notices. AIG understands that some of its employees have received Wells notices in connection with previously disclosed SEC investigations of certain of AIG’s transactions or accounting practices. Under SEC procedures, a Wells notice is an indication that the SEC staff has made a preliminary decision to recommend enforcement action that provides recipients with an opportunity to respond to the SEC staff before a formal recommendation is finalized. It is possible that additional current and former employees could receive similar notices in the future as the regulatory investigations proceed.
Effect on AIG
In the opinion of AIG management, AIG’s ultimate liability for the unresolved litigation and investigation matters referred to above is not likely to have a material adverse effect on AIG’s consolidated financial condition, although it is possible that the effect would be material to AIG’s consolidated results of operations for an individual reporting period.
Item 4.
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
There were no matters submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2007.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         25


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Part II
 
Item 5.
Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
AIG’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, as well as on the stock exchanges in Paris and Tokyo.
The following table presents the high and low closing sales prices and the dividends paid per share of AIG’s common stock on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Tape, for each quarter of 2007 and 2006:
                                                 
 
    2007   2006
         
        Dividends       Dividends
    High   Low   Paid   High   Low   Paid
 
First quarter
  $ 72.15     $ 66.77     $ 0.165     $ 70.83     $ 65.35     $ 0.150  
Second quarter
    72.65       66.49       0.165       66.54       58.67       0.150  
Third quarter
    70.44       61.64       0.200       66.48       57.76       0.165  
Fourth quarter
    70.11       51.33       0.200       72.81       66.30       0.165  
 
The approximate number of holders of common stock as of January 31, 2008, based upon the number of record holders, was 56,500.
Subject to the dividend preference of any of AIG’s serial preferred stock that may be outstanding, the holders of shares of common stock are entitled to receive such dividends as may be declared by AIG’s Board of Directors from funds legally available therefor.
In February 2007, AIG’s Board of Directors adopted a new dividend policy, which took effect with the dividend that was declared in the second quarter of 2007. Under ordinary circumstances, AIG’s plan is to increase its common stock dividend by approximately 20 percent annually. The payment of any dividend, however, is at the discretion of AIG’s Board of Directors, and the future payment of dividends will depend on various factors, including the performance of AIG’s businesses, AIG’s consolidated financial condition, results of operations and liquidity and the existence of investment opportunities.
For a discussion of certain restrictions on the payment of dividends to AIG by some of its insurance subsidiaries, see Note 14 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following table summarizes AIG’s stock repurchases for the three-month period ended December 31, 2007:
                                 
 
    Maximum Number
    Total Number   of Shares that
    of Shares   May Yet Be
    Total Number       Purchased as Part   Purchased Under the
    of Shares   Average Price   of Publicly Announced   Plans or Programs
Period   Purchased(a)(b)   Paid per Share   Plans or Programs   at End of Month(b)
 
October 1 - 31, 2007
    13,964,098     $ 66.12       13,964,098          
November 1 - 30, 2007
    5,709,067       61.56       5,709,067          
December 1 - 31, 2007
    1,584,199       55.58       1,584,199          
 
Total
    21,257,364     $ 64.11       21,257,364          
 
(a)  Reflects date of delivery. Does not include 49,583 shares delivered or attested to in satisfaction of the exercise price by holders of AIG employee stock options exercised during the three months ended December 31, 2007 or 23,300 shares purchased by ILFC to satisfy obligations under employee benefit plans.
 
(b)  In February 2007, AIG’s Board of Directors increased AIG’s share repurchase program by authorizing the repurchase of shares with an aggregate purchase price of $8 billion. In November 2007, AIG’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of an additional $8 billion in common stock. A balance of $10.9 billion remained for purchases under the program as of December 31, 2007, although $912 million of that amount has been advanced by AIG to purchase shares under the program and an additional $1 billion was required to be advanced in January 2008 to meet commitments that existed at December 31, 2007.
AIG does not expect to purchase additional shares under its share repurchase program for the foreseeable future, other than to meet commitments that existed at December 31, 2007.
AIG’s table of equity compensation plans previously approved by security holders and equity compensation plans not previously approved by security holders will be included in AIG’s Definitive Proxy Statement in connection with its 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which will be filed with the SEC within 120 days of AIG’s fiscal year end.
26        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Performance Graph
The following Performance Graph compares the cumulative total shareholder return on AIG common stock for a five-year period (December 31, 2002 to December 31, 2007) with the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s 500 stock index (which includes AIG) and a peer group of companies consisting of nine insurance companies to which AIG compares its business and operations: ACE Limited, Aflac Incorporated, The Chubb Corporation, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., Lincoln National Corporation, MetLife, Inc., Prudential Financial, Inc., The Travelers Companies, Inc. (formerly The St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.) and XL Capital Ltd.
FIVE-YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL SHAREHOLDER RETURNS
Value of $100 Invested on December 31, 2002
(COMPARISON GRAPH)
                                                 
    As of December 31,
     
    2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007
                         
AIG
  $ 100.00     $ 115.02     $ 114.43     $ 119.98     $ 127.24     $ 104.67  
S&P 500
    100.00       128.68       142.69       149.70       173.34       182.86  
Peer Group
    100.00       126.10       145.73       179.22       207.37       216.60  
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         27


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
Item 6.
Selected Financial Data
American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Selected Consolidated Financial Data
The Selected Consolidated Financial Data should be read in conjunction with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere herein.
                                             
 
Years Ended December 31,
(in millions, except per share data)   2007   2006(a)   2005(a)   2004(a)   2003(a)
 
Revenues(b)(c)(d):
                                       
 
Premiums and other considerations
  $ 79,302     $ 74,213     $ 70,310     $ 66,704     $ 54,874  
 
Net investment income
    28,619       26,070       22,584       19,007       16,024  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    (3,592 )     106       341       44       (442 )
 
Unrealized market valuation losses on AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio
    (11,472 )                        
 
Other income
    17,207       12,998       15,546       12,068       9,145  
Total revenues
    110,064       113,387       108,781       97,823       79,601  
Benefits and expenses:
                                       
 
Incurred policy losses and benefits
    66,115       60,287       64,100       58,600       46,362  
 
Insurance acquisition and other operating expenses
    35,006       31,413       29,468       24,378       21,332  
Total benefits and expenses
    101,121       91,700       93,568       82,978       67,694  
Income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes (b)(c)(d)(e)(f)
    8,943       21,687       15,213       14,845       11,907  
Income taxes
    1,455       6,537       4,258       4,407       3,556  
Income before minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes
    7,488       15,150       10,955       10,438       8,351  
Minority interest
    (1,288 )     (1,136 )     (478 )     (455 )     (252 )
Income before cumulative effect of accounting changes
    6,200       14,014       10,477       9,983       8,099  
Cumulative effect of accounting changes, net of tax
          34             (144 )     9  
Net income
    6,200       14,048       10,477       9,839       8,108  
 
Earnings per common share:
                                       
 
Basic
                                       
   
Income before cumulative effect of accounting changes
    2.40       5.38       4.03       3.83       3.10  
   
Cumulative effect of accounting changes, net of tax
          0.01             (0.06 )      
   
Net income
    2.40       5.39       4.03       3.77       3.10  
 
Diluted
                                       
   
Income before cumulative effect of accounting changes
    2.39       5.35       3.99       3.79       3.07  
   
Cumulative effect of accounting changes, net of tax
          0.01             (0.06 )      
   
Net income
    2.39       5.36       3.99       3.73       3.07  
Dividends declared per common share
    0.77       0.65       0.63       0.29       0.24  
 
Year-end balance sheet data:
                                       
 
Total assets
    1,060,505       979,410       853,048       801,007       675,602  
 
Long-term borrowings(g)
    162,935       135,316       100,314       86,653       73,881  
 
Commercial paper and extendible commercial notes
    13,114       13,363       9,535       10,246       6,468  
 
Total liabilities
    964,604       877,542       766,545       721,135       606,180  
 
Shareholders’ equity
  $ 95,801     $ 101,677     $ 86,317     $ 79,673     $ 69,230  
 
(a) Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts to conform to the current period presentation.
 
(b) In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of $4.7 billion, $944 million, $598 million, $684 million and $1.5 billion, respectively. Also includes gains (losses) from hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, including the related foreign exchange gains and losses. In 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, the effect was $(1.44) billion, $(1.87) billion, $2.02 billion, $385 million and $(1.50) billion in revenues and $(1.44) billion, $(1.87) billion, $2.02 billion, $671 million and $(1.22) billion in operating income. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are effective economic hedges of investments and borrowings. These gains (losses) in 2007 include a $380 million out of period charge to reverse net gains recognized on transfers of available for sale securities among legal entities consolidated within AIGFP. The gains (losses) in 2006 include an out of period charge of $223 million related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over the accounting for certain derivative transactions under FAS 133. In the first quarter of 2007, AIG began applying hedge accounting for certain transactions, primarily in its Capital Markets operations. In the second quarter of 2007, AGF and ILFC began applying hedge accounting to most of their derivatives hedging interest rate and foreign exchange risks associated with their floating rate and foreign currency denominated borrowings.
 
(c) In 2006, includes the effect of out of period adjustments related to the accounting for UCITS. The effect was an increase of $490 million in both revenues and operating income for General Insurance and an increase of $240 million and $169 million in revenues and operating income, respectively, for Life Insurance & Retirement Services.
 
(d) In 2007, includes an unrealized market valuation loss of $11.5 billion on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio and an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $643 million on AIGFP’s available for sale investment securities reported in other income.
 
(e) Includes current year catastrophe-related losses of $276 million in 2007, $3.28 billion in 2005 and $1.16 billion in 2004. There were no significant catastrophe-related losses in 2006 and 2003.
 
(f) Reduced by fourth quarter charges of $1.8 billion and $850 million in 2005 and 2004, respectively, related to the annual review of General Insurance loss and loss adjustment reserves. In 2006, 2005 and 2004, changes in estimates for asbestos and environmental reserves were $198 million, $873 million and $850 million, respectively.
 
(g) Includes that portion of long-term debt maturing in less than one year. See also Note 11 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
28        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
 
Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Throughout this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, AIG presents its operations in the way it believes will be most meaningful. Statutory underwriting profit (loss) and combined ratios are presented in accordance with accounting principles prescribed by insurance regulatory authorities because these are standard measures of performance used in the insurance industry and thus allow more meaningful comparisons with AIG’s insurance competitors. AIG has also incorporated into this discussion a number of cross-references to additional information included throughout this Annual Report on Form 10-K to assist readers seeking additional information related to a particular subject.
 
           
Index   Page
 
Cautionary Statement Regarding
Projections and Other Information About Future Events
    29  
Overview of Operations and Business Results
    30  
Outlook
    30  
Consolidated Results
    34  
Segment Results
    36  
Capital Resources
    37  
Liquidity
    38  
Critical Accounting Estimates
    38  
Operating Review
    40  
General Insurance Operations
    40  
 
General Insurance Results
    41  
 
Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses
    47  
Life Insurance & Retirement Services Operations
    62  
 
Life Insurance & Retirement Services Results
    63  
 
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Sales Inducement Assets
    78  
Financial Services Operations
    81  
Asset Management Operations
    86  
Other Operations
    88  
Capital Resources and Liquidity
    88  
Borrowings
    89  
Shareholders’ Equity
    97  
Liquidity
    99  
Invested Assets
    101  
Investment Strategy
    102  
Valuation of Invested Assets
    108  
Portfolio Review
    109  
 
Other-than-temporary impairments
    109  
 
Unrealized gains and losses
    111  
Risk Management
    112  
Overview
    112  
Corporate Risk Management
    112  
 
Credit Risk Management
    113  
 
Market Risk Management
    115  
 
Operational Risk Management
    116  
 
Insurance Risk Management
    116  
Segment Risk Management
    118  
 
Insurance Operations
    118  
 
Financial Services
    121  
 
Asset Management
    126  
Economic Capital
    126  
Recent Accounting Standards
    127  
 
Cautionary Statement Regarding Projections and Other Information About Future Events
This Annual Report on Form 10-K and other publicly available documents may include, and AIG’s officers and representatives may from time to time make, projections concerning financial information and statements concerning future economic performance and events, plans and objectives relating to management, operations, products and services, and assumptions underlying these projections and statements. These projections and statements are not historical facts but instead represent only AIG’s belief regarding future events, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and outside AIG’s control. These projections and statements may address, among other things, the status and potential future outcome of the current regulatory and civil proceedings against AIG and their potential effect on AIG’s businesses, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and liquidity, AIG’s exposures to subprime mortgages, monoline insurers and the residential real estate market and AIG’s strategy for growth, product development, market position, financial results and reserves. It is possible that AIG’s actual results and financial condition may differ, possibly materially, from the anticipated results and financial condition indicated in these projections and statements. Factors that could cause AIG’s actual results to differ, possibly materially, from those in the specific projections and statements are discussed throughout this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and in Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. AIG is not under any obligation (and expressly disclaims any such obligations) to update or alter any projection or other statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         29


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
Overview of Operations and Business Results

AIG identifies its reportable segments by product or service line, consistent with its management structure. AIG’s major product and service groupings are General Insurance, Life Insurance & Retirement Services, Financial Services and Asset Management. Through these operating segments, AIG provides insurance, financial and investment products and services to both businesses and individuals in more than 130 countries and jurisdictions. This geographic, product and service diversification is one of AIG’s major strengths and sets it apart from its competitors. AIG’s Other category consists of items not allocated to AIG’s operating segments.
    AIG’s subsidiaries serve commercial, institutional and individual customers through an extensive property-casualty and life insurance and retirement services network. In the United States, AIG companies are the largest underwriters of commercial and industrial insurance and are among the largest life insurance and retirement services operations as well. AIG’s Financial Services businesses include commercial aircraft and equipment leasing, capital markets operations and consumer finance, both in the United States and abroad. AIG also provides asset management services to institutions and individuals. As part of its Spread-Based Investment activities, and to finance its operations, AIG issues various debt instruments in the public and private markets.
    AIG’s operating performance reflects implementation of various long-term strategies and defined goals in its various operating segments. A primary goal of AIG in managing its General Insurance operations is to achieve an underwriting profit. To achieve this goal, AIG must be disciplined in its risk selection, and premiums must be adequate and terms and conditions appropriate to cover the risks accepted and expenses incurred.
    AIG has commenced a realignment to simplify its Foreign General Insurance operations, many of which were historically conducted through branches of U.S. companies. On October 8, 2007, AIU Insurance Company announced the conversion of its existing China branches into AIG General Insurance Company China Limited, the first non-Chinese owned general insurance company established in China. This subsidiary assumed the existing business portfolio, assets and liabilities of the China branches. On October 15, 2007, AIG General Insurance (Taiwan) Co., Ltd. (AIGGI Taiwan) announced the completion of its merger with AIU Insurance Company Taiwan Branch. On December 1, 2007, Landmark Insurance Company Limited, a U.K. subsidiary, assumed all of the insurance liabilities of the U.K. branch of New Hampshire Insurance Company and changed its name to AIG U.K. Ltd. On January 1, 2008, AIU Insurance Company ceased participating in the Domestic General Insurance pooling arrangement. These ongoing simplification efforts are expected to result in better utilization of capital and a lower effective tax rate.
    A central focus of AIG operations in recent years has been the development and expansion of distribution channels. In 2007, AIG continued to expand its distribution channels, which now include banks, credit card companies, television-media home shopping, affinity groups, direct response, worksite marketing and e-commerce.
    AIG patiently builds relationships in markets around the world where it sees long-term growth opportunities. For example, the fact that AIG has the only wholly owned foreign life insurance operations in China, operating in 19 cities, is the result of relationships developed over nearly 30 years. AIG’s more recent extensions of operations into India, Vietnam, Russia and other emerging markets reflect the same growth strategy. Moreover, AIG believes in investing in the economies and infrastructures of these countries and growing with them. When AIG companies enter a new jurisdiction, they typically offer basic protection and savings products. As the economies evolve, AIG’s products evolve with them, to more sophisticated and investment-oriented models.
    Growth for AIG may be generated internally as well as through acquisitions which both fulfill strategic goals and offer adequate return on capital. In October 2007, AIG expanded its Foreign General Insurance operations in Germany through the acquisition of Württembergische und Badische Versicherungs-AG (WüBA). In January 2007, American General Finance, Inc. (AGF) expanded its operations into the U.K. through the acquisition of Ocean Finance and Mortgages Limited, a finance broker for home owner loans in the U.K.
Outlook
General Trends
In mid-2007, the U.S. residential mortgage market began to experience serious disruption due to credit quality deterioration in a significant portion of loans originated, particularly to non-prime and subprime borrowers; evolving changes in the regulatory environment; a slower residential housing market; increased cost of borrowings for mortgage participants; and illiquid credit markets.
    AIG participates in the U.S. residential mortgage market in several ways: AGF originates principally first-lien mortgage loans and to a lesser extent second-lien mortgage loans to buyers and owners of residential housing; United Guaranty Corporation (UGC) provides first loss mortgage guaranty insurance for high loan-to-value first- and second-lien residential mortgages; AIG insurance and financial services subsidiaries invest in mortgage-backed securities and CDOs, in which the underlying collateral is composed in whole or in part of residential mortgage loans; and AIGFP provides credit protection through credit default swaps on certain super senior tranches of collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), a significant majority of which have AAA underlying or subordinate layers.
    Disruption in the U.S. residential mortgage market may also increase claim activity in the financial institution segment of AIG’s D&O and professional liability classes of business. However, based on its review of information currently available, AIG believes overall loss activity for the broader D&O and professional liability classes is likely to remain within or near the levels observed during the last several years, which include losses related to stock options backdating as well as to the U.S. residential mortgage market.
    The operating results of AIG’s consumer finance and mortgage guaranty operations in the United States have been and are likely
30        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
to continue to be adversely affected by the factors referred to above. The downward cycle in the U.S. housing market is not expected to improve until residential inventories return to a more normal level and the mortgage credit market stabilizes. AIG expects that this downward cycle will continue to adversely affect UGC’s operating results for the foreseeable future and will result in a significant operating loss for UGC in 2008. AIG also incurred substantial unrealized market valuation losses in 2007, particularly in the fourth quarter, on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio and substantial other-than-temporary impairment charges on AIG’s Insurance and Financial Services available for sale securities. The results from AIG’s operations with exposure to the U.S. residential mortgage market will be highly dependent on future market conditions. Continuing market deterioration will cause AIG to report additional unrealized market valuation losses and impairment charges.
    The ongoing effect of the downward cycle in the U.S. housing market on AIG’s other operations, investment portfolio and overall consolidated financial condition could be material if the market disruption continues and expands beyond the residential mortgage markets, although AIG seeks to mitigate the risks to its business by disciplined underwriting and active risk management.
    Globally, heightened regulatory scrutiny of financial services companies in many jurisdictions has the potential to affect future financial results through higher compliance costs. This is particularly true in the United States, where Federal and state authorities have commenced various investigations of the financial services industry, and in Japan and Southeast Asia, where financial institutions have received remediation orders affecting consumer and policyholder rights.
    In certain quarters, AIG’s returns from partnerships and other alternative investments were particularly strong, driven by favorable equity market performance and credit conditions. These returns may vary from period to period and AIG believes that the particularly strong performance in certain prior periods is not indicative of the returns to be expected from this asset class in future periods.
    AIG has recorded out of period adjustments in the last two years due to the remediation of control deficiencies. As AIG continues its remediation activities, AIG expects to continue to incur expenses related to these activities and to record additional out of period adjustments, although all known errors have been corrected.
General Insurance
The commercial property and casualty insurance industry has historically experienced cycles of price erosion followed by rate strengthening as a result of catastrophes or other significant losses that affect the overall capacity of the industry to provide coverage. As premium rates decline, AIG will generally experience higher current accident year loss ratios, as the written premiums are earned. Despite industry price erosion in commercial lines, AIG expects to continue to identify profitable opportunities and build attractive new general insurance businesses as a result of AIG’s broad product line and extensive distribution networks in the United States and abroad.
    Workers compensation remains under considerable pricing pressure, as statutory rates continue to decline. Rates for aviation, excess casualty, D&O and certain other lines of insurance also continue to decline due to competitive pressures. Rates for commercial property lines are also declining following another year of relatively low catastrophe losses. Further price erosion is expected in 2008 for the commercial lines; AIG seeks to mitigate the decline by constantly seeking out profitable opportunities across its diverse product lines and distribution networks while maintaining a commitment to underwriting discipline. There can be no assurance that price erosion will not become more widespread or that AIG’s profitability will not deteriorate from current levels in major commercial lines.
    In Foreign General Insurance, opportunities for growth exist in the consumer lines due to increased demand in emerging markets and the trend toward privatization of health insurance. In commercial lines, the late 2007 acquisition of WüBa enhances AIG’s insurance offerings to small and medium sized companies in Europe.
    Through operations in Bahrain designed to comply with Islamic law, AIG is tapping into a growing market. Islamic insurance, called Takaful, is an alternative to conventional insurance based on the concept of mutual assistance through pooling of resources.
    The Personal Lines automobile marketplace remains challenging with rates declining steadily, increased spending on commissions and advertising and favorable liability frequency trends slowing, while severity in both liability and physical damage are expected to increase. In addition to the deteriorating underwriting cycle, a generally weakening economy leads to slower growth in automobile insurance exposure units and values. The Personal Lines business is focused on consolidation and improving operational efficiencies to reduce costs, as well as enhancing rating algorithms and creating a new aigdirect.com brand, as a result of the 2007 combination of AIG Direct and 21st Century Insurance Group (21st Century) operations, to support growth. The high net worth market continues to provide opportunities for growth as a result of AIG’s innovative products and services specifically designed for that market.
    Losses caused by catastrophes can fluctuate widely from year to year, making comparisons of results more difficult. With respect to catastrophe losses, AIG believes that it has taken appropriate steps, such as careful exposure selection and adequate reinsurance coverage, to reduce the effect of possible future losses. The occurrence of one or more catastrophic events of higher than anticipated frequency or severity, such as a terrorist attack, earthquake or hurricane, that causes insured losses, however, could have a material adverse effect on AIG’s results of operations, liquidity or financial condition.
Life Insurance & Retirement Services
Disruption in the U.S. residential mortgage and credit markets had a significant adverse effect on Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating results in 2007 and will continue to be a key factor in 2008 and beyond, especially in the U.S.-based operations. The volatility in operating results will be further magnified by the continuing market shift to variable products with living benefits
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         31


