BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY - FORM 10-K

Attached files

file	filename
EX-31.1 - EXHIBIT 31.1 - BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY	bhny-20171231xex311.htm
EX-32.2 - EXHIBIT 32.2 - BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY	bhny-20171231xex322.htm
EX-32.1 - EXHIBIT 32.1 - BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY	bhny-20171231xex321.htm
EX-31.2 - EXHIBIT 31.2 - BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY	bhny-20171231xex312.htm
EX-23.1 - EXHIBIT 23.1 - BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY	bhny-20171231xex231.htm

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, 2017



¨	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 000-55705

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



New York		13-3690700
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

285 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y.		10017
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

(980) 365-7100

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Common Stock, par value $10.00

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ¨ No þ

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ 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 for 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 ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes þ No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) 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. þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):



Large accelerated filer ¨		Accelerated filer ¨
Non-accelerated filer þ(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)		Smaller reporting company ¨
Emerging growth company ¨

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No þ

As of March 22, 2018, 200,000 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $10 par value per share, were outstanding, all of which were owned indirectly by Brighthouse Financial, Inc.

REDUCED DISCLOSURE FORMAT

The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form with the reduced disclosure format.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: NONE

Table of Contents



		Page
Part I
Item 1.	Business	4
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	19
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	43
Item 2.	Properties	43
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	43
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	43

Part II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	44
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	44
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	45
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	59
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	63
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	132
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	132
Item 9B.	Other Information	132

Part III
Item 10.	Directors, Executives Officers and Corporate Governance	133
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	133
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	133
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	133
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	133

Part IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	135
Exhibit Index		136
Signatures		137

Table of Contents

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, “BHNY,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (formerly, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company (“FMLI”), a New York domiciled life insurance company. BHNY is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates,“BLIC”), which is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “Brighthouse”). The term “Separation” refers to the separation of MetLife, Inc.’s former Brighthouse Financial segment from MetLife’s other businesses and the creation of a separate, publicly traded company, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., to hold the assets (including the equity interests of certain MetLife, Inc. subsidiaries) and liabilities associated with MetLife, Inc.’s former Brighthouse Financial segment from and after the Distribution; the term “Distribution” refers to the distribution on August 4, 2017 of 96,776,670 shares, or 80.8%, of the 119,773,106 shares of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. common stock outstanding immediately prior to the Distribution date by MetLife, Inc. to shareholders of MetLife, Inc. as of the record date for the Distribution.

Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This report and other written or oral statements that we make from time to time may contain information that includes or is based upon forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve substantial risks and uncertainties. We have tried, wherever possible, to identify such statements using words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “may,” “will,” “could,” “intend,” “goal,” “target,” “forecast,” “objective,” “continue,” “aim,” “plan,” “believe” and other words and terms of similar meaning, or are tied to future periods, in connection with a discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these include, without limitation, statements relating to future actions, prospective services or products, future performance or results of current and anticipated services or products, sales efforts, expenses, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, trends in operating and financial results, as well as statements regarding the expected benefits of the Separation and the recapitalization actions.

Any or all forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Many such factors will be important in determining the actual future results of BHNY. These statements are based on current expectations and the current economic environment and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. These statements are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors. Although it is not possible to identify all of these risks and factors, they include, among others:


•	differences between actual experience and actuarial assumptions and the effectiveness of our actuarial models;


•	higher risk management costs and exposure to increased counterparty risk due to guarantees within certain of our products;


•	the effectiveness of our exposure management strategy and the impact of such strategy on net income volatility and negative effects on our statutory capital;


•	a sustained period of low equity market prices and interest rates that are lower than those we assumed when we issued our variable annuity products;


•	the effect adverse capital and credit market conditions may have on our ability to meet liquidity needs and our access to capital;


•	the impact of changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies on our insurance business or other operations;


•	the effectiveness of our risk management policies and procedures;


•	the availability of reinsurance and the ability of our counterparties to our reinsurance or indemnification arrangements to perform their obligations thereunder;


•	heightened competition, including with respect to service, product features, scale, price, actual or perceived financial strength, claims-paying ratings, credit ratings, e-business capabilities and name recognition;


•	changes in accounting standards, practices and/or policies applicable to us;


•	our ability to market and distribute our products through distribution channels;

Table of Contents


•	the impact of the Separation on our business and profitability due to MetLife’s strong brand and reputation, the increased costs related to replacing arrangements with MetLife with those of third parties;


•	whether the operational, strategic and other benefits of the Separation can be achieved, and our ability to implement our business strategy;


•	whether all or any portion of the Separation tax consequences are not as expected, leading to material additional taxes or material adverse consequences to tax attributes that impact us;


•	the uncertainty of the outcome of any disputes with MetLife over tax-related matters and agreements including the potential of outcomes adverse to us that could cause us to owe MetLife material tax reimbursements or payments;


•	the impact on our business structure, profitability, cost of capital and flexibility due to restrictions we have agreed to that preserve the tax-free treatment of certain parts of the Separation;


•	the potential material negative tax impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) and other potential future tax legislation that could decrease the value of our tax attributes, lead to increased risk-based capital (“RBC”) requirements and cause other cash expenses, such as reserves, to increase materially and make some of our products less attractive to consumers;


•	whether the Distribution will qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes and potential indemnification to MetLife if the Distribution does not so qualify;


•	our ability to attract and retain key personnel; and


•	other factors described in this report and from time to time in documents that we file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

For the reasons described above, we caution you against relying on any forward-looking statements, which should also be read in conjunction with the other cautionary statements included and the risks, uncertainties and other factors identified elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, particularly in “Risk Factors” and “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk,” as well as in our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and other documents we file from time to time with the SEC. Further, any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as otherwise may be required by law. Please consult any further disclosures BHNY makes on related subjects in reports to the SEC.

Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts

See “Exhibit Index — Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts” for information regarding agreements included as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business

Index to Business



	Page
Business Overview	5
Segments and Corporate & Other	6
Sales Distribution	7
Policyholder Liabilities	7
Reinsurance Activity	8
Regulation	10
Company Ratings	19

Table of Contents

Business Overview

BHNY was incorporated on December 31, 1992 as a New York stock life insurance company and is licensed to do business only in the State of New York.

The Company offers a range of individual annuities and individual life insurance products in New York. The Company is organized into two reporting segments: Annuities and Life. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. See “— Segments and Corporate & Other” and Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for further information on the Company’s segments and Corporate & Other. Management continues to evaluate the Company’s segment performance and allocated resources and may adjust related measurements in the future to better reflect segment profitability.

Revenues derived from any customer did not exceed 10% of premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015. Substantially all of our premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues originated in NY. Financial information, including revenues, expenses, adjusted earnings and total assets by segment, as well as premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues by major product groups, is provided in Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements. Adjusted earnings is a performance measure that is not based on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for a definition of such measure.

Other Key Information

Significant Events

The Separation

On January 12, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced its plan to pursue the separation of a substantial portion of its former U.S. retail business. Additionally, on July 21, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced that the separated business would be rebranded as “Brighthouse Financial.” Effective March 6, 2017, and in connection with the Separation, the Company changed its name from First MetLife Investors Insurance Company to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY.

On October 5, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., which until the completion of the Separation on August 4, 2017 was a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc., filed a registration statement on Form 10 (as amended, the “Form 10”) with the SEC that was declared effective by the SEC on July 6, 2017. The Form 10 disclosed MetLife, Inc.’s plans to undertake several actions, including an internal reorganization involving its U.S. retail business (the “Restructuring”) and include, among others, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, BHNY, New England Life Insurance Company (“NELICO”), Brighthouse Investment Advisers, LLC (formerly known as MetLife Advisers, LLC) and certain affiliated reinsurance companies in the separated business, and distribute at least 80.1% of the shares of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s common stock on a pro rata basis to the holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock. In connection with the Restructuring, in April 2017 following receipt of applicable regulatory approvals, MetLife, Inc. contributed certain affiliated reinsurance companies and BHNY to Brighthouse Insurance. The affiliated reinsurance companies were then merged into Brighthouse Reinsurance Company of Delaware (“BRCD”), a licensed reinsurance subsidiary of Brighthouse Insurance.

On July 28, 2017 MetLife, Inc. contributed Brighthouse Holdings, LLC, an intermediate holding company, to Brighthouse Financial, Inc., resulting in BHNY becoming an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. On August 4, 2017, MetLife, Inc. completed the Separation through a distribution of 96,776,670 of the 119,773,106 shares of the common stock of Brighthouse Financial, Inc., representing 80.8% of MetLife, Inc.’s interest in Brighthouse, to holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock.

In July 2016, MetLife, Inc. completed the sale to Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“MassMutual”) of MetLife’s U.S. retail advisor force and certain assets associated with the MetLife Premier Client Group (“MPCG”), including all of the issued and outstanding shares of MetLife’s affiliated broker-dealer, MetLife Securities, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. MassMutual assumed all of the liabilities related to such assets that arise or occur (or have arisen or occurred) at or after the sale was closed. As part of the transactions, MetLife, Inc. and MassMutual entered into a product development agreement under which Brighthouse is the exclusive developer of certain annuity products to be issued by MassMutual. In connection with the Separation, Brighthouse entered into an agreement with MetLife, Inc., that among other things, provides for the sharing of certain liabilities that may arise with respect to this relationship.

Table of Contents

Reinsurance Transactions

In May 2017, the Company recaptured from Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”) risks related to multiple life products under yearly renewable term and coinsurance agreements, previously issued by the Company. This recapture resulted in an increase in cash and cash equivalents of $25.6 million and a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $22.4 million. The Company recognized a gain of $2.1 million, net of income tax, as a result of reinsurance termination. Concurrent with the recapture from MLIC, the Company executed a reinsurance agreement with Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, as reinsurer to cede on a yearly renewable term basis risks related to multiple life products. The transaction resulted in an increase in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $24.7 million, an increase in other liabilities of $22.7 million, a decrease in premiums of $22.7 million and a reduction in policyholder benefits and claims of $24.7 million. The Company recognized a gain of $1.3 million, net of income tax, as a result of the transaction.

Segments and Corporate & Other

The Company is organized into two segments: Annuities and Life. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other.

Annuities

The Annuities segment consists of a variety of variable, fixed, and index-linked and income annuities designed to address contract holders’ needs for protected wealth accumulation on a tax-deferred basis, wealth transfer and income security.

Life

The Life segment consists of term, universal and whole life insurance products in New York designed to address policyholders’ needs for financial security and protected wealth transfer, which may be provided on a tax-advantaged basis. In addition to contributing to our revenues and earnings, mortality protection-based products offered by our Life segment diversify the longevity and other risks in our Annuity segment.

Pricing and Underwriting

Pricing

Life insurance pricing at issuance is based on the expected payout of benefits calculated using our assumptions for mortality, morbidity, premium payment patterns, sales mix, expenses, persistency and investment returns, as well as certain macroeconomic factors, such as inflation. Our product pricing models consider additional factors, such as hedging costs, reinsurance programs, and capital requirements. We have historically leveraged the actuarial capabilities and long history of MetLife. Our product pricing reflects our pricing standards and guidelines. We continually review our pricing guidelines in light of applicable regulations and to ensure that our policies remain competitive and supportive of our marketing strategies and profitability goals.

We have a dedicated unit, the primary responsibility of which is the development of product pricing standards and independent pricing and underwriting oversight for our insurance business. Further important controls around management of underwriting and pricing processes include regular experience studies to monitor assumptions against expectations, formal new product approval processes, periodic updates to product profitability studies and the use of reinsurance to manage our exposures, as appropriate. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Reinsurance.”

Underwriting

Underwriting generally involves an evaluation of applications by a professional staff of underwriters and actuaries, who determine the type and the amount of insurance risk that we are willing to accept. We employ detailed underwriting policies, guidelines and procedures designed to assist the underwriters to properly assess and quantify such risks before issuing policies to qualified applicants or groups.

Insurance underwriting may consider not only an insured’s medical history, but also other factors such as the insured’s foreign travel, vocations, alcohol, drug and tobacco use, and the policyholder’s financial profile. We generally perform our own underwriting; however, certain policies are reviewed by intermediaries under guidelines established by us. Requests for coverage are reviewed on their merits and a policy is not issued unless the particular risk has been examined and approved in accordance with our underwriting guidelines.

Table of Contents

The underwriting conducted by our corporate underwriting office and intermediaries is subject to periodic quality assurance reviews to maintain high standards of underwriting and consistency. The office is also subject to periodic external audits by reinsurers with whom we do business.

We have established oversight of the underwriting process that facilitates quality sales and serves the needs of our customers, while supporting our financial strength and business objectives. Our goal is to achieve the underwriting, mortality and morbidity levels reflected in the assumptions in our product pricing. This is accomplished by determining and establishing underwriting policies, guidelines, philosophies and strategies that are competitive and suitable for the customer, the agent and us.

We continually review our underwriting guidelines (i) in light of applicable regulations and (ii) to ensure that our practices remain competitive and supportive of our marketing strategies, emerging industry trends and profitability goals.

Corporate & Other

Corporate & Other contains the excess capital not allocated to the segments and expenses associated with certain legal proceedings, as well as income tax audit issues. Corporate & Other also includes the elimination of intersegment amounts and a portion of MetLife’s former U.S. insurance business sold direct to consumers, which is no longer being offered for new sales.

Sales Distribution

We distribute our annuity and life insurance products in New York through a diverse network of independent distribution partners. Our partners include independent broker-dealers, general agencies and other marketing organizations. Our products are marketed to third-party distribution organizations through wholesalers of a BHNY-affiliated wholesaler broker-dealer for ultimate sale to individual and business clients of the third-party distribution organizations.

Policyholder Liabilities

We establish, and carry as liabilities, actuarially determined amounts that are calculated to meet policy obligations or to provide for future annuity payments. Amounts for actuarial liabilities are computed and reported on the financial statements in conformity with GAAP. For more details on policyholder liabilities, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Liability for Future Policy Benefits.”

Due to the nature of the underlying risks and the uncertainty associated with the determination of actuarial liabilities, we cannot precisely determine the amounts that will ultimately be paid with respect to these actuarial liabilities, and the ultimate amounts may vary from the estimated amounts, particularly when payment may not occur until well into the future.

We periodically review the assumptions supporting our estimates of actuarial liabilities for future policy benefits. We revise estimates, to the extent permitted or required under GAAP, if we determine that future expected experience differs from assumptions used in the development of actuarial liabilities. If the liabilities originally established for future benefit payments prove inadequate, we must increase them. We charge or credit changes in our liabilities to expenses in the period the liabilities are established or re-estimated. Any increase could adversely affect our earnings and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have experienced, and will likely in the future experience, catastrophe losses and possibly acts of terrorism, as well as turbulent financial markets that may have an adverse impact on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Due to their nature, we cannot predict the incidence, timing, severity or amount of losses from catastrophes and acts of terrorism, but we make broad use of catastrophic and noncatastrophic reinsurance to manage risk from these perils. We also use hedging, reinsurance and other risk management activities to mitigate financial market volatility. Pursuant to applicable insurance laws and regulations, the Company establishes statutory reserves, reported as liabilities, to meet its obligations on its policies. These statutory reserves are established in amounts sufficient to meet policy and contract obligations, when taken together with expected future premiums and interest at assumed rates. Statutory reserves and actuarial liabilities for future policy benefits generally differ based on accounting guidance.

New York Insurance Law and regulations require us to submit to the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”), with each annual report, an opinion and memorandum of a “qualified actuary” that the statutory reserves and related actuarial amounts recorded in support of specified policies and contracts, and the assets supporting such statutory reserves and related actuarial amounts, make adequate provision for our statutory liabilities with respect to these obligations. See “— Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Policy and Contract Reserve Adequacy Analysis.”

Table of Contents

Reinsurance Activity

We enter into reinsurance agreements primarily as a purchaser of reinsurance for our various insurance products. We participate in reinsurance activities in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to significant risks, and provide additional capacity for future growth. We enter into various agreements with reinsurers that cover individual risks, primarily on a coinsurance, yearly renewable term, or excess basis. These reinsurance agreements spread risk and minimize the effect of losses. The extent of each risk retained by us depends on our evaluation of the specific risk, subject, in certain circumstances, to maximum retention limits based on the characteristics of coverages. We also cede first dollar mortality risk under certain contracts. In addition to reinsuring mortality risk, we reinsure other risks, as well as specific coverages. We obtain reinsurance for capital requirement purposes and also when the economic impact of the reinsurance agreement makes it appropriate to do so.

Under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, the reinsurer agrees to reimburse us for the ceded amount in the event a claim is paid. Cessions under reinsurance agreements do not discharge our obligations as the primary insurer. In the event that reinsurers do not meet their obligations under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, reinsurance recoverable balances could become uncollectible.

We reinsure our business through a diversified group of well-capitalized reinsurers. We analyze recent trends in arbitration and litigation outcomes in disputes, if any, with our reinsurers. We monitor ratings and evaluate the financial strength of our reinsurers by analyzing their financial statements. In addition, the reinsurance recoverable balance due from each reinsurer is evaluated as part of the overall monitoring process. Recoverability of reinsurance recoverable balances is evaluated based on these analyses. We generally secure large reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts, funds withheld accounts and irrevocable letters of credit.

Annuities

For annuities, we currently reinsure to our parent Brighthouse Life Insurance Company and formerly reinsured to MLIC, a former affiliate, 100% of certain variable annuity risks or 100% of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with certain variable annuities. Under the benefit guarantee reinsurance agreements, we pay a reinsurance premium generally based on fees associated with the guarantees collected from policyholders, and receive reimbursement for benefits paid or accrued in excess of account values, subject to certain limitations. In connection with the Separation, MLIC novated and assigned its rights and obligations under its agreement with Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, effective January 1, 2017.

We also previously reinsured 90% of our fixed annuities to MLIC. We recaptured this reinsurance agreement effective November 1, 2016, in connection with the Restructuring.

Life

For individual Life insurance products, we have historically reinsured the mortality risk on our life insurance policies primarily on an excess of retention basis or on a quota share basis. When we cede risks to a reinsurer on an excess of retention basis we retain the liability up to a contractually specified amount and the reinsurer is responsible for indemnifying us for amounts in excess of the liability we retain, subject sometimes to a cap. When we cede risks on a quota share basis we share a portion of the risk within a contractually specified layer of reinsurance coverage. We reinsure on a facultative basis for risks with specified characteristics. On a case by case basis, we may retain up to $100,000 per life and reinsure 100% of amounts in excess of $100,000. We evaluate our reinsurance programs routinely and may increase or decrease our retention at any time.

