| TREASURY AND RISK MANAGEMENT |
April 2003 |
FILLING THE VOID
In the wake of Sarbanes-Oxley, insurers
are making a case for covering CFOs with key-person policies.
But who's buying it?
By Russ Banham
Andrew Morrison, CFO of
American Science and Engineering, died in August at the age
of 52, a year after joining the US$70 million US-based manufacturer
of x-ray detection and imaging systems. At the time of Morrison's
hiring, AS&E CEO Ralph Sheridan said the CFO brought "a wealth
of international treasury finance experience" that was "invaluable"
to AS&E in broadening the global reach of field operations.
Yet, while his death left a void, AS&E had elected not to
insure Morrison - or any other company officer for that matter
- with key-person life insurance. "It just didn't make sense,"
says Paige Cochran, vice president of AS&E's human resources
department.
AS&E is not alone in forgoing key-person
life insurance, employer-paid coverage that provides a payout
to the employer in the event of the death of one of their
all-important members of staff. While it is routine for corporations
to insure their physical assets, many do not insure their
human assets, believing key-person life insurance to be pointless,
if not inappropriate. They contend that prudent succession
planning obviates the need for the insurance - the argument
at AS&E.
Vendors of key-person life insurance policies
maintain companies are wrong about this. They note the policies'
wide-ranging utility, relative inexpensiveness (costs are
based on standard actuarial tables), and tax-free benefits.
Moreover, they point out that the insurance payout from the
policy not only defrays the costs of replacing an executive,
but also can finance employee-benefit obligations and absorb
financial strains caused by a key executive's death, from
an impaired credit rating to lost customers.
Such benefits are part of a renewed campaign
by insurers to sell key-person insurance to the C-level suite.
And given the new responsibilities bestowed upon them since
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed in the US last year, some
are convinced that policies for CFOs will be a major new market.
"The role of the CFO has taken on an importance post-Enron
and post-Sarbanes-Oxley that is greater than at any other
time in history," says Patrick Smith, director of advanced
marketing at US-based insurer The Hartford, adding: "We believe
that key-person life insurance on CFOs will be a growing phenomenon,
given their expanded responsibilities."
Smith is not alone. "Key-person life insurance
on a CFO makes sense today," says Robert Hartwig, chief economist
at the New York-based Insurance Information Institute. "CFOs'
reputations and potential freedom are at stake in the wake
of Sarbanes-Oxley. Consequently, companies will seek higher
quality CFOs - individuals whose integrity is unimpeachable
and whose skills are broad. These CFOs would be more costly
to replace in the event something happened to them."
Still, key-person life insurance promises
to be a tough sell. Many public companies are loath to buy
insurance that pays a large sum of money when a C-level executive
dies. And, given the strain on cash-strapped budgets from
skyrocketing insurance premiums, beleaguered risk managers
are not about to add another policy to the mix. "Insurance
is not a good substitute for high quality management teams,"
says Richard Inserra, assistant treasurer and director of
risk management at Praxair, a US-based industrial gas company
with US$5.2 billion in 2002 revenues. "When you lose a general,
the colonels take over until a new general is put in place."
Game of Life
While key-person life insurance has been
around in the US since the 1960s, it has been eclipsed in
recent years by the insurance industry's push toward corporate-owned
life insurance (COLI) policies. The controversial product
covers more than just key executives; it's designed to cover
the entire rank and file, hence its more colloquial name -
janitors' insurance.
The problem with COLI policies, which
were born in the 1980s as a tax-advantaged way for companies
to fund rapidly rising employee health-care costs, is that
actions by the US Congress, the country's Internal Revenue
Service, and its courts have removed some of their gleam.
In 1999, for instance, Congress phased out corporate deductions
for interest on loans against COLI policies. Negative publicity
about how companies were benefiting financially from employees'
deaths - especially in relation to September 11 - has slowed
growth in a line that traditionally accounts for up to 30
percent of the life insurance market.