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
and the adoption of FAS No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (FAS 157). Life Insurance & Retirement Services elected the fair value option under FAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (FAS 159), for two products beginning January 1, 2008 - a closed block of single premium variable life business in Japan and an investment-linked life insurance product sold principally in Asia. After adoption on January 1, 2008, subsequent changes in fair value for these products will be reported in operating income. The adoption of FAS 159 for these products is expected to result in a decrease to opening 2008 retained earnings of approximately $600 million. For a description of these accounting standards, see Note 1 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
       Life Insurance & Retirement Services uses various derivative instruments to hedge cash flows related to certain foreign currencies and fixed income related instruments. Although these derivatives are purchased to mitigate the economic effect of movements in foreign exchange rates and interest rates, reported earnings may be volatile due to certain hedges not qualifying for hedge accounting under FAS 133. The change in fair value of derivative instruments is reported in net realized capital gains (losses). Life Insurance & Retirement Services engages in hedging programs that use derivatives and other instruments to hedge the guaranteed living benefits associated with variable products. Nevertheless, short-term market movements will vary from long-term expectations underlying the product pricing assumptions and may cause volatility in reported earnings. The inclusion of risk margins in the valuation of embedded derivatives under FAS 157 will increase earnings volatility as differences emerge between the change in fair value of embedded derivatives and the change in fair value of hedging instruments. As variable products with guaranteed living benefits continue to grow, the reported earnings volatility associated with these programs will likely increase.
       Life Insurance & Retirement Services may continue to experience volatility in net realized capital gains (losses) due to other-than-temporary impairment writedowns of the fair value of investments, primarily related to the significant disruption in the residential mortgage and credit markets and foreign currency related losses.
       In Japan, given AIG’s multi-channel, multi-product strategy, AIG expects its Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations to exceed industry growth in the long term, although downward pressure on earnings growth rates is anticipated due to the difficult market conditions. Market conditions remain challenging as a result of increased competition due to new market entrants, the increasing financial strength of the domestic companies as the economy has recovered, the effect of additional regulatory oversight, changes to the tax deductibility of insurance premiums and the regulatory claims review which has negatively affected consumer perceptions of the industry. While the market shift to variable products with living benefits will constrain fixed annuity sales, AIG is positioned to grow annuity sales overall with its annuity products designed to meet the needs of consumers in a range of market conditions. In addition, AIG expects that the planned integration of AIG Star Life and AIG Edison Life, which is anticipated to be completed in 2009, will provide enhanced distribution opportunities and operational efficiencies pending regulatory approval.
       Full deregulation of banks in Japan with respect to insurance product sales became effective in December 2007, and AIG expects that it will be able to leverage its existing bank relationships and innovative product expertise to expand sales of both life and accident and health products in 2008. Deregulation of Japan Post is also expected to provide additional growth opportunities during 2008 and beyond.
       Although the Japanese Yen strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2007, historical volatility of Japanese Yen-dollar exchange rates has resulted in higher than normal surrenders, and if that trend returns, an acceleration of the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs could occur.
       Outside of Japan, ALICO continues to execute its strategy of diversifying distribution channels and developing new products. In particular, ALICO’s Central and Eastern European operations performed well and demographic and economic conditions in these countries provide excellent opportunities for continued growth.
       AIG’s operations in China continue to expand, but AIG expects competition in China to remain strong. AIG’s success in China will depend on its ability to execute its growth strategy. Key growth strategies in 2008 include expansion of sales and service centers, increased bank distribution and entering into strategic alliances with key partners. In Southeast Asia, AIG’s operations are focused on growing market share and profits in Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Hong Kong with products focused on the life savings-oriented consumer along with high net worth consumers through the newly formed Wealth Management Group.
    Domestically, AIG plans to continue expansion of its Life Insurance & Retirement Services businesses through direct marketing and independent agent distribution channels. The aging population in the United States provides a growth opportunity for a variety of products, including longevity, guaranteed income and supplemental accident and health products. Certain other demographic groups that have traditionally been underserved provide additional growth opportunities. The Domestic Life Insurance operations showed positive momentum in the second half of 2007 resulting from new products and expanded distribution. Domestic group life/health operations continue to face competitors with greater scale in group benefits.
    The fixed annuities business experienced a difficult year as surrenders increased in 2007 due to both an increasing number of policies coming out of their surrender charge period and increased competition from bank deposit products. While surrenders are expected to continue to be higher than normal, the current interest rate environment should provide opportunities for improvements in net flows during 2008. AIG believes that improvement in net flows in the individual variable annuity market will be driven by variable annuity products with living benefits while the group retirement products will continue to experience a shift from group annuities to lower margin mutual fund products.
    Since the beginning of 2000, the yield available on Taiwanese 10-year government bonds dropped from approximately 6 percent to less than 3 percent at December 31, 2007. Yields on most
32        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
other invested assets have correspondingly dropped over the same period. New regulatory capital requirements being developed in Taiwan, combined with growth opportunities in bancassurance and variable annuities with living benefits, may potentially create a need for capital contributions in 2008 and beyond to support local solvency requirements.
Financial Services
Within Financial Services, demand for International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC’s) modern, fuel efficient aircraft remains strong, and ILFC plans to increase its fleet by purchasing 73 aircraft in 2008. However, ILFC’s margins may be adversely affected by increases in interest rates. AIG Financial Products Corp. and AIG Trading Group Inc. and their respective subsidiaries (collectively, AIGFP) expect opportunities for growth across their product segments, but AIGFP is a transaction-oriented business, and its operating results will depend to a significant extent on actual transaction flow, which is affected by market conditions and other variables outside its control. AIG continues to explore opportunities to expand its Consumer Finance operations into new domestic and foreign markets.
    The ongoing disruption in the U.S. residential mortgage and credit markets and the recent downgrades of residential mortgage-backed securities and CDO securities by rating agencies continue to adversely affect the fair value of the super senior credit default swap portfolio written by AIGFP. AIG expects that continuing limitations on the availability of market observable data will affect AIG’s determinations of the fair value of these derivatives, including by preventing AIG, for the foreseeable future, from recognizing the beneficial effect of the differential between credit spreads used to price a credit default swap and spreads implied from prices of the CDO bonds referenced by such swap. The fair value of these derivatives is expected to continue to fluctuate, perhaps materially, in response to changing market conditions, and AIG’s estimates of the value of AIGFP’s super senior credit derivative portfolio at future dates could therefore be materially different from current estimates. AIG continues to believe that the unrealized market valuation losses recorded on the AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio are not indicative of the losses AIGFP may realize over time. Under the terms of most of these credit derivatives, losses to AIG would generally result from the credit impairment of the referenced CDO bonds that AIG would acquire in satisfying its swap obligations. Based upon its most current analyses, AIG believes that any credit impairment losses realized over time by AIGFP will not be material to AIG’s consolidated financial condition, although it is possible that such realized losses could be material to AIG’s consolidated results of operations for an individual reporting period. Except to the extent of any such credit impairment losses, AIG expects the unrealized market valuation losses to reverse over the remaining life of the super senior credit default swap portfolio.
    Approximately $379 billion of the $527 billion in notional exposure on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio as of December 31, 2007 were written to facilitate regulatory capital relief for financial institutions primarily in Europe. AIG expects that the majority of these transactions will be terminated within the next 12 to 18 months by AIGFP’s counterparties as they implement models compliant with the new Basel II Accord. As of February 26, 2008, $54 billion in notional exposures have either been terminated or are in the process of being terminated. AIGFP was not required to make any payments as part of these terminations and in certain cases was paid a fee upon termination. In light of this experience to date and after other comprehensive analyses, AIG did not recognize an unrealized market valuation adjustment for this regulatory capital relief portfolio for the year ended December 31, 2007. AIG will continue to assess the valuation of this portfolio and monitor developments in the marketplace. There can be no assurance that AIG will not recognize unrealized market valuation losses from this portfolio in future periods. These transactions contributed approximately $210 million to AIGFP’s revenues in 2007. If AIGFP is not successful in replacing the revenues generated by these transactions, AIGFP’s operating results could be materially adversely affected. For additional information on the AIGFP super senior credit default swap portfolio, see Risk Management — Segment Risk Management — Financial Services — Capital Markets Derivative Transactions and Note 8 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
    In March 2007, the U.S. Treasury Department published proposed regulations that, had they been adopted in 2007, would have had the effect of limiting the ability of AIG to claim foreign tax credits with respect to certain transactions entered into by AIGFP. AIGFP is no longer a participant in those transactions and therefore, the proposed regulations, if adopted in their current form in 2008 or subsequent years, would not be expected to have any material effect on AIG’s ability to claim foreign tax credits.
    Effective January 1, 2008, AIGFP elected to apply the fair value option to all eligible assets and liabilities, other than equity method investments. The adoption of FAS 159 with respect to elections made by AIGFP is currently being evaluated for the effect of recently issued draft guidance by the FASB, anticipated to be issued in final form in early 2008, and its potential effect on AIG’s consolidated financial statements.
Asset Management
In the Spread-Based Investment business, the Guaranteed Investment Contract (GIC) portfolio continues to run off and was replaced by the Matched Investment Program (MIP). The results from domestic GICs and the MIP have been adversely affected by the ongoing disruption in the credit markets, the weakening U.S. dollar and declining interest rates. The MIP is exposed to credit and market risk in the form of investments in, among other asset classes, U.S. residential mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities, commercial mortgage-backed securities and single name corporate credit default swaps entered into by the MIP. In addition, earnings volatility for the MIP may arise from investments in bank loans that are held for future collateralized loan obligations to be managed by AIG Investments. The value of the investments may fluctuate materially from period to period due to market movements, which may result in realized and unrealized net losses. Although it is difficult to estimate future movements in these markets, effective hedges exist to mitigate the effect of
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         33


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
interest rate and foreign currency exchange rate disruptions. Reported results may be volatile due to certain hedges not qualifying for hedge accounting treatment.
    In the Institutional Asset Management business, carried interest, computed in accordance with each fund’s governing agreement, is based on the investment’s performance over the life of each fund. Unrealized carried interest is recognized based on each fund’s performance as of the balance sheet date. Future fund performance may negatively affect previously recognized carried interest.
    For a description of important factors that may affect the operations and initiatives described above, see Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Consolidated Results
The following table summarizes AIG’s consolidated revenues, income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes and net income for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
                                         
 
    Percentage Increase/(Decrease)
Years Ended December 31,        
(in millions)   2007   2006   2005   2007 vs. 2006   2006 vs. 2005
 
Total revenues
  $ 110,064     $ 113,387     $ 108,781       (3 )%     4 %
 
Income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes
    8,943       21,687       15,213       (59 )     43  
 
Net income
  $ 6,200     $ 14,048     $ 10,477       (56 )%     34 %
 
Effect of Credit Market Events in the Fourth Quarter of 2007
AIG reported a net loss of $8.4 billion before tax ($5.2 billion after tax) in the fourth quarter of 2007 as a result of severe credit market disruption. Contributing to this loss was an $11.5 billion pre-tax charge for the unrealized market valuation loss on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio. Net realized capital losses totaled $2.6 billion before tax in the fourth quarter of 2007, arising primarily from other-than-temporary impairment charges in AIG’s investment portfolio, with an additional $643 million impairment charge related to Financial Services securities available for sale reported in other income. Also contributing to the operating loss for the fourth quarter was an operating loss of $348 million before tax from Mortgage Guaranty from continued deterioration in the U.S. residential housing market.
2007 and 2006 Comparison
AIG’s consolidated revenues decreased in 2007 compared to 2006 as growth in Premiums and other considerations and Net investment income in the General Insurance and Life Insurance & Retirement Services segments were more than offset by higher Net realized capital losses compared to 2006 and an unrealized market valuation loss of $11.5 billion on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio recorded in other income. Net realized capital losses of $3.6 billion in 2007 included other-than-temporary impairment charges of the fair value of investments of $4.1 billion, primarily related to the significant disruption in the residential mortgage and credit markets, and foreign currency related losses of $500 million. Similarly, AIG recorded in other income, other-than-temporary impairment charges of $643 million related to its Financial Services securities available for sale reported in other income. Total other-than-temporary impairment charges in 2006 were $944 million. See Invested Assets — Other-than-temporary impairments herein.
    Income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes declined in 2007 due to the losses described above, partially offset by the favorable effects in 2007 of the application of hedge accounting under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (FAS 133). In 2007, AIGFP applied hedge accounting to certain of its interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts hedging its investments and borrowings. As a result, AIGFP recognized in earnings the change in the fair value of the hedged items attributable to the hedged risks, substantially offsetting the gains and losses on the derivatives designated as hedges. In 2006, AIGFP did not apply hedge accounting to any of its assets and liabilities.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
The increase in revenues in 2006 compared to 2005 was primarily attributable to the growth in Premiums and other considerations and Net investment income in the General Insurance and Life Insurance & Retirement Services segments. Revenues in the Financial Services segment declined as a result of the effect of hedging activities for AIGFP that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, decreasing revenues by $1.8 billion in 2006 and increasing revenues by $2.0 billion in 2005.
    Income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of accounting changes increased in 2006 compared to 2005, reflecting higher General Insurance and Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating income. These increases were partially offset by lower Financial Services operating income reflecting the effects of hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133. Results in 2005 reflected the negative effect of $3.3 billion (pre-tax) in catastrophe-related losses incurred that year. Net income in 2005 also reflected the charges related to regulatory settlements, as described in Item 3. Legal Proceedings, and the fourth quarter
34        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
charge resulting from the annual review of General Insurance loss and loss adjustment reserves.
Remediation
Throughout 2007 and 2006, as part of its continuing remediation efforts, AIG recorded out of period adjustments which are detailed below. In addition, certain revisions were made to the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
2007 Adjustments
During 2007, out of period adjustments collectively decreased pre-tax operating income by $372 million ($399 million after tax). The adjustments were comprised of a charge of $380 million ($247 million after tax) to reverse net gains on transfers of investment securities among legal entities consolidated within AIGFP and a corresponding increase to accumulated other comprehensive income (loss); $156 million of additional income tax expense related to the successful remediation of the material weakness in internal control over income tax accounting; $142 million ($92 million after tax) of additional expense related to insurance reserves and DAC in connection with improvements in internal control over financial reporting and consolidation processes; $42 million ($29 million after tax) of additional expense, primarily related to other remediation activities; and $192 million ($125 million after tax) of net realized capital gains related to foreign exchange.
2006 Adjustments
During 2006, out of period adjustments collectively increased pre-tax operating income by $313 million ($65 million after tax). The adjustments were comprised of $773 million ($428 million after tax) of additional investment income related to the accounting for certain interests in unit investment trusts (UCITS); $300 million ($145 million after tax) of charges primarily related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over the accounting for certain derivative transactions under FAS 133; $58 million of additional income tax expense related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over income tax accounting; $85 million ($55 million after tax) of interest income related to interest earned on deposit contracts; $61 million (before and after tax) of expenses related to the Starr International Company, Inc. (SICO) Deferred Compensation Profit Participation Plans (SICO Plans); $59 million ($38 million after tax) of expenses related to deferred advertising costs; and $125 million ($116 million after tax) of additional expense, primarily related to other remediation activities.
    Results in 2006 were also negatively affected by a one-time charge relating to the C.V. Starr & Co., Inc. (Starr) tender offer ($54 million before and after tax) and an additional allowance for losses in AIG Credit Card Company (Taiwan) ($88 million before and after tax), both of which were recorded in first quarter of 2006.
Cash Flows
As part of its ongoing remediation activities, AIG has made certain revisions to the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows, primarily relating to the effect of reclassifying certain policyholders’ account balances, the elimination of certain intercompany balances and revisions related to separate account assets. Accordingly, AIG revised the previous periods presented to conform to the revised presentation. See Note 24 to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
Income Taxes
The effective tax rate declined from 30.1 percent in 2006 to 16.3 percent in 2007, primarily due to the unrealized market valuation losses on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio and other-than-temporary impairment charges. These losses, which are taxed at a U.S. tax rate of 35 percent and are included in the calculation of income tax expense, reduced AIG’s overall effective tax rate. In addition, other tax benefits, including tax exempt interest and effects of foreign operations are proportionately larger in 2007 than in 2006 due to the decline in pre-tax income in 2007. Furthermore, tax deductions taken in 2007 for SICO compensation plans for which the expense had been recognized in prior years also reduced the effective tax rate in 2007. AIG has now completed its claims for tax refunds attributable to adjustments made for 2004 and prior financial statements. Refund claims for tax years 1991-1996 were filed with the Internal Revenue Service in June 2007. Claims for tax years 1997-2004 will be filed before September 2008.
    AIG expects to receive cash tax benefits in 2008 as a result of the unrealized market valuation losses on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio, whether AIG is in a regular or alternative minimum tax position.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         35


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
The following table summarizes the net effect of catastrophe-related losses for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2005. There were no significant catastrophe-related losses for the year ended December 31, 2006.
                 