We previously reinsured portions of certain level premium term life to a former affiliate, MetLife Reinsurance Company of Vermont. We recaptured this reinsurance agreement effective December 27, 2016, in connection with the Restructuring.

Additionally, in connection with the Restructuring, in May 2017, we recaptured all of the reinsurance covering our term life insurance previously reinsured to MLIC. Concurrent with the recapture we executed a reinsurance agreement with Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, as reinsurer to cede on a yearly renewable term basis risks related to multiple life products. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Affiliated Reinsurance Transactions.”

Table of Contents

Catastrophe Coverage

We have exposure to catastrophes which could contribute to significant fluctuations in our results of operations. We use excess reinsurance agreements, under which the direct writing company reinsures risk in excess of a specific dollar value for each policy within a class of policies, to provide greater diversification of risk and minimize exposure to larger risks. Such excess reinsurance agreements include retention reinsurance agreements and quota share reinsurance agreements. Retention reinsurance agreements provide for a portion of a risk to remain with the direct writing company, and quota share reinsurance agreements provide for the direct writing company to transfer a fixed percentage of all risks of a class of policies. Our life insurance products subject us to catastrophe risk which we do not reinsure other than through our ongoing mortality reinsurance program which transfers risk at the individual policy level.

Table of Contents

Regulation

Index to Regulation



	Page
Overview	11
Insurance Regulation	11
Department of Labor and ERISA Considerations	16
Federal Tax Reform	18
Consumer Protection Laws	18
Regulation of Over-the-Counter Derivatives	18
Securities and Investment Advisor Regulation	19
Unclaimed Property	19

Table of Contents

Overview

We are domiciled in New York and regulated by the NYDFS. We are regulated primarily at the state level, with some products and services also subject to federal regulation. Furthermore, some of our operations, products and services are subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), consumer protection laws, securities, broker-dealer and investment advisor regulations, and environmental and unclaimed property laws and regulations. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.”

Insurance Regulation

State insurance regulation generally aims at supervising and regulating insurers, with the goal of protecting policyholders and ensuring that insurance companies remain solvent. Insurance regulators have increasingly sought information about the potential impact of activities in holding company systems as a whole and have adopted laws and regulations enhancing “group-wide” supervision. See “— Holding Company Regulation” for information regarding an enterprise risk report.

We are licensed only in New York and regulated by the NYDFS. We are licensed to issue insurance products only in New York. New York law grants the NYDFS broad administrative powers with respect to, among other things:


•	licensing companies and agents to transact business;


•	calculating the value of assets to determine compliance with statutory requirements;


•	mandating certain insurance benefits;


•	regulating certain premium rates;


•	reviewing and approving certain policy forms and rates;


•	regulating unfair trade and claims practices, including through the imposition of restrictions on marketing and sales practices, distribution arrangements and payment of inducements, and identifying and paying to the state benefits and other property that are not claimed by the owners;


•	regulating advertising and marketing of insurance products;


•	protecting privacy;


•	establishing statutory capital (including RBC) and reserve requirements and solvency standards;


•	specifying the conditions under which a ceding company can take credit for reinsurance in its statutory financial statements (i.e., reduce its reserves by the amount of reserves ceded to a reinsurer);


•	fixing maximum interest rates on insurance policy loans and minimum rates for guaranteed crediting rates on life insurance policies and annuity contracts;


•	adopting and enforcing suitability standards with respect to the sale of annuities and other insurance products;


•	approving changes in control of New York-domiciled insurance companies;


•	restricting the payment of dividends and other transactions between affiliates; and


•	regulating the types, amounts and valuation of investments.

We are required to file reports, including detailed annual financial statements, with the NYDFS, and our operations and accounts are subject to periodic examination by the NYDFS. We must also file and obtain regulatory approval for rules, rates and forms relating to the insurance written by us.

State and federal insurance and securities regulatory authorities and other state law enforcement agencies and attorneys general from time to time may make inquiries regarding our compliance with insurance, securities and other laws and regulations regarding the conduct of our insurance and securities businesses. We cooperate with such inquiries and take corrective action when warranted. See Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Table of Contents

Holding Company Regulation

Insurance holding company laws and regulations vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but generally require a controlled insurance company (i.e., insurers that are subsidiaries of insurance holding companies) to register with state regulatory authorities and to file with those authorities certain reports, including information concerning its capital structure, ownership, financial condition, certain intercompany transactions and general business operations. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) adopted revisions to the NAIC Insurance Holding Company System Model Act (“Model Holding Company Act”) and the Insurance Holding Company System Model Regulation (“Model Holding Company Regulation”) in December 2010 and December 2014. New York has adopted a modified version, although its supporting regulation is substantially similar to the model regulation.

The New York Insurance Law generally provides that no person, corporation or other entity may acquire control of a New York-domiciled insurance company, or a controlling interest in any parent company of any such insurance company, without the prior approval of the NYDFS. Under the laws of New York, any person acquiring, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting securities of an insurance company is presumed to have acquired “control” of the company. This statutory presumption of control may be rebutted by a showing that control does not exist in fact. The NYDFS may find, however, that “control” exists in circumstances in which a person owns or controls less than 10% of voting securities. The insurance company laws and regulations include a requirement that the ultimate controlling person of a U.S. insurer file an annual enterprise risk report with the lead state of the insurance holding company system identifying risks likely to have a material adverse effect upon the financial condition or liquidity of the insurer or its insurance holding company system as a whole. New York has enacted this enterprise risk reporting requirement.

The laws and regulations regarding acquisition of control transactions may discourage potential acquisition proposals and may delay, deter or prevent a change of control involving us, including through unsolicited transactions. The New York Insurance Law also places restrictions and limitations on the amount of dividends or other distributions payable by BHNY to our parent company, as well as on certain transactions between BHNY and its affiliates. Dividends in excess of prescribed limits and transactions above a specified size between an insurer and its affiliates require the approval of the NYDFS. The insurance statutes of New York were amended, effective for dividends paid in 2016 and thereafter, to permit payment of ordinary dividends without regulatory approval based on one of two standards. One standard allows us to pay an ordinary dividend out of earned surplus (generally defined as positive “unassigned funds (surplus)” excluding 85% of the change in net unrealized capital gains or losses (less capital gains tax) for the immediately preceding calendar year), in an amount up to the greater of: (i) 10% of our surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) our statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains), not to exceed 30% of our surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year. In addition, under this standard, we may not, without prior insurance regulatory approval, pay any dividends in any calendar year immediately following a calendar year for which our net gain from operations, excluding realized capital gains, was negative. The second standard allows us to pay an ordinary dividend out of other than earned surplus if we do not have sufficient positive earned surplus to pay an ordinary dividend, in an amount up to the lesser of: (i) 10% of our surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) our statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains). Under the New York Insurance Law, the New York Superintendent of Financial Services of the NYDFS has broad discretion in determining whether the financial condition of a stock life insurance company would support the payment of an extraordinary dividend (i.e., a dividend that exceeds the standards described above) to its stockholders. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Own Risk and Solvency Assessment Model Act

In September 2012, the NAIC adopted the Risk Management and Own Risk and Solvency Assessment Model Act (“ORSA”), which has been enacted by New York. ORSA requires that insurers maintain a risk management framework and conduct an internal own risk and solvency assessment of the insurer’s material risks in normal and stressed environments. The assessment must be documented in a confidential annual summary report, a copy of which must be made available to regulators as required or upon request.

Federal Initiatives

Although the insurance business in the United States is primarily regulated by the states, federal initiatives often have an impact on our business in a variety of ways. From time to time, federal measures are proposed which may significantly and adversely affect the insurance business. These areas include financial services regulation, securities regulation, derivatives regulation, pension regulation, privacy, tort reform legislation and taxation. In addition, various forms of direct and indirect federal regulation of insurance have been proposed from time to time, including proposals for the establishment of an optional federal charter for insurance companies. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.”

Table of Contents

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) effected the most far-reaching overhaul of financial regulation in the U.S. in decades. The full impact of Dodd-Frank on us will depend on the numerous rulemaking initiatives required or permitted by Dodd-Frank and the various studies mandated by Dodd-Frank, a number of which remain to be completed.

Dodd-Frank established the Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) within the Department of the Treasury, which has the authority to participate in the negotiations of international insurance agreements with foreign regulators for the United States, as well as to collect information about the insurance industry, negotiate covered agreements with one or more foreign governments and recommend prudential standards. While not having a general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance, the director of this office performs various functions with respect to insurance, including serving as a non-voting member of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) and making recommendations to the FSOC regarding insurers to be designated for more stringent regulation. On December 12, 2013, the FIO issued a report, mandated by Dodd-Frank, which, among other things, urged the states to modernize and promote greater uniformity in insurance regulation. However, the report also discussed potential federal solutions if states fail to modernize and improve regulation and some of the report’s recommendations, for instance, favored a greater federal role in monitoring financial stability and identifying issues or gaps in the regulation of large national and internationally active insurers.

Under the provisions of Dodd-Frank relating to the resolution or liquidation of certain types of financial institutions, if Brighthouse or another financial institution were to become insolvent or were in danger of defaulting on its obligations, it could be compelled to undergo liquidation with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as receiver. For this new regime to be applicable, a number of determinations would have to be made, including that a default by the affected company would have serious adverse effects on financial stability in the U.S. Under this new regime an insurance company such as Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, BHNY or NELICO would be resolved in accordance with state insurance law. If the FDIC were to be appointed as the receiver for another type of company (including an insurance holding company such as Brighthouse Financial, Inc.), the liquidation of that company would occur under the provisions of the new liquidation authority, and not under the Bankruptcy Code, which ordinarily governs liquidations. The FDIC’s purpose under the liquidation regime is to mitigate the systemic risks the institution’s failure poses, which is different from that of a bankruptcy trustee under the Bankruptcy Code. In an FDIC-managed liquidation, the holders of such company’s debt could in certain respects be treated differently than under the Bankruptcy Code. As required by Dodd-Frank, the FDIC has established rules relating to the priority of creditors’ claims and the potentially dissimilar treatment of similarly situated creditors. These provisions could apply to some financial institutions whose outstanding debt securities we hold in our investment portfolios.

The Trump administration has released a memorandum that generally delayed all pending regulations from publication in the Federal Register pending their review and approval by a department or agency head appointed or designated by President Trump. President Trump has also issued an executive order that calls for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank and requires the Secretary of the Treasury to consult with the heads of the member agencies of FSOC to identify any laws, regulations or requirements that inhibit federal regulation of the financial system in a manner consistent with the core principles identified in the executive order. On June 8, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Financial CHOICE Act of 2017, which proposes to amend or repeal various sections of Dodd-Frank. This proposed legislation will now be considered by the U.S. Senate. We cannot predict what other proposals may be made or what legislation may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

On September 22, 2017, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative entered into a bilateral covered agreement on insurance and reinsurance with the European Union (the “Covered Agreement”), which addresses, among other things, reinsurance collateral requirements and insurance group supervision. In connection with the announcement of its signature, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative released a “Statement of the United States on the Covered Agreement with the European Union” (the “Policy Statement”). To comply with the terms of the Covered Agreement, the Policy Statement encourages each U.S. state to adopt applicable credit for reinsurance laws and regulations and to phase out the amount of collateral required for full credit for reinsurance cessions to European Union (“EU”) reinsurers. It also states that the U.S. expects that the group capital calculation under development by the NAIC will satisfy the Covered Agreement’s group capital assessment requirement. The Covered Agreement is to be fully applicable to the U.S. and EU 60 months after signature. However, some parts of the agreement are subject to further procedural requirements, and so full implementation of the Covered Agreement may occur, if at all, only after a significant period of time.

Table of Contents

Guaranty Associations and Similar Arrangements

New York requires us to participate in The Life Insurance Guaranty Corporation, which is a guaranty association organized to pay certain contractual benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed insurers, or those that may become impaired, insolvent or fail, for example, following the occurrence of one or more catastrophic events. This association levies assessments, up to prescribed limits, on all member insurers in the state on the basis of the proportionate share of the premiums written by member insurers in the lines of business in which the impaired, insolvent or failed insurer is engaged. New York permits member insurers to recover assessments paid through full or partial premium tax offsets.

In December of 2017, the NAIC approved revisions to its Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association Model Act governing assessments for long-term care insurance. The revisions include a 50/50 split between life and health carriers for future long term care insolvencies, the inclusion of HMOs in the assessment base, and no change to the premium tax offset. Several states are now considering legislation to codify these changes into law, and more states are expected to propose legislation in their 2018 legislative sessions.

In the past three years, the aggregate assessments levied against us have not been material. We have established liabilities for guaranty fund assessments that we consider adequate. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — State insurance guaranty associations” and Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on the guaranty association assessments.

Insurance Regulatory Examinations and Other Activities

As part of its regulatory oversight process, the NYDFS conducts periodic detailed examinations of our books, records, accounts, and business practices. BHNY did not receive any material adverse findings resulting from an NYDFS examination.

Regulatory authorities in a small number of states, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) and, occasionally, the SEC, have had investigations or inquiries relating to sales of individual life insurance policies, annuities or other products by us or our affiliates. These investigations have focused on the conduct of particular financial services representatives, the sale of unregistered or unsuitable products, the misuse of client assets, and sales and replacements of annuities and certain riders on such annuities. Over the past several years, these and a number of investigations by other regulatory authorities were resolved for monetary payments and certain other relief, including restitution payments. We may continue to receive, and may resolve, further investigations and actions on these matters in a similar manner.

In addition, claims payment practices by insurance companies have received increased scrutiny from regulators. See Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for further information regarding unclaimed property inquiries and related litigation and sales practices claims.

Policy and Contract Reserve Adequacy Analysis

Annually, we are required to conduct an analysis of the adequacy of all statutory reserves. A qualified actuary must submit an opinion which states that the statutory reserves make adequate provision, according to accepted actuarial standards of practice, for the anticipated cash flows required by the contractual obligations and related expenses. The adequacy of the statutory reserves is considered in light of the assets held by us with respect to such reserves and related actuarial items including, but not limited to, the investment earnings on such assets, and the consideration anticipated to be received and retained under the related policies and contracts. We may increase reserves in order to submit an opinion without qualification. Since the inception of this requirement, we have provided the NYDFS such opinions without qualifications.

NAIC

The NAIC is an organization, whose mission is to assist state insurance regulatory authorities in serving the public interest and achieving the insurance regulatory goals of its members, the state insurance regulatory officials. Through the NAIC, state insurance regulators establish standards and best practices, conduct peer reviews, and coordinate their regulatory oversight. The NAIC provides standardized insurance industry accounting and reporting guidance through its Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual (the “Manual”), which states have largely adopted by regulation. However, statutory accounting principles continue to be established by individual state laws, regulations and permitted practices, which may differ from the Manual. Changes to the Manual or modifications by the NYDFS may impact our statutory capital and surplus.

Table of Contents

In 2015, the NAIC commissioned an initiative to identify changes to the statutory framework for variable annuities that can remove or mitigate the motivation for insurers to engage in captive reinsurance transactions. In September 2015, a third-party consultant engaged by the NAIC provided the NAIC with a preliminary report covering several sets of recommendations regarding Actuarial Guideline 43 (“AG 43”) and RBC C3 Phase II reserve requirements. These recommendations generally focus on (i) mitigating the asset-liability accounting mismatch between hedge instruments and statutory instruments and statutory liabilities, (ii) removing the non-economic volatility in statutory capital charges and the resulting solvency ratios and (iii) facilitating greater harmonization across insurers and products for greater comparability. An updated variable annuity reserve and capital framework proposal was presented at the August 2016 NAIC meeting, followed by a 90-day comment period on the proposal. This updated proposal included the initial recommendations from 2015, but also some new aspects. The standard scenario floor for reserves may incorporate multiple paths. The stochastic calculations may include alternative calibration criteria for equities and other market risk factors, and the RBC C3 Phase II component may reflect a new level of capitalization. The NAIC is continuing its consideration of these recommendations. These recommendations, if adopted, would likely apply to all existing business and may materially change the sensitivity of reserve and capital requirements to capital markets including interest rate, equity markets and volatility, as well as prescribed assumptions for policyholder behavior. It is not possible at this time to predict whether the amount of reserves or capital required to support our variable annuity contracts would increase or decrease if the NAIC adopts any new model laws, regulations and/or other standards applicable to variable annuity business after considering such recommendations, nor is it possible to predict the materiality of any such increase or decrease. It is also not possible to predict the extent to which any such model laws, regulations and/or other standards would affect the effectiveness and design of our risk mitigation and hedging programs. Furthermore, no assurances can be given to whether any such model laws, regulations and/or other standards will be adopted or to the timing of any such adoption.

The NAIC has adopted a new approach for the calculation of life insurance reserves, known as principle-based reserving (“PBR”). PBR became operative on January 1, 2017 in those states where it has been adopted, to be followed by a three-year phase-in period for business issued on or after this date The NYDFS has publicly announced that it intends to implement this approach, subject to a working group of the NYDFS establishing the necessary reserves safeguards and the adoption of enabling legislation by the New York legislature.

The NAIC as well as certain state regulators are currently considering implementing regulations that would apply an impartial conduct standard similar to the Fiduciary Rule to recommendations made in connection with certain annuities and, in the case of New York, life insurance policies. In particular, on December 27, 2017, the NYDFS proposed regulations that would adopt a “best interest” standard for the sale of life insurance and annuity products in New York. The likelihood of enactment of these regulations is uncertain at this time, but if implemented, these regulations could have significant adverse effects on our business and results of operations.

The NAIC is considering revisions to RBC factors for bonds, real estate, common stock and collateral pledged to support Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances, as well as developing RBC charges for operational and longevity risk. We cannot predict the impact of any potential proposals that may result from these studies.

We cannot predict the capital and reserve impacts or compliance costs, if any, that may result from the above initiatives.

