• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
AIG: What Went WrongA look at how the icon of insurance got itself in such a mess -- and where all the probesare headedInvestors in embattled American International Group Inc. (AIG ) may have breathed asigh of relief at the Mar. 28 announcement that Chairman Maurice R. "Hank" Greenbergwould step aside two weeks after being pressured to give up the chief executive's role.But the complex $99 billion insurance and financial empire he leaves behind remainsmired in turmoil.What began as an investigation into two reinsurance transactions has mushroomed into agrowing scandal that has tarnished the reputation of one of America's premier corporations. On Mar. 30, AIG acknowledged that it had improperly accounted for thereinsurance transaction to bolster reserves, and detailed numerous other examples of  problematic accounting. It also announced the delay of its annual 10-K filing, and saidthe moves may have inflated its net worth by up to $1.7 billion. While AIG says it doesnot yet know if the review will force a restatement of prior results, its stock dropped 2.1%on the news; all together, AIG shares have dropped 22%, to $57 apiece, since thecompany was served with subpoenas by state and federal regulators six weeks ago. Theannouncement also caused Standard & Poor's (MHP ) to downgrade AIG's debt ratingfrom AAA to AA+. Here's a look at where the AIG mess stands and where the probes areheaded:What is it that has regulators up in arms?Investigators believe that AIG may have goosed its financial performance with dubioustransactions and improper accounting. Last fall, the insurer paid $126 million in fines tothe Securities & Exchange Commission and Justice Dept. for deals it structured for outside clients that allegedly violated insurance accounting rules, although AIG admittedno wrongdoing. The company also came under the glare of New York Attorney GeneralEliot Spitzer for its role in bid-rigging with broker Marsh & McLennan Cos. (MMC ),which led to the ouster of Hank's son Jeffrey as CEO there. AIG admitted no wrongdoing, but two of its executives plead guilty and left the company.This time, investigators initially focused on two transactions involving BerkshireHathaway's (BRK ) General Re Corp. unit. The deals essentially amounted to a $500million loan that was dressed up on the books as premium revenue. That allowed AIG to boost its sagging reserves at a time when investors thought they were too low. The problem: AIG never assumed any of the risk associated with insurance underwriting. OnMar. 30, the company acknowledged that "the transaction documentation was improper"and should never have been classified as insurance premiums.Since then, AIG 's problems have escalated. In its Mar. 30 release, the company itself identified several problem areas. They include transactions with supposedly independent
 
companies that were in fact controlled by AIG; bond transactions that may have allowedit to claim gains without actually selling the bonds; misclassified losses; and questionableestimates on deferred acquisition costs. Investigators and state regulators are looking intosome 60 transactions involving these and other possible accounting shenanigans."Greenberg strived for a steadily rising stock price," says a source in Spitzer's office. "Heused mechanisms now being revealed as deceptive and improper."What is the company doing at this point?It has installed longtime AIG exec Martin J. Sullivan, 50, as the new CEO, and namedindependent director Frank G. Zarb as chairman. In addition, it has launched its owninternal investigation, which has so far revealed several arrangements and deals that werenot properly accounted for. The company says that its review is not yet complete.Moreover, AIG has pledged to change how it accounts for deferred compensation that'snow paid to senior executives through Starr International Co. (SICO) -- one of severalcontroversial private entities that also are under investigation.What are these private entities and why are they under scrutiny?AIG has a highly unusual arrangement with three private entities, governed andcontrolled by Greenberg and other AIG executives. Each serves a different purpose andraises unique concerns. SICO is a holding company that owns about 12% of AIG stock --making it the company's largest shareholder -- and pays out some of that stock to an elitegroup of AIG managers as deferred compensation. Greenberg and other AIG directors siton the board, have large personal stakes, and decide who gets paid what. Regulators believe SICO hides executive pay and takes away powers that should rightly lie with thecompensation committee of the board.C.V. Starr & Co., on the other hand, is a group of agencies that develops business andissues specialized policies for AIG. It's owned and operated by AIG executives -- many of whom perform functions similar to what they do at AIG -- and controls 1.8% of AIGshares. Critics worry that the opaque nature of its transactions, for example, could allowC.V. Starr to become a convenient tool for managing earnings at AIG, which has been amodel of earnings consistency in a notoriously volatile industry. The arrangement alsocreates endless possibilities for conflicts of interest. Says North Carolina State Treasurer Richard H. Moore, who oversees a stake in AIG worth more than $300 million: "I don'tthink you can have a publicly traded company that allows board members to own a private entity that does business with the publicly traded company. [It's] impossible toknow if shareholders are being taken advantage of."Finally, there's the Starr Foundation, a charitable entity which Greenberg also chairs andwhich has a 2% share in AIG. It has come under fire for doling out money for political
 
causes and for giving $36.5 million to the American Museum of Natural History shortlyafter museum President Ellen V. Futter joined AIG 's board.What pressure does Sullivan now face?Insiders say the new chief, who began his AIG career at the age of 16, is aggressivelyleading the charge for changes necessary to create a more transparent organization. Butthe longtime AIG manager -- formerly a vice-chairman and co-chief operating officer -- isalso under scrutiny by regulators. A close confidante of Greenberg, who essentially hand- picked Sullivan as his replacement, he also serves as a director in C.V. Starr and SICO.Sullivan has not been accused of any wrongdoing, but regulators are looking for signsthat he knew of or oversaw the dubious transactions. Any hint of that and he, too, could be forced out. An AIG spokesman says Sullivan has no comment on his future or thecompany's direction while AIG cooperates with investigators.Is Greenberg out of the picture?The 79-year-old insurance legend is due to appear before Spitzer for a deposition on Apr.12 and may face continued scrutiny for his actions, sources say. But Greenberg stillretains significant control of AIG through his 1.7% personal shareholding and stakes inthe private entities that together own another 15.7%. Although the full extent of hisinfluence is unknown, Greenberg controls 8.3% of SICO's voting stock, is president andCEO of C.V. Starr, where he owns 16.4% of the common stock, and is chairman of theStarr Foundation. The structure of SICO, in particular, has also given Greenbergenormous control because anyone who left the company -- or was fired -- prior toretirement often forfeited lucrative payments. "It was like joining some elite brotherhoodwhere, if you toed the line, you were set for life," says one insider. Investigators anddirectors may be hard-pressed to force Greenberg out of a private company, and he couldcontinue to exert influence from the background.Where was the board through this mess?For years, AIG had a board that was notoriously clubby and close to Greenberg. SaysPatrick McGurn of Institutional Shareholder Services: "Was there a reform Hank ever putin place that he liked?" But, thanks to shareholder pressure and new governanceregulations, the board has become more independent in recent years. More important, perhaps, the investigations have made directors nervous about their own liability -- anddetermined to take proactive action to distance themselves from any scandal, insiders say.They even demanded Greenberg's resignation -- an unthinkable act just months ago.How do regulators or other critics propose to fix these conflicts of interest?
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...