 
(in millions)   2007   2005
 
Pretax
  $ 276     $ 3,280 *
 
Net of tax and minority interest
  $ 177       2,109  
 
Includes $312 million in catastrophe-related losses from partially owned companies.
Segment Results
The following table summarizes AIG’s operations by reporting segment for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005. See also Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
                                           
 
    Percentage Increase/(Decrease)
     
(in millions)   2007   2006(a)   2005(a)   2007 vs. 2006   2006 vs. 2005
 
Revenues(b):
                                       
 
General Insurance(c)
  $ 51,708     $ 49,206     $ 45,174       5 %     9 %
 
Life Insurance & Retirement Services(c)(d)
    53,570       50,878       48,020       5       6  
 
Financial Services(e)(f)
    (1,309 )     7,777       10,677             (27 )
 
Asset Management
    5,625       4,543       4,582       24       (1 )
 
Other
    457       483       344       (5 )     40  
 
Consolidation and eliminations
    13       500       (16 )     (97 )      
 
Total
  $ 110,064     $ 113,387     $ 108,781       (3 )%     4 %
 
Operating Income (loss)(b)(g):
                                       
 
General Insurance(c)
  $ 10,526     $ 10,412     $ 2,315       1 %     350 %
 
Life Insurance & Retirement Services(c)(d)
    8,186       10,121       8,965       (19 )     13  
 
Financial Services(e)(f)
    (9,515 )     383       4,424             (91 )
 
Asset Management
    1,164       1,538       1,963       (24 )     (22 )
 
Other(h)
    (2,140 )     (1,435 )     (2,765 )            
 
Consolidation and eliminations
    722       668       311       8       115  
 
Total
  $ 8,943     $ 21,687     $ 15,213       (59 )%     43 %
 
(a) Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts to conform to the current period presentation.
(b) In 2007, 2006 and 2005, includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of $4.7 billion, $944 million and $598 million, respectively. Also includes gains (losses) from hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, including the related foreign exchange gains and losses. In 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively, the effect was $(1.44) billion, $(1.87) billion and $2.02 billion in both revenues and operating income. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are effective economic hedges of investments and borrowings. These gains (losses) in 2007 include a $380 million out of period charge to reverse net gains recognized on transfers of available for sale securities among legal entities consolidated within AIGFP. The gains (losses) in 2006 include an out of period charge of $223 million related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over the accounting for certain derivative transactions under FAS 133.
(c) In 2006, includes the effect of out of period adjustments related to the accounting for UCITS. In 2006, the effect was an increase of $490 million in both revenues and operating income for General Insurance and an increase of $240 million and $169 million in revenues and operating income, respectively, for Life Insurance & Retirement Services.
 
(d) In 2007, 2006 and 2005, includes other-than-temporary impairment charges of $2.8 billion, $641 million and $425 million, respectively, for Life Insurance & Retirement Services.
 
(e) Includes gains (losses) from hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, including the related foreign exchange gains and losses. In 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, the effect was $104 million, $(1.97) billion, and $2.19 billion in both revenues and operating income. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are effective economic hedges of investments and borrowings. The years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 include out of period charges of $380 million and $223 million, respectively, as discussed in footnote (b). In the first quarter of 2007, AIG began applying hedge accounting for certain transactions, primarily in its Capital Markets operations. In the second quarter of 2007, AGF and ILFC began applying hedge accounting to most of their derivatives hedging interest rate and foreign exchange risks associated with their floating rate and foreign currency denominated borrowings.
(f) In 2007, both revenues and operating income (loss) include an unrealized market valuation loss of $11.5 billion on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio and an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $643 million on AIGFP’s available for sale investment securities recorded in other income.
(g) Includes current year catastrophe-related losses of $276 million in 2007 and $3.28 billion in 2005. There were no significant catastrophe-related losses in 2006.
 
(h) In 2005, includes current year catastrophe-related losses from unconsolidated entities of $312 million.
36        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
General Insurance
AIG’s General Insurance operations provide property and casualty products and services throughout the world. Revenues in the General Insurance segment represent net premiums earned, net investment income and net realized capital gains (losses). The increase in General Insurance operating income in 2007 compared to 2006 was driven by strength in the Domestic Brokerage Group (DBG), partially offset by operating losses from the Mortgage Guaranty business and a decrease in Personal Lines operating income.
Life Insurance & Retirement Services
AIG’s Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations provide insurance, financial and investment-oriented products throughout the world. Revenues in the Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations represent premiums and other considerations, net investment income and net realized capital gains (losses). Foreign operations contributed approximately 76 percent, 68 percent and 59 percent of AIG’s Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating income in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
    Life Insurance & Retirement Services operating income declined in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to higher net realized capital losses in 2007. In addition, operating income in 2007 was negatively affected by charges related to remediation activity in Asia; an industry wide regulatory claims review in Japan; the effect of Statement of Position 05-1, “Accounting by Insurance Enterprises for Deferred Acquisition Costs in Connection with Modifications or Exchanges of Insurance Contracts” (SOP 05-1), which was adopted in 2007; and investment losses where a FAS 115 trading election was made (trading account).
Financial Services
AIG’s Financial Services subsidiaries engage in diversified activities including aircraft and equipment leasing, capital markets, consumer finance and insurance premium finance. Revenues in the Financial Services segment include interest, realized and unrealized gains and losses, including the unrealized market valuation losses on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio, lease and finance charges.
    Financial Services reported an operating loss in 2007 compared to operating income in 2006, primarily due to an unrealized market valuation loss of $11.5 billion on AIGFP’s super senior credit default swap portfolio, an other-than-temporary impairment charge of $643 million on AIGFP’s investment portfolio of CDOs of asset-backed securities (ABS) and a decline in operating income for AGF. AGF’s operating income declined in 2007 compared to 2006 due to reduced residential mortgage origination volume, lower revenues from its mortgage banking activities and increases in the provision for finance receivable losses. In 2007, AGF’s mortgage banking operations recorded a pre-tax charge of $178 million, representing the estimated cost of implementing the Supervisory Agreement entered into with the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), which is discussed in the Consumer Finance results of operations section.
    Operating income for ILFC increased in 2007 compared to 2006, driven to a large extent by a larger aircraft fleet, higher lease rates and higher utilization.
    In 2007, AIGFP began applying hedge accounting under FAS 133 to certain of its interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts that hedge its investments and borrowings and AGF and ILFC began applying hedge accounting to most of their derivatives that hedge floating rate and foreign currency denominated borrowings. Prior to 2007, hedge accounting was not applied to any of AIG’s derivatives and related assets and liabilities. Accordingly, revenues and operating income were exposed to volatility resulting from differences in the timing of revenue recognition between the derivatives and the hedged assets and liabilities.
Asset Management
AIG’s Asset Management operations include institutional and retail asset management, broker-dealer services and spread-based investment businesses. Revenues in the Asset Management segment represent investment income with respect to spread-based products and management, advisory and incentive fees.
    Asset Management operating income decreased in 2007 compared to 2006, due to realized capital losses on interest rate and foreign currency hedge positions not qualifying for hedge accounting and other-than-temporary impairment charges on fixed income investments due primarily to disruptions in the U.S. credit markets. These decreases were partially offset by higher partnership income from the Spread-Based Investment business, increased gains on real estate investments and a gain on the sale of a portion of AIG’s investment in Blackstone Group, L.P. in connection with its initial public offering.
Capital Resources
At December 31, 2007, AIG had total consolidated shareholders’ equity of $95.8 billion and total consolidated borrowings of $176.0 billion. At that date, $67.9 billion of such borrowings were subsidiary borrowings not guaranteed by AIG.
    In 2007, AIG issued an aggregate of $5.6 billion of junior subordinated debentures in five series of securities. Substantially all of the proceeds from these sales, net of expenses, were used to repurchase shares of AIG’s common stock. A total of 76,361,209 shares were repurchased during 2007.
    In February 2007, AIG’s Board of Directors increased AIG’s share repurchase program by authorizing the repurchase of shares with an aggregate purchase price of $8 billion. In November 2007, AIG’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of an additional $8 billion in common stock. At February 15, 2008, $10.25 billion was available for repurchase under the aggregate authorization. AIG did not purchase shares of its common stock under its common stock repurchase authorization during 2006. AIG does not expect to purchase additional shares under its share repurchase program for the foreseeable future, other than pursuant to commitments that existed at December 31, 2007.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         37


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
Liquidity
AIG manages liquidity at both the subsidiary and parent company levels. At December 31, 2007, AIG’s consolidated invested assets, primarily held by its subsidiaries, included $65.6 billion in cash and short-term investments. Consolidated net cash provided from operating activities in 2007 amounted to $35.2 billion. At both the subsidiary and parent company level, liquidity management activities are intended to preserve and enhance funding stability, flexibility, and diversity through a wide range of potential operating environments and market conditions. AIG’s primary sources of cash flow are dividends and other payments from its regulated and unregulated subsidiaries, as well as issuances of debt securities. Primary uses of cash flow are for debt service, subsidiary funding, shareholder dividend payments and common stock repurchases. As a result of disruption in the credit markets during 2007, AIG took steps to enhance the liquidity of its portfolios, including increasing the liquidity of the collateral in the securities lending program. Management believes that AIG’s liquid assets, cash provided by operations and access to the capital markets will enable it to meet its anticipated cash requirements, including the funding of increased dividends under AIG’s new dividend policy.
Critical Accounting Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires the application of accounting policies that often involve a significant degree of judgment. AIG considers that its accounting policies that are most dependent on the application of estimates and assumptions, and therefore viewed as critical accounting estimates, to be those relating to reserves for losses and loss expenses, future policy benefits for life and accident and health contracts, recoverability of DAC, estimated gross profits for investment-oriented products, fair value measurements of certain financial assets and liabilities, other-than-temporary impairments, the allowance for finance receivable losses and flight equipment recoverability. These accounting estimates require the use of assumptions about matters, some of which are highly uncertain at the time of estimation. To the extent actual experience differs from the assumptions used, AIG’s results of operations would be directly affected.
    Throughout this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, AIG’s critical accounting estimates are discussed in detail. The major categories for which assumptions are developed and used to establish each critical accounting estimate are highlighted below.
Reserves for Losses and Loss Expenses (General Insurance):
•   Loss trend factors: used to establish expected loss ratios for subsequent accident years based on premium rate adequacy and the projected loss ratio with respect to prior accident years.
•   Expected loss ratios for the latest accident year: in this case, accident year 2007 for the year-end 2007 loss reserve analysis. For low-frequency, high-severity classes such as excess casualty, expected loss ratios generally are utilized for at least the three most recent accident years.
•   Loss development factors: used to project the reported losses for each accident year to an ultimate amount.
•   Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses: the expected recoveries from reinsurers on losses that have not yet been reported and/or settled.
Future Policy Benefits for Life and Accident and Health Contracts (Life Insurance & Retirement Services):
•   Interest rates: which vary by geographical region, year of issuance and products.
•   Mortality, morbidity and surrender rates: based upon actual experience by geographical region modified to allow for variation in policy form, risk classification and distribution channel.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs (Life Insurance & Retirement Services):
•   Recoverability: based on current and future expected profitability, which is affected by interest rates, foreign exchange rates, mortality experience and policy persistency.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs (General Insurance):
•   Recoverability: based upon the current terms and profitability of the underlying insurance contracts.
Estimated Gross Profits (Life Insurance & Retirement Services):
•   Estimated gross profits: to be realized over the estimated duration of the contracts (investment-oriented products) affect the carrying value of DAC, unearned revenue liability and associated amortization patterns under FAS 97, “Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Contracts and for Realized Gains and Losses from the Sale of Investments” (FAS 97); and Sales Inducement Assets under American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Statement of Position (SOP) 03-1, “Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Nontraditional Long- Duration Contracts and for Separate Accounts” (SOP 03-1). Estimated gross profits include investment income and gains and losses on investments less required interest, actual mortality and other expenses.
Fair Value Measurements of Financial Instruments:
    AIG measures financial instruments in its trading and available for sale securities portfolios, together with securities sold but not yet purchased, certain hybrid financial instruments, and derivative assets and liabilities at fair value. The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.
    The degree of judgment used in measuring the fair value of financial instruments generally correlates with the level of pricing observability. Financial instruments with quoted prices in active markets generally have more pricing observability and less judgment is used in measuring fair value. Conversely, financial instruments traded in other than active markets or that do not have quoted prices have less observability and are measured at fair value using valuation models or other pricing techniques that
38        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
require more judgment. Pricing observability is affected by a number of factors, including the type of financial instrument, whether the financial instrument is new to the market and not yet established, the characteristics specific to the transaction and general market conditions.
    AIG maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. AIG obtains market price data to value financial instruments whenever such information is available. Market price data generally is obtained from market exchanges or dealer quotations. The types of instruments valued based on market price data include G-7 government and agency securities, equities listed in active markets, investments in publicly traded mutual funds with quoted market prices and listed derivatives.
    AIG estimates the fair value of fixed income instruments not traded in active markets by referring to traded securities with similar attributes and using a matrix pricing methodology. This methodology considers such factors as the issuer’s industry, the security’s rating and tenor, its coupon rate, its position in the capital structure of the issuer, and other relevant factors. The types of fixed income instruments not traded in active markets include non-G-7 government securities, municipal bonds, certain hybrid financial instruments, most investment-grade and high-yield corporate bonds, and most mortgage- and asset-backed products.
    AIG initially estimates the fair value of equity instruments not traded in active markets by reference to the transaction price. This valuation is adjusted only when changes to inputs and assumptions are corroborated by evidence such as transactions in similar instruments, completed or pending third-party transactions in the underlying investment or comparable entities, subsequent rounds of financing, recapitalizations and other transactions across the capital structure, offerings in the equity capital markets, and changes in financial ratios or cash flows.
    For equity and fixed income instruments that are not traded in active markets or that are subject to transfer restrictions, valuations are adjusted to reflect illiquidity and/or non-transferability, and such adjustments generally are based on available market evidence. In the absence of such evidence, management’s best estimate is used.
    AIG obtains the fair value of its investments in limited partnerships and hedge funds from information provided by the general partner or manager of the investments, the financial statements of which generally are audited annually.
    Derivative assets and liabilities can be exchange-traded or traded over the counter (OTC). AIG generally values exchange-traded derivatives within portfolios using models that calibrate to market clearing levels and eliminate timing differences between the closing price of the exchange-traded derivatives and their underlying instruments.
    OTC derivatives are valued using market transactions and other market evidence whenever possible, including market-based inputs to models, model calibration to market clearing transactions, broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. When models are used, the selection of a particular model to value an OTC derivative depends on the contractual terms of, and specific risks inherent in, the instrument as well as the availability of pricing information in the market. AIG generally uses similar models to value similar instruments. Valuation models require a variety of inputs, including contractual terms, market prices and rates, yield curves, credit curves, measures of volatility, prepayment rates and correlations of such inputs. For OTC derivatives that trade in liquid markets, such as generic forwards, swaps and options, model inputs can generally be verified and model selection does not involve significant management judgment.
    Certain OTC derivatives trade in less liquid markets with limited pricing information, and the determination of fair value for these derivatives is inherently more difficult. When AIG does not have corroborating market evidence to support significant model inputs and cannot verify the model to market transactions, transaction price is initially used as the best estimate of fair value. Accordingly, when a pricing model is used to value such an instrument, the model is adjusted so that the model value at inception equals the transaction price. Subsequent to initial recognition, AIG updates valuation inputs when corroborated by evidence such as similar market transactions, third-party pricing services and/or broker or dealer quotations, or other empirical market data. When appropriate, valuations are adjusted for various factors such as liquidity, bid/offer spreads and credit considerations. Such adjustments are generally based on available market evidence. In the absence of such evidence, management’s best estimate is used.
    AIGFP employs a modified version of the Binomial Expansion Technique (BET) model to value its super senior credit default swap portfolio, including maturity-shortening puts that allow the holders of the notes issued by certain multi-sector CDOs to treat the notes as short-term eligible 2a-7 investments under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (2a-7 Puts). The BET model utilizes default probabilities derived from credit spreads implied from market prices for the individual securities included in the underlying collateral pools securing the CDOs, as well as diversity scores, weighted average lives, recovery rates and discount rates. The determination of some of these inputs requires the use of judgment and estimates, particularly in the absence of market observable data. AIGFP also employs a Monte Carlo simulation to assist in quantifying the effect on the valuation of the CDOs of the unique aspects of the CDO’s structure such as triggers that divert cash flows to the most senior part of the capital structure. In the final determination of fair value, AIGFP also considers the price estimates for the super senior CDO notes provided by third parties, including counterparties to these transactions, and makes adjustments when deemed necessary. See also Risk Management, Segment Risk Management, Financial Services — Capital Markets Derivative Transactions and Note 8 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments:
AIG evaluates its investments for impairment such that a security is considered a candidate for other-than-temporary impairment if it meets any of the following criteria:
•   Trading at a significant (25 percent or more) discount to par, amortized cost (if lower) or cost for an extended period of time (nine consecutive months or longer);
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         39