Surplus and Capital; Risk-Based Capital

We are required to maintain our capital and surplus at or above minimum levels. Regulators have discretionary authority, in connection with the continued licensing of an insurer, to limit or prohibit the insurer’s sales to policyholders if, in their judgment, the regulators determine that such insurer has not maintained the minimum surplus or capital or that the further transaction of business will be hazardous to policyholders. We are subject to RBC requirements that were developed by the NAIC and adopted by New York. RBC is based on a formula calculated by applying factors to various asset, premium, claim, expense and statutory reserve items. The formula takes into account the risk characteristics of the insurer and is calculated on an annual basis. The major categories of risk involved are asset risk, insurance risk, interest rate risk, market risk and business risk. The formula is used as an early warning regulatory tool to identify possible inadequately capitalized insurers for purposes of initiating regulatory action, and not as a means to rank insurers generally. The New York Insurance Law provides the NYDFS the authority to require various actions by, or take various actions against, insurers whose total adjusted capital does not meet or exceed certain RBC levels. As of the date of the most recent annual statutory financial statements filed with the NYDFS, our total adjusted capital was in excess of the required RBC levels. See “Statutory Equity and Income” in Note 9 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

The NYDFS issues an annual “Special Considerations” circular letter (“SCL”) to New York licensed insurers requiring tests to be performed as part of insurers’ year-end asset adequacy testing. A SCL could require us, among other things, to use certain asset adequacy testing assumptions resulting in increases or releases of certain asset adequacy reserves for a particular year, which could have a material impact on our statutory capital and surplus. There was no impact to our statutory capital and surplus resulting from SCLs for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Table of Contents

Regulation of Investments

The New York Insurance Law requires diversification of investment portfolios and limits the amount of investments that we may have in certain asset categories, such as below investment grade fixed income securities, real estate equity, other equity investments, and derivatives. Failure to comply with these requirements would cause investments exceeding regulatory limitations to be treated as non-admitted assets for purposes of measuring surplus and, in some instances, would require divestiture of such non-qualifying investments. We believe that our investments complied, in all material respects, with such requirements at December 31, 2017.

Cybersecurity Regulation

On February 16, 2017, the NYDFS announced the adoption of a new cybersecurity regulation for financial services institutions, including banking and insurance entities, under its jurisdiction. The new regulation became effective on March 1, 2017 and will be implemented in stages commencing 180 days later. Among other things, this new regulation requires these entities to establish and maintain a cybersecurity program designed to protect the consumers’ private data. The new regulation specifically provides for: (i) implementation and maintenance of, and a governance framework for overseeing, the cybersecurity program and a cybersecurity policy based on a risk assessment to be periodically conducted; (ii) development of access controls and other technology standards for data protection, and the monitoring and testing of the cybersecurity program, in accordance with the entity’s risk assessment; (iii) implementation of policies and procedures designed to ensure the security of private data accessible to or held by third-party service providers; (iv) minimum standards for cyber breach responses, including an incident response plan, preservation of data to respond to such breaches, and notice to NYDFS of material events; and (v) annual certifications of regulatory compliance to the NYDFS. In addition to New York’s cybersecurity regulation, the NAIC adopted the Insurance Data Security Model Law in October 2017. Under the model law, companies that are compliant with the NYDFS cybersecurity regulation are deemed also to be in compliance with the model law. The purpose of the model law is to establish standards for data security and for the investigation and notification of insurance commissioners of cybersecurity events involving unauthorized access to, or the misuse of, certain nonpublic information.

NYDFS Insurance Regulation 210

On March 19, 2018, NYDFS Insurance Regulation 210: Life Insurance and Annuity Non-Guaranteed Elements, will take effect. The regulation establishes standards for the determination and readjustment of non-guaranteed elements (“NGEs”) that may vary at the insurer’s discretion for life insurance policies and annuity contracts delivered or issued in New York. In addition, the regulation establishes guidelines for related disclosure to NYDFS and policy owners. The regulation applies to all individual life insurance policies, individual annuity contracts and certain group life insurance and group annuity certificates. NGEs include such policy elements as expense rates and interest crediting rates.

Department of Labor and ERISA Considerations

We manufacture annuities for third parties to sell to tax-qualified pension plans, retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”), as well as individual retirement annuities sold to individuals that are subject to ERISA or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Also, a portion of our in-force life insurance products are held by tax-qualified pension and retirement plans. While we currently believe manufacturers do not have as much exposure to ERISA and the Code as distributors, certain activities are subject to the restrictions imposed by ERISA and the Code, including the requirement under ERISA that fiduciaries of a Plan subject to Title I of ERISA (an “ERISA Plan”) must perform their duties solely in the interests of the ERISA Plan participants and beneficiaries, and those fiduciaries may not cause a covered plan to engage in certain prohibited transactions. The applicable provisions of ERISA and the Code are subject to enforcement by the Department of Labor (the “DOL”), the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”).

In addition, the prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Code generally restrict the provision of investment advice to ERISA qualified plans, plan participants and IRAs if the investment recommendation results in fees paid to an individual advisor, the firm that employs the advisor or their affiliates that vary according to the investment recommendation chosen.

The DOL issued new regulations on April 6, 2016 that became applicable on June 9, 2017 (the “Fiduciary Rule”). As initially adopted, these rules substantially expand the definition of “investment advice,” thereby broadening the circumstances under which distributors and manufacturers can be considered fiduciaries under ERISA or the Code and subject to an impartial or “best interests” standard in providing such advice. Pursuant to the final rule, certain communications with plans, plan participants and IRA holders, including the marketing of products, and marketing of investment management or advisory services, could be deemed fiduciary investment advice, thus, causing increased exposure to fiduciary liability if the distributor does not recommend what is in the client’s best interests.

In connection with the promulgation of the Fiduciary Rule, the DOL also issued amendments to certain of its prohibited transaction exemptions, and issued the Best Interest Contract Exemption (“BIC”), a new prohibited transaction exemption that imposes more significant disclosure and contract requirements to certain transactions involving ERISA Plans, plan participants and IRAs. The new and amended exemptions increase fiduciary requirements and fiduciary liability exposure for transactions

Table of Contents

involving ERISA Plans, plan participants and IRAs. The application of the BIC contract and point of sale disclosures required under BIC and the changes made to prohibited transaction exemption 84-24 were delayed until July 1, 2019, except for the impartial conduct standards (i.e., compliance with the “best interest” standard, reasonable compensation, and no misleading statements), which are applicable as of June 9, 2017. Contracts entered into prior to June 9, 2017 are generally “grandfathered” and, as such, are not subject to the requirements of the rule and related exemptions. To retain “grandfathered” status for annuity products, no investment recommendations may be made after the applicability date of the final regulation with respect to such annuity products that were sold to ERISA Plans or IRAs.

MetLife sold MPCG, its former Retail segment’s proprietary distribution channel, in July 2016 to MassMutual to complete a transition to an independent third-party distribution model. We will not be engaging in direct distribution of retail products, including IRA products and retail annuities sold into ERISA Plans and IRAs, and therefore we anticipate that we will have limited exposure to the new DOL regulations, as the application of the vast majority of the provisions of the new DOL regulations are targeted at such retail products. Specifically, the most onerous of the requirements under the DOL Fiduciary Rule, as currently adopted, relate to BIC. The DOL guidance makes clear that distributors, not manufacturers, are primarily responsible for BIC compliance. However, we will be asked by our distributors, to assist them with preparing the voluminous disclosures required under BIC. Furthermore, if we want to retain the “grandfathered” status described above of current contracts, we will be limited in the interactions we can have directly with customers and the information that can be provided. We also anticipate that we will need to undertake certain additional tasks in order to comply with certain of the exemptions provided in the DOL regulations, including additional compliance reviews of material shared with distributors, wholesaler and call center training and product reporting and analysis. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.”

On February 3, 2017, President Trump, in a memorandum to the Secretary of Labor, requested that the DOL prepare an updated economic and legal analysis concerning the likely impact of the new rules, and possible revisions to the rules. In response to President Trump’s request, on June 29, 2017, the DOL issued a request for information related to the Fiduciary Rule, and also the DOL’s new and amended exemptions that were published in conjunction with the final rule. The request for information sought public input that could lead to new exemptions or changes and revisions to the final rule. On November 29, 2017, the DOL finalized an 18 month delay, from January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019, of the applicability of significant portions of the previously proposed exemptions (including BIC and prohibited transaction exemption 84-24), to afford sufficient time to review further the previously adopted rules and such exemptions. The DOL also updated its enforcement policy to indicate that the DOL and IRS will not pursue claims, until July 1, 2019, against fiduciaries who are working diligently and in good faith to comply with the final Fiduciary Rule or treat those fiduciaries as being in violation of the final rule.

On March 15, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision vacating the Fiduciary Rule, overturning a lower court ruling that rejected a challenge to the rule. The Court of Appeals decision, if allowed to stand, would nullify the Fiduciary Rule in its entirety. As of the filing date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, another case challenging the Fiduciary Rule was pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

While we continue to analyze the impact of the final regulations on our business and work diligently to comply with the final rule, subject to its continued applicability, we anticipate that we will need to undertake certain additional tasks in order to comply with certain of the exemptions provided in the DOL regulations, including additional compliance reviews of material shared with distributors, wholesaler and call center training and product reporting and analysis.

The change of administration, the DOL’s June 29, 2017 request for information related to the Fiduciary Rule and related exemptions, the November 29, 2017 extension of the applicability of many of the conditions of the proposed and revised exemptions, and the March 15, 2018 Court of Appeals decision leave uncertainty over whether the regulations will be substantially modified, repealed or vacated. This uncertainty could create confusion among our distribution partners, which could negatively impact product sales. We cannot predict what other proposals may be made, what legislation or regulations may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation or regulations may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See also “— NAIC” for a discussion of efforts by the NAIC and state regulators to implement regulations that would apply an impartial conduct standard similar to the Fiduciary Rule.

On July 11, 2016, the DOL, the IRS and the PBGC proposed revisions to the Form 5500, the form used for ERISA annual reporting. The DOL included the proposed revisions in its Fall 2017 regulatory agenda released December 14, 2017. The revisions affect employee pension and welfare benefit plans, including our ERISA Plans and require audits of information, self-directed brokerage account disclosure requirements and additional extensive disclosure. We cannot predict the effect these proposals, if enacted, will have on our business, or what other proposals may be made, what legislation, regulations or exemptions may be introduced or enacted or the impact of any such legislation, regulations or exemptions on our results of operations and financial condition.

Table of Contents

In addition, the DOL has issued a number of regulations that increase the level of disclosure that must be provided to plan sponsors and participants. The participant disclosure regulations and the regulations which require service providers to disclose fee and other information to plan sponsors took effect in 2012. In John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Harris Trust and Savings Bank (1993), the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain assets in excess of amounts necessary to satisfy guaranteed obligations under a participating group annuity general account contract are “plan assets.” Therefore, these assets are subject to certain fiduciary obligations under ERISA, which requires fiduciaries to perform their duties solely in the interest of ERISA Plan participants and beneficiaries. On January 5, 2000, the Secretary of Labor issued final regulations indicating, in cases where an insurer has issued a policy backed by the insurer’s general account to or for an employee benefit plan, the extent to which assets of the insurer constitute plan assets for purposes of ERISA and the Code. The regulations apply only with respect to a policy issued by an insurer on or before December 31, 1998 (“Transition Policy”). No person will generally be liable under ERISA or the Code for conduct occurring prior to July 5, 2001, where the basis of a claim is that insurance company general account assets constitute plan assets. An insurer issuing a new policy that is backed by its general account and is issued to or for an employee benefit plan after December 31, 1998 will generally be subject to fiduciary obligations under ERISA, unless the policy is a guaranteed benefit policy.

The regulations indicate the requirements that must be met so that assets supporting a Transition Policy will not be considered plan assets for purposes of ERISA and the Code. These requirements include detailed disclosures to be made to the employee benefits plan and the requirement that the insurer must permit the policyholder to terminate the policy on 90 days’ notice and receive without penalty, at the policyholder’s option, either (i) the unallocated accumulated fund balance (which may be subject to market value adjustment), or (ii) a book value payment of such amount in annual installments with interest. We have taken and continue to take steps designed to ensure compliance with these regulations.

Federal Tax Reform

On December 22, 2017, President Trump signed the Tax Act into law, resulting in sweeping changes to the tax code. The Tax Act reduced the corporate tax rate to 21%, reduced interest expense deductibility, increased capitalization amounts for deferred acquisition costs, eliminated the corporate alternative minimum tax, provided for determining reserve deductions at 92.81% of statutory reserves, and reduced the dividend received deduction. Most of the changes in the Tax Act are effective as of January 1, 2018.

The reduction in the corporate rate will require a one-time remeasurement of certain deferred tax items. For the estimated impact of the Tax Act on our financial statements, including the estimated impact resulting from the remeasurement of our deferred tax assets and liabilities, see Note 11 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information. Our actual results may materially differ from our current estimate due to, among other things, further guidance that may be issued by U.S. tax authorities or regulatory bodies and/or changes in interpretations and assumptions we have preliminarily made. We will continue to analyze the Tax Act to finalize its financial statement impact.

Consumer Protection Laws

Numerous federal and state laws affect our earnings and activities, including federal and state consumer protection laws. As part of Dodd-Frank, Congress established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) to supervise and regulate institutions that provide certain financial products and services to consumers. Although the consumer financial services subject to the CFPB’s jurisdiction generally exclude insurance business of the kind in which we engage, the CFPB does have authority to regulate non-insurance consumer services we may provide.

Regulation of Over-the-Counter Derivatives

Dodd-Frank includes a framework of regulation of the over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives markets which requires clearing of certain types of currently traded OTC derivatives and imposes additional costs, including new reporting and margin requirements, and will likely impose additional regulation on us. Our costs of risk mitigation are increasing under Dodd-Frank. For example, Dodd-Frank imposes requirements, including the requirement to pledge initial margin (i) for “OTC-cleared” transactions (OTC derivatives that are cleared and settled through central clearing counterparties), and (ii) for “OTC-bilateral” transactions (OTC derivatives that are bilateral contracts between two counterparties) entered into after the phase-in period. The initial margin requirements for OTC-bilateral transactions will likely be applicable to us in September 2020. The increased margin requirements, combined with increased capital charges for our counterparties and central clearinghouses with respect to non-cash collateral, will likely require increased holdings of cash and highly liquid securities with lower yields causing a reduction in income and less favorable pricing for OTC-cleared and OTC-bilateral transactions. Centralized clearing of certain OTC derivatives exposes us to the risk of a default by a clearing member or clearinghouse with respect to our cleared derivative transactions. We use derivatives to mitigate a wide range of risks in connection with our businesses, including the impact of increased benefit exposures from certain of our annuity products that offer guaranteed benefits. We have always been subject to the risk that hedging and other management procedures might prove ineffective in reducing the risks to which insurance policies expose us or that unanticipated policyholder behavior or mortality, combined with adverse market events, could produce economic losses beyond the scope of the risk management techniques employed. Any such losses could be increased by higher

Table of Contents

costs of writing derivatives (including customized derivatives) and the reduced availability of customized derivatives that might result from the implementation of Dodd-Frank and comparable international derivatives regulations.

Dodd-Frank also expanded the definition of “swap” and mandated the SEC and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) study whether “stable value contracts” should be treated as swaps. Pursuant to the new definition and the Commissions’ interpretive regulations, products offered by our insurance subsidiaries other than stable value contracts might also be treated as swaps, even though we believe otherwise. Should such products become regulated as swaps, we cannot predict how the rules would be applied to them or the effect on such products’ profitability or attractiveness to our clients. Federal banking regulators have recently adopted new rules that will apply to certain qualified financial contracts, including many derivatives contracts, securities lending agreements and repurchase agreements, with certain banking institutions and certain of their affiliates. These new rules, which will begin to go into effect in 2019, will generally require the banking institutions and their applicable affiliates to include contractual provisions in their qualified financial contracts that limit or delay certain rights of their counterparties including counterparties’ default rights (such as the right to terminate the contracts or foreclose on collateral) and restrictions on assignments and transfers of credit enhancements (such as guarantees) arising in connection with the banking institution or an applicable affiliate becoming subject to a bankruptcy, insolvency, resolution or similar proceeding. To the extent that any of the derivatives, securities lending agreements or repurchase agreements that we enter into are subject to these new rules, it could limit our recovery in the event of a default and increase our counterparty risk.

Securities and Investment Advisor Regulation

Some of our activities in offering and selling variable insurance products, as well as certain fixed interest rate contracts, are subject to extensive regulation under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. We issue variable annuity contracts through separate accounts that are registered with the SEC as investment companies under the Investment Company Act. Each registered separate account is generally divided into sub-accounts, each of which invests in an underlying mutual fund which is itself a registered investment company under the Investment Company Act. In addition, the variable annuity contracts issued by these registered separate accounts are registered with the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). We also issue index-linked annuity contracts with features that require them to be registered as securities under the Securities Act. In the future we may issue variable contracts through separate accounts which would be exempt from registration, but may be subject to other provisions of the federal securities laws. In addition, because our variable contracts are required to be sold by broker-dealers that are FINRA members, sales of our variable contracts also are subject to the requirements of FINRA rules.

Federal, state and other securities regulatory authorities, including the SEC and FINRA, may from time to time make inquiries and conduct examinations regarding our compliance with securities and other laws and regulations. We will cooperate with such inquiries and examinations and take corrective action when warranted. See “— Insurance Regulation — Insurance Regulatory Examinations and Other Activities.”

Federal and state securities laws and regulations are primarily intended to ensure the integrity of the financial markets, to protect investors in the securities markets, and to protect investment advisory or brokerage clients, and generally grant regulatory agencies broad rulemaking and enforcement powers, including the power to limit or restrict the conduct of business for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

Unclaimed Property

We are subject to the laws and regulations of New York and other jurisdictions concerning identification, reporting and escheatment of unclaimed or abandoned funds, and are subject to audit and examination for compliance with these requirements.

Company Ratings

Financial strength ratings represent the opinions of rating agencies, including A.M. Best Company (“A.M. Best”), Fitch Ratings (“Fitch”), Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) and Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings (“S&P”), regarding the ability of an insurance company to meet its financial obligations to policyholders and contract holders. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Rating Agencies.”

Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the factors described below, in addition to the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These risk factors are important to understanding the contents of this Form 10-K and our other reports. If any of the following events occur, our business, financial condition and operating results may be materially adversely affected. In that event, the trading price of our securities could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Table of Contents

The materialization of any risks and uncertainties set forth below or identified in “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other filings with the SEC or those that are presently unforeseen or that we currently believe to be immaterial could result in significant adverse effects on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. See “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Risks Related to Our Business

Differences between actual experience and actuarial assumptions and the effectiveness of our actuarial models may adversely affect our financial results, capitalization and financial condition

Our earnings significantly depend upon the extent to which our actual claims experience and benefit payments on our products are consistent with the assumptions we use in setting prices for our products and establishing liabilities for future policy benefits and claims. Such amounts are established based on estimates by actuaries of how much we will need to pay for future benefits and claims. To the extent that actual claims and benefits experience is less favorable than the underlying assumptions we used in establishing such liabilities, we could be required to increase our liabilities. We make assumptions regarding policyholder behavior at the time of pricing and in selecting and utilizing the guaranteed options inherent within our products based in part upon expected persistency of the products, which change the probability that a policy or contract will remain in force from one period to the next. Persistency within our annuities business may be significantly affected by the value of guaranteed minimum benefits (“GMxBs”) contained in many of our variable annuities being higher than current account values in light of poor equity market performance or extended periods of low interest rates as well as other factors. Persistency could be adversely affected generally by developments affecting policyholder perception of us, including perceptions arising from adverse publicity. The pricing of certain of our variable annuity products that contain certain guaranteed minimum living benefits (“GMLBs”) is also based on assumptions about utilization rates, or the percentage of contracts that will utilize the benefit during the contract duration, including the timing of the first lifetime income withdrawal. Results may vary based on differences between actual and expected benefit utilization. A material increase in the valuation of the liability could result to the extent emerging and actual experience deviates from these policyholder option utilization assumptions, and in certain circumstances this deviation may impair our solvency.

We use actuarial models to assist us in establishing reserves for liabilities arising from our insurance policies and annuity contracts. We periodically review the effectiveness of these models, their underlying logic and assumptions and, from time to time, implement refinements to our models based on these reviews. We only implement refinements after rigorous testing and validation and, even after such validation and testing our models remain subject to inherent limitations. Accordingly, no assurances can be given as to whether or when we will implement refinements to our actuarial models, and, if implemented, the extent of such refinements. Furthermore, if implemented, any such refinements could cause us to increase the reserves we hold for our insurance policy and annuity contract liabilities which would adversely affect our RBC ratio and the amount of variable annuity assets we hold in excess of target funding levels and, in the case of any material model refinements, could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Liability for Future Policy Benefits” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives.”

Due to the nature of the underlying risks and the uncertainty associated with the determination of liabilities for future policy benefits and claims, we cannot determine precisely the amounts which we will ultimately pay to settle our liabilities. Such amounts may vary materially from the estimated amounts, particularly when those payments may not occur until well into the future. We evaluate our liabilities periodically based on accounting requirements, which change from time to time, the assumptions and models used to establish the liabilities, as well as our actual experience. If the liabilities originally established for future benefit payments and claims prove inadequate, we must increase them. Such increases would adversely affect our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, including our capitalization, as well as a material adverse effect on the financial strength ratings which are necessary to support our product sales. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Liability for Future Policy Benefits” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives.”

Guarantees within certain of our products may decrease our earnings, decrease our capitalization, increase the volatility of our results, result in higher risk management costs and expose us to increased counterparty risk

Certain of the variable annuity products we offer include guaranteed benefits, including guaranteed minimum death benefits (“GMDBs”), guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits (“GMWBs”) and guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits (“GMABs”). While we continue to have guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIBs”) in force with respect to which we are obligated to perform, we no longer offer GMIBs. We also offer index-linked annuities with guarantees against a defined

Table of Contents

floor on losses. These guarantees are designed to protect contract holders against significant changes in equity markets and interest rates. Any such periods of significant and sustained negative or low separate account returns, increased equity volatility, or reduced interest rates could result in an increase in the valuation of our liabilities associated with those products. In addition, if the separate account assets consisting of fixed income securities, which support the guaranteed index-linked return feature are insufficient to reflect a period of sustained growth in the equity-index on which the product is based, we may be required to support such separate accounts with assets from our general account and increase our liabilities. An increase in these liabilities would result in a decrease in our net income and could materially and adversely affect our financial condition, including our capitalization and our ability to receive statutory dividends from our operating insurance companies, as well as the financial strength ratings which are necessary to support our product sales.

Additionally, we make assumptions regarding policyholder behavior at the time of pricing and in selecting and utilizing the guaranteed options inherent within our products (e.g., utilization of option to annuitize within a GMIB product). An increase in the valuation of the liability could result to the extent emerging and actual experience deviates from these policyholder option utilization assumptions. On an annual basis we review key actuarial assumptions used to record our variable annuity liabilities, including those assumptions regarding policyholder behavior. Changes to assumptions based on our annual actuarial assumption review in future years could result in an increase in the liabilities we record for future policy benefits and claims to a level that may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition which, in certain circumstances, could impair our solvency.

While we have ceded all of the economic risk associated with our GMxBs to BLIC and MLIC, we retain exposure related to the guarantees in the event our affiliated reinsurers fail to perform.

Elements of our business strategy are new and may not be effective in accomplishing our objectives

Our objective is to leverage our competitive strengths to distinguish ourselves in the individual life insurance and annuity markets and, over the longer term, to generate more distributable cash from our business. We seek to achieve this by being a focused product manufacturer with an emphasis on independent distribution, while having the goal of achieving a competitive expense ratio through financial discipline. We intend to achieve our goals by focusing on target market segments, concentrating on product manufacturing, maintaining a strong balance sheet and using the scale of our seasoned in-force business to support the effectiveness of our risk management program, and focusing on operating cost and flexibility.

There can be no assurance that our strategy will be successful as it may not adequately alleviate the risks relating to less diverse product offerings; volatility of, and capital requirements with respect to, variable annuities; risk of loss with respect to use of derivatives in hedging transactions; and greater dependence on a relatively small number of independent distributors to market our products and generate most of our sales. Furthermore, such distributions may be subject to differing commission structures depending on the product sold and there can be no assurance that these new commission structures will be acceptable. See “— General Risks — Brighthouse may experience difficulty in marketing and distributing products through our distribution channels.”

An inability to access credit facilities could result in a reduction in our liquidity and lead to downgrades in Brighthouse’s credit ratings and our financial strength ratings.

On December 2, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. entered into a $2.0 billion five-year senior unsecured revolving credit facility that matures on December 2, 2021 (the “Revolving Credit Facility”) and, on July 21, 2017, entered into a $600 million senior unsecured term loan facility that matures on December 2, 2019 (the “2017 Term Loan Facility” and, together with the Revolving Credit Facility, the “Brighthouse Credit Facilities.”). On June 22, 2017, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. issued $1.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 3.700% senior notes due 2027 (the “2027 Senior Notes”) and $1.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 4.700% senior notes due 2047 (the “2047 Senior Notes” and, together with the 2027 Senior Notes, the “Senior Notes”) to third-party investors and in August 2017, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. borrowed the full $600 million under the 2017 Term Loan Facility.

The right to borrow funds under the Revolving Credit Facility is subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions, including compliance with all covenants. Failure to comply with the covenants in the Revolving Credit Facility or fulfill the conditions to borrowings, or the failure of lenders to fund their lending commitments (whether due to insolvency, illiquidity or other reasons) in the amounts provided for under the terms of the Revolving Credit Facility, would restrict the ability to access the Revolving Credit Facility when needed and, consequently, could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, results of operations and financial condition.

Table of Contents

A downgrade or a potential downgrade in our financial strength ratings could result in a loss of business and materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations

Financial strength ratings are published by various nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (“NRSROs”) and similar entities not formally recognized as NRSROs. They indicate the NRSROs’ opinions regarding an insurance company’s ability to meet contract holder and policyholder obligations and are important to maintaining public confidence in our products and our competitive position. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Rating Agencies.”

Downgrades in our financial strength ratings or changes to our ratings outlooks could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways, including:


•	reducing new sales of insurance products and annuity products;


•	adversely affecting our relationships with independent sales intermediaries;


•	increasing the number or amount of policy surrenders and withdrawals by contract holders and policyholders;


•	requiring us to reduce prices for many of our products and services to remain competitive;


•	providing termination rights for the benefit of our derivative instrument counterparties;


•	adversely affecting our ability to obtain reinsurance at reasonable prices, if at all; and


•	subjecting us to potentially increased regulatory scrutiny.

Downgrades in our financial strength ratings or changes to our rating outlook could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways, including limiting our access to distributors, restricting our ability to generate new sales because our products depend on strong financial strength ratings to compete effectively, limiting our access to capital markets, and potentially increasing the cost of debt, which could adversely affect our liquidity.

In view of the difficulties experienced by many financial institutions as a result of the financial crisis and ensuing global recession, including our competitors in the insurance industry, we believe it is possible that the NRSROs will continue to heighten the level of scrutiny that they apply to insurance companies, will continue to increase the frequency and scope of their credit reviews, will continue to request additional information from the companies that they rate, and may adjust upward the capital and other requirements employed in the models for maintenance of certain ratings levels. Our ratings could be downgraded at any time and without notice by any NRSRO. Any such downgrade could result in a reduction in new sales of our insurance products, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Reinsurance may not be available, affordable or adequate to protect us against losses

As part of our overall risk management strategy, we may purchase reinsurance from third-party reinsurers for certain risks we underwrite. While reinsurance agreements generally bind the reinsurer for the life of the business reinsured at generally fixed pricing, market conditions beyond our control determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance protection for new business. In certain circumstances, the price of reinsurance for business already reinsured may also increase. Also, under certain of our reinsurance arrangements, it is common for the reinsurer to have a right to increase reinsurance rates on in-force business if there is a systematic deterioration of mortality in the market as a whole. Any decrease in the amount of reinsurance will increase our risk of loss and any increase in the cost of reinsurance will, absent a decrease in the amount of reinsurance, reduce our earnings. Accordingly, we may be forced to incur additional expenses for reinsurance or may not be able to obtain sufficient reinsurance on acceptable terms, which could adversely affect our ability to write future business or result in the assumption of more risk with respect to those policies we issue. See “Business — Reinsurance Activity.”

If the counterparties to our reinsurance or indemnification arrangements default or fail to perform, we may be exposed to risks we had sought to mitigate, which could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We use reinsurance, indemnification and derivatives to mitigate our risks in various circumstances. In general, reinsurance, indemnification and derivatives do not relieve us of our direct liability to our policyholders, even when the reinsurer is liable to us. Accordingly, we bear credit risk with respect to our reinsurers, indemnitors, counterparties and central clearinghouses. A reinsurer’s, indemnitor’s, counterparty’s or central clearinghouse’s insolvency, inability or unwillingness to make payments under the terms of reinsurance agreements, indemnity agreements or derivatives agreements with us or inability or unwillingness to return collateral could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. See “Business — Reinsurance Activity.”

Table of Contents

In addition, we use derivatives to hedge various business risks. We enter into a variety of derivatives, including interest rate and currency swaps with a number of counterparties on a bilateral basis for uncleared OTC derivatives and with clearing brokers and central clearinghouses for OTC-cleared derivatives (OTC derivatives that are cleared and settled through central clearing counterparties). See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives.” If our counterparties, clearing brokers or central clearinghouses fail or refuse to honor their obligations under these derivatives, our hedges of the related risk will be ineffective. Such failure could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Extreme mortality events resulting from catastrophes may adversely impact liabilities for policyholder claims and reinsurance availability

Our life insurance operations are exposed to the risk of catastrophic mortality, such as a pandemic or other event that causes a large number of deaths. For example, significant influenza pandemics have occurred three times in the last century. The likelihood, timing, and severity of a future pandemic cannot be predicted. A significant pandemic could have a major impact on the global economy or the economies of particular countries or regions, including travel, trade, tourism, the health system, food supply, consumption, overall economic output, as well as on the financial markets. In addition, a pandemic that affected our employees or the employees of our distributors or of other companies with which we do business could disrupt our business operations. The effectiveness of external parties, including governmental and non-governmental organizations, in combating the spread and severity of such a pandemic could have a material impact on the losses we experience. These events could cause a material adverse effect on our results of operations in any period and, depending on their severity, could also materially and adversely affect our financial condition.

Consistent with industry practice and accounting standards, we establish liabilities for claims arising from a catastrophe only after assessing the probable losses arising from the event. We cannot be certain that the liabilities we have established will be adequate to cover actual claim liabilities. A catastrophic event or multiple catastrophic events could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Conversely, improvements in medical care and other developments which positively affect life expectancy can cause our assumptions with respect to longevity, which we use when we price our products, to become incorrect and, accordingly, can adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

Factors affecting our competitiveness may adversely affect our market share and profitability

We believe competition among insurance companies is based on a number of factors, including service, product features, scale, price, actual or perceived financial strength, claims-paying ratings, credit ratings, e-business capabilities and name recognition. We compete with a large number of other insurance companies, as well as non-insurance financial services companies, such as banks, broker-dealers and asset managers. Some of these companies offer a broader array of products, have more competitive pricing or, with respect to other insurance companies, have higher claims paying ability and financial strength ratings. Some may also have greater financial resources with which to compete. In some circumstances, national banks that sell annuity products of life insurers may also have a pre-existing customer base for financial services products. These competitive pressures may adversely affect the persistency of our products, as well as our ability to sell our products in the future. If, as a result of competitive factors or otherwise, we are unable to generate a sufficient return on insurance policies and annuity products we sell in the future, we may stop selling such policies and products, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We have limited control over many of our costs. For example, we have limited control over the cost of third-party reinsurance, the cost of meeting changing regulatory requirements, and our cost to access capital or financing. There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve or maintain a cost advantage over our competitors. If our cost structure increases and we are not able to achieve or maintain a cost advantage over our competitors, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to execute our strategy, as well as on our results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, since numerous aspects of our business are subject to regulation, legislative and other changes affecting the regulatory environment for our business may have, over time, the effect of supporting or burdening some aspects of the financial services industry. This can affect our competitive position within the life insurance industry and within the broader financial services industry. See “Business — Regulation.”

Table of Contents

The failure of third parties to provide various services, or any failure of the practices and procedures that these third parties use to provide services to us, could have a material adverse effect on our business

A key part of our operating strategy is to outsource certain services important to our business. In July 2016, Brighthouse entered into a multi-year outsourcing arrangement for the administration of certain in-force policies currently housed on up to 20 systems. Pursuant to this arrangement, at least 13 of such systems will be consolidated down to one. In December 2017, Brighthouse formalized an arrangement for the administration of life and annuities new business and approximately 1.3 million in-force life and annuities contracts. Brighthouse intends to focus on further outsourcing opportunities with third-party vendors, including after the Transition Services Agreement, Investment Management Agreements and other agreements with MetLife companies expire. See “— Risks Related to Our Separation from, and Continuing Relationship with, MetLife — Brighthouse’s contractual arrangements with MetLife may not be adequate to meet our operational and business needs. The terms of our arrangements with MetLife may be more favorable than we would be able to obtain from an unaffiliated third party. Brighthouse may be unable to replace those services in a timely manner or on comparable terms” for information regarding the potential effect that the Separation from MetLife will have on the pricing of such services. It may be difficult and disruptive for us to replace some of our third-party vendors in a timely manner if they were unwilling or unable to provide us with these services in the future (as a result of their financial or business conditions or otherwise), and our business and operations likely could be materially adversely affected.

In addition, if a third-party provider fails to provide the administrative, operational, financial, and actuarial services we require, fails to meet contractual requirements, such as compliance with applicable laws and regulations, or suffers a cyberattack or other security breach, our business could suffer economic and reputational harm that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. See “— Operational Risks — The failure in cyber- or other information security systems, as well as the occurrence of events unanticipated in Brighthouse’s and MetLife’s disaster recovery systems and business continuity planning could result in a loss or disclosure of confidential information, damage to our reputation and impairment of our ability to conduct business effectively.”

Similarly, if any third-party provider experiences any deficiency in internal controls, determines that its practices and procedures used in administering our policies require review or otherwise fails to administer our policies in accordance with acceptable standards, we could incur expenses and experience other adverse effects as a result. In these situations, we may be unable to resolve any issues on our own without assistance from the third-party provider, and we may have limited ability to influence the speed and effectiveness of that resolution. In December 2017, for example, MetLife announced that it was undertaking a review of practices and procedures used to estimate its reserves related to certain group annuitants that have been unresponsive or missing over time. As a result of this review, MetLife identified a material weakness in its internal control over financial reporting relating to certain group annuity reserves and announced that it was recording charges to reinstate reserves previously released. As a result of that review and based on information provided by MetLife, Brighthouse identified approximately 14,000 group annuitants across Brighthouse entities who may be owed annuity payments now or in the future. These group annuity contracts are administered by MetLife under the Transition Services Agreement, and we depend on MetLife for the information and modifications to administrative practices and procedures necessary to resolve this matter. If similar issues were to arise in the future, whether involving MetLife or another third-party provider, any resulting expenses or other economic or reputational harm could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations, particularly if they involved our core annuity and life insurance businesses. In addition, we could be subject to litigation or regulatory investigations and actions resulting from any such issues, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We may be required to establish a valuation allowance against the deferred income tax assets, which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition

Deferred income tax represents the tax effect of the differences between the book and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets are assessed periodically by management to determine whether they are realizable. Factors in management’s determination include the performance of the business including the ability to generate future taxable income. If, based on available information, it is more likely than not that the deferred income tax asset will not be realized, then a valuation allowance must be established with a corresponding charge to net income. Such charges could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial position. In addition, changes in the corporate tax rates could affect the value of our deferred tax assets and may require a write-off of some of those assets. See Note 11 to the Financial Statements for the impact of the Tax Act on our financial statements. Also see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Income Taxes.”

Table of Contents

If our business does not perform well or if actual experience versus estimates used in valuing and amortizing DAC vary significantly, we may be required to accelerate the amortization and/or impair the DAC, which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition

We incur significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that are related directly to the successful acquisition of new and renewal insurance business are deferred and referred to as deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”). The estimated fair value of the acquired liabilities is based on actuarially determined projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operating expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. DAC related to fixed and variable life and deferred annuity contracts is amortized in proportion to actual and expected future gross profits. The amount of future gross profit is dependent principally on investment returns in excess of the amounts credited to policyholders, mortality, morbidity, persistency, interest crediting rates, dividends paid to policyholders, expenses to administer the business, creditworthiness of reinsurance counterparties and certain economic variables, such as inflation. Of these factors, we anticipate that investment returns are most likely to impact the rate of amortization of DAC for the aforementioned contracts.

If actual gross profits are less than originally expected, then the amortization of such costs would be accelerated in the period the actual experience is known and would result in a charge to net income. Significant or sustained equity market declines could result in an acceleration of amortization of DAC related to variable annuity and variable life contracts, resulting in a charge to net income. Such adjustments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired” for a discussion of how significantly lower net investment spreads may cause us to accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period.