With COLI policies losing their luster,
insurers are returning to key-person life insurance as a risk-transfer
strategy for critical human assets. The benefit of having
such coverage, vendors contend, is that it helps defray the
cost of recruiting and training a replacement executive. In
addition, the insurance also helps fund any financial promises
made to a deceased executive's spouse, such as salary continuation
or deferred compensation. And, on the softer side, the insurance
proceeds also can counter the financial impact of distracted
employees - missed deadlines, deteriorating morale, and personality
conflicts, according to W. Thomas Lobaugh, a senior vice president
in the Chicago office of US insurance broker Willis Group
Holdings.
The case for having such coverage, says
Lobaugh, is often clear. "The impact of a key executive's
death is many-fold," he comments. "It can cause a loss of
confidence among suppliers and customers, and an inability
to seize upon a business opportunity, because cash reserves
are being used to train the new employee. There's also the
potential of impairing a company's credit standing and its
ability to secure financing."
But deciding who to cover is tricky. Traditionally,
public companies that purchased the coverage did so to insure
their CEOs, particularly those with long tenures and high
profiles whose sudden demise would impair public confidence
and cause financial repercussions. It has been rumored for
years, for example, that Robert Maxwell, the British media
mogul and owner of the tabloid Daily Mirror, who either fell,
jumped, or was pushed to his death from his yacht in 1991,
had taken out a US$100 million key-person life insurance policy
just weeks before the plunge.
Unfortunately, getting companies to reveal
that they even have the insurance on their CEO (or any top
executive) is difficult. "You don't want some disgruntled
shareholder to catch wind of the fact that the CEO's death
could mean a windfall for the company," says an insurance
broker, off the record. So while it is likely that such marquee
CEOs as Martha Stewart are covered by key-person life insurance,
the extent to which this is the case at other large companies
remains speculative.
Statistics on the prevalence of such insurance
at private companies are also hard to come by. But given that
CEOs' close ties to customers and suppliers are often irreplaceable
at such companies, the policies are said to be more popular,
though equally secretive. It's the same case with partnerships,
where it is common for one partner to insure the life of another
partner. And experts say that the insurance is often used
to cover certain other employees - a salesperson with decades
of experience nurturing customer relationships or a corporate
scientist whose ideas are about to be commercialized - since
their loss means corporate loss.
Where statistics do exist, however, is
in the UK, where a study last year conducted by Continental
Research for insurer Royal & SunAlliance found that nearly
half of all midsize and smaller UK companies purchase the
insurance. Forty-four percent of 135,000 companies surveyed
said they had bought key-person life insurance on one or more
executives whose loss would have a serious impact on trading
and profitability. Overall, says Bill Kelly, a former JP Morgan
managing director who headed the investment firm's risk management
department until recently, such policies make the most sense
"in terms of [covering] someone in a critical revenue-generating
position or for an executive with tremendous intellectual
capital."
Moribund or Morbid?
No one knows how many companies buy key-person
life insurance on their senior finance executives. What is
clear is that there may be specific circumstances in which
such a policy is vital. "If the CFO is in the middle of negotiations
with another firm, in the midst of an incomplete project,
or just short of reporting to regulators and Wall Street,
his or her death would cause huge financial distress.
Key-person life insurance would offset
any losses caused by the CFO's demise through an inflow of
cash," says Robert Travers, counsel in the estate- and business-planning
group at US-based insurer John Hancock Financial Services.
Willis, for example, "just bound a policy for a company that
was acquiring another company," says Lobaugh, noting that:
"It wanted short-term, key-person life insurance on the target
company's CFO." He adds that the CFO was critical to the success
of the post-merger company.
Vendors are sure to leverage the importance
of senior finance executives in such situations, as well as
in the new legal responsibilities bestowed on them by Sarbanes-Oxley.