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
•   The occurrence of a discrete credit event resulting in (i) the issuer defaulting on a material outstanding obligation; (ii) the issuer seeking protection from creditors under the bankruptcy laws or any similar laws intended for court supervised reorganization of insolvent enterprises; or (iii) the issuer proposing a voluntary reorganization pursuant to which creditors are asked to exchange their claims for cash or securities having a fair value substantially lower than par value of their claims; or
•   AIG may not realize a full recovery on its investment, regardless of the occurrence of one of the foregoing events.
    The above criteria also consider circumstances of a rapid and severe market valuation decline, such as that experienced in current credit markets, in which AIG could not reasonably assert that the recovery period would be temporary (severity losses).
    In light of the recent significant disruption in the U.S. residential mortgage and credit markets, particularly in the fourth quarter, AIG has recognized an other-than-temporary impairment charge (severity loss) of $2.2 billion (including $643 million related to AIGFP’s available for sale investment securities recorded in other income), primarily from certain residential mortgage-backed securities and other structured securities. Even while retaining their investment grade ratings, such securities were priced at a severe discount to cost. Notwithstanding AIG’s intent and ability to hold such securities indefinitely, and despite structures which indicate that a substantial amount of the securities should continue to perform in accordance with their original terms, AIG concluded that it could not reasonably assert that the recovery period would be temporary.
    At each balance sheet date, AIG evaluates its securities holdings with unrealized losses. When AIG does not intend to hold such securities until they have recovered their cost basis, AIG records the unrealized loss in income. If a loss is recognized from a sale subsequent to a balance sheet date pursuant to changes in circumstances, the loss is recognized in the period in which the intent to hold the securities to recovery no longer existed.
    In periods subsequent to the recognition of an other-than-temporary impairment charge for fixed maturity securities, which is not credit or foreign exchange related, AIG generally accretes into income the discount or amortizes the reduced premium resulting from the reduction in cost basis over the remaining life of the security.
Allowance for Finance Receivable Losses (Financial Services):
•   Historical defaults and delinquency experience: utilizing factors, such as delinquency ratio, allowance ratio, charge-off ratio, and charge-off coverage.
•   Portfolio characteristics: portfolio composition and consideration of the recent changes to underwriting criteria and portfolio seasoning.
•   External factors: consideration of current economic conditions, including levels of unemployment and personal bankruptcies.
•   Migration analysis: empirical technique measuring historical movement of similar finance receivables through various levels of repayment, delinquency, and loss categories to existing finance receivable pools.
Flight Equipment Recoverability (Financial Services):
•   Expected undiscounted future net cash flows: based upon current lease rates, projected future lease rates and estimated terminal values of each aircraft based on third-party information.
Operating Review
General Insurance Operations
AIG’s General Insurance subsidiaries write substantially all lines of commercial property and casualty insurance and various personal lines both domestically and abroad.
    As previously noted, AIG believes it should present and discuss its financial information in a manner most meaningful to its financial statement users. Accordingly, in its General Insurance business, AIG uses certain regulatory measures, where AIG has determined these measurements to be useful and meaningful.
    A critical discipline of a successful general insurance business is the objective to produce profit from underwriting activities taking into account costs of capital. AIG views underwriting results to be critical in the overall evaluation of performance.
    Statutory underwriting profit is derived by reducing net premiums earned by net losses and loss expenses incurred and net expenses incurred. Statutory accounting generally requires immediate expense recognition and ignores the matching of revenues and expenses as required by GAAP. That is, for statutory purposes, expenses (including acquisition costs) are recognized immediately, not over the same period that the revenues are earned. Thus, statutory expenses exclude changes in DAC.
    GAAP provides for the recognition of certain acquisition expenses at the same time revenues are earned, the accounting principle of matching. Therefore, acquisition expenses are deferred and amortized over the period the related net premiums written are earned. DAC is reviewed for recoverability, and such review requires management judgment. The most comparable GAAP measure to statutory underwriting profit is income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of an accounting change. A table reconciling statutory underwriting profit to income before income taxes, minority interest and cumulative effect of an accounting change is contained in footnote (d) to the following table. See also Critical Accounting Estimates herein and Notes 1 and 6 to Consolidated Financial Statements.
    AIG, along with most general insurance companies, uses the loss ratio, the expense ratio and the combined ratio as measures of underwriting performance. The loss ratio is the sum of losses and loss expenses incurred divided by net premiums earned. The expense ratio is statutory underwriting expenses divided by net premiums written. These ratios are relative measurements that describe, for every $100 of net premiums earned or written, the cost of losses and statutory expenses, respectively. The combined ratio is the sum of the loss ratio and the expense ratio. The combined ratio presents the total cost per $100 of premium production. A combined ratio below 100 demonstrates underwriting profit; a combined ratio above 100 demonstrates underwriting loss.
40        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
    Net premiums written are initially deferred and earned based upon the terms of the underlying policies. The net unearned premium reserve constitutes deferred revenues which are generally earned ratably over the policy period. Thus, the net unearned premium reserve is not fully recognized in income as net premiums earned until the end of the policy period.
    The underwriting environment varies from country to country, as does the degree of litigation activity. Regulation, product type and competition have a direct effect on pricing and consequently on profitability as reflected in underwriting profit and statutory general insurance ratios.
General Insurance Results
General Insurance operating income is comprised of statutory underwriting profit (loss), changes in DAC, net investment income and net realized capital gains and losses. Operating income, as well as net premiums written, net premiums earned, net investment income and net realized capital gains (losses) and statutory ratios in 2007, 2006 and 2005 were as follows:
                                             
 
    Percentage Increase/(Decrease)
     
(in millions, except ratios)   2007   2006   2005   2007 vs. 2006   2006 vs. 2005
 
Net premiums written:
                                       
 
Domestic General Insurance
                                       
   
DBG
  $ 24,112     $ 24,312     $ 23,104       (1 )%     5 %
   
Transatlantic
    3,953       3,633       3,466       9       5  
   
Personal Lines
    4,808       4,654       4,653       3        
   
Mortgage Guaranty
    1,143       866       628       32       38  
 
Foreign General Insurance
    13,051       11,401       10,021       14       14  
 
Total
  $ 47,067     $ 44,866     $ 41,872       5 %     7 %
 
Net premiums earned:
                                       
 
Domestic General Insurance
                                       
   
DBG
  $ 23,849     $ 23,910     $ 22,567       %     6 %
   
Transatlantic
    3,903       3,604       3,385       8       6  
   
Personal Lines
    4,695       4,645       4,634       1        
   
Mortgage Guaranty
    886       740       533       20       39  
 
Foreign General Insurance
    12,349       10,552       9,690       17       9  
 
Total
  $ 45,682     $ 43,451     $ 40,809       5 %     6 %
 
Net investment income(a):
                                       
 
Domestic General Insurance
                                       
   
DBG
  $ 3,879     $ 3,411     $ 2,403       14 %     42 %
   
Transatlantic
    470       435       343       8       27  
   
Personal Lines
    231       225       217       3       4  
   
Mortgage Guaranty
    158       140       123       13       14  
   
Intercompany adjustments and eliminations — net
    6       1       1       500        
 
Foreign General Insurance
    1,388       1,484       944       (6 )     57  
 
Total
  $ 6,132     $ 5,696     $ 4,031       8 %     41 %
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
  $ (106 )   $ 59     $ 334       %     %
 
Operating income (loss)(a)(b):
                                       
 
Domestic General Insurance
                                       
   
DBG
  $ 7,305     $ 5,845     $ (820 )     25 %     %
   
Transatlantic
    661       589       (39 )     12        
   
Personal Lines
    67       432       195       (84 )     122  
   
Mortgage Guaranty
    (637 )     328       363             (10 )
 
Foreign General Insurance
    3,137       3,228       2,601       (3 )     24  
Reclassifications and eliminations
    (7 )     (10 )     15              
 
Total
  $ 10,526     $ 10,412     $ 2,315       1 %     350 %
 
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         41


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
                                             
 
    Percentage Increase/(Decrease)
     
(in millions, except ratios)   2007   2006   2005   2007 vs. 2006   2006 vs. 2005
 
Statutory underwriting profit (loss) (b)(d):
                                       
 
Domestic General Insurance
                                       
   
DBG
  $ 3,404     $ 2,322     $ (3,403 )     47 %     %
   
Transatlantic
    165       129       (434 )     28        
   
Personal Lines
    (191 )     204       (38 )            
   
Mortgage Guaranty
    (849 )     188       249             (24 )
 
Foreign General Insurance
    1,544       1,565       1,461       (1 )     7  
 
Total
  $ 4,073     $ 4,408     $ (2,165 )     (8 )%     %
 
Domestic General Insurance(b):
                                       
 
Loss ratio
    71.2       69.6       90.1                  
 
Expense ratio
    20.8       21.4       21.0                  
             
Combined ratio
    92.0       91.0       111.1                  
             
Foreign General Insurance(b):
                                       
 
Loss ratio
    50.6       48.9       52.0                  
 
Expense ratio(c)
    34.9       33.6       31.8                  
             
Combined ratio
    85.5       82.5       83.8                  
             
Consolidated(b):
                                       
 
Loss ratio
    65.6       64.6       81.1                  
 
Expense ratio
    24.7       24.5       23.6                  
             
Combined ratio
    90.3       89.1       104.7                  
             
(a) Includes the effect of out-of-period adjustments related to the accounting for UCITS in 2006. For DBG, the effect was an increase of $66 million, and for Foreign General Insurance, the effect was an increase of $424 million.
 
(b) Catastrophe-related losses increased the consolidated General Insurance combined ratio in 2007 and 2005 by 0.60 points and 7.06 points, respectively. There were no significant catastrophe-related losses in 2006. Catastrophe-related losses in 2007 and 2005 by reporting unit were as follows:
                                   
    2007   2005
 
    Insurance   Net   Insurance   Net
    Related   Reinstatement   Related   Reinstatement
(in millions)   Losses   Premium Cost   Losses   Premium Cost
 
Reporting Unit:
                               
 
DBG
  $ 113     $ (13 )   $ 1,811     $ 136  
 
Transatlantic
    11       (1 )     463       45  
 
Personal Lines
    61       14       112       2  
 
Mortgage Guaranty
                10        
 
Foreign General Insurance
    90       1       229       80  
 
Total
  $ 275     $ 1     $ 2,625     $ 263  
 
(c) Includes amortization of advertising costs.
42        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
(d) Statutory underwriting profit (loss) is a measure that U.S. domiciled insurance companies are required to report to their regulatory authorities. The following table reconciles statutory underwriting profit (loss) to operating income for General Insurance for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005:
                                                           
 
    Domestic       Foreign    
    Brokerage       Personal   Mortgage   General   Reclassifications    
(in millions)   Group   Transatlantic   Lines   Guaranty   Insurance   and Eliminations   Total
 
2007:
                                                       
Statutory underwriting profit (loss)
  $ 3,404     $ 165     $ (191 )   $ (849 )   $ 1,544     $     $ 4,073  
 
Increase in DAC
    97       17       29       57       227             427  
 
Net investment income
    3,879       470       231       158       1,388       6       6,132  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    (75 )     9       (2 )     (3 )     (22 )     (13 )     (106 )
     
Operating income (loss)
  $ 7,305     $ 661     $ 67     $ (637 )   $ 3,137     $ (7 )   $ 10,526  
 
2006:
                                                       
Statutory underwriting profit (loss)
  $ 2,322     $ 129     $ 204     $ 188     $ 1,565     $     $ 4,408  
 
Increase in DAC
    14       14       2       3       216             249  
 
Net investment income
    3,411       435       225       140       1,484       1       5,696  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    98       11       1       (3 )     (37 )     (11 )     59  
     
Operating income (loss)
  $ 5,845     $ 589     $ 432     $ 328     $ 3,228     $ (10 )   $ 10,412  
 
2005:
                                                       
Statutory underwriting profit (loss)
  $ (3,403 )   $ (434 )   $ (38 )   $ 249     $ 1,461     $     $ (2,165 )
 
Increase (decrease) in DAC
    (21 )     14       19       (8 )     111             115  
 
Net investment income
    2,403       343       217       123       944       1       4,031  
 
Net realized capital gains (losses)
    201       38       (3 )     (1 )     85       14       334  
     
Operating income (loss)
  $ (820 )   $ (39 )   $ 195     $ 363     $ 2,601     $ 15     $ 2,315  
 
AIG transacts business in most major foreign currencies. The following table summarizes the effect of changes in foreign currency exchange rates on the growth of General Insurance net premiums written for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006:
                 
 
    2007   2006
 
Growth in original currency*
    3.5 %     7.4 %
Foreign exchange effect
    1.4       (0.2 )
 
Growth as reported in U.S. dollars
    4.9 %     7.2 %
 
* Computed using a constant exchange rate for each period.
2007 and 2006 Comparison
General Insurance operating income increased in 2007 compared to 2006 due to growth in net investment income, partially offset by a decline in underwriting profit and Net realized capital losses. The 2007 combined ratio increased to 90.3, an increase of 1.2 points compared to 2006, primarily due to an increase in the loss ratio of 1.0 points. The loss ratio for accident year 2007 recorded in 2007 was 2.3 points higher than the loss ratio recorded in 2006 for accident year 2006. Increases in Mortgage Guaranty losses accounted for a 2.1 point increase in the 2007 accident year loss ratio. The downward cycle in the U.S. housing market is not expected to improve until residential inventories return to a more normal level, and AIG expects that this downward cycle will continue to adversely affect Mortgage Guaranty’s loss ratios for the foreseeable future. The higher accident year loss ratio was partially offset by favorable development on prior years, which reduced incurred losses by $606 million and $53 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively. Additional favorable loss development of $50 million (recognized in consolidation and related to certain asbestos settlements) reduced overall incurred losses.
    General Insurance net premiums written increased in 2007 compared to 2006, reflecting growth in Foreign General Insurance from both established and new distribution channels, and the effect of changes in foreign currency exchange rates as well as growth in Mortgage Guaranty, primarily from international business.
    General Insurance net investment income increased in 2007 by $436 million. Interest and dividend income increased $714 million in 2007 compared to 2006 as fixed maturities and equity securities increased by $11.6 billion and the average yield increased 10 basis points. Income from partnership investments increased $159 million in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to improved returns on underlying investments and higher levels of invested assets. Investment expenses in 2007 declined $60 million compared to 2006, primarily due to decreased interest expense on deposit liabilities. These increases to net investment income were partially offset by $490 million of income from an out of period UCITS adjustment recorded in 2006. Net realized capital losses in 2007 include other-than-temporary impairment charges of $276 million compared to $77 million in 2006. See also Capital Resources and Liquidity and Invested Assets herein.
    In order to better align financial reporting with the manner in which AIG’s chief operating decision makers manage their businesses, commencing in 2007, the foreign aviation business, which was historically reported in DBG, is now reported as part of Foreign General Insurance, and the oil rig and marine businesses, which were historically reported in Foreign General Insurance, are now reported as part of DBG. Prior period amounts have been revised to conform to the current presentation.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
General Insurance operating income increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due to growth in net premiums, a reduction in both
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         43


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
catastrophe losses and prior accident year development, and growth in Net investment income. The combined ratio improved to 89.1, a reduction of 15.6 points from 2005, including an improvement in the loss ratio of 16.5 points. The reduction in catastrophe losses represented 6.9 points and the reduction in prior year adverse development represented 11.5 points of the overall reduction. Net premiums written increased $3.0 billion or 7 percent in 2006 compared to 2005. Domestic General Insurance accounted for $1.6 billion of the increase as property rates improved and submission activity increased due to the strength of AIG’s capacity, commitment to difficult markets and diverse product offerings. Foreign General Insurance contributed $1.4 billion to the increase in net premiums written. In 2005, Domestic General Insurance net premiums written increased by $300 million and Foreign General Insurance net premiums written decreased by the same amount as a result of the commutation of the Richmond reinsurance contract. The commutation partially offset the increase in Domestic General Insurance net premiums written in 2006 compared to 2005 and increased Foreign General Insurance net premiums written in 2006 compared to 2005.
    In 2006, certain adjustments were made in conjunction with the remediation of the material weakness relating to balance sheet account reconciliations which increased earned premiums by $189 million and increased other expenses by $415 million. The combined effect of these adjustments increased the expense ratio by 0.9 points and decreased the loss ratio by 0.3 points.
    General Insurance net investment income increased $1.67 billion in 2006 to $5.7 billion on higher levels of invested assets, strong cash flows, slightly higher yields and increased partnership income, and included increases from out of period adjustments of $490 million related to the accounting for certain interests in UCITS, $43 million related to partnership income and $85 million related to interest earned on a DBG deposit contract. See also Capital Resources and Liquidity — Liquidity and Invested Assets herein.
DBG Results
2007 and 2006 Comparison
DBG’s operating income increased in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to growth in both net investment income and underwriting profit. The improvement is also reflected in the combined ratio, which declined 4.5 points in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to an improvement in the loss ratio of 3.3 points. Catastrophe-related losses increased the 2007 loss ratio by 0.4 points. The loss ratio for accident year 2007 recorded in 2007 was 0.9 points lower than the loss ratio recorded in 2006 for accident year 2006. The loss ratio for accident year 2006 has improved in each quarter since September 30, 2006. As a result, the 2007 accident year loss ratio is 2.8 points higher than the 2006 accident year loss ratio, reflecting reductions in 2006 accident year losses recorded through December 31, 2007. Prior year development reduced incurred losses by $390 million in 2007 and increased incurred losses by $175 million in 2006, accounting for 2.4 points of the improvement in the loss ratio.
    DBG’s net premiums written declined in 2007 compared to 2006 as ceded premiums as a percentage of gross written premiums increased to 24 percent in 2007 compared to 23 percent in 2006, primarily due to additional reinsurance for property risks to manage catastrophe exposures.
    DBG’s expense ratio decreased to 18.7 in 2007 compared to 19.8 in 2006, primarily due to the 2006 charge related to the remediation of the material weakness in internal control over certain balance sheet reconciliations that accounted for 2.1 points of the decline. The decline was partially offset by increases in operating expenses for marketing initiatives and operations.
    DBG’s net investment income increased in 2007 compared to 2006, as interest income increased $384 million in 2007, on growth in the bond portfolio resulting from investment of operating cash flows. Income from partnership investments increased $159 million in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to improved returns on the underlying investments. Other investment income declined $163 million in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to out of period adjustments of $194 million recorded in 2006. DBG recorded net realized capital losses in 2007 compared to net realized capital gains in 2006 primarily due to other-than-temporary impairment charges of $213 million in 2007 compared to $73 million in 2006.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
DBG’s operating income was $5.85 billion in 2006 compared to a loss of $820 million in 2005, an improvement of $6.67 billion. The improvement is also reflected in the combined ratio, which declined to 89.9 in 2006 compared to 114.6 in 2005 primarily due to an improvement in the loss ratio of 24.9 points. The reduction in prior year adverse development and the reduction in catastrophe losses and related reinstatement premiums accounted for 20.7 points and 8.3 points, respectively, of the improvement.
    DBG’s net premiums written increased in 2006 compared to 2005 as property rates improved and submission activity increased due to the strength of AIG’s capacity, commitment to difficult markets and diverse product offerings. Net premiums written in 2005 were reduced by $136 million due to reinstatement premiums related to catastrophes, offset by increases of $300 million for the Richmond commutation and $147 million related to an accrual for workers compensation premiums for payroll not yet reported by insured employers. The combined effect of these items reduced the growth rate for net premiums written by 1.3 percent.
    The loss ratio in 2006 declined 24.9 points to 70.2. The 2005 loss ratio was negatively affected by catastrophe-related losses of $1.8 billion and related reinstatement premiums of $136 million. Adverse development on reserves for loss and loss adjustment expenses declined to $175 million in 2006 compared to $4.9 billion in 2005, accounting for 20.7 points of the decrease in the loss ratio.
    DBG’s expense ratio increased to 19.8 in 2006 compared to 19.5 in 2005, primarily due to an increase in other expenses that amounted to $498 million in 2006 (including out of period charges of $356 million) compared to $372 million in 2005. This increase added 0.4 points to the expense ratio.
44        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
    DBG’s net investment income increased by $1.0 billion in 2006 compared to 2005, as interest income increased $482 million on growth in the bond portfolio resulting from investment of operating cash flows and capital contributions. Partnership income increased from 2005 due to improved performance of the underlying investments, including initial public offering activity. Net investment income in 2006 included increases relating to out of period adjustments of $109 million for the accounting for UCITS and partnerships and $85 million related to interest earned on a deposit contract that did not exist in the prior year.
Transatlantic Results
2007 and 2006 Comparison
Transatlantic’s net premiums written and net premiums earned increased in 2007 compared to 2006 due to increases in both domestic and international operations. The increase in statutory underwriting profit in 2007 compared to 2006 reflects improved underwriting results in Domestic operations. Operating income increased in 2007 compared to 2006 due principally to increased net investment income and improved underwriting results.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
Transatlantic’s net premiums written and net premiums earned increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due primarily to increased writings in domestic operations. Operating income increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due largely to lower catastrophe losses and net ceded reinstatement premiums, and increased net investment income.
Personal Lines Results
2007 and 2006 Comparison
Personal Lines operating income in 2007 decreased by $365 million compared to 2006, largely due to an increase in incurred losses from a number of sources, leading to an overall increase in the loss ratio of 6.8 points. Prior year net adverse reserve development contributed 2.5 points of this increase in the loss ratio, as Personal Lines experienced $7 million in net adverse development (including $64 million in adverse development from businesses placed in runoff), compared to $111 million of favorable development in 2006. An additional 1.6 point increase in the loss ratio resulted from $61 million of losses and $14 million of reinstatement premiums due to the California wildfires. In addition, an increase in the loss ratio recorded in 2007 for accident year 2007 compared to the loss ratio recorded in 2006 for accident year 2006 of 2.7 points resulted, in part, from an increased frequency of large losses in the Private Client Group and average automobile premiums declining faster than loss trends.
    Operating income also declined due to increased expenses. The expense ratio increased 1.1 points in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to $63 million of transaction and integration costs associated with the 2007 acquisition of the minority interest in 21st Century.
    Net premiums written increased in 2007 compared to 2006 due to continued growth in the Private Client Group and increased new business production in the aigdirect.com business partially offset by a reduction in the Agency Auto business.
    On September 27, 2007, AIG completed its previously announced acquisition of 21st Century, paying $759 million to acquire the remaining 39.2 percent of the shares of 21st Century that it did not previously own. As a result of the acquisition, the AIG Direct and 21st Century operations have been combined as aigdirect.com.
    Under the purchase method of accounting, the assets and liabilities of 21st Century that were acquired were adjusted to their estimated fair values as of the date of the acquisition, and goodwill of $342 million was recorded. A customer relationship intangible asset, initially valued at $119 million, was also established.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
Personal Lines operating income increased $237 million in 2006 compared to 2005 reflecting a reduction in the loss ratio of 5.8 points. Favorable development on prior accident years reduced incurred losses by $111 million in 2006 compared to an increase of $14 million in 2005, accounting for 2.7 points of the decrease in the loss ratio. The 2005 catastrophe-related losses of $112 million added 2.4 points to the loss ratio. The loss ratio for the 2006 accident year improved 0.7 points primarily due to the termination of The Robert Plan relationship effective December 31, 2005 and growth in the Private Client Group. The improvement in the loss ratio was partially offset by an increase in the expense ratio of 0.6 points primarily due to investments in people and technology, national expansion efforts and lower response rates. Net premiums written were flat in 2006 compared to 2005, with growth in the Private Client Group and Agency Auto divisions offset by termination of The Robert Plan relationship. Growth in the Private Client Group spans multiple products, with a continued penetration of the high net worth market, strong brand promotion and innovative loss prevention programs.
Mortgage Guaranty Results
2007 and 2006 Comparison
Mortgage Guaranty’s operating loss in 2007 was $637 million compared to operating income of $328 million in 2006 as the deteriorating U.S. residential housing market adversely affected losses incurred for both the domestic first- and second-lien businesses. Domestic first- and second-lien losses incurred increased 362 percent and 346 percent respectively, compared to 2006, resulting in loss ratios of 122.0 and 357.0, respectively, in 2007. Increases in domestic losses incurred resulted in an overall loss ratio of 168.6 in 2007 compared to 47.2 in 2006. Prior year development reduced incurred losses in 2007 by $25 million compared to a reduction of $115 million in 2006, which accounted for 12.7 points of the increase in the loss ratio.
    Net premiums written increased in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to growth in the international markets, accounting for 19 percent of the increase in net premiums written. In addition
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         45