Economic Environment and Capital Markets-Related Risks

If difficult conditions in the capital markets and the U.S. economy generally persist or are perceived to persist, they may materially adversely affect our business and results of operations

Our business and results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the capital markets and the U.S. economy generally, as well as by the global economy to the extent it affects the U.S. economy. In addition, while our operations are entirely in the United States, we have foreign investments in our general and separate accounts, and, accordingly, conditions in the global capital markets can affect the value of our general account and separate account assets, as well as our financial results. Stressed conditions, volatility and disruptions in financial asset classes or various capital markets can have an adverse effect on us, both because we have a large investment portfolio and our benefit and claim liabilities are sensitive to changing market factors. In addition, perceived difficult conditions in the capital markets may discourage individuals from making investment decisions and purchasing our products. Market factors include interest rates, credit spreads, equity and commodity prices, derivative prices and availability, real estate markets, foreign exchange rates and the volatility and the returns of capital markets. Our business operations and results may also be affected by the level of economic activity, such as the level of employment, business investment and spending, consumer spending and savings; monetary and fiscal policies and their resulting impact on economic activity and conditions like inflation and credit formation. Accordingly, both market and economic factors may affect our business results by adversely affecting our business volumes, profitability, cash flow, capitalization and overall financial condition. Disruptions in one market or asset class can also spread to other markets or asset classes. Upheavals and stagnation in the financial markets can also affect our financial condition (including our liquidity and capital levels) as a result of the impact of such events on our assets and liabilities.

At times throughout the past several years, volatile conditions have characterized financial markets. Significant market volatility in reaction to geopolitical risks, changing monetary policy and uncertain fiscal policy may exacerbate some of the risks we face. The Federal Reserve may reduce the size of its balance sheet and continue to raise interest rates as it unwinds the monetary accommodation put in place after the global financial crisis in 2008-2009, while other major central banks may continue to pursue accommodative, unconventional monetary policies. Uncertainties associated with the United Kingdom’s potential withdrawal from the EU and concerns about the political and/or economic stability of Puerto Rico and certain countries outside the EU have also contributed to market volatility in the U.S. This market volatility has affected, and may continue to affect the performance of the various asset classes in which we invest, as well as separate account values.

Table of Contents

To the extent these uncertain financial market conditions persist, our revenues, reserves and net investment income, as well as the demand for certain of our products, are likely to come under pressure. Similarly, sustained periods of low interest rates and risk asset returns could reduce income from our investment portfolio, increase our liabilities for claims and future benefits, and increase the cost of risk transfer measures such as hedging, causing our profit margins to erode as a result of reduced income from our investment portfolio and increase in insurance liabilities. Extreme declines in equity markets could cause us to incur significant capital and/or operating losses due to, among other reasons, the impact on us of guarantees related to our annuity products, including increases in liabilities, increased capital requirements, and/or collateral requirements associated with our risk transfer arrangements. Even in the absence of a financial market downturn, sustained periods of low market returns and/or low level of U.S. interest rates and/or heightened market volatility may increase the cost of our insurance liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our statutory capital and earnings as well as impair our financial strength ratings.

Variable annuity products issued through separate accounts are a significant portion of our in-force business. The account values of these products decrease as a result of declining equity markets. Lower interest rates may result in lower returns in the future due to lower returns on our investments. Decreases in account values reduce certain fees generated by these products, cause the amortization of DAC to accelerate, could increase the level of insurance liabilities we must carry to support such products issued with any associated guarantees and could require us to provide additional funding to our affiliated reinsurer. Even absent declining equity and bond markets, periods of sustained stagnation in these markets, which are characterized by multiple years of low annualized total returns impacting the growth in separate accounts and/or low level of U.S. interest rates, may materially increase our liabilities for claims and future benefits due to inherent market return guarantees in these liabilities. We ceded all of the risks associated with these guarantees to BLIC and MLIC. However, because the accounting for the ceded reinsurance is different from the accounting for the directly written guarantees, there can be a net impact to our financial statements even though all of the economic risks have been ceded. In an economic downturn characterized by higher unemployment, lower family income, lower corporate earnings, lower business investment and lower consumer spending, the demand for our annuity and insurance products could be adversely affected as customers are unwilling or unable to purchase our products. In addition, we may experience an elevated incidence of claims, adverse utilization of benefits relative to our best estimate expectations and lapses or surrenders of policies. Furthermore, our policyholders may choose to defer paying insurance premiums or stop paying insurance premiums altogether. Such adverse changes in the economy could negatively affect our earnings and capitalization and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Difficult conditions in the U.S. capital markets and the economy generally may also continue to raise the possibility of legislative, judicial, regulatory and other governmental actions. The Trump administration has released a memorandum that generally delayed all pending regulations from publication in the Federal Register pending their review and approval by a department or agency head appointed or designated by President Trump, and has issued an executive order that calls for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank. Also, on June 8, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Financial CHOICE Act of 2017, which proposes to amend or repeal various sections of Dodd-Frank. We cannot predict what other proposals may be made or what legislation may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See “ — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth” and “— Risks Related to Our Business — Factors affecting our competitiveness may adversely affect our market share and profitability.”

Adverse capital and credit market conditions may significantly affect our ability to meet liquidity needs and our access to capital

The capital and credit markets may be subject to periods of extreme volatility. Disruptions in capital markets could adversely affect our liquidity and credit capacity or limit our access to capital which may in the future be needed to operate our business and meet policyholder obligations.

We need liquidity to pay our operating expenses, maintain our securities lending activities and replace certain maturing liabilities. Without sufficient liquidity, we could be forced to curtail our operations and limit the investments necessary to grow our business.

Our principal sources of liquidity are insurance premiums and fees paid in connection with annuity products, and cash flow from our investment portfolio to the extent consisting of cash and readily marketable securities.

Table of Contents

In the event capital market or other conditions have an adverse impact on our capital and liquidity, or our stress-testing indicates that such conditions could have such an impact beyond expectations and our current resources do not satisfy our needs or regulatory requirements, we may have to seek additional financing to enhance our capital and liquidity position. The availability of additional financing will depend on a variety of factors such as the then current market conditions, regulatory capital requirements, availability of credit to us and the financial services industry generally, our financial strength ratings and credit capacity, and the perception of our customers and lenders regarding our long- or short-term financial prospects if we incur large operating or investment losses or if the level of our business activity decreases due to a market downturn. Similarly, our access to funds may be impaired if regulatory authorities or rating agencies take negative actions against us. Our internal sources of liquidity may prove to be insufficient and, in such case, we may not be able to successfully obtain additional financing on favorable terms, or at all.

In addition, our liquidity requirements may change if, among other things, we are required to return significant amounts of cash collateral on short notice under collateral agreements. See “— Investments - Related Risks — Should the need arise, we may have difficulty selling certain holdings in our investment portfolio or in our securities lending program in a timely manner and realizing full value given that not all assets are liquid,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements — Collateral for Derivatives” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity.”

Such conditions may limit our ability to replace, in a timely manner, maturing liabilities, satisfy regulatory capital requirements, and access the capital necessary to grow our business. See “— Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.” As a result, we may be forced to bear an unattractive cost of capital, which could decrease our profitability and significantly reduce our financial flexibility. Our results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and statutory capital position could be materially adversely affected by disruptions in the financial markets.

We are exposed to significant financial and capital markets risks which may adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, and may cause our net investment income and net income to vary from period to period.

We are exposed to significant financial and capital markets risks both in the United States and in global markets generally to the extent they influence U.S. financial and capital markets, including changes in interest rates, credit spreads, equity markets, real estate markets, the performance of specific obligors, including governments, included in our investment portfolio, derivatives and other factors outside our control. From time to time we may also have exposure through our investment portfolio to foreign currency and commodity price volatility.

Interest rate risk

Some of our current or anticipated future products, principally traditional life, universal life and fixed annuities, expose us to the risk that changes in interest rates will reduce our investment margin or “net investment spread,” or the difference between the amounts that we are required to pay under the contracts in our general account and the rate of return we earn on general account investments intended to support obligations under such contracts. Our net investment spread is a key component of our net income.

We are affected by the monetary policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve Board”) and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (collectively, with the Federal Reserve Board, the “Federal Reserve”) and other major central banks, as such policies may adversely impact the level of interest rates and, as discussed below, the income we earn on our investments or the level of product sales.

In a low interest rate environment, we may be forced to reinvest proceeds from investments that have matured or have been prepaid or sold at lower yields, which will reduce our net investment spread. Moreover, borrowers may prepay or redeem the fixed income securities, commercial, and agricultural mortgage loans in our investment portfolio with greater frequency in order to borrow at lower market rates, thereby exacerbating this risk. Although reducing interest crediting rates can help offset decreases in net investment spreads on some products, our ability to reduce these rates is limited to the portion of our in-force product portfolio that has adjustable interest crediting rates, and could be limited by the actions of our competitors or contractually guaranteed minimum rates and may not match the timing or magnitude of changes in asset yields. As a result, our net investment spread would decrease or potentially become negative, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Liability for Future Policy Benefits.”

Our estimation of future net investment spreads is an important component in the amortization of DAC. Significantly lower than anticipated net investment spreads reduce our net income and may cause us to accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period and thereby potentially negatively affecting rating agency assessment of our financial condition.

Table of Contents

During periods of declining interest rates, our return on investments that do not support particular policy obligations may decrease. During periods of sustained lower interest rates, our reserves for policy liabilities may not be sufficient to meet future policy obligations and may need to be strengthened. Accordingly, declining and sustained lower interest rates may materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and significantly reduce our profitability.

Increases in interest rates could also negatively affect our profitability. In periods of rapidly increasing interest rates, we may not be able to replace, in a timely manner, the investments in our general account with higher yielding investments needed to fund the higher crediting rates necessary to keep interest rate sensitive products competitive. We, therefore, may have to accept a lower credit spread and, thus, lower profitability or face a decline in sales and greater loss of existing contracts and related assets. In addition, policy loans, surrenders and withdrawals may tend to increase as policyholders seek investments with higher perceived returns as interest rates rise. This process may result in cash outflows requiring that we sell investments at a time when the prices of those investments are adversely affected by the increase in interest rates, which may result in realized investment losses. Unanticipated withdrawals, terminations and substantial policy amendments may cause us to accelerate the amortization of DAC, which reduces net income and potentially negatively affects rating agency assessment of our financial condition. An increase in interest rates could also have a material adverse effect on the value of our investment portfolio, for example, by decreasing the estimated fair values of the fixed income securities and mortgage loans that comprise a significant portion of our investment portfolio. Finally, an increase in interest rates could result in decreased fee revenue associated with a decline in the value of variable annuity account balances invested in fixed income funds.

We manage interest rate risk as part of our asset and liability management strategies, which include maintaining an investment portfolio with diversified maturities that has a weighted average duration that is approximately equal to the duration of our estimated liability cash flow profile. For certain of our liability portfolios, it is not possible to invest assets to the full liability duration, thereby creating some asset/liability mismatch. Where a liability cash flow may exceed the maturity of available assets, as is the case with certain retirement products, we may support such liabilities with equity investments, derivatives or interest rate mismatch strategies. Although we take measures to manage the economic risks of investing in a changing interest rate environment, we may not be able to mitigate the interest rate risk of our fixed income investments relative to our interest sensitive liabilities. The level of interest rates also affects our liabilities for benefits under our annuity contracts. As interest rates decline we may need to increase our reserves for future benefits under our annuity contracts, which would adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk — Market Risk - Fair Value Exposures — Interest Rates.”

Significant volatility in the markets could cause changes in the risks described above which, individually or in tandem, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or cash flows, through realized investment losses, derivative losses, change in insurance liabilities, impairments, increased valuation allowances, increases in reserves for future policyholder benefits, reduced net investment income and changes in unrealized gain or loss positions.

Credit spread risk

Our exposure to credit spreads primarily relates to market price volatility. Market price volatility can make it difficult to value certain of our securities if trading becomes less frequent, as was the case, for example, during the financial crisis commencing in 2008. In such case, valuations may include assumptions or estimates that may have significant period-to-period changes, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition and may require additional reserves. If there is a resumption of significant volatility in the markets, it could cause changes in credit spreads and defaults and a lack of pricing transparency which, individually or in tandem, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.

An increase in credit spreads relative to U.S. Treasury benchmarks can also adversely affect the cost of our borrowing if we need to access credit markets.

Equity risk

Our primary exposure to equity relates to the potential for lower earnings associated with certain of our businesses where fee income is earned based upon the estimated market value of the separate account assets and other assets related to our variable annuity business. Because these products generate fees related primarily to the value of separate account assets and other assets under management, a decline in the equity markets could reduce our revenues as a result of the reduction in the value of the investments supporting those products and services. The variable annuity business in particular is highly sensitive to equity markets, and a sustained weakness or stagnation in the equity markets could decrease revenues and earnings with respect to those products. Furthermore, certain of our variable annuity products offer guaranteed benefits which increase our potential guaranteed benefit exposure should equity markets decline or stagnate. We cede the exposure associated with these guaranteed benefits to BLIC and MLIC.

Table of Contents

Real estate risk

A portion of our investment portfolio consists of mortgage loans on commercial and agricultural real estate. Our exposure to this risk stems from various factors, including the supply and demand of leasable commercial space, creditworthiness of tenants and partners, capital markets volatility, interest rate fluctuations, agricultural prices and farm incomes. Although we manage credit risk and market valuation risk for our commercial and agricultural real estate assets through geographic, property type and product type diversification, and asset allocation, general economic conditions in the commercial and agricultural real estate sectors will continue to influence the performance of these investments. These factors, which are beyond our control, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or cash flows. In addition, we rely, and expect to continue to rely, on MetLife Investment Advisors, LLC (“MLIA”) for a period to provide the services required to manage the portfolio.

Obligor-related risk

Fixed income securities and mortgage loans represent a significant portion of our investment portfolio. We are subject to the risk that the issuers, or guarantors, of fixed income securities and mortgage loans we own may default on principal and interest payments they owe us. We are also subject to the risk that the underlying collateral within asset-backed securities (“ABS”), including mortgage-backed securities, may default on principal and interest payments causing an adverse change in cash flows. The occurrence of a major economic downturn, acts of corporate malfeasance, widening mortgage or credit spreads, or other events that adversely affect the issuers, guarantors or underlying collateral of these securities and mortgage loans could cause the estimated fair value of our portfolio of fixed income securities and mortgage loans and our earnings to decline and the default rate of the fixed income securities and mortgage loans in our investment portfolio to increase.

Derivatives risk

We use the payments we receive from counterparties pursuant to derivative instruments we have entered into to offset future changes in the fair value of our assets and liabilities and current or future changes in cash flows. We enter into a variety of derivative instruments, including options, futures, forwards, and interest rate and credit default swaps with a number of counterparties. Amounts that we expect to collect under current and future derivatives are subject to counterparty risk. Our obligations under our products are not changed by our hedging activities and we are liable for our obligations even if our derivative counterparties do not pay us. Such defaults could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Substantially all of our derivatives require us to pledge or receive collateral or make payments related to any decline in the net estimated fair value of such derivatives executed through a specific broker at a clearinghouse or entered into with a specific counterparty on a bilateral basis. In addition, ratings downgrades or financial difficulties of derivative counterparties may require us to utilize additional capital with respect to the impacted businesses. Furthermore, the valuation of our derivatives could change based on changes to our valuation methodology or the discovery of errors.

Federal banking regulators have recently adopted new rules that will apply to certain qualified financial contracts, including many derivatives contracts, securities lending agreements and repurchase agreements, with certain banking institutions and certain of their affiliates. These new rules, which will be applicable beginning in 2019, will generally require the banking institutions and their applicable affiliates to include contractual provisions in their qualified financial contracts that limit or delay certain rights of their counterparties including counterparties’ default rights (such as the right to terminate the contracts or foreclose on collateral) and restrictions on assignments and transfers of credit enhancements (such as guarantees) arising in connection with the banking institution or an applicable affiliate becoming subject to a bankruptcy, insolvency, resolution or similar proceeding. To the extent that any of the derivatives, securities lending agreements or repurchase agreements that we enter into are subject to these new rules, it could increase our counterparty risk or limit our recovery in the event of a default.

Summary

In addition to the economic or counterparty risks described above which, individually or in tandem, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or cash flows through realized investment losses, derivative losses, change in insurance liabilities, impairments, increased valuation allowances, increases in reserves for future policyholder benefits, reduced net investment income and changes in unrealized gain or loss positions, we are also exposed to volatility risk with respect to any one or more of these economic risks. Significant volatility in the markets could cause changes in the risks set forth above which, individually or in tandem, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or cash flows through realized investment losses, derivative losses, change in insurance liabilities, impairments, increased valuation allowances, increases in reserves for future policyholder benefits, reduced net investment income and changes in unrealized gain or loss positions.

Table of Contents

Regulatory and Legal Risks

Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.

We are subject to a wide variety of insurance and other laws and regulations. We are domiciled in New York and regulated by the NYDFS.

NAIC - Existing and proposed insurance regulation

The NAIC is an organization whose mission is to assist state insurance regulatory authorities in serving the public interest and achieving the insurance regulatory goals of its members, the state insurance regulatory officials. State insurance regulators may act independently or adopt regulations proposed by the NAIC. State insurance regulators and the NAIC regularly re-examine existing laws and regulations applicable to insurance companies and their products. Some NAIC pronouncements take effect automatically in the various states, particularly with respect to accounting issues. Statutes, regulations and interpretations may be applied with retroactive impact, particularly in areas such as accounting and reserve requirements. Changes in existing laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, can sometimes lead to additional expense for the insurer and, thus, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

From time to time, regulators raise issues during examinations or audits of us that could, if determined adversely, have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, the interpretations of regulations by regulators may change and statutes may be enacted with retroactive impact, particularly in areas such as accounting or statutory reserve requirements. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations is time consuming and personnel-intensive, and changes in these laws and regulations may materially increase our direct and indirect compliance and other expenses of doing business, thus having a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

During 2014, the NAIC approved a new regulatory framework applicable to the use of captive insurers in connection with Regulation XXX and Guideline AXXX transactions. This could impact our competitiveness and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

In 2015, the NAIC commissioned an initiative to identify changes to the statutory framework for variable annuities that can remove or mitigate the motivation for insurers to engage in captive reinsurance transactions. In September 2015, a third-party consultant engaged by the NAIC provided the NAIC with a preliminary report covering several sets of recommendations regarding AG 43 and RBC C3 Phase II reserve requirements. These recommendations generally focus on (1) addressing inconsistencies between the statutory reserve and RBC regimes, (2) mitigating the asset-liability accounting mismatch between hedge instruments and statutory instruments and statutory liabilities, (3) removing the non-economic volatility in statutory total asset requirements and the resulting solvency ratios and (4) facilitating greater harmonization across insurers and products for greater comparability. An updated variable annuity reserve and capital framework proposal was presented at the August 2016 NAIC meeting, followed by a 90-day comment period on the proposal. This updated proposal included the initial recommendations from 2015, but also some new aspects. The standard scenario floor for reserves may incorporate multiple paths instead of the current single deterministic scenario, also known as the standard scenario. The stochastic calculations may include alternative calibration criteria for equities and other market risk factors, and the RBC C3 Phase II component may reflect a new level of capitalization. The NAIC is continuing its consideration of these recommendations. These recommendations, if adopted, would likely apply to all existing business and may materially change the sensitivity of reserve and capital requirements to capital markets including interest rate, equity markets and volatility, as well as prescribed assumptions for policyholder behavior. It is not possible at this time to predict whether the amount of reserves or capital required to support our variable annuity contracts would increase or decrease if the NAIC adopts any new model laws, regulations and/or other standards applicable to variable annuity business after considering such recommendations, nor is it possible to predict the materiality of any such increase or decrease. It is also not possible to predict the extent to which any such model laws, regulations and/or other standards would affect the effectiveness and design of our risk mitigation and hedging programs. Furthermore, no assurances can be given to whether any such model laws, regulations and/or other standards will be adopted or to the timing of any such adoption.