Still, a sampling of corporate risk managers indicates few
accept such arguments. While Praxair's Inserra agrees that
"the passing of a CFO could be a major blow," he notes that,
"they're not irreplaceable. He adds that there isn't a compelling
financial case for such insurance - meaning its tax benefits
and investment potential. "A whole-life policy pays about
4 percent," says Inserra. "You can't tell me a company can't
get a higher return than that on its capital. Shareholders
want 10 percent returns anyway. This is just a way to squander
shareholder value."
And David Hennes, director of risk management
at US-based turf care equipment maker Toro, is simply not
comfortable with the whole premise of the coverage. Says Hennes,
who eliminated such policies for two of his last three employers
on his first day on each job: "It's not appropriate for a
midsize or larger company to rely on a cash windfall in the
event a key executive dies. The whole principle of insurance
is to absorb catastrophic loss. In 99.9 percent of companies,
the loss of any one person would not be catastrophic." Toro,
with US$1.5 billion in revenues, also eschews the policies.
But vendors stick to their guns
on the merit of the strategy. Putting his money where his
mouth is, Smith notes that The Hartford owns a key-person
life insurance policy on its CFO, David Johnson, as part of
a wider corporate plan to provide such coverage for The Hartford's
executives.

Russ Banham is a contributing editor
at CFO, CFO Asia's sister magazine in the US.
|
What's Your Worth?
As with any insurance, figuring out appropriate
limits of protection for key-person policies is a delicate
proposition - too much insurance means you've overpaid; too
little means you're financially vulnerable. But insurers and
brokers have devised specific methodologies to gauge the right
amount of insurance coverage for the life of a CFO - or of
any executive.
The first is the valuation
approach, a calculation based on a CFO's average annual earnings
over his or her working life. "Say the CFO of a company with
a book value of US$900,000 earns US$100,000 a year and has
10 years left until retirement," says Patrick Smith, director
of advanced marketing at US-based insurer The Hartford. "This
CFO would earn US$1 million for the remainder of his or her
tenure. Once you deduct federal and state income taxes, the
CFO would net about US$64,000 annually, or US$640,000."
Here's where the calculations
get protracted. "Subtract US$640,000 from the $1 million,
leaving US$360,000, and multiply the difference by the present
value of US$1 per year for the ten-year period, discounting
the earnings over this time by a reasonable rate of interest,
say 5 percent," says Smith. "The CFO's value is US$392,904."
Another method is the contribution-to-earnings
approach, based upon two financial statement metrics - average
book value (or shareholders' equity) in a company measured
during a five-year period, or the average net income before
taxes for the same five-year period. This method determines
limits by estimating the CFO's contributions to net profits.
Using the same CFO example, here is a short primer, provided
by Smith:
Multiply the average book
value by a selected percentage that represents a fair rate
of return. Eight percent of a US$900,000 book value yields
US$72,000. Subtract this amount from the CFO's average five-year
income to obtain the portion of the business income representing
his or her contribution. Since the CFO's annual salary is
US$100,000, subtracting US$72,000 leaves US$28,000. Multiply
US$28,000 by the number of years it would take the business
to hire and train a replacement for the key person; for example,
it would take a replacement CFO five years to become as proficient.
Multiplying US$28,000 by five yields US$140,000 - the contribution
to earnings of the key person.
Yet another way to measure
a CFO's worth is the cost to replace his or her expertise,
a test that focuses squarely on the salaries of the CFO and
the potential replacement. To calculate this value, start
by subtracting the replacement CFO's salary from the former
CFO's, the difference "being the value of the key person's
special attributes," says Smith. "Subtracting US$70,000 from
US$100,000 leaves US$30,000. You then multiply US$30,000 by
the number of years it would take to hire and train a replacement
to become as proficient as the CFO. If it's five years, the
limits of protection should be US$150,000."
Since the three methods
produce different limits, what's the point? "You want to do
all three calculations and then average them out," says Smith.
"The methodologies give you a means to assess a person's value
in dollars and cents. The true value of an employee cannot
be tagged to any single arithmetical method."
RB |