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
the increased use of mortgage insurance for credit enhancement as well as better persistency resulted in an increase in domestic first-lien premiums. UGC has taken steps to strengthen its underwriting guidelines and increase rates. It also discontinued new production for certain programs in the second-lien business beginning in the fourth quarter of 2006. However, UGC will continue to receive renewal premiums on that portfolio for the life of the loans, estimated to be three to five years, and will continue to be exposed to possible losses from future defaults.
    The expense ratio in 2007 was 21.2, down from 23.4 in 2006 as premium growth offset the effect of increased expenses related to UGC’s international expansion and the employment of additional operational resources in the second-lien business.
    UGC domestic mortgage risk in force totaled $29.8 billion as of December 31, 2007 and the 60-day delinquency ratio was 3.7 percent (based on number of policies, consistent with mortgage industry practice) compared to domestic mortgage risk in force of $24.9 billion and a delinquency ratio of 2.1 percent at December 31, 2006. Approximately 81 percent of the domestic mortgage risk is secured by first-lien, owner-occupied properties.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
Mortgage Guaranty operating income declined in 2006 from 2005 due primarily to unfavorable loss experience on third-party originated second-lien business with a credit quality lower than typical for UGC and a softening U.S. housing market. This increased Mortgage Guaranty’s consolidated loss ratio in 2006 to 47.2 compared to 26.0 in 2005. The writing of this second-lien coverage, which began in 2005, was discontinued as of year end 2006. Losses in the second-lien business have been mitigated by a policy year aggregate limitation provision that is typically established for each lender.
    Net premiums written increased due to growth in the domestic second-lien and international businesses as well as improved persistency in the domestic first-lien business. The expense ratio remained flat as premium growth covered increased expenses related to expansion internationally and continued investment in risk management resources.
Foreign General Insurance Results
2007 and 2006 Comparison
Foreign General Insurance operating income decreased in 2007 compared to 2006, due primarily to decreases in Net investment income and statutory underwriting profit. Net investment income in 2006 included income of $424 million from out of period UCITS adjustments. Statutory underwriting profit decreased due to losses from the June 2007 U.K. floods, an increase in severe but non-catastrophic losses and higher frequency of non-severe losses compared to 2006, partially offset by higher favorable loss development on prior accident years.
    Net premiums written increased 14 percent (10 percent in original currency) in 2007 compared to 2006, reflecting growth in commercial and consumer lines driven by new business from both established and new distribution channels, including Central Insurance Co. Ltd. in Taiwan acquired in late 2006. Net premiums written for commercial lines increased due to new business in the U.K. and Europe and decreases in the use of reinsurance, partially offset by declines in premium rates. Growth in consumer lines in Latin America, Asia and Europe also contributed to the increase. Net premiums written for the Lloyd’s syndicate Ascot (Ascot) and Aviation declined due to rate decreases and increased market competition.
    The 2007 loss ratio increased a total of 1.7 points compared to 2006. Losses of $90 million from the June 2007 U.K. floods added 0.7 points to the loss ratio and higher severe but non-catastrophic losses and higher loss frequency for personal accident business in Japan and personal lines business in Asia and Latin America added 1.6 points to the loss ratio. Partially offsetting these increases was favorable loss development on prior accident years of $286 million in 2007 compared to $183 million in 2006, which decreased the loss ratio by 0.6 points.
    The 2007 expense ratio increased 1.3 points compared to 2006. This increase reflected the cost of realigning certain legal entities through which Foreign General Insurance operates and the increased significance of consumer lines of business, which have higher acquisition costs. These factors contributed 0.7 points to the 2007 expense ratio. AIG expects the expense ratio to increase in 2008 due to the continued cost of realigning certain legal entities through which Foreign General Insurance operates.
    Net investment income decreased in 2007 compared to 2006 as the 2006 period included the out of period UCITS adjustments, which more than offset increases resulting from higher interest rates, increased cash flows and mutual fund income. Mutual fund income was $93 million higher than 2006 reflecting improved performance in the equity markets in 2007. Partnership income was essentially unchanged.
2006 and 2005 Comparison
Foreign General Insurance operating income increased in 2006 compared to 2005 due to out of period UCITS adjustments in 2006, the absence of significant catastrophe-related losses in 2006, rate increases and lower current accident year losses by Ascot on its U.S. book of business and lower asbestos and environmental reserve increases. These increases were partially offset by lower favorable loss development from prior accident years and adverse loss development on the 2005 hurricanes. Statutory underwriting profit increased $104 million in 2006 compared to 2005. Catastrophes in 2005 resulted in losses of $229 million and reinstatement premiums of $80 million.
    Net premiums written increased 14 percent (15 percent in original currency) in 2006 compared to 2005, reflecting growth in both commercial and consumer lines driven by new business from both established and new distribution channels, including a wholly owned insurance company in Vietnam and Central Insurance Co., Ltd. in Taiwan. Ascot also contributed to the growth in net premiums written as a result of rate increases on its U.S. business. Consumer lines in Latin America and commercial lines in Europe, including the U.K., also contributed to the increase. Net premiums written in 2005 were reduced by reinstatement premiums related to catastrophes and a portfolio
46        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
transfer of unearned premium reserves to DBG related to the Richmond commutation, accounting for 4 percent of the increase in 2006 compared to 2005.
    The loss ratio decreased 3.1 points in 2006 compared to 2005, as the absence of significant catastrophes in 2006 resulted in a decrease in the loss ratio of 2.8 points. The loss ratio also decreased due to rate increases and lower current year losses by Ascot on its U.S. book of business and lower asbestos and environmental reserve increases. These declines were partially offset by lower favorable loss development from prior accident years and adverse development on 2005 hurricanes.
    The expense ratio increased 1.8 points in 2006 compared to 2005 due to a $59 million out of period adjustment for amortization of deferred advertising costs and a premium reduction of $61 million related to reconciliation remediation activities, in aggregate accounting for 0.7 points of the increase in the expense ratio. The expense ratio also increased due to growth in consumer business lines, which have higher acquisition expenses but historically lower loss ratios.
    Net investment income increased $540 million in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily due to a $424 million out of period UCITS adjustment.
Reserve for Losses and Loss Expenses
The following table presents the components of the General Insurance gross reserve for losses and loss expenses (loss reserves) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 by major lines of business on a statutory Annual Statement basis(a):
                 
 
(in millions)   2007   2006(b)
 
Other liability occurrence
  $ 20,580     $ 19,327  
Workers compensation
    15,568       13,612  
Other liability claims made
    13,878       12,513  
Auto liability
    6,068       6,070  
International
    7,036       6,006  
Property
    4,274       5,499  
Reinsurance
    3,127       2,979  
Medical malpractice
    2,361       2,347  
Products liability
    2,416       2,239  
Accident and health
    1,818       1,693  
Commercial multiple peril
    1,900       1,651  
Aircraft
    1,623       1,629  
Fidelity/surety
    1,222       1,148  
Mortgage Guaranty/Credit
    1,426       567  
Other
    2,203       2,719  
 
Total
  $ 85,500     $ 79,999  
 
(a)  Presented by lines of business pursuant to statutory reporting requirements as prescribed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
 
(b)  Allocations among various lines were revised based on the 2007 presentation.
    AIG’s gross reserve for losses and loss expenses represents the accumulation of estimates of ultimate losses, including estimates for incurred but not yet reported reserves (IBNR) and loss expenses. The methods used to determine loss reserve estimates and to establish the resulting reserves are continually reviewed and updated by management. Any adjustments resulting therefrom are reflected in operating income currently. Because loss reserve estimates are subject to the outcome of future events, changes in estimates are unavoidable given that loss trends vary and time is often required for changes in trends to be recognized and confirmed. Reserve changes that increase previous estimates of ultimate cost are referred to as unfavorable or adverse development or reserve strengthening. Reserve changes that decrease previous estimates of ultimate cost are referred to as favorable development.
    Estimates for mortgage guaranty insurance losses and loss adjustment expense reserves are based on notices of mortgage loan delinquencies and estimates of delinquencies that have been incurred but have not been reported by loan servicers, based upon historical reporting trends. Mortgage Guaranty establishes reserves using a percentage of the contractual liability (for each delinquent loan reported) that is based upon past experience regarding certain loan factors such as age of the delinquency, dollar amount of the loan and type of mortgage loan. Because mortgage delinquencies and claims payments are affected primarily by macroeconomic events, such as changes in home price appreciation, interest rates and unemployment, the determination of the ultimate loss cost requires a high degree of judgment. AIG believes it has provided appropriate reserves for currently delinquent loans. Consistent with industry practice, AIG does not establish a reserve for loans that are not currently delinquent, but that may become delinquent in future periods.
    At December 31, 2007, General Insurance net loss reserves increased $6.66 billion from 2006 to $69.29 billion. The net loss reserves represent loss reserves reduced by reinsurance recoverable, net of an allowance for unrecoverable reinsurance and applicable discount for future investment income.
The following table classifies the components of the General Insurance net loss reserve by business unit as of December 31, 2007 and 2006:
                 
 
(in millions)   2007   2006
 
DBG(a)
  $ 47,392     $ 44,119  
Transatlantic
    6,900       6,207  
Personal Lines(b)
    2,417       2,440  
Mortgage Guaranty
    1,339       460  
Foreign General Insurance(c)
    11,240       9,404  
 
Total Net Loss Reserve
  $ 69,288     $ 62,630  
 
(a)  At December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, DBG loss reserves include approximately $3.13 billion and $3.33 billion ($3.34 billion and $3.66 billion, respectively, before discount), related to business written by DBG but ceded to AIRCO and reported in AIRCO’s statutory filings. DBG loss reserves also include approximately $590 million and $535 million related to business included in AIUO’s statutory filings at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
 
(b)  At December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, Personal Lines loss reserves include $894 million and $861 million related to business ceded to DBG and reported in DBG’s statutory filings.
 
(c)  At December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, Foreign General Insurance loss reserves include approximately $3.02 billion and $2.75 billion related to business reported in DBG’s statutory filings.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         47


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
    The DBG net loss reserve of $47.4 billion is comprised principally of the business of AIG subsidiaries participating in the American Home Assurance Company (American Home)/ National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. (National Union) pool (10 companies) and the surplus lines pool (Lexington, AIG Excess Liability Insurance Company and Landmark Insurance Company).
    DBG cedes a quota share percentage of its other liability occurrence and products liability occurrence business to AIRCO. The quota share percentage ceded was 15 percent in 2007 and 20 percent in 2006 and covered all business written in these years for these lines by participants in the American Home/ National Union pool. AIRCO’s loss reserves relating to these quota share cessions from DBG are recorded on a discounted basis. As of December 31, 2007, AIRCO carried a discount of approximately $210 million applicable to the $3.34 billion in undiscounted reserves it assumed from the American Home/ National Union pool via this quota share cession. AIRCO also carries approximately $540 million in net loss reserves relating to Foreign General Insurance business. These reserves are carried on an undiscounted basis.
    The companies participating in the American Home/ National Union pool have maintained a participation in the business written by AIU for decades. As of December 31, 2007, these AIU reserves carried by participants in the American Home/ National Union pool totaled approximately $3.02 billion. The remaining Foreign General Insurance reserves are carried by AIUO, AIRCO, and other smaller AIG subsidiaries domiciled outside the United States. Statutory filings in the United States by AIG companies reflect all the business written by U.S. domiciled entities only, and therefore exclude business written by AIUO, AIRCO, and all other internationally domiciled subsidiaries. The total reserves carried at December 31, 2007 by AIUO and AIRCO were approximately $5.16 billion and $3.67 billion, respectively. AIRCO’s $3.67 billion in total general insurance reserves consist of approximately $3.13 billion from business assumed from the American Home/ National Union pool and an additional $540 million relating to Foreign General Insurance business.
Discounting of Reserves
At December 31, 2007, AIG’s overall General Insurance net loss reserves reflect a loss reserve discount of $2.43 billion, including tabular and non-tabular calculations. The tabular workers compensation discount is calculated using a 3.5 percent interest rate and the 1979-81 Decennial Mortality Table. The non-tabular workers compensation discount is calculated separately for companies domiciled in New York and Pennsylvania, and follows the statutory regulations for each state. For New York companies, the discount is based on a five percent interest rate and the companies’ own payout patterns. For Pennsylvania companies, the statute has specified discount factors for accident years 2001 and prior, which are based on a six percent interest rate and an industry payout pattern. For accident years 2002 and subsequent, the discount is based on the yield of U.S. Treasury securities ranging from one to twenty years and the company’s own payout pattern, with the future expected payment for each year using the interest rate associated with the corresponding Treasury security yield for that time period. The discount is comprised of the following: $794 million — tabular discount for workers compensation in DBG; $1.42 billion — non-tabular discount for workers compensation in DBG; and, $210 million — non-tabular discount for other liability occurrence and products liability occurrence in AIRCO. The total undiscounted workers compensation loss reserve carried by DBG is approximately $13.3 billion as of December 31, 2007. The other liability occurrence and products liability occurrence business in AIRCO that is assumed from DBG is discounted based on the yield of U.S. Treasury securities ranging from one to twenty years and the DBG payout pattern for this business. The undiscounted reserves assumed by AIRCO from DBG totaled approximately $3.34 billion at December 31, 2007.
Results of the Reserving Process
Management believes that the General Insurance net loss reserves are adequate to cover General Insurance net losses and loss expenses as of December 31, 2007. While AIG regularly reviews the adequacy of established loss reserves, there can be no assurance that AIG’s ultimate loss reserves will not develop adversely and materially exceed AIG’s loss reserves as of December 31, 2007. In the opinion of management, such adverse development and resulting increase in reserves is not likely to have a material adverse effect on AIG’s consolidated financial condition, although it could have a material adverse effect on AIG’s consolidated results of operations for an individual reporting period. See also Item 1A. Risk Factors — Casualty Insurance and Underwriting Reserves.
48        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
The following table presents the reconciliation of net loss reserves for 2007, 2006 and 2005 as follows:
                         
 
(in millions)   2007   2006   2005
 
Net reserve for losses and loss expenses at beginning of year
  $ 62,630     $ 57,476     $ 47,254  
Foreign exchange effect
    955       741       (628 )
Acquisitions(a)
    317       55        
 
Losses and loss expenses incurred:
                       
Current year
    30,261       27,805       28,426  
Prior years, other than accretion of discount
    (656 )     (53 )     4,680 (b )
Prior years, accretion of discount
    327       300       (15 )
 
Losses and loss expenses incurred
    29,932       28,052       33,091  
 
Losses and loss expenses paid:
                       
Current year
    9,684       8,368       7,331  
Prior years
    14,862       15,326       14,910  
 
Losses and loss expenses paid
    24,546       23,694       22,241  
 
Net reserve for losses and loss expenses at end of year
  $ 69,288     $ 62,630     $ 57,476  
 
(a)  Reflects the opening balance with respect to the acquisitions of WüBa and the Central Insurance Co., Ltd. in 2007 and 2006, respectively.
 
(b)  Includes fourth quarter charge of $1.8 billion.
The following tables summarize development, (favorable) or unfavorable, of incurred losses and loss expenses for prior years (other than accretion of discount):
                         
 
(in millions)   2007   2006   2005
 
Prior Accident Year Development by Reporting Unit:
                       
DBG
  $ (390 )   $ 175     $ 4,878  
Personal Lines
    7       (111 )     14  
UGC
    (25 )     (115 )     (103 )
Foreign General Insurance
    (286 )     (183 )     (378 )
 
Sub total
    (694 )     (234 )     4,411  
Transatlantic
    88       181       269  
Asbestos settlements*
    (50 )            
 
Prior years, other than accretion of discount
  $ (656 )   $ (53 )   $ 4,680  
 
Represents the effect of settlements of certain asbestos liabilities.
                         