The NAIC has adopted a new approach for the calculation of life insurance reserves, known as PBR. PBR became operative on January 1, 2017 in those states where it has been adopted, to be followed by a three-year phase-in period for business issued on or after this date. In New York where we are domiciled, the NYDFS has publicly stated its intention to implement this approach subject to a working group of the NYDFS establishing the necessary reserves safeguards and the adopting of enabling legislation by the New York legislature. We cannot predict how PBR will impact our reserves or compliance costs, if any. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — NAIC.”

The NAIC, as well as certain state regulators are currently considering implementing regulations that would apply an impartial conduct standard similar to the Fiduciary Rule to recommendations made in connection with certain annuities, and in the case of New York, life insurance policies. In particular, on December 27, 2017, the NYDFS proposed regulations that would

Table of Contents

adopt a “best interest” standard for the sale of life insurance and annuity products in New York. The likelihood of enactment of these regulations is uncertain at this time, but if implemented, these regulations could have significant adverse effects on our business and results of operations. Generally, changes in laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, including potentially rescinding prior product approvals, are often made for the benefit of the consumer at the expense of the insurer and could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.

The NAIC is developing a U.S. group capital calculation using an RBC aggregation methodology. We cannot predict with any certainty when the group capital calculation might be implemented or the impact (if any) that such implementation may have on our capital requirements, compliance costs or other aspects of our business.

In addition, following the reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate pursuant to federal tax reform, the NAIC may revise the methodology or factors used to calculate RBC, which is the denominator of the RBC ratio. If such potential revisions to the NAIC’s RBC calculation would result in a reduction in our RBC ratio below certain prescribed levels, we may be required to hold additional capital. Any reduction in our RBC ratios could adversely affect our financial strength ratings. For more information regarding federal tax reform, see “Business — Regulation — Federal Tax Reform.”

The NAIC has started work related to macro-prudential initiatives. Currently, the NAIC is focused on liquidity, but other macro-prudential topics of focus are expected to include recovery and resolution, capital stress testing and exposure concentrations.

State insurance guaranty associations

New York requires domestic life insurers to participate in a guaranty association. Guaranty associations are organized to pay contractual benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed insurers, or those that may become impaired, insolvent or fail, for example, following the occurrence of one or more catastrophic events. These associations levy assessments, up to prescribed limits, on all member insurers on the basis of the proportionate share of the premiums written by member insurers in the lines of business in which the impaired, insolvent or failed insurer is engaged. New York permits member insurers to recover assessments paid through full or partial premium tax offsets.

It is possible that additional insurance company insolvencies or failures could render the state’s guaranty funds from assessments previously levied against us inadequate and we may be called upon to contribute additional amounts, which may have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations in a particular period. We have established liabilities for guaranty fund assessments that we consider adequate, but additional liabilities may be necessary. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Guaranty Associations and Similar Arrangements.”

Federal - Insurance regulation

Currently, the U.S. federal government does not directly regulate the business of insurance. However, Dodd-Frank established the FIO within the Department of the Treasury, which has the authority to, among other things, collect information about the insurance industry, negotiate covered agreements with one or more foreign governments and recommend prudential standards. On December 12, 2013, the FIO issued a report, mandated by Dodd-Frank, which, among other things, urged the states to modernize and promote greater uniformity in insurance regulation. The report raised the possibility of a greater role for the federal government if states do not achieve greater uniformity in their laws and regulations. Following the transition occurring in the federal government and the priorities of the Trump administration, we cannot predict whether any such legislation or regulatory changes will be adopted, or what impact they will have on our business, financial condition or results of operations. The Trump administration and the Republican party have expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank and President Trump has issued an executive order that calls for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank in light of certain enumerated core principles of financial system regulation. On June 8, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Financial CHOICE Act of 2017, which proposed to amend or repeal various sections of Dodd-Frank. This proposed legislation will now be considered by the U.S. Senate. We are not able to predict whether any such proposal to roll back Dodd-Frank would have a material effect on our business operations and cannot currently identify the risks, if any, that may be posed to our businesses as a result of changes to, or legislative replacements for, Dodd-Frank.

Federal legislation and administrative policies can significantly and adversely affect insurance companies, including policies regarding financial services regulation, securities regulation, derivatives regulation, pension regulation, privacy, tort reform legislation and taxation. In addition, various forms of direct and indirect federal regulation of insurance have been proposed from time to time, including proposals for the establishment of an optional federal charter for insurance companies.

Table of Contents

Department of Labor and ERISA considerations

We manufacture annuities for third parties to sell to tax-qualified pension plans, retirement plans and IRAs, as well as individual retirement annuities sold to individuals that are subject to ERISA or the Code. Also, a portion of our in-force life insurance products are held by tax-qualified pension and retirement plans. While we currently believe manufacturers do not have as much exposure to ERISA and the Code as distributors, certain activities are subject to the restrictions imposed by ERISA and the Code, including the requirement under ERISA that fiduciaries must perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA Plan participants and beneficiaries, and those fiduciaries may not cause a covered plan to engage in certain prohibited transactions. The prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Code generally restrict the provision of investment advice to ERISA qualified plans and participants and IRAs if the investment recommendation results in fees paid to the individual advisor, the firm that employs the advisor or their affiliates that vary according to the investment recommendation chosen. Similarly, without an exemption, fiduciary advisors are prohibited from receiving compensation from third parties in connection with their advice. ERISA also affects certain of our in-force insurance policies and annuity contracts as well as insurance policies and annuity contracts we may sell in the future.

The DOL issued the Fiduciary Rule on April 6, 2016, which became applicable on June 9, 2017. As initially adopted, the Fiduciary Rule substantially expands the definition of “investment advice” and requires that an impartial or “best interests” standard be met in providing such advice, thereby broadening the circumstances under which we or our representatives, in providing investment advice with respect to ERISA Plans, plan participants or IRAs, could be deemed a fiduciary under ERISA or the Code. Pursuant to the Fiduciary Rule, certain communications with plans, plan participants and IRA owners, including the marketing of products, and marketing of investment management or advisory services, could be deemed fiduciary investment advice, thus causing increased exposure to fiduciary liability if the distributor does not recommend what is in the client’s best interests.

In connection with the promulgation of the Fiduciary Rule, the DOL also issued amendments to certain of its prohibited transaction exemptions, and issued BIC, a new prohibited transaction exemption that imposes more significant disclosure and contract requirements to certain transactions involving ERISA Plans, plan participants and IRAs. The new and amended exemptions increase fiduciary requirements and fiduciary liability exposure for transactions involving ERISA plans, plan participants and IRAs. The application of the BIC contract and point of sale disclosures required under BIC and the changes made to prohibited transaction exemption 84-24 were delayed until July 1, 2019, except for the impartial conduct standards (i.e., compliance with the “best interest” standard, reasonable compensation, and no misleading statements), which are applicable as of June 9, 2017.

On February 3, 2017, President Trump, in a memorandum to the Secretary of Labor, requested that the DOL prepare an updated economic and legal analysis concerning the likely impact of the new rules, and possible revisions to the rules. In response to President Trump’s request, on June 29, 2017, the DOL issued a request for information related to the Fiduciary Rule and the DOL’s new and amended exemptions that were published in conjunction with the final rule. The request for information sought public input that could lead to new exemptions or changes and revisions to the final rule. On November 29, 2017, the DOL finalized an 18-month delay from January 1, 2018 to July 1, 2019, of the applicability of significant portions of the previously proposed exemptions (including BIC and prohibited transaction exemption 84-24), to afford sufficient time to review further the previously adopted rules and such exemptions. The DOL also updated its enforcement policy to indicate that the DOL and IRS will not pursue claims, until July 1, 2019, against fiduciaries who are working diligently and in good faith to comply with the final Fiduciary Rule or treat those fiduciaries as being in violation of the final rule.

While we continue to analyze the impact of the final regulations on our business and have worked diligently to comply with the final rule, subject to its continued applicability, we anticipate that we will need to undertake certain additional tasks in order to comply with certain of the exemptions provided in the DOL regulations, including additional compliance reviews of material shared with distributors, wholesaler and call center training, and product reporting and analysis. The change of administration, the DOL’s June 29, 2017 request for information related to the Fiduciary Rule and related exemptions, the November 29, 2017 extension of the applicability of many of the conditions of the proposed and revised exemptions, and the March 15, 2018 Court of Appeals decision leave uncertainty over whether the regulations will be substantially modified, repealed or vacated. This uncertainty could create confusion among our distribution partners, which could negatively impact product sales. We cannot predict what other proposals may be made, what legislation or regulations may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation or regulations may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See also “— NAIC — Existing and proposed insurance regulation” for a discussion of efforts by the NAIC and state regulators to implement regulations that would apply an impartial conduct standard similar to the Fiduciary Rule.

Table of Contents

While the Fiduciary Rule also provides that, to a limited extent, contracts sold and advice provided prior to the applicable date would not have to be modified to comply with the new investment advice regulations, there is lack of clarity surrounding some of the conditions for qualifying for this limited exception. There can be no assurance that the DOL will agree with our interpretation of these provisions, in which case the DOL and IRS could assess significant penalties against a portion of products sold prior to the applicable date of the new regulations. The assessment of such penalties could also trigger substantial litigation risk. Any such penalties and related litigation could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

While we continue to analyze the impact of the final regulation on our business and its continued applicability, we believe it could have an adverse effect on sales of annuity products to ERISA qualified plans and IRAs through our independent distribution partners. A significant portion of our annuity sales are to IRAs. The new regulation deems advisors, including independent distributors, who sell fixed index-linked annuities to IRAs, IRA rollovers or 401(k) plans, to be fiduciaries and prohibits them from receiving compensation unless they comply with a prohibited transaction exemption. The relevant exemption requires advisors to comply with impartial conduct standards and may require us to exercise additional oversight of the sales process. Compliance with the prohibited transaction exemptions will likely result in increased regulatory burdens on us and our independent distribution partners, changes to our compensation practices and product offerings and increased litigation risk, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. See “Business — Regulation — Department of Labor and ERISA Considerations.”

The NAIC and the NYDFS have proposed a “best interest” standard become part of their suitability requirements. These new rules could increase the amount of training and documentation of sales practices required between us, our distributors and their advisors. Depending on the final version of these rules, we could be exposed to regulatory penalties if and when the best interest standard is not met.

A decrease in our RBC ratio (as a result of a reduction in statutory surplus and/or increase in RBC requirements) could result in increased scrutiny by insurance regulators and rating agencies and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition

The NAIC has established model regulations that provide minimum capitalization requirements based on RBC formulas for insurance companies. The RBC formula for life insurance companies establishes capital requirements relating to asset, insurance, interest rate, market and business risks, including equity, interest rate and expense recovery risks associated with variable annuities that contain certain guaranteed minimum death and living benefits. We are subject to RBC standards and or other minimum statutory capital and surplus requirements imposed under the New York Insurance Law. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Surplus and Capital; Risk-Based Capital.”

In any particular year, statutory surplus amounts and RBC ratios may increase or decrease depending on a variety of factors, including the amount of statutory income or losses generated by us (which itself is sensitive to equity market and credit market conditions), the amount of additional capital we must hold to support business growth, changes in equity market levels, the value and credit ratings of certain fixed-income securities in our investment portfolio, the value of certain derivative instruments that do not receive hedge accounting and changes in interest rates, as well as changes to the RBC formulas and the interpretation of the NAIC’s instructions with respect to RBC calculation methodologies. Our financial strength ratings are significantly influenced by statutory surplus amounts and RBC ratios. In addition, rating agencies may implement changes to their own internal models, which differ from the RBC capital model, that have the effect of increasing or decreasing the amount of statutory capital we should hold relative to the rating agencies’ expectations. Under stressed or stagnant capital market conditions and with the aging of existing insurance liabilities, without offsets from new business, the amount of additional statutory reserves that we are required to hold may materially increase. This increase in reserves would decrease the statutory surplus available for use in calculating our RBC ratio. To the extent that our RBC ratio is deemed to be insufficient, we may seek to take actions either to increase our capitalization or to reduce the capitalization requirements. If we were unable to accomplish such actions, the rating agencies may view this as a reason for a ratings downgrade.

The failure to meet our RBC requirements or minimum capital and surplus requirements could subject us to further examination or corrective action imposed by the NYDFS, including limitations on our ability to write additional business, supervision by regulators or seizure or liquidation. Any corrective action imposed could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. A decline in RBC ratios, whether or not it results in a failure to meet applicable RBC requirements, could result in a loss of customers or new business, and could be a factor in causing ratings agencies to downgrade our financial strength ratings, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Table of Contents

The Dodd-Frank provisions compelling the liquidation of certain types of financial institutions could materially and adversely affect us, as such a financial institution and as an investor in or counterparty to other such financial institutions, as well as our respective investors

Under provisions of Dodd-Frank, if we or another financial institution were to become insolvent or were in danger of defaulting on our or its respective obligations and it was determined that such default would have serious effects on financial stability in the United States, we or such other financial institution could be compelled to undergo liquidation with the FDIC as receiver. Under this new regime, we would be resolved in accordance with state insurance law. If the FDIC were to be appointed as the receiver for another type of company (including an insurance holding company such as Brighthouse), the liquidation of that company would occur under the provisions of the new liquidation authority, and not under the Bankruptcy Code, which ordinarily governs liquidations. In an FDIC-managed liquidation, holders of a company’s debt could in certain respects be treated differently than they would be under the Bankruptcy Code and similarly situated creditors could be treated differently. In particular, unsecured creditors and shareholders are intended to bear the losses of the company being liquidated. These provisions could apply to some financial institutions whose debt securities Brighthouse holds in its investment portfolios and could adversely affect the respective positions of creditors and the value of their respective holdings.

Dodd-Frank also provides for the assessment of charges against certain financial institutions, including non-bank systemically important financial institutions and bank holding companies, to cover the costs of liquidating any financial company subject to the new liquidation authority. The liquidation authority could increase the funding charges assessed against Brighthouse.

We are subject to U.S. federal, state and other securities and state insurance laws and regulations which, among other things, require that we distribute certain of our products through a registered broker-dealer; failure to comply with these laws, or changes to these laws may have a material adverse effect on our operations and our profitability

Federal and state securities laws and regulations apply to insurance products that are also “securities,” including variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies, to the separate accounts that issue them, and to certain fixed interest rate or index-linked contracts (“registered fixed annuity contracts”). Such laws and regulations require that we distribute these products through a broker-dealer that is registered with the SEC and certain state securities regulators and is a member of FINRA. Accordingly, by offering and selling of variable annuity contracts and registered fixed annuity contracts, we are subject to, and bear the costs of compliance with, extensive regulation under federal and state securities laws as well as FINRA rules. Due to the increased operating and compliance costs, the profitability of issuing these products is uncertain.

While prior to the Separation we relied on a MetLife-affiliated broker-dealer to distribute our variable and registered fixed products, we currently and in the future will utilize Brighthouse Securities, LLC (“Brighthouse Securities”), a subsidiary Brighthouse acquired from MetLife in the Separation. Brighthouse Securities is a FINRA member and a broker-dealer registered with the SEC and applicable state regulators.

Federal and state securities laws and regulations are primarily intended to ensure the integrity of the financial markets, to protect investors in the securities markets, and to protect investment advisory or brokerage clients. These laws and regulations generally grant regulatory and self-regulatory agencies broad rulemaking and enforcement powers, including the power to adopt new rules impacting new and/or existing products, regulate the issuance, sale and distribution of our products and limit or restrict the conduct of business for failure to comply with securities laws and regulations.

As a result of Dodd-Frank and the Fiduciary Rule, there have been a number of proposed or adopted changes to the laws and regulations that govern the conduct of our variable and registered fixed insurance products business and the firms that distribute these products. The future impact of recently adopted revisions to laws and regulations, as well as revisions that are still in the proposal stage, on the way we conduct our business and the products we sell is unclear. Such impact could adversely affect our operations and profitability, including increasing the regulatory and compliance burden upon us, resulting in increased costs, or limiting the type, amount or structure of compensation arrangements into which we may enter with certain of our employees, negatively impacting our ability to compete with other companies in recruiting and maintaining key personnel. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Federal Initiatives.” However, following the change of administration, we cannot predict with certainty whether any such proposals will be adopted, or what impact adopted revisions will have on our business, financial condition or results of operations. See “— Our business is highly regulated, and changes in regulation and in supervisory and enforcement policies may materially impact our capitalization or cash flows, reduce our profitability and limit our growth.”

The global financial crisis has led to significant changes in economic and financial markets that have, in turn, led to a dynamic competitive landscape for variable and registered fixed annuity contract issuers. Our ability to react to rapidly changing market and economic conditions will depend on the continued efficacy of provisions we have incorporated into our product design allowing frequent and contemporaneous revisions of key pricing elements and our ability to work collaboratively with federal securities regulators. Changes in regulatory approval processes, rules and other dynamics in the regulatory process could adversely impact our ability to react to such changing conditions.

Table of Contents

Changes in tax laws or interpretations of such laws could reduce our earnings and materially impact our operations by increasing our corporate taxes and making some of our products less attractive to consumers

Changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our profitability and financial condition, and could result in our incurring materially higher corporate taxes. Higher tax rates may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Conversely, if tax rates decline it could adversely affect the desirability of our products.

On December 22, 2017, President Trump signed into law sweeping changes to the tax code. The Tax Act reduced the corporate tax rate to 21%, reduced interest expense deductibility, increased capitalization amounts for deferred acquisition costs, eliminated the corporate alternative minimum tax, provided for determining reserve deductions at 92.81% of statutory reserves, and reduced the dividend received deduction. Most of the changes in the Tax Act are effective as of January 1, 2018.

The reduction in the corporate rate will require a one-time remeasurement of certain deferred tax items. For additional information on the estimated impact of the Tax Act on our financial statements, including the estimated impact resulting from the remeasurement of our deferred tax assets and liabilities, see Note 11 of the Notes to the Financial Statements. Our actual results may materially differ from our current estimate due to, among other things, further guidance that may be issued by U.S. tax authorities or regulatory bodies and/or changes in interpretations and assumptions we have preliminarily made. We will continue to analyze the Tax Act to finalize its financial statement impact.

Litigation and regulatory investigations are increasingly common in our businesses and may result in significant financial losses and/or harm to our reputation

We face a significant risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating our businesses, including the risk of class action lawsuits. Our pending legal and regulatory actions include proceedings specific to us, as well as other proceedings that raise issues that are generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which we operate. In connection with our insurance operations, plaintiffs’ lawyers may bring or are bringing class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to sales or underwriting practices, claims payments and procedures, product design, disclosure, administration, investments, denial or delay of benefits and breaches of fiduciary or other duties to customers. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against us may seek very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages. Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may be difficult to ascertain. Uncertainties can include how fact finders will evaluate documentary evidence and the credibility and effectiveness of witness testimony, and how trial and appellate courts will apply the law in the context of the pleadings or evidence presented, whether by motion practice, at trial or on appeal. Disposition valuations are also subject to the uncertainty of how opposing parties and their counsel will themselves view the relevant evidence and applicable law. Material pending litigation and regulatory matters affecting us and risks to our business presented by these proceedings, if any, are discussed in Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

A substantial legal liability or a significant federal, state or other regulatory action against us, as well as regulatory inquiries or investigations, could harm our reputation, result in material fines or penalties, result in significant legal costs and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if we ultimately prevail in the litigation, regulatory action or investigation, our ability to attract new customers, retain our current customers and recruit and retain employees could be materially and adversely impacted. Regulatory inquiries and litigation may also cause volatility in the price of stocks of companies in our industry.

Current claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and other proceedings against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. It is also possible that related or unrelated claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and proceedings may be commenced in the future, and we could become subject to further investigations and have lawsuits filed or enforcement actions initiated against us. Increased regulatory scrutiny and any resulting investigations or proceedings in any of the jurisdictions where we operate could result in new legal actions and precedents or changes in regulations that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Investments-Related Risks

Should the need arise, we may have difficulty selling certain holdings in our investment portfolio in a timely manner and realizing full value given that not all assets are liquid

There may be a limited market for certain investments we hold in our investment portfolio, making them relatively illiquid. These include privately-placed fixed maturity securities, mortgage loans and policy loans. In the past, even some of our very high quality investments experienced reduced liquidity during periods of market volatility or disruption. If we were forced to sell certain of our investments during periods of market volatility or disruption, market prices may be lower than our carrying value in such investments. This could result in realized losses which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, as well as our financial ratios, which could affect compliance with Brighthouse’s credit instruments and our rating agency capital adequacy measures.

If we need significant amounts of cash on short notice and we are forced to sell securities, we may have difficulty selling such collateral that is invested in securities in a timely manner, be forced to sell securities in a volatile or illiquid market for less than we otherwise would have been able to realize under normal market conditions, or both. In the event of a forced sale, accounting guidance requires the recognition of a loss for securities in an unrealized loss position and may require the impairment of other securities based on our ability to hold those securities, which would negatively impact our financial condition, as well as our financial ratios, which could affect compliance with our credit instruments and rating agency capital adequacy measures. In addition, under stressful capital market and economic conditions, liquidity broadly deteriorates, which may further restrict our ability to sell securities. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity.”

Table of Contents

Our requirements to pledge collateral or make payments related to declines in estimated fair value of derivatives transactions or specified assets in connection with OTC-cleared and OTC-bilateral transactions may adversely affect our liquidity, expose us to central clearinghouse and counterparty credit risk, and increase our costs of hedging

Many of our derivatives transactions require us to pledge collateral related to any decline in the net estimated fair value of such derivatives transactions executed through a specific broker at a clearinghouse or entered into with a specific counterparty on a bilateral basis. The amount of collateral we may be required to pledge and the payments we may be required to make under our derivatives transactions may increase under certain circumstances and will increase as a result of the requirement to pledge initial margin for OTC-cleared transactions entered into after June 10, 2013 and for OTC-bilateral transactions entered into after the phase-in period, which would be applicable to us in 2020 as a result of the adoption by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board, FDIC, Farm Credit Administration and Federal Housing Finance Agency (collectively, the “Prudential Regulators”) and the CFTC of final margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. Although the final rules allow us to pledge a broad range of non-cash collateral as initial and variation margin, the Prudential Regulators, CFTC, central clearinghouses and counterparties may restrict or eliminate certain types of previously eligible collateral, or charge us to pledge such non-cash collateral, which would increase our costs and could adversely affect our liquidity and the composition of our investment portfolio.

Gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities and defaults, downgrades or other events may result in future impairments to the carrying value of such securities, resulting in a reduction in our net income

Fixed maturity securities classified as available-for-sale (“AFS”) securities are reported at their estimated fair value. Unrealized gains or losses on AFS securities are recognized as a component of other comprehensive income (loss) (“OCI”) and are, therefore, excluded from net income. In recent periods, as a result of low interest rates, the unrealized gains on our fixed maturity securities have exceeded the unrealized losses. However, if interest rates rise, our unrealized gains would decrease and our unrealized losses would increase, perhaps substantially. The accumulated change in estimated fair value of these AFS securities is recognized in net income when the gain or loss is realized upon the sale of the security or in the event that the decline in estimated fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary and impairment charges to earnings are taken.

The occurrence of a major economic downturn, acts of corporate malfeasance, widening credit risk spreads, or other events that adversely affect the issuers or guarantors of securities or the underlying collateral of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”), commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) and asset-backed securities (collectively, “Structured Securities”) could cause the estimated fair value of our fixed maturity securities portfolio and corresponding earnings to decline and cause the default rate of the fixed maturity securities in our investment portfolio to increase. A ratings downgrade affecting issuers or guarantors of particular securities, or similar trends that could worsen the credit quality of issuers, such as the corporate issuers of securities in our investment portfolio, could also have a similar effect. With economic uncertainty, credit quality of issuers or guarantors could be adversely affected. Similarly, a ratings downgrade affecting a security we hold could indicate the credit quality of that security has deteriorated and could increase the capital we must hold to support that security to maintain our RBC levels. Levels of write-downs or impairments are impacted by intent to sell, or our assessment of the likelihood that we will be required to sell, fixed maturity securities. Realized losses or impairments on these securities may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition in, or at the end of, any quarterly or annual period.

Our valuation of securities and investments and the determination of the amount of allowances and impairments taken on our investments are subjective and, if changed, could materially adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition

Fixed maturity securities, as well as short-term investments that are reported at estimated fair value, represent the majority of our total cash and investments. We define fair value generally as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability. Considerable judgment is often required in interpreting market data to develop estimates of fair value, and the use of different assumptions or valuation methodologies may have a material effect of the estimated fair value amounts. During periods of market disruption, including periods of significantly rising or high interest rates, rapidly widening credit spreads or illiquidity, it may be difficult to value certain of our securities if trading becomes less frequent and/or market data becomes less observable. In addition, in times of financial market disruption, certain asset classes that were in active markets with significant observable data may become illiquid. In those cases, the valuation process includes inputs that are less observable and require more subjectivity and management judgment. Valuations may result in estimated fair values which vary significantly from the amount at which the investments may ultimately be sold. Further, rapidly changing and unprecedented credit and equity market conditions could materially impact the valuation of securities as reported within our financial statements and the period-to-period changes in estimated fair value could vary significantly. Decreases in the estimated fair value of securities we hold may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Estimated Fair Value of Investments.”

Table of Contents

The determination of the amount of allowances and impairments varies by investment type and is based upon our periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with the respective asset class. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available. We reflect any changes in allowances and impairments in earnings as such evaluations are revised. However, historical trends may not be indicative of future impairments or allowances. In addition, any such future impairments or allowances could have a materially adverse effect on our earnings and financial position. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Investment Impairments.”

Defaults on our mortgage loans and volatility in performance may adversely affect our profitability

Our mortgage loans face default risk and are principally collateralized by commercial and agricultural properties. We establish valuation allowances for estimated impairments, which are based on loan risk characteristics, historical default rates and loss severities, real estate market fundamentals and outlooks, as well as other relevant factors. In addition, substantially all of our commercial and agricultural mortgage loans held-for-investment have balloon payment maturities. An increase in the default rate of our mortgage loan investments or fluctuations in their performance could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Further, any geographic or property type concentration of our mortgage loans may have adverse effects on our investment portfolio and consequently on our results of operations or financial condition. Events or developments that have a negative effect on any particular geographic region or sector may have a greater adverse effect on our investment portfolio to the extent that the portfolio is concentrated. Moreover, our ability to sell assets relating to a group of related assets may be limited if other market participants are seeking to sell at the same time. In addition, scrutiny of the mortgage industry continues and there may be legislative proposals that would allow or require modifications to the terms of mortgage loans could be enacted. We cannot predict whether any such proposals will be adopted, or what impact, if any, such proposals or, if enacted, such laws, could have on our business or investments.

The defaults or deteriorating credit of other financial institutions could adversely affect us

We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, central clearinghouses, commercial banks, investment banks, and other financial institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of the default of our counterparty. In addition, with respect to secured transactions, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due to us. We also have exposure to these financial institutions in the form of unsecured debt instruments, derivatives and joint venture investments. Further, potential action by governments and regulatory bodies in response to the financial crisis affecting the global banking system and financial markets, such as investment, nationalization, conservatorship, receivership and other intervention, whether under existing legal authority or any new authority that may be created, or lack of action by governments and central banks, as well as deterioration in the banks’ credit standing, could negatively impact these instruments, securities, transactions and investments or limit our ability to trade with them. Any such losses or impairments to the carrying value of these investments or other changes may materially and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

The continued threat of terrorism and ongoing military actions may adversely affect the value of our investment portfolio and the level of claim losses we incur

The continued threat of terrorism, both within the United States and abroad, ongoing military and other actions and heightened security measures in response to these types of threats may cause significant volatility in global financial markets and result in loss of life, property damage, additional disruptions to commerce and reduced economic activity. The value of assets in our investment portfolio may be adversely affected by declines in the credit and equity markets and reduced economic activity caused by the continued threat of terrorism. Companies in which we maintain investments may suffer losses as a result of financial, commercial or economic disruptions and such disruptions might affect the ability of those companies to pay interest or principal on their securities or mortgage loans. Terrorist actions also could disrupt our operations centers in the U.S. and result in higher than anticipated claims under our insurance policies. See “Business — Policyholder Liabilities.”

Operational Risks

Gaps in our risk management policies and procedures may leave us exposed to unidentified or unanticipated risk, which could negatively affect our business

We have developed and continue to develop risk management policies and procedures to reflect the ongoing review of our risks and expect to continue to do so in the future. Nonetheless, our policies and procedures may not be comprehensive and may not identify every risk to which we are exposed. Many of our methods for managing risk and exposures are based upon the use of observed historical market behavior to model or project potential future exposure. Models used by our business are based on assumptions and projections which may be inaccurate. Business decisions based on incorrect or misused model output and reports could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations. Model risk may be the result of a model being misspecified for its intended purpose, being misused or producing incorrect or inappropriate results. Models used by our business may not operate properly and could contain errors related to model inputs, data, assumptions, calculations, or output which could give rise to adjustments to models that may adversely impact our results of operations. As a result, these methods may not fully predict future exposures, which can be significantly greater than our historical measures indicate. Other risk management methods depend upon the evaluation of information regarding markets, clients, catastrophe occurrence or other matters that are publicly available or otherwise accessible to us. This information may not always be accurate, complete, up-to-date or properly evaluated. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that we can effectively review and monitor all risks or that all of our employees will follow our risk management policies and procedures, nor can there be any assurance that our risk management policies and procedures will enable us to accurately identify all risks and limit our exposures based on our assessments. In addition, we may have to implement more extensive and perhaps different risk management policies and procedures under pending regulations.

Table of Contents

The failure in cyber- or other information security systems, as well as the occurrence of events unanticipated in Brighthouse’s and MetLife’s disaster recovery systems and business continuity planning could result in a loss or disclosure of confidential information, damage to our reputation and impairment of our ability to conduct business effectively

Our business is highly dependent upon the effective operation of our computer systems and, for the duration of the Transition Services Agreement and other agreements with MetLife companies, MetLife’s computer systems. We rely on these systems throughout our business for a variety of functions, including processing new business claims, and post-issue transactions, providing information to customers and distributors, performing actuarial analyses and maintaining financial records. We also retain confidential and proprietary information on such computer systems and we rely on sophisticated technologies to maintain the security of that information. Such computer systems have been, and will likely continue to be, subject to a variety of forms of cyberattacks with the objective of gaining unauthorized access to Brighthouse systems and data or disrupting Brighthouse operations. These include, but are not limited to, phishing attacks, malware, ransomware, denial of service attacks, and other computer-related penetrations. Administrative and technical controls and other preventive actions taken to reduce the risk of cyber-incidents and protect our information technology may be insufficient to prevent physical and electronic break-ins, cyber attacks or other security breaches to such computer systems. In some cases, such physical and electronic break-ins, cyber attacks or other security breaches may not be immediately detected. This may impede or interrupt our business operations and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the availability and cost of insurance for operational and other risks relating to our business and systems may change and any such change may affect our results of operations.

In the event of a disaster such as a natural catastrophe, epidemic, industrial accident, blackout, computer virus, terrorist attack, cyberattack or war, unanticipated problems with our disaster recovery systems or, for the duration of the Transition Services Agreement and other agreements with MetLife companies, MetLife’s disaster recovery systems, could have a material adverse impact on our ability to conduct business and on our results of operations and financial position, particularly if those problems affect our computer-based data processing, transmission, storage and retrieval systems and destroy valuable data. In addition, in the event that a significant number of our or MetLife’s managers were unavailable following a disaster, our ability to effectively conduct business could be severely compromised. These interruptions also may interfere with our suppliers’ ability to provide goods and services and our employees’ ability to perform their job responsibilities.

The failure of our computer systems or, for the duration of the Transition Services Agreement and other agreements with MetLife companies, MetLife’s systems, and/or our respective disaster recovery plans for any reason could cause significant interruptions in our operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to our customers. Such a failure could harm our reputation, subject us to regulatory sanctions and legal claims, lead to a loss of customers and revenues and otherwise adversely affect our business and financial results. Vendors, distributors, and other third parties, including MetLife, provide operational or information technology services to us. The failure of such third parties’ or MetLife’s computer systems and/or their disaster recovery plans for any reason might cause significant interruptions in our operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to our customers. Such a failure could harm our reputation, subject us to regulatory sanctions and legal claims, lead to a loss of customers and revenues and otherwise adversely affect our business and financial results. While we maintain cyber liability insurance that provides both third-party liability and first-party liability coverages, this insurance may not be sufficient to protect us against all losses. There can be no assurance that our information security policies and systems in place can prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information, including nonpublic personal information. See “— General Risks — Any failure to protect the confidentiality of client information could adversely affect our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.”

Our associates and those of MetLife may take excessive risks which could negatively affect our financial condition and business

As an insurance enterprise, we are in the business of accepting certain risks. The associates who conduct our business, including executive officers and other members of management, sales intermediaries, investment professionals, product managers, and other associates, as well as associates of MetLife who provide services to Brighthouse in connection with the Transition Services Agreement, the Third-Party Administrative Services Agreement or the Investment Management Agreements do so in part by making decisions and choices that involve exposing us to risk. These include decisions such as setting underwriting guidelines and standards, product design and pricing, determining what assets to purchase for investment and when to sell them, which business opportunities to pursue, and other decisions. Associates may take excessive risks regardless of the structure of our compensation programs and practices. Similarly, our controls and procedures designed to monitor associates’ business decisions and prevent them from taking excessive risks, and to prevent employee misconduct, may not be effective. If our associates take excessive risks, the impact of those risks could harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and business operations.

General Risks

Changes in accounting standards issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board may adversely affect our financial statements

Our financial statements are subject to the application of GAAP, which is periodically revised by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”), a recognized authoritative body. Accordingly, from time to time we are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards or interpretations issued by the FASB. The impact of accounting pronouncements that have been issued but not yet implemented are disclosed in our reports filed with the SEC. The FASB issued several proposed amendments to the accounting for long duration insurance contracts on September 29, 2016. One of the proposed amendments, in particular, would require all guarantees associated with our variable annuity business to be accounted for at fair value, with changes in fair value reported in net income (excluding the change in fair value attributable to nonperformance risk, which would be reported in OCI). Any of the proposed amendments to the accounting for long duration insurance contracts, if adopted, would not be expected to be effective for several years after issuance of a final standard. An assessment of the potential impact of proposed FASB standards, including the proposed changes to long duration insurance accounting, is not provided as such proposals are subject to change through the exposure process and official positions of the FASB are determined only after extensive due process and deliberations. The required adoption of these proposed and other future accounting standards could have a material adverse effect on our GAAP basis equity and results of operations, including on our net income.

Brighthouse may not be able to protect our intellectual property and may be subject to infringement claims

We rely on a combination of contractual rights with third parties and copyright, trademark, patent and trade secret laws to establish and protect our intellectual property. Third parties may infringe or misappropriate our intellectual property. We may have to litigate to enforce and protect our copyrights, trademarks, patents, trade secrets and know-how or to determine their scope, validity or enforceability. This would represent a diversion of resources that may be significant and our efforts may not prove successful. The inability to secure or protect our intellectual property assets could harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business and our ability to compete with other insurance companies and financial institutions. See “— Risks Related to Our Separation from, and Continuing Relationship with, MetLife — Our separation from MetLife could adversely affect our business and profitability due to MetLife’s strong brand and reputation.”