 
(in millions)   2007   2006   2005
 
Prior Accident Year Development by Major Class of Business:
                       
Excess casualty (DBG)
  $ 73     $ 102     $ 1,191  
D&O and related management liability (DBG)
    (305 )     (20 )     1,627  
Excess workers compensation (DBG)
    (14 )     74       983  
Reinsurance (Transatlantic)
    88       181       269  
Asbestos and environmental (primarily DBG)
    18       208       930  
All other, net
    (516 )     (598 )     (320 )
 
Prior years, other than accretion of discount
  $ (656 )   $ (53 )   $ 4,680  
 
                           
 
    Calendar Year
Accident Year    
(in millions)   2007   2006   2005
 
Prior Accident Year Development
by Accident Year:
                       
 
2006
  $ (1,248 )                
 
2005
    (446 )   $ (1,576 )        
 
2004
    (428 )     (511 )   $ (3,853 )
 
2003
    37       (212 )     (63 )
 
2002
    234       373       1,360  
 
2001
    263       29       1,749  
 
2000
    321       338       1,323  
 
1999
    47       382       944  
 
1998
    154       41       605  
 
1997 & Prior
    410       1,083       2,615  
 
Prior years, other than accretion of discount
  $ (656 )   $ (53 )   $ 4,680  
 
    In determining the loss development from prior accident years, AIG conducts analyses to determine the change in estimated ultimate loss for each accident year for each profit center. For example, if loss emergence for a profit center is different than expected for certain accident years, the actuaries examine the indicated effect such emergence would have on the reserves of that profit center. In some cases, the higher or lower than expected emergence may result in no clear change in the ultimate loss estimate for the accident years in question, and no adjustment would be made to the profit center’s reserves for prior accident years. In other cases, the higher or lower than expected emergence may result in a larger change, either favorable or unfavorable, than the difference between the actual and expected loss emergence. Such additional analyses were conducted for each profit center, as appropriate, in 2007 to determine the loss development from prior accident years for 2007. As part of its reserving process, AIG also considers notices of claims received with respect to emerging issues, such as those related to the U.S. mortgage and housing market.
    The loss ratios recorded by AIG in 2006 took into account the results of the comprehensive reserve reviews that were completed in the fourth quarter of 2005. AIG’s year-end 2005 reserve review reflected careful consideration of the reserve analyses prepared by AIG’s internal actuarial staff with the assistance of third-party
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         49


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
actuaries. In determining the appropriate loss ratios for accident year 2006 for each class of business, AIG gave consideration to the loss ratios resulting from the 2005 reserve analyses as well as all other relevant information including rate changes, expected changes in loss costs, changes in coverage, reinsurance or mix of business, and other factors that may affect the loss ratios.
2007 Net Loss Development
In 2007, net loss development from prior accident years was favorable by approximately $656 million, including approximately $88 million of adverse development from Transatlantic; and excluding approximately $327 million from accretion of loss reserve discount. Excluding Transatlantic, as well as accretion of discount, net loss development in 2007 from prior accident years was favorable by approximately $744 million. The overall favorable development of $656 million consisted of approximately $2.12 billion of favorable development from accident years 2004 through 2006, partially offset by approximately $1.43 billion of adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior and $37 million of adverse development from accident year 2003. In 2007, most classes of AIG’s business continued to experience favorable development for accident years 2004 through 2006. The majority of the adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior was related to development from excess casualty and primary workers compensation business within DBG and from Transatlantic. The development from accident year 2003 was primarily related to adverse development from excess casualty and primary workers compensation business within DBG offset by favorable development from most other classes of business. The overall favorable development of $656 million includes approximately $305 million pertaining to the D&O and related management liability classes of business within DBG, consisting of approximately $335 million of favorable development from accident years 2003 through 2006, partially offset by approximately $30 million of adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior. The overall favorable development of $656 million also includes approximately $300 million of adverse development from primary workers compensation business within DBG. See Volatility of Reserve Estimates and Sensitivity Analyses below.
2006 Net Loss Development
In 2006, net loss development from prior accident years was favorable by approximately $53 million, including approximately $198 million in net adverse development from asbestos and environmental reserves resulting from the updated ground up analysis of these exposures in the fourth quarter of 2006; approximately $103 million of adverse development pertaining to the major hurricanes in 2004 and 2005; and $181 million of adverse development from Transatlantic; and excluding approximately $300 million from accretion of loss reserve discount. Excluding the fourth quarter asbestos and environmental reserve increase, catastrophes and Transatlantic, as well as accretion of discount, net loss development in 2006 from prior accident years was favorable by approximately $535 million. The overall favorable development of $53 million consisted of approximately $2.30 billion of favorable development from accident years 2003 through 2005, partially offset by approximately $2.25 billion of adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior. In 2006, most classes of AIG’s business continued to experience favorable development for accident years 2003 through 2005. The adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior reflected development from excess casualty, workers compensation, excess workers compensation, and post-1986 environmental liability classes of business, all within DBG, from asbestos reserves within DBG and Foreign General Insurance, and from Transatlantic.
2005 Net Loss Development
In 2005, net loss development from prior accident years was adverse by approximately $4.68 billion, including approximately $269 million from Transatlantic. This $4.68 billion adverse development in 2005 was comprised of approximately $8.60 billion for the 2002 and prior accident years, partially offset by favorable development for accident years 2003 and 2004 for most classes of business, with the notable exception of D&O. The adverse loss development for 2002 and prior accident years was attributable to approximately $4.0 billion of development from the D&O and related management liability classes of business, excess casualty, and excess workers compensation, and to approximately $900 million of adverse development from asbestos and environmental claims. The remaining portion of the adverse development from 2002 and prior accident years included approximately $520 million related to Transatlantic with the balance spread across many other classes of business. Most classes of business produced favorable development for accident years 2003 and 2004, and adverse development for accident years 2001 and prior.
Net Loss Development by Class of Business
The following is a discussion of the primary reasons for the development in 2007, 2006 and 2005 for those classes of business that experienced significant prior accident year developments during the three-year period. See Asbestos and Environmental Reserves below for a further discussion of asbestos and environmental reserves and developments.
Excess Casualty: Excess Casualty reserves experienced significant adverse loss development in 2005, but there was only a relatively minor amount of adverse development in 2006 and 2007. The adverse development for all periods shown related principally to accident years 2002 and prior, and resulted from significant loss cost increases due to both frequency and severity of claims. The increase in loss costs resulted primarily from medical inflation, which increased the economic loss component of tort claims, advances in medical care, which extended the life span of severely injured claimants, and larger jury verdicts, which increased the value of severe tort claims. An additional factor affecting AIG’s excess casualty experience in recent years has been the accelerated exhaustion of underlying primary policies for homebuilders. This has led to increased construction defect-related claims activity on AIG’s excess policies. Many excess casualty policies were written on a multi-year basis in the late
50        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
1990s, which limited AIG’s ability to respond to emerging market trends as rapidly as would otherwise be the case. In subsequent years, AIG responded to these emerging trends by increasing rates and implementing numerous policy form and coverage changes. This led to a significant improvement in experience beginning with accident year 2001. In 2007, a significant portion of the adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior also related to other latent exposures, including pharmaceutical and product aggregate-related exposures as well as the construction defect exposures noted above. AIG’s exposure to these latent exposures was sharply reduced after 2002 due to significant changes in policy terms and conditions as well as underwriting guidelines.
    For the year-end 2005 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries responded to the continuing adverse development by further increasing the loss development factors applicable to accident years 1999 and subsequent by approximately 5 percent. In addition, to more accurately estimate losses for construction defect-related claims, a separate review was performed by AIG claims staff for accounts with significant exposure to these claims.
    For the year-end 2006 loss reserve review, AIG claims staff updated the separate review for accounts with significant exposure to construction defect-related claims in order to assist the actuaries in determining the proper reserve for this exposure. AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year loss development in 2006 was adverse by approximately $100 million, a relatively minor amount for this class of business. However, AIG continued to experience adverse development for this class for accident years prior to 2003.
    For the year-end 2007 loss reserve review, AIG claims staff updated its review of accounts with significant exposure to construction defect-related claims. AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year loss developments in 2007 were adverse by approximately $75 million, a minor amount for this class of business. However, AIG continued to experience adverse development in this class for accident years 2002 and prior, amounting to approximately $450 million in 2007. In addition, loss reserves developed adversely for accident year 2003 by approximately $100 million in 2007 for this class. The loss ratio for accident year 2003 remains very favorable for this class and has been relatively stable over the past several years. Favorable developments in 2007 for accident years 2004 through 2006 largely offset the adverse developments from accident years 2003 and prior. A significant portion of the adverse development from accident years 2002 and prior related to the latent exposures described above.
    Loss reserves pertaining to the excess casualty class of business are generally included in the other liability occurrence line of business, with a small portion of the excess casualty reserves included in the other liability claims made line of business, as presented in the table above.
D&O and Related Management Liability Classes of Business: These classes of business experienced significant adverse development in 2005, but experienced slightly favorable development in 2006 and more significantly favorable development in 2007. The adverse development in 2005 related principally to accident years 2002 and prior. This adverse development resulted from significant loss cost escalation due to a variety of factors, including the following: the increase in frequency and severity of corporate bankruptcies; the increase in frequency of financial statement restatements; the sharp rise in market capitalization of publicly traded companies; and the increase in the number of initial public offerings, which led to an unprecedented number of IPO allocation/laddering suits in 2001. In addition, extensive utilization of multi-year policies during this period limited AIG’s ability to respond to emerging trends as rapidly as would otherwise be the case. AIG experienced significant adverse loss development during the period 2002 through 2005 as a result of these issues. AIG responded to this development with rate increases and policy form and coverage changes to better contain future loss costs in this class of business.
    For the year-end 2005 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries responded to the continuing adverse development by further increasing the loss development factor assumptions. The loss development factors applicable to 1997 and subsequent accident years were increased by approximately 4 percent. In addition, AIG’s actuaries began to give greater weight to loss development methods for accident years 2002 and 2003, in order to more fully respond to the recent loss experience. AIG’s claims staff also conducted a series of ground-up claim projections covering all open claims for this business through accident year 2004. AIG’s actuaries benchmarked the loss reserve indications for all accident years through 2004 to these claim projections.
    For the year-end 2006 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year loss development in 2006 was favorable by approximately $20 million, an insignificant amount for these classes. AIG’s actuaries continued to benchmark the loss reserve indications to the ground-up claim projections provided by AIG claims staff for this class of business. For the year-end 2006 loss reserve review, the ground-up claim projections included all accident years through 2005.
    For the year-end 2007 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year reserve development in 2007 was favorable by approximately $305 million, due primarily to favorable development from accident years 2004 and 2005, and to a lesser extent 2003 and 2006. AIG’s actuaries continued to benchmark the loss reserve indications to the ground-up claim projections provided by AIG claims staff for this class of business. For the year-end 2007 loss reserve review, the ground-up claim projections included all accident years through 2006, and included stock options backdating-related exposures from accident year 2006. Accident year 2006 reserves developed favorably notwithstanding the effect of claims relating to stock options backdating, which totaled approximately $300 million. Further, AIG is closely monitoring claims activity in accident year 2007 relating to the U.S. residential mortgage market, consistent with the manner in which claims relating to stock options backdating were monitored
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         51


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
in 2006, and believes that its reserves as of December 31, 2007 are adequate for its D&O and related management liability classes of business.
    Loss reserves pertaining to D&O and related management liability classes of business are included in the other liability claims made line of business, as presented in the table above.
Excess Workers Compensation: This class of business experienced significant adverse development in 2005, a relatively minor amount of adverse development in 2006, and a minor amount of favorable development in 2007. The adverse development in 2005 related to 2002 and prior accident years. This adverse development resulted primarily from significant loss cost increases, primarily attributable to rapidly increasing medical inflation and advances in medical care, which increased the cost of covered medical care and extended the life span of severely injured workers. The effect of these factors on excess workers compensation claims experience is leveraged, as frequency is increased by the rising number of claims that reach the excess layers.
    In response to the significantly adverse loss development in 2005, an additional study was conducted for the 2005 year-end actuarial reserve analysis for DBG pertaining to the selection of loss development factors for this class of business. Claims for excess workers compensation exhibit an exceptionally long-tail of loss development, running for decades from the date the loss is incurred. Thus, the adequacy of loss reserves for this class is sensitive to the estimated loss development factors, as such factors may be applied to many years of loss experience. In order to better estimate the tail development for this class, AIG claims staff conducted a claim-by-claim projection of the expected ultimate paid loss for each open claim for 1998 and prior accident years as these are the primary years from which the tail factors are derived. The objective of the study was to provide a benchmark against which loss development factors in the tail could be evaluated. The resulting loss development factors utilized by the actuaries in the year-end 2005 study reflected an increase of approximately 18 percent from the factors used in the prior year study without the benefit of the claims benchmark. In addition, the loss cost trend assumption for excess workers compensation was increased from approximately 2.5 percent to 6 percent for the 2005 study.
    For the year-end 2006 loss reserve review, AIG claims staff updated the claim-by-claim projection for each open claim for accident years 1999 and prior. These updated claims projections were utilized by the actuaries as a benchmark for loss development factors in the year-end 2006 study. AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year development in 2006 was adverse by approximately $70 million, a relatively minor amount for this class.
    For the year-end 2007 loss reserve review, AIG claims staff again updated the claim-by-claim projection for each open claim for accident years 2000 and prior. These updated claims projections were utilized by the actuaries as a benchmark for loss development factors in the year-end 2007 study. AIG’s actuaries determined that no significant changes in the assumptions were required. Prior accident year development in 2007 was favorable by approximately $15 million, an insignificant amount for this class.
Overview of Loss Reserving Process
The General Insurance loss reserves can generally be categorized into two distinct groups. One group is short-tail classes of business consisting principally of property, personal lines and certain casualty classes. The other group is long-tail casualty classes of business which includes excess and umbrella liability, D&O, professional liability, medical malpractice, workers compensation, general liability, products liability, and related classes.
Short-Tail Reserves
For operations writing short-tail coverages, such as property coverages, the process of recording quarterly loss reserves is generally geared toward maintaining an appropriate reserve for the outstanding exposure, rather than determining an expected loss ratio for current business. For example, the IBNR reserve required for a class of property business might be expected to approximate 20 percent of the latest year’s earned premiums, and this level of reserve would generally be maintained regardless of the loss ratio emerging in the current quarter. The 20 percent factor would be adjusted to reflect changes in rate levels, loss reporting patterns, known exposure to unreported losses, or other factors affecting the particular class of business.
Long-Tail Reserves
Estimation of ultimate net losses and loss expenses (net losses) for long-tail casualty classes of business is a complex process and depends on a number of factors, including the class and volume of business involved. Experience in the more recent accident years of long-tail casualty classes of business shows limited statistical credibility in reported net losses because a relatively low proportion of net losses would be reported claims and expenses and an even smaller percentage would be net losses paid. Therefore, IBNR would constitute a relatively high proportion of net losses.
    AIG’s carried net long-tail loss reserves are tested using loss trend factors that AIG considers appropriate for each class of business. A variety of actuarial methods and assumptions is normally employed to estimate net losses for long-tail casualty classes of businesses. These methods ordinarily involve the use of loss trend factors intended to reflect the annual growth in loss costs from one accident year to the next. For the majority of long-tail casualty classes of business, net loss trend factors approximated five percent. Loss trend factors reflect many items including changes in claims handling, exposure and policy forms, current and future estimates of monetary inflation and social inflation and increases in litigation and awards. These factors are periodically reviewed and adjusted, as appropriate, to reflect emerging trends which are based upon past loss experience. Thus, many factors are implicitly considered in estimating the year to year growth in loss costs.
52        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
    A number of actuarial assumptions are generally made in the review of reserves for each class of business. For longer tail classes of business, actuarial assumptions generally are made with respect to the following:
•   Loss trend factors which are used to establish expected loss ratios for subsequent accident years based on the projected loss ratio for prior accident years.
•   Expected loss ratios for the latest accident year (i.e., accident year 2007 for the year-end 2007 loss reserve analysis) and, in some cases for accident years prior to the latest accident year. The expected loss ratio generally reflects the projected loss ratio from prior accident years, adjusted for the loss trend (see above) and the effect of rate changes and other quantifiable factors on the loss ratio. For low-frequency, high-severity classes such as excess casualty, expected loss ratios generally are used for at least the three most recent accident years.
•   Loss development factors which are used to project the reported losses for each accident year to an ultimate basis. Generally, the actual loss development factors observed from prior accident years would be used as a basis to determine the loss development factors for the subsequent accident years.
    AIG records quarterly changes in loss reserves for each of its many General Insurance classes of business. The overall change in AIG’s loss reserves is based on the sum of these classes of business changes. For most long-tail classes of business, the process of recording quarterly loss reserve changes involves determining the estimated current loss ratio for each class of coverage. This loss ratio is multiplied by the current quarter’s net earned premium for that class of coverage to determine the current accident quarter’s total estimated net incurred loss and loss expense. The change in loss reserves for the quarter for each class is thus the difference between the net incurred loss and loss expense, estimated as described above, and the net paid losses and loss expenses in the quarter. Also any change in estimated ultimate losses from prior accident years, either positive or negative, is reflected in the loss reserve for the current quarter.
Details of the Loss Reserving Process
The process of determining the current loss ratio for each class of business is based on a variety of factors. These include, but are not limited to, the following considerations: prior accident year and policy year loss ratios; rate changes; changes in coverage, reinsurance, or mix of business; and actual and anticipated changes in external factors affecting results, such as trends in loss costs or in the legal and claims environment. The current loss ratio for each class of business reflects input from actuarial, underwriting and claims staff and is intended to represent management’s best estimate of the current loss ratio after reflecting all of the factors described above. At the close of each quarter, the assumptions underlying the loss ratios are reviewed to determine if the loss ratios based thereon remain appropriate. This process includes a review of the actual claims experience in the quarter, actual rate changes achieved, actual changes in coverage, reinsurance or mix of business, and changes in certain other factors that may affect the loss ratio. When this review suggests that the initially determined loss ratio is no longer appropriate, the loss ratio for current business is changed to reflect the revised assumptions.
    A comprehensive annual loss reserve review is completed in the fourth quarter of each year for each AIG general insurance subsidiary. These reviews are conducted in full detail for each class of business for each subsidiary, and thus consist of hundreds of individual analyses. The purpose of these reviews is to confirm the appropriateness of the reserves carried by each of the individual subsidiaries, and therefore of AIG’s overall carried reserves. The reserve analysis for each class of business is performed by the actuarial personnel who are most familiar with that class of business. In completing these detailed actuarial reserve analyses, the actuaries are required to make numerous assumptions, including the selection of loss development factors and loss cost trend factors. They are also required to determine and select the most appropriate actuarial methods to employ for each business class. Additionally, they must determine the appropriate segmentation of data from which the adequacy of the reserves can be most accurately tested. In the course of these detailed reserve reviews a point estimate of the loss reserve is determined. The sum of these point estimates for each class of business for each subsidiary provides an overall actuarial point estimate of the loss reserve for that subsidiary. The ultimate process by which the actual carried reserves are determined considers both the actuarial point estimate and numerous other internal and external factors including a qualitative assessment of inflation and other economic conditions in the United States and abroad, changes in the legal, regulatory, judicial and social environment, underlying policy pricing, terms and conditions, and claims handling. Loss reserve development can also be affected by commutations of assumed and ceded reinsurance agreements.
Actuarial Methods for Major Classes of Business
In testing the reserves for each class of business, a determination is made by AIG’s actuaries as to the most appropriate actuarial methods. This determination is based on a variety of factors including the nature of the claims associated with the class of business, such as frequency or severity. Other factors considered include the loss development characteristics associated with the claims, the volume of claim data available for the applicable class, and the applicability of various actuarial methods to the class. In addition to determining the actuarial methods, the actuaries determine the appropriate loss reserve groupings of data. For example, AIG writes a great number of unique subclasses of professional liability. For pricing or other purposes, it is appropriate to evaluate the profitability of each subclass individually. However, for purposes of estimating the loss reserves for professional liability, it is appropriate to combine the subclasses into larger groups. The greater degree of credibility in the claims experience of the larger groups may outweigh the greater degree of homogeneity of the individual subclasses. This determination of data segmentation and actuarial methods is carefully considered for each class of business. The segmentation and actuarial methods chosen are those which together are expected to produce the most accurate estimate of the loss reserves.
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         53


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
    Actuarial methods used by AIG for most long-tail casualty classes of business include loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods, including “Bornhuetter Ferguson” methods described below. Other methods considered include frequency/severity methods, although these are generally used by AIG more for pricing analysis than for loss reserve analysis. Loss development methods utilize the actual loss development patterns from prior accident years to project the reported losses to an ultimate basis for subsequent accident years. Loss development methods generally are most appropriate for classes of business which exhibit a stable pattern of loss development from one accident year to the next, and for which the components of the classes have similar development characteristics. For example, property exposures would generally not be combined into the same class as casualty exposures, and primary casualty exposures would generally not be combined into the same class as excess casualty exposures. Expected loss ratio methods are generally utilized by AIG where the reported loss data lacks sufficient credibility to utilize loss development methods, such as for new classes of business or for long-tail classes at early stages of loss development.
    Expected loss ratio methods rely on the application of an expected loss ratio to the earned premium for the class of business to determine the loss reserves. For example, an expected loss ratio of 70 percent applied to an earned premium base of $10 million for a class of business would generate an ultimate loss estimate of $7 million. Subtracting any reported paid losses and loss expense would result in the indicated loss reserve for this class. “Bornhuetter Ferguson” methods are expected loss ratio methods for which the expected loss ratio is applied only to the expected unreported portion of the losses. For example, for a long-tail class of business for which only 10 percent of the losses are expected to be reported at the end of the accident year, the expected loss ratio would be applied to the 90 percent of the losses still unreported. The actual reported losses at the end of the accident year would be added to determine the total ultimate loss estimate for the accident year. Subtracting the reported paid losses and loss expenses would result in the indicated loss reserve. In the example above, the expected loss ratio of 70 percent would be multiplied by 90 percent. The result of 63 percent would be applied to the earned premium of $10 million resulting in an estimated unreported loss of $6.3 million. Actual reported losses would be added to arrive at the total ultimate losses. If the reported losses were $1 million, the ultimate loss estimate under the “Bornhuetter Ferguson” method would be $7.3 million versus the $7 million amount under the expected loss ratio method described above. Thus, the “Bornhuetter Ferguson” method gives partial credibility to the actual loss experience to date for the class of business. Loss development methods generally give full credibility to the reported loss experience to date. In the example above, loss development methods would typically indicate an ultimate loss estimate of $10 million, as the reported losses of $1 million would be estimated to reflect only 10 percent of the ultimate losses.
    A key advantage of loss development methods is that they respond quickly to any actual changes in loss costs for the class of business. Therefore, if loss experience is unexpectedly deteriorating or improving, the loss development method gives full credibility to the changing experience. Expected loss ratio methods would be slower to respond to the change, as they would continue to give more weight to the expected loss ratio, until enough evidence emerged for the expected loss ratio to be modified to reflect the changing loss experience. On the other hand, loss development methods have the disadvantage of overreacting to changes in reported losses if in fact the loss experience is not credible. For example, the presence or absence of large losses at the early stages of loss development could cause the loss development method to overreact to the favorable or unfavorable experience by assuming it will continue at later stages of development. In these instances, expected loss ratio methods such as “Bornhuetter Ferguson” have the advantage of properly recognizing large losses without extrapolating unusual large loss activity onto the unreported portion of the losses for the accident year. AIG’s loss reserve reviews for long-tail classes typically utilize a combination of both loss development and expected loss ratio methods. Loss development methods are generally given more weight for accident years and classes of business where the loss experience is highly credible. Expected loss ratio methods are given more weight where the reported loss experience is less credible, or is driven more by large losses. Expected loss ratio methods require sufficient information to determine the appropriate expected loss ratio. This information generally includes the actual loss ratios for prior accident years, and rate changes as well as underwriting or other changes which would affect the loss ratio. Further, an estimate of the loss cost trend or loss ratio trend is required in order to allow for the effect of inflation and other factors which may increase or otherwise change the loss costs from one accident year to the next.
    Frequency/severity methods generally rely on the determination of an ultimate number of claims and an average severity for each claim for each accident year. Multiplying the estimated ultimate number of claims for each accident year by the expected average severity of each claim produces the estimated ultimate loss for the accident year. Frequency/severity methods generally require a sufficient volume of claims in order for the average severity to be predictable. Average severity for subsequent accident years is generally determined by applying an estimated annual loss cost trend to the estimated average claim severity from prior accident years. Frequency/severity methods have the advantage that ultimate claim counts can generally be estimated more quickly and accurately than can ultimate losses. Thus, if the average claim severity can be accurately estimated, these methods can more quickly respond to changes in loss experience than other methods. However, for average severity to be predictable, the class of business must consist of homogeneous types of claims for which loss severity trends from one year to the next are reasonably consistent. Generally these methods work best for high frequency, low severity classes of business such as personal auto. AIG also utilizes these methods in pricing subclasses of professional liability. However, AIG does not generally utilize
54        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
frequency/severity methods to test loss reserves, due to the general nature of AIG’s reserves being applicable to lower frequency, higher severity commercial classes of business where average claim severity is volatile.
Excess Casualty: AIG generally uses a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for excess casualty classes. Expected loss ratio methods are generally utilized for at least the three latest accident years, due to the relatively low credibility of the reported losses. The loss experience is generally reviewed separately for lead umbrella classes and for other excess classes, due to the relatively shorter tail for lead umbrella business. Automobile-related claims are generally reviewed separately from non-auto claims, due to the shorter tail nature of the automobile related claims. The expected loss ratios utilized for recent accident years are based on the projected ultimate loss ratios of prior years, adjusted for rate changes, estimated loss cost trends and all other changes that can be quantified. The estimated loss cost trend utilized in the year-end 2007 reviews averaged approximately five percent for excess casualty classes. Frequency/severity methods are generally not utilized as the vast majority of reported claims do not result in a claim payment. In addition, the average severity varies significantly from accident year to accident year due to large losses which characterize this class of business, as well as changing proportions of claims which do not result in a claim payment.
D&O: AIG generally utilizes a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for D&O and related management liability classes of business. Expected loss ratio methods are given more weight in the two most recent accident years, whereas loss development methods are given more weight in more mature accident years. Beginning with the year-end 2005 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries began to utilize claim projections provided by AIG claims staff as a benchmark for determining the indicated ultimate losses for accident years 2004 and prior. For the year end 2007 loss reserve review, claims projections for accident years 2006 and prior were utilized. In prior years, AIG’s actuaries had utilized these claims projections as a benchmark for profitability studies for major classes of D&O and related management liability business. The track record of these claims projections has indicated a very low margin of error, thus providing support for their usage as a benchmark in determining the estimated loss reserve. These classes of business reflect claims made coverage, and losses are characterized by low frequency and high severity. Thus, the claim projections can produce an accurate overall indicator of the ultimate loss exposure for these classes by identifying and estimating all large losses. Frequency/severity methods are generally not utilized for these classes as the overall losses are driven by large losses more than by claim frequency. Severity trends have varied significantly from accident year to accident year.
Workers Compensation: AIG generally utilizes loss development methods for all but the most recent accident year. Expected loss ratio methods generally are given significant weight only in the most recent accident year. Workers compensation claims are generally characterized by high frequency, low severity, and relatively consistent loss development from one accident year to the next. AIG is a leading writer of workers compensation, and thus has sufficient volume of claims experience to utilize development methods. AIG does not believe frequency/severity methods are as appropriate, due to significant growth and changes in AIG’s workers compensation business over the years. AIG generally segregates California business from other business in evaluating workers compensation reserves. Certain classes of workers compensation, such as construction, are also evaluated separately. Additionally, AIG writes a number of very large accounts which include workers compensation coverage. These accounts are generally priced by AIG actuaries, and to the extent appropriate, the indicated losses based on the pricing analysis may be utilized to record the initial estimated loss reserves for these accounts.
Excess Workers Compensation: AIG generally utilizes a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods. Loss development methods are given the greater weight for mature accident years such as 2001 and prior. Expected loss ratio methods are given the greater weight for the more recent accident years. Excess workers compensation is an extremely long-tail class of business, with loss emergence extending for decades. Therefore there is limited credibility in the reported losses for many of the more recent accident years. Beginning with the year-end 2005 loss reserve review, AIG’s actuaries began to utilize claims projections provided by AIG claims staff to help determine the loss development factors for this class of business.
General Liability: AIG generally uses a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for primary general liability or products liability classes. For certain classes of business with sufficient loss volume, loss development methods may be given significant weight for all but the most recent one or two accident years, whereas for smaller or more volatile classes of business, loss development methods may be given limited weight for the five or more most recent accident years. Expected loss ratio methods would be utilized for the more recent accident years for these classes. The loss experience for primary general liability business is generally reviewed at a level that is believed to provide the most appropriate data for reserve analysis. For example, primary claims made business is generally segregated from business written on an occurrence policy form. Additionally, certain subclasses, such as construction, are generally reviewed separately from business in other subclasses. Due to the fairly long-tail nature of general liability business, and the many subclasses that are reviewed individually, there is less credibility in the reported losses and increased reliance on expected loss ratio methods. AIG’s actuaries generally do not utilize frequency/severity methods to test reserves for this business, due to significant changes and growth in AIG’s general liability and products liability business over the years.
Commercial Automobile Liability: AIG generally utilizes loss development methods for all but the most recent accident year for commercial automobile classes of business. Expected loss ratio methods are generally given significant weight only in the most recent accident year. Frequency/severity methods are generally
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         55


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
not utilized due to significant changes and growth in this business over the years.
Healthcare: AIG generally uses a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for healthcare classes of business. The largest component of the healthcare business consists of coverage written for hospitals and other healthcare facilities. Reserves for excess coverage are tested separately from those for primary coverage. For primary coverages, loss development methods are generally given the majority of the weight for all but the latest three accident years, and are given some weight for all years other than the latest accident year. For excess coverages, expected loss methods are generally given all the weight for the latest three accident years, and are also given considerable weight for accident years prior to the latest three years. For other classes of healthcare coverage, an analogous weighting between loss development and expected loss ratio methods is utilized. The weights assigned to each method are those which are believed to result in the best combination of responsiveness and stability. Frequency/severity methods are sometimes utilized for pricing certain healthcare accounts or business. However, in testing loss reserves the business is generally combined into larger groupings to enhance the credibility of the loss experience. The frequency/severity methods that are applicable in pricing may not be appropriate for reserve testing and thus frequency/severity methods are not generally employed in AIG’s healthcare reserve analyses.
Professional Liability: AIG generally uses a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for professional liability classes of business. Loss development methods are used for the more mature accident years. Greater weight is given to expected loss ratio methods in the more recent accident years. Reserves are tested separately for claims made classes and classes written on occurrence policy forms. Further segmentations are made in a manner believed to provide an appropriate balance between credibility and homogeneity of the data. Frequency/severity methods are used in pricing and profitability analyses for some classes of professional liability; however, for loss reserve testing, the need to enhance credibility generally results in classes that are not sufficiently homogenous to utilize frequency/severity methods.
Catastrophic Casualty: AIG utilizes expected loss ratio methods for all accident years for catastrophic casualty business. This class of business consists of casualty or financial lines coverage which attaches in excess of very high attachment points; thus the claims experience is marked by very low frequency and high severity. Because of the limited number of claims, loss development methods are not utilized. The expected loss ratios and loss development assumptions utilized are based upon the results of prior accident years for this business as well as for similar classes of business written above lower attachment points. The business is generally written on a claims made basis. AIG utilizes ground-up claim projections provided by AIG claims staff to assist in developing the appropriate reserve.
Aviation: AIG generally uses a combination of loss development methods and expected loss ratio methods for aviation exposures. Aviation claims are not very long-tail in nature; however, they are driven by claim severity. Thus a combination of both development and expected loss ratio methods are used for all but the latest accident year to determine the loss reserves. Expected loss ratio methods are used to determine the loss reserves for the latest accident year. Frequency/severity methods are not employed due to the high severity nature of the claims and different mix of claims from year to year.
Personal Auto (Domestic): AIG generally utilizes frequency/severity methods and loss development methods for domestic personal auto classes. For many classes of business, greater reliance is placed on frequency/severity methods as claim counts emerge quickly for personal auto and allow for more immediate analysis of resulting loss trends and comparisons to industry and other diagnostic metrics.
Fidelity/ Surety: AIG generally uses loss development methods for fidelity exposures for all but the latest accident year. Expected loss ratio methods are also given weight for the more recent accident years, and for the latest accident year they may be given 100 percent weight. For surety exposures, AIG generally uses the same method as for short-tail classes.
Mortgage Guaranty: AIG tests mortgage guaranty reserves using loss development methods, supplemented by an internal claim analysis by actuaries and staff who specialize in the mortgage guaranty business. The claim analysis projects ultimate losses for claims within each of several categories of delinquency based on actual historical experience and is essentially a frequency/severity analysis for each category of delinquency. Additional reserve tests using “Bornhuetter Ferguson” methods are also employed, as well as tests measuring losses as a percent of risk in force. Reserves are reviewed separately for each class of business to consider the loss development characteristics associated with the claims, the volume of claim data available for the applicable class and the applicability of various actuarial methods to the class.
Short-Tail Classes: AIG generally uses either loss development methods or IBNR factor methods to set reserves for short-tail classes such as property coverages. Where a factor is used, it generally represents a percent of earned premium or other exposure measure. The factor is determined based on prior accident year experience. For example, the IBNR for a class of property coverage might be expected to approximate 20 percent of the latest year’s earned premium. The factor is continually reevaluated in light of emerging claim experience as well as rate changes or other factors that could affect the adequacy of the IBNR factor being employed.
International: Business written by AIG’s Foreign General Insurance sub-segment includes both long-tail and short-tail classes of business. For long-tail classes of business, the actuarial methods utilized would be analogous to those described above. However, the majority of business written by Foreign General Insurance is short-tail, high frequency and low severity in nature. For this business, loss development methods are generally employed to
56        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
test the loss reserves. AIG maintains a data base of detailed historical premium and loss transactions in original currency for business written by Foreign General Insurance, thereby allowing AIG actuaries to determine the current reserves without any distortion from changes in exchange rates over time. In testing the Foreign General Insurance reserves, AIG’s actuaries segment the data by region, country or class of business as appropriate to determine an optimal balance between homogeneity and credibility.
Loss Adjustment Expenses: AIG determines reserves for legal defense and cost containment loss adjustment expenses for each class of business by one or more actuarial methods. The methods generally include development methods analogous to those described for loss development methods. The developments could be based on either the paid loss adjustment expenses or the ratio of paid loss adjustment expenses to paid losses, or both. Other methods include the utilization of expected ultimate ratios of paid loss expense to paid losses, based on actual experience from prior accident years or from similar classes of business. AIG generally determines reserves for adjuster loss adjustment expenses based on calendar year ratios of adjuster expenses paid to losses paid for the particular class of business. AIG generally determines reserves for other unallocated loss adjustment expenses based on the ratio of the calendar year expenses paid to overall losses paid. This determination is generally done for all classes of business combined, and reflects costs of home office claim overhead as a percent of losses paid.
Catastrophes: Special analyses are conducted by AIG in response to major catastrophes in order to estimate AIG’s gross and net loss and loss expense liability from the events. These analyses may include a combination of approaches, including modeling estimates, ground up claim analysis, loss evaluation reports from on-site field adjusters, and market share estimates.
    AIG’s loss reserve analyses do not calculate a range of loss reserve estimates. Because a large portion of the loss reserves from AIG’s General Insurance business relates to longer-tail casualty classes of business driven by severity rather than frequency of claims, such as excess casualty and D&O, developing a range around loss reserve estimates would not be meaningful. Using the reserving methodologies described above, AIG’s actuaries determine their best estimate of the required reserve and advise Management of that amount. AIG then adjusts its aggregate carried reserves as necessary so that the actual carried reserves as of December 31 reflect this best estimate.
Volatility of Reserve Estimates and Sensitivity Analyses
As described above, AIG uses numerous assumptions in determining its best estimate of reserves for each class of business. The importance of any specific assumption can vary by both class of business and accident year. If actual experience differs from key assumptions used in establishing reserves, there is potential for significant variation in the development of loss reserves, particularly for long-tail casualty classes of business such as excess casualty, D&O or workers compensation. Set forth below is a sensitivity analysis that estimates the effect on the loss reserve position of using alternative loss trend or loss development factor assumptions rather than those actually used in determining AIG’s best estimates in the year-end loss reserve analyses in 2007. The analysis addresses each major class of business for which a material deviation to AIG’s overall reserve position is believed reasonably possible, and uses what AIG believes is a reasonably likely range of potential deviation for each class. There can be no assurance, however, that actual reserve development will be consistent with either the original or the adjusted loss trend or loss development factor assumptions, or that other assumptions made in the reserving process will not materially affect reserve development for a particular class of business.
Excess Casualty: For the excess casualty class of business, the assumed loss cost trend was approximately five percent. After evaluating the historical loss cost trends from prior accident years since the early 1990s, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss cost trends applicable to the year-end 2007 loss reserve review for excess casualty will range from negative five percent to positive 15 percent, or approximately ten percent lower or higher than the assumption actually utilized in the year-end 2007 reserve review. A ten percent change in the assumed loss cost trend for excess casualty would cause approximately a $2.4 billion increase or a $1.6 billion decrease in the net loss and loss expense reserve for this class of business. It should be emphasized that the ten percent deviations are not considered the highest possible deviations that might be expected, but rather what is considered by AIG to reflect a reasonably likely range of potential deviation. Actual loss cost trends in the early 1990s were negative for several years, including amounts below the negative five percent cited above, whereas actual loss cost trends in the late 1990s ran well into the double digits for several years, including amounts greater than the 15 percent cited above. Thus, there can be no assurance that loss trends will not deviate by more than ten percent. The loss cost trend assumption is critical for the excess casualty class of business due the long-tail nature of the claims and therefore is applied across many accident years.
    For the excess casualty class of business, the assumed loss development factors are also a key assumption. After evaluating the historical loss development factors from prior accident years since the early 1990s, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss development factors will range from approximately 3.5 percent below those actually utilized in the year-end 2007 reserve review to approximately 6.5 percent above those factors actually utilized. If the loss development factor assumptions were changed by 3.5 percent and 6.5 percent, respectively, the net loss reserves for the excess casualty class would decrease by approximately $600 million under the lower assumptions or increase by approximately $1.0 billion under the higher assumptions. Generally, actual historical loss development factors are used to project future loss development. However there can be no assurance that future loss development patterns will be the same as in the past, or that they will not deviate by more than the amounts illustrated above. Moreover, as excess casualty is a long-tail class of business, any deviation in loss cost trends or in loss development factors might not be discernible for an extended
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         57


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
period of time subsequent to the recording of the initial loss reserve estimates for any accident year. Thus, there is the potential for the reserves with respect to a number of accident years to be significantly affected by changes in the loss cost trends or loss development factors that were initially relied upon in setting the reserves. These changes in loss trends or loss development factors could be attributable to changes in inflation or in the judicial environment, or in other social or economic conditions affecting claims. Thus, there is the potential for variations greater than the amounts cited above, either positively or negatively.
D&O and Related Management Liability Classes of Business: For D&O and related management liability classes of business, the assumed loss cost trend was approximately four percent. After evaluating the historical loss cost trends from prior accident years since the early 1990s, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss cost trends applicable to the year-end 2007 loss reserve review for these classes will range from negative 11 percent to positive 19 percent, or approximately 15 percent lower or higher than the assumption actually utilized in the year-end 2007 reserve review. A 15 percent change in the assumed loss cost trend for these classes would cause approximately a $550 million increase or a $500 million decrease in the net loss and loss expense reserves for these classes of business. It should be emphasized that the 15 percent deviations are not considered the highest possible deviations that might be expected, but rather what is considered by AIG to reflect a reasonably likely range of potential deviation. Actual loss cost trends for these classes in the early 1990s were negative for several years, including amounts below the negative 11 percent cited above, whereas actual loss cost trends in the late 1990s ran at nearly 50 percent per year for several years, vastly exceeding the 19 percent figure cited above. Because the D&O class of business has exhibited highly volatile loss trends from one accident year to the next, there is the possibility of an exceptionally high deviation.
    For D&O and related management liability classes of business, the assumed loss development factors are also an important assumption but less critical than for excess casualty. Because these classes are written on a claims made basis, the loss reporting and development tail is much shorter than for excess casualty. However, the high severity nature of the claims does create the potential for significant deviations in loss development patterns from one year to the next. After evaluating the historical loss development factors for these classes of business for accident years since the early 1990s, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss development factors will range approximately 6 percent lower to 3.5 percent higher than those factors actually utilized in the year-end 2007 loss reserve review for these classes. If the loss development factor assumptions were changed by 6 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively, the net loss reserves for these classes would be estimated to decrease or increase by approximately $250 million and $125 million, respectively. As noted above for excess casualty, actual historical loss development factors are generally used to project future loss development. However, there can be no assurance that future loss development patterns will be the same as in the past, or that they will not deviate by more than the 6 percent or 3.5 percent amounts.
Excess Workers Compensation: For excess workers compensation business, loss costs were trended at six percent per annum. After reviewing actual industry loss trends for the past ten years, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss cost trends applicable to the year-end 2007 loss reserve review for excess workers compensation will range five percent lower or higher than this estimated loss trend. A five percent change in the assumed loss cost trend would cause approximately a $425 million increase or a $275 million decrease in the net loss reserves for this business. It should be emphasized that the actual loss cost trend could vary significantly from this assumption, and there can be no assurance that actual loss costs will not deviate, perhaps materially, by greater than five percent.
    For excess workers compensation business, the assumed loss development factors are a critical assumption. Excess workers compensation is an extremely long-tail class of business, with a much greater than normal uncertainty as to the appropriate loss development factors for the tail of the loss development. After evaluating the historical loss development factors for prior accident years since the 1980s, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss development factors will range approximately 15 percent lower or higher than those factors actually utilized in the year-end 2007 loss reserve review for excess workers compensation. If the loss development factor assumptions were changed by 15 percent, the net loss reserves for excess workers compensation would increase or decrease by approximately $600 million. Given the exceptionally long-tail for this class of business, there is the potential for actual deviations in the loss development tail to exceed the deviations assumed, perhaps materially.
Primary Workers Compensation: For primary workers compensation, the loss cost trend assumption is not believed to be material with respect to AIG’s loss reserves. This is primarily because AIG’s actuaries are generally able to use loss development projections for all but the most recent accident year’s reserves, so there is limited need to rely on loss cost trend assumptions for primary workers compensation business.
    However, for primary workers compensation business the loss development factor assumptions are important. Generally, AIG’s actual historical workers compensation loss development factors would be expected to provide a reasonably accurate predictor of future loss development. However, workers compensation is a long-tail class of business, and AIG’s business reflects a very significant volume of losses particularly in recent accident years due to growth of the business. After evaluating the actual historical loss developments since the 1980s for this business, in AIG’s judgment, it is reasonably likely that actual loss development factors will fall within the range of approximately 3.5 percent below to 8.25 percent above those actually utilized in the year-end 2007 loss reserve review. If the loss development factor assumptions were changed by 3.5 percent and 8.25 percent, respectively, the net loss reserves for workers compensation
58        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
would decrease or increase by approximately $800 million and $1.9 billion, respectively. It should be noted that loss emergence in 2006 and 2007 for this class was higher than historical averages, resulting in an increase in loss reserves for prior accident years. During 2007, reserves from prior accident years developed adversely by approximately $300 million for AIG’s primary workers compensation business. AIG relies on longer term averages of historical loss development patterns in setting loss reserves; thus if loss emergence in subsequent years continues at the levels observed in 2006 and 2007 there could be additional adverse development for this class of business that could be more significant than the amount observed in 2007. However, AIG believes it is too soon to ascertain if this increased emergence represents a new trend in the pattern of loss development. For this class of business, there can be no assurance that actual deviations from the expected loss development factors will not exceed the deviations assumed, perhaps materially.
Other Casualty Classes of Business: For casualty business other than the classes discussed above, there is generally some potential for deviation in both the loss cost trend and loss development factor assumptions. However, the effect of such deviations is expected to be less material when compared to the effect on the classes cited above.
Asbestos and Environmental Reserves
The estimation of loss reserves relating to asbestos and environmental claims on insurance policies written many years ago is subject to greater uncertainty than other types of claims due to inconsistent court decisions as well as judicial interpretations and legislative actions that in some cases have tended to broaden coverage beyond the original intent of such policies and in others have expanded theories of liability. The insurance industry as a whole is engaged in extensive litigation over these coverage and liability issues and is thus confronted with a continuing uncertainty in its efforts to quantify these exposures.
    AIG continues to receive claims asserting injuries and damages from toxic waste, hazardous substances, and other environmental pollutants and alleged claims to cover the cleanup costs of hazardous waste dump sites, referred to collectively as environmental claims, and indemnity claims asserting injuries from asbestos.
    The vast majority of these asbestos and environmental claims emanate from policies written in 1984 and prior years. Commencing in 1985, standard policies contained an absolute exclusion for pollution-related damage and an absolute asbestos exclusion was also implemented. The current environmental policies that AIG underwrites on a claims-made basis have been excluded from the analysis herein.
    The majority of AIG’s exposures for asbestos and environmental claims are excess casualty coverages, not primary coverages. Thus, the litigation costs are treated in the same manner as indemnity amounts. That is, litigation expenses are included within the limits of the liability AIG incurs. Individual significant claim liabilities, where future litigation costs are reasonably determinable, are established on a case-by-case basis.
    Estimation of asbestos and environmental claims loss reserves is a subjective process and reserves for asbestos and environmental claims cannot be estimated using conventional reserving techniques such as those that rely on historical accident year loss development factors. The methods used to determine asbestos and environmental loss estimates and to establish the resulting reserves are continually reviewed and updated by management.
    Significant factors which affect the trends that influence the asbestos and environmental claims estimation process are the court resolutions and judicial interpretations which broaden the intent of the policies and scope of coverage. The current case law can be characterized as still evolving, and there is little likelihood that any firm direction will develop in the near future. Additionally, the exposures for cleanup costs of hazardous waste dump sites involve issues such as allocation of responsibility among potentially responsible parties and the government’s refusal to release parties from liability.
    Due to this uncertainty, it is not possible to determine the future development of asbestos and environmental claims with the same degree of reliability as with other types of claims. Such future development will be affected by the extent to which courts continue to expand the intent of the policies and the scope of the coverage, as they have in the past, as well as by the changes in Superfund and waste dump site coverage and liability issues. If the asbestos and environmental reserves develop deficiently, such deficiency would have an adverse effect on AIG’s future results of operations.
    With respect to known asbestos and environmental claims, AIG established over a decade ago specialized toxic tort and environmental claims units, which investigate and adjust all such asbestos and environmental claims. These units evaluate these asbestos and environmental claims utilizing a claim-by-claim approach that involves a detailed review of individual policy terms and exposures. Because each policyholder presents different liability and coverage issues, AIG generally evaluates exposure on a policy-by-policy basis, considering a variety of factors such as known facts, current law, jurisdiction, policy language and other factors that are unique to each policy. Quantitative techniques have to be supplemented by subjective considerations, including management judgment. Each claim is reviewed at least semi-annually utilizing the aforementioned approach and adjusted as necessary to reflect the current information.
    In both the specialized and dedicated asbestos and environmental claims units, AIG actively manages and pursues early resolution with respect to these claims in an attempt to mitigate its exposure to the unpredictable development of these claims. AIG attempts to mitigate its known long-tail environmental exposures by utilizing a combination of proactive claim-resolution techniques, including policy buybacks, complete environmental releases, compromise settlements, and, where indicated, litigation.
    With respect to asbestos claims handling, AIG’s specialized claims staff operates to mitigate losses through proactive handling, supervision and resolution of asbestos cases. Thus, while AIG has resolved all claims with respect to miners and major manufacturers (Tier One), its claims staff continues to operate under the same proactive philosophy to resolve claims involving accounts with products containing asbestos (Tier Two), products
AIG 2007 Form 10-K         59


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
 
containing small amounts of asbestos, companies in the distribution process, and parties with remote, ill-defined involvement in asbestos (Tiers Three and Four). Through its commitment to appropriate staffing, training, and management oversight of asbestos cases, AIG seeks to mitigate its exposure to these claims.
    To determine the appropriate loss reserve as of December 31, 2007 for its asbestos and environmental exposures, AIG performed a series of top-down and ground-up reserve analyses. In order to ensure it had the most comprehensive analysis possible, AIG engaged a third-party actuary to assist in a review of these exposures, including ground-up estimates for asbestos reserves consistent with the 2005 and 2006 reviews as well as a top-down report year projection for environmental reserves. Prior to 2005, AIG’s reserve analyses for asbestos and environmental exposures was focused around a report year projection of aggregate losses for both asbestos and environmental reserves. Additional tests such as market share analyses were also performed. Ground-up analyses take into account policyholder-specific and claim-specific information that has been gathered over many years from a variety of sources. Ground-up studies can thus more accurately assess the exposure to AIG’s layers of coverage for each policyholder, and hence for all policyholders in the aggregate, provided a sufficient sample of the policyholders can be modeled in this manner.
    In order to ensure its ground-up analysis was comprehensive, AIG staff produced the information required at policy and claim level detail for nearly 1,000 asbestos defendants. This represented over 95 percent of all accounts for which AIG had received any claim notice of any amount pertaining to asbestos exposure. AIG did not set any minimum thresholds, such as amount of case reserve outstanding, or paid losses to date, that would have served to reduce the sample size and hence the comprehensiveness of the ground-up analysis. The results of the ground-up analysis for each significant account were examined by AIG’s claims staff for reasonableness, for consistency with policy coverage terms, and any claim settlement terms applicable. Adjustments were incorporated accordingly. The results from the universe of modeled accounts, which as noted above reflects the vast majority of AIG’s known exposures, were then utilized to estimate the ultimate losses from accounts or exposures that could not be modeled and to determine an appropriate provision for unreported claims.
    AIG conducted a comprehensive analysis of reinsurance recoverability to establish the appropriate asbestos and environmental reserve net of reinsurance. AIG determined the amount of reinsurance that would be ceded to insolvent reinsurers or to commuted reinsurance contracts for both reported claims and for IBNR. These amounts were then deducted from the indicated amount of reinsurance recoverable. The year-end 2007 analysis reflected an update to the comprehensive analysis of reinsurance recoverability that was first completed in 2005 and updated in 2006. All asbestos accounts for which there was a significant change in estimated losses in the 2007 review were analyzed to determine the appropriate reserve net of reinsurance.
    AIG also completed a top-down report year projection of its indicated asbestos and environmental loss reserves. These projections consist of a series of tests performed separately for asbestos and for environmental exposures.
    For asbestos, these tests project the losses expected to be reported over the next nineteen years, i.e., from 2008 through 2026, based on the actual losses reported through 2007 and the expected future loss emergence for these claims. Three scenarios were tested, with a series of assumptions ranging from more optimistic to more conservative. In the first scenario, all carried asbestos case reserves are assumed to be within ten percent of their ultimate settlement value. The second scenario relies on an actuarial projection of report year development for asbestos claims reported from 1993 to the present to estimate case reserve adequacy as of year-end 2007. The third scenario relies on an actuarial projection of report year claims for asbestos but reflects claims reported from 1989 to the present to estimate case reserve adequacy as of year-end 2007. Based on the results of the prior report years for each of the three scenarios described above, the report year approach then projects forward to the year 2026 the expected future report year losses, based on AIG’s estimate of reasonable loss trend assumptions. These calculations are performed on losses gross of reinsurance. The IBNR (including a provision for development of reported claims) on a net basis is based on applying a factor reflecting the expected ratio of net losses to gross losses for future loss emergence.
    For environmental claims, an analogous series of frequency/severity tests are produced. Environmental claims from future report years, (i.e., IBNR) are projected out nine years, i.e., through the year 2016.
    At year-end 2007, AIG considered a number of factors and recent experience in addition to the results of the respective top-down and ground-up analyses performed for asbestos and environmental reserves. AIG considered the significant uncertainty that remains as to AIG’s ultimate liability relating to asbestos and environmental claims. This uncertainty is due to several factors including:
•   The long latency period between asbestos exposure and disease manifestation and the resulting potential for involvement of multiple policy periods for individual claims;
•   The increase in the volume of claims by currently unimpaired plaintiffs;
•   Claims filed under the non-aggregate premises or operations section of general liability policies;
•   The number of insureds seeking bankruptcy protection and the effect of prepackaged bankruptcies;
•   Diverging legal interpretations; and
•   With respect to environmental claims, the difficulty in estimating the allocation of remediation cost among various parties.
    After carefully considering the results of the ground-up analysis, which AIG updates on an annual basis, as well as all of the above factors, including the recent report year experience, AIG increased its gross asbestos reserves by $75 million, all of which was reinsured, resulting in no increase to net reserves. Additionally, during 2007 a reduction in estimated reinsurance recoverable, partially offset by several large favorable asbestos settlements, resulted in a minor amount of adverse incurred loss development.
    Based on the environmental top-down report year analysis performed in the fourth quarter of 2007, a minor increase in both gross and net reserves was recognized, resulting in the relatively minor amount of development shown in the table below.
60        AIG 2007 Form 10-K


Table of Contents

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries
 
A summary of reserve activity, including estimates for applicable IBNR, relating to asbestos and environmental claims separately and combined at December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 appears in the table below. The vast majority of such claims arise from policies written in 1984 and prior years. The current environmental policies that AIG underwrites on a claims-made basis have been excluded from the table below.
                                                   
 
    2007   2006   2005
             
(in millions)   Gross   Net   Gross(e)   Net   Gross(e)   Net
 
Asbestos:
                                               
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at beginning of year
  $ 4,523     $ 1,889     $ 4,501     $ 1,840     $ 2,622     $ 1,060  
 
Losses and loss expenses incurred(a)
    96       5       572       267       2,206 (b)     903 (b)
 
Losses and loss expenses paid(a)
    (755 )     (440 )     (550 )     (218 )     (327 )     (123 )
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at end of year
  $ 3,864     $ 1,454     $ 4,523     $ 1,889     $ 4,501     $ 1,840  
 
Environmental:
                                               
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at beginning of year
  $ 629     $ 290     $ 969     $ 410     $ 1,018     $ 451  
 
Losses and loss expenses incurred(a)
    10       13       (231 )     (59 )     47 (c)     27 (c)
 
Losses and loss expenses paid(a)
    (124 )     (66 )     (109 )     (61 )     (96 )     (68 )
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at end of year
  $ 515     $ 237     $ 629     $ 290     $ 969     $ 410  
 
Combined:
                                               
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at beginning of year
  $ 5,152     $ 2,179     $ 5,470     $ 2,250     $ 3,640     $ 1,511  
 
Losses and loss expenses incurred(a)
    106       18       341       208       2,253 (d)     930 (d)
 
Losses and loss expenses paid(a)
    (879 )     (506 )     (659 )     (279 )     (423 )     (191 )
 
Reserve for losses and loss expenses at end of year
  $ 4,379     $ 1,691     $ 5,152     $ 2,179     $ 5,470     $ 2,250  
 
(a)  All amounts pertain to policies underwritten in prior years, primarily to policies issued in 1984 and prior.
 
(b)  Includes increases to gross losses and loss expense reserves of $2.0 billion and increases to net losses and loss expense reserves of $843 million for the fourth quarter of 2005.
 
(c)  Includes increases to gross losses and loss expense reserves of $56 million and increases to net losses and loss expense reserves of $30 million for the fourth quarter of 2005.
 
(d)  Includes increases to gross losses and loss expense reserves of $2.0 billion and increases to net losses and loss expense reserves of $873 million for the fourth quarter of 2005.
(e)  Gross amounts were revised from the previous presentation to reflect the inclusion of certain reserves not previously identified as asbestos and environmental related. This revision had no effect on net reserves.
The gross and net IBNR included in the reserve for losses and loss expenses, relating to asbestos and environmental claims separately and combined, at December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 were estimated as follows:
                                                 
 
    2007   2006   2005
             
(in millions)   Gross   Net   Gross*   Net   Gross*   Net
 
Asbestos
  $ 2,701     $ 1,145     $ 3,270     $ 1,469     $ 3,458     $ 1,465  
Environmental
    325       131       378       173       625       266  
 
Combined
  $ 3,026     $ 1,276     $ 3,648     $ 1,642     $ 4,083     $ 1,731  
 
Gross amounts were revised from the previous presentation to reflect the inclusion of certain reserves not previously identified as asbestos and environmental related. This revision had no effect on net reserves.
A summary of asbestos and environmental claims count activity for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 was as follows:
                                                                           
 
    2007   2006   2005
             
    Asbestos   Environmental   Combined   Asbestos   Environmental   Combined   Asbestos   Environmental   Combined
 
Claims at beginning of year
    6,878       9,442       16,320       7,293       9,873       17,166       7,575       8,216       15,791  
Claims during year:
                                                          &nbs