Table of Contents

In addition, we may be subject to claims by third parties for (i) patent, trademark or copyright infringement, (ii) breach of patent, trademark or copyright license usage rights, or (iii) misappropriation of trade secrets. Any such claims or resulting litigation could result in significant expense and liability for damages. If we were found to have infringed or misappropriated a third-party patent or other intellectual property right, we could in some circumstances be enjoined from providing certain products or services to our customers or from utilizing and benefiting from certain patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets or licenses. Alternatively, we could be required to enter into costly licensing arrangements with third parties or implement a costly alternative. Any of these scenarios could harm our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Brighthouse may experience difficulty in marketing and distributing products through our distribution channels

We distribute our products exclusively through a variety of third-party distribution channels. We may periodically negotiate the terms of these relationships, and there can be no assurance that such terms will remain acceptable to us or such third parties. Such distributors will be subject to differing commission structures, depending on the product sold, one of which is a level/asset-based commission structure; other products are subject to a more traditional commission structure. If a particular commission structure is not acceptable to these distributors, or if we are unsuccessful in attracting and retaining key associates who conduct our business, including wholesalers and financial advisors, our sales of individual insurance, annuities and investment products could decline and our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. See “— Risks Related to Our Business — Elements of our business strategy are new and may not be effective in accomplishing our objectives.”

Furthermore, an interruption in certain key relationships could materially affect our ability to market our products and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Our Separation from MetLife prompted some third parties to re-price, modify or terminate their distribution or vendor relationships with us. An interruption or significant change in certain key relationships could materially affect our ability to market our products and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In February 2016, Fidelity elected to suspend its distribution relationship with us following the announcement of the planned separation from MetLife; the suspension was the primary cause of a significant reduction in our sales of variable annuities year-over-year for the year ended December 31, 2016. Other distributors may elect to suspend, alter, reduce or terminate their distribution relationships with us for various reasons, changes in our distribution strategy, adverse developments in our business, adverse rating agency actions, or concerns about market-related risks. We are also at risk that key distribution partners may merge, change their business models in ways that affect how our products are sold, or terminate their distribution contracts with us, or that new distribution channels could emerge and adversely impact the effectiveness of our distribution efforts. In addition, we rely on a core number of our distributors to produce the majority of our sales. If any one such distributor were to terminate its relationship with us or reduce the amount of sales which it produces for us, our results of operations could be adversely affected. An increase in bank and broker-dealer consolidation activity could increase competition for access to distributors, result in greater distribution expenses and impair our ability to market products through these channels. Consolidation of distributors and/or other industry changes may also increase the likelihood that distributors will try to renegotiate the terms of any existing selling agreements to terms less favorable to us.

Because our products are distributed through unaffiliated firms, we may not be able to monitor or control the manner of their distribution despite our training and compliance programs. If our products are distributed by such firms in an inappropriate manner, or to customers for whom they are unsuitable, we may suffer reputational and other harm to our business.

In addition, our distributors may also sell our competitors’ products. If our competitors offer products that are more attractive than ours, or pay higher commission rates to the sales representatives than we do, these representatives may concentrate their efforts in selling our competitors’ products instead of ours.

Brighthouse may be unable to attract and retain key personnel to support our business

Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract and retain key personnel. We compete with other financial services companies for personnel primarily on the basis of compensation, support services and financial position. Intense competition exists for key personnel with demonstrated ability, and Brighthouse may be unable to hire or retain such personnel. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business due to loss of their skills, knowledge of our business, their years of industry experience and the potential difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel. We may not be able to attract and retain qualified personnel to fill open positions or replace or succeed members of our senior management team or other key personnel. Proposed rules implementing the executive compensation provisions of Dodd-Frank may limit the type and structure of compensation arrangements into which we may enter with certain of its employees and officers. In addition, proposed rules under Dodd-Frank would prohibit the payment of “excessive compensation” to our executives. These restrictions could negatively impact our ability to compete with other companies in recruiting and retaining key personnel.

Our ability to attract and retain highly qualified independent sales intermediaries for our products may also be negatively affected by our Separation from MetLife. We may be required to lower the prices of our products, increase our sales commissions and fees, change long-term selling and marketing agreements and take other actions to maintain our relationship with our sales

Table of Contents

intermediaries and distribution partners, all of which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. We cannot accurately predict the long-term effect that our Separation from MetLife will have on our business, sales intermediaries, customers, distributors or associates who conduct our business. In addition, we agreed in the Master Separation Agreement with MetLife that for a certain period following the date of the Master Separation Agreement, subject to customary exceptions regarding prior associates who conduct our business, general solicitation and employees who contact us without being solicited, we will not solicit for employment certain current employees of MetLife or any of its affiliates. We cannot predict how this potential agreement not to solicit employees will impact our ability to attract and recruit associates necessary to the operation of our business.

Any failure to protect the confidentiality of client information could adversely affect our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations

Pursuant to federal and state laws, various government agencies have established rules protecting the privacy and security of personal information. In addition, most states have enacted laws, which vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, to safeguard the privacy and security of personal information. Many of the associates who conduct our business have access to, and routinely process, personal information of clients through a variety of media, including information technology systems. We rely on various internal processes and controls to protect the confidentiality of client information that is accessible to us, or in our possession or the possession of our associates. It is possible that an associate could, intentionally or unintentionally, disclose or misappropriate confidential client information and our data has been the subject of cyberattacks and could be subject to additional attacks. If we fail to maintain adequate internal controls or if our associates fail to comply with our policies and procedures, misappropriation or intentional or unintentional inappropriate disclosure or misuse of client information could occur. Such internal control inadequacies or non-compliance could materially damage our reputation or lead to civil or criminal penalties, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we analyze customer data to better manage our business. There has been increased scrutiny, including from state regulators, regarding the use of “big data” techniques such as price optimization. We cannot predict what, if any, actions may be taken with regard to “big data,” but any inquiry in connection with our “big data” business practices could cause reputational harm and any limitations could have a material impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “— The failure in cyber- or other information security systems, as well as the occurrence of events unanticipated in Brighthouse’s and MetLife’s disaster recovery systems and business continuity planning could result in a loss or disclosure of confidential information, damage to our reputation and impairment of our ability to conduct business effectively.”

Risks Related to Our Separation from, and Continuing Relationship with, MetLife

Our Separation from MetLife could adversely affect our business and profitability due to MetLife’s strong brand and reputation

Prior to the Distribution, as a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, we marketed our products and services using the “MetLife” brand name and logo. We have also benefited from trademarks licensed in connection with the MetLife brand. We believe the association with MetLife provided us with preferred status among our customers, vendors and other persons due to MetLife’s globally recognized brand, reputation for high quality products and services and strong capital base and financial strength.

Our Separation from MetLife could adversely affect our ability to attract and retain customers, which could result in reduced sales of our products. In connection with the Distribution, Brighthouse entered into the Intellectual Property License Agreement and Master Separation Agreement with MetLife, pursuant to which we have a license to use certain trademarks and the “MetLife” name in certain limited circumstances, including as part of a marketing tag line, for a transition period or otherwise to refer to our historic affiliation with MetLife on selected materials for a limited period of time following the Distribution.

Our affiliate has established a portfolio of trademarks in the United States that we consider important in the marketing of our products and services, including for our name, “Brighthouse Financial.” We have also filed other trademark applications in the United States, including for our logo design and potential taglines. However, the registration of some of these trademarks is not complete and they may not all ultimately become registered. Our use of the Brighthouse Financial name for the Company or for our existing or any new products in the United States has been challenged by third parties, and our affiliates were involved in legal proceedings to protect or defend their and our rights with respect to the Brighthouse Financial name and trademarks. Although the parties to these proceedings have resolved this matter and dismissed the action, it is possible that other challenges to our trademarks could arise in the future.

As a result of our Separation from MetLife, some of our existing policyholders, contract owners and other customers have chosen, and some may in the future choose to stop doing business with us, which could increase the rate of surrenders and withdrawals in our policies and contracts. In addition, other potential policyholders and contract owners may decide not to purchase our products because we no longer are a part of MetLife.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse’s contractual arrangements with MetLife may not be adequate to meet our operational and business needs. The terms of our arrangements with MetLife may be more favorable than we would be able to obtain from an unaffiliated third party. Brighthouse may be unable to replace those services in a timely manner or on comparable terms

Brighthouse has contractual arrangements, such as the Transition Services Agreement, Investment Management Agreements, the Intellectual Property License Agreement, the Investment Finance Services Agreements entered into in connection with the Investment Management Agreements and other agreements that require MetLife affiliates to provide certain services to us, including the receipt of certain IT services pursuant to software license agreements that MetLife affiliates have with certain third-party software vendors, and the provision of investment management and related accounting, reporting, actuarial and other administrative services by MLIA with respect to our general and separate account investment portfolios. There can be no assurance that the services to be provided by the MetLife affiliates will be sufficient to meet our operational and business needs, that the MetLife affiliates will be able to perform such functions in a manner satisfactory to us, that MetLife’s practices and procedures will enable it to adequately administer the policies it handles or that any remedies available under these arrangements will be sufficient to us in the event of a dispute or nonperformance. See “— Risks Related to Our Business — The failure of third parties to provide various services, or any failure of the practices and procedures that these third parties use to provide services to us, could have a material adverse effect on our business.”

Upon termination or expiration of any agreement between Brighthouse and MetLife affiliates, there can be no assurance that these services will be sustained at the same levels as they were when we were receiving such services from MetLife or that Brighthouse or we will be able to obtain the same benefits from another provider or that Brighthouse’s or our indemnity rights from such third parties will not be limited. Brighthouse or we may not be able to replace services and arrangements in a timely manner or on terms and conditions, including cost, as favorable as those we have previously received from MetLife. The agreements with the MetLife affiliates were entered into in the context of intercompany relationships that arose from enterprise-wide agreements with vendors, and we may have to pay higher prices for similar services from MetLife or unaffiliated third parties in the future. See “— Risks Related to Our Business — The failure of third parties to provide various services, or any failure of the practices and procedures that these third parties use to provide services to us, could have a material adverse effect on our business.”

There are incremental costs as a subsidiary of a separate, public company

As a result of the Separation, Brighthouse needed to replicate or replace certain functions, systems and infrastructure to which we do not have the same access. Brighthouse has also begun to make infrastructure investments in order to operate without the same access to MetLife’s existing operational and administrative infrastructure. These initiatives involve substantial costs, the hiring and integration of a large number of new employees, and integration of the new and expanded operations and infrastructure with our existing operations and infrastructure and, in some cases, the operations and infrastructure of our partners and other third parties. They also require significant time and attention from our senior management and others throughout Brighthouse, in addition to their day-to-day responsibilities running the business. There can be no assurance that Brighthouse will be able to establish and expand the operations and infrastructure to the extent required, in the time, or at the costs anticipated, and without disrupting our ongoing business operations in a material way, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our business has benefited from MetLife’s purchasing power when procuring goods and services. As a standalone company, Brighthouse may be unable to obtain such goods and services at comparable prices or on terms as favorable as those obtained prior to the Distribution, which could decrease our overall profitability. See “— Brighthouse’s contractual arrangements with MetLife may not be adequate to meet our operational and business needs. The terms of our arrangements with MetLife may be more favorable than we would be able to obtain from an unaffiliated third party. Brighthouse may be unable to replace those services in a timely manner or on comparable terms.”

Risks Relating to the Distribution

If the Distribution were to fail to qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes, then we could be subject to significant tax liabilities

The Distribution was conditioned on the continued validity as of the Distribution date of the private letter ruling that MetLife has received from the IRS regarding certain significant issues under the Code, and the receipt and continued validity as of the Distribution date of an opinion from MetLife’s tax advisor that the Distribution qualifies for non-recognition of gain or loss to MetLife and MetLife’s shareholders pursuant to Sections 355 and 361 of the Code, except to the extent of cash received in lieu of fractional shares, each subject to the accuracy of and compliance with certain representations, assumptions and covenants therein.

Notwithstanding the receipt of the private letter ruling and the tax opinion, the IRS could determine that the Distribution should be treated as a taxable transaction if it determines that any of the representations, assumptions or covenants on which the private letter ruling is based are untrue or have been violated. Furthermore, as part of the IRS’s policy, the IRS did not determine whether the Distribution satisfies certain conditions that are necessary to qualify for non-recognition treatment. Rather, the private letter ruling is based on representations by MetLife and Brighthouse that these conditions have been satisfied. The tax opinion addresses the satisfaction of these conditions.

The tax opinion is not binding on the IRS or the courts, and there can be no assurance that the IRS or a court will not take a contrary position. In addition, the tax advisor relied on certain representations and covenants that have been delivered by MetLife and Brighthouse.

If the IRS ultimately determines that the Distribution is taxable, we could incur significant U.S. federal income tax liabilities, and Brighthouse could have an indemnification obligation to MetLife. For a more detailed discussion, see “— Potential indemnification obligations if the Distribution does not qualify for non-recognition treatment or if certain other steps that are part of the Separation do not qualify for their intended tax treatment could materially adversely affect our financial condition.”

Potential indemnification obligations if the Distribution does not qualify for non-recognition treatment or if certain other steps that are part of the Separation do not qualify for their intended tax treatment could materially adversely affect our financial condition

Generally, taxes resulting from the failure of the Distribution to qualify for non-recognition treatment for U.S. federal income tax purposes would be imposed on MetLife or MetLife’s shareholders and, under a tax separation agreement the Company entered into with MetLife (the “Tax Separation Agreement”), MetLife is generally obligated to indemnify Brighthouse against such taxes if the failure to qualify for tax-free treatment results from any action or inaction that is within MetLife’s control or if the failure results from any direct or indirect transfer of MetLife’s stock. MetLife may have an adverse interpretation of or object to its indemnification obligations to Brighthouse under the Tax Separation Agreement, and there can be no assurance that MetLife will be able to satisfy its indemnification obligation to Brighthouse or that such indemnification will be sufficient to us in the event of a dispute or nonperformance by MetLife. The failure of MetLife to fully indemnify Brighthouse could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, MetLife will generally bear tax-related losses due to the failure of certain steps that were part of the Separation to qualify for their intended tax treatment. However, the IRS could seek to hold Brighthouse responsible for such liabilities, and under the Tax Separation Agreement, Brighthouse could be required, under certain circumstances, to indemnify MetLife and its affiliates against certain tax-related liabilities caused by those failures, to the extent those liabilities result from an action Brighthouse or its affiliates, including us, take or from any breach of Brighthouse’s or its affiliates’, including us, representations, covenants or obligations under the Tax Separation Agreement. Events triggering an indemnification obligation under the Tax Separation Agreement include ceasing to actively conduct Brighthouse’s business and events occurring after the Distribution that cause MetLife to recognize a gain under Section 355(e) of the Code. If the Distribution does not qualify for non-recognition treatment or if certain other steps that are part of the Separation do not qualify for their intended tax treatment, we could be required to pay material additional taxes or an indemnification obligation to MetLife, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition.

We could be required to pay material additional taxes or suffer other material adverse tax consequences if the tax consequences of the Separation to us are not as expected

The Separation is expected to have certain federal income tax consequences to MetLife and to Brighthouse, including us, as set forth in a private letter ruling issued by the IRS to MetLife and opinions provided by MetLife’s tax advisors. These opinions are not binding on the IRS or the courts, and the tax opinions and the private letter ruling do not address all of the tax consequences of the Separation to Brighthouse, including us. The Separation is a complex transaction subject to numerous tax rules, including rules that could require us to reduce our tax attributes (such as the basis in our assets) in certain circumstances, and the application of these various rules to the Separation is not entirely clear. The ultimate tax consequences to us of the Separation may not be finally determined for many years and may differ from the tax consequences that we and MetLife currently expect and intend to report. As a result, we could be required to pay material additional taxes and to materially reduce the tax assets (or materially increase the tax liabilities) on our balance sheet. These changes could impact our available capital, ratings or cost of capital. There can be no assurance that the Tax Separation Agreement will protect Brighthouse, including us, from any such consequences, or that any issue that may arise will be subject to indemnification by MetLife under the Tax Separation Agreement. As a result, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Table of Contents

Disputes or disagreements with MetLife may affect our financial statements and business operations, and Brighthouse’s contractual remedies may not be sufficient

In connection with the Separation, Brighthouse entered into certain agreements that provide a framework for the ongoing relationship with MetLife, including a Transition Services Agreement, a Tax Separation Agreement and a Tax Receivables Agreement. Brighthouse’s agreements with MetLife may not reflect terms that would have resulted from negotiation between unaffiliated parties. Such provisions may include, among other things, indemnification rights and obligations, the allocation of tax liabilities, and other payment obligations between Brighthouse, including us, and MetLife. Disagreements regarding the obligations of MetLife or Brighthouse, including us, under these agreements or any renegotiation of their terms could create disputes that may be resolved in a manner unfavorable to Brighthouse, including us. In addition, there can be no assurance that any remedies available under these agreements will be sufficient to Brighthouse, including us, in the event of a dispute or nonperformance by MetLife or that any such remedies will be sufficiently broad to cover any issues that arise under Brighthouse’s arrangements with MetLife. The failure of MetLife to perform its obligations under these agreements (or claims by MetLife that Brighthouse has failed to perform its obligations under the agreements) may have a material adverse effect on our financial statements, and could consume substantial resources and attention thus creating a material adverse impact on our business performance.

Brighthouse is required to pay MetLife for certain tax benefits, which amounts are expected to be material

In partial consideration for the assets contributed by MetLife to Brighthouse, Brighthouse has entered into a Tax Receivables Agreement with MetLife that provided for the payment by Brighthouse to MetLife of 86% of the amount of cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal income tax that Brighthouse and its subsidiaries, including the us, actually realize (or are deemed to realize under certain circumstances, as discussed in more detail under the heading “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions — Agreements Between Us and MetLife — Tax Agreements — Tax Receivables Agreement” included in Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017) as a result of the utilization of Brighthouse’s and its subsidiaries’, including our, net operating losses, capital losses, tax basis and amortization or depreciation deductions in respect of certain tax benefits Brighthouse, including us, may realize as a result of certain transactions involved in the Separation, together with interest accrued from the date the applicable tax return is due (without extension) until the date the applicable payment is due.

Estimating the amount of payments that may be made under the Tax Receivables Agreement is by its nature imprecise, insofar as the calculation of amounts payable depends on a variety of factors. The actual amount and utilization of net operating losses, tax basis and other tax attributes, as well as the amount and timing of any payments under the Tax Receivables Agreement, will vary depending upon a number of factors, including the amount, character and timing of Brighthouse’s and its subsidiaries’, including our, taxable income in the future. The Base Case Scenario has not assumed any benefit from the deferred taxes that are subject to the Tax Receivables Agreement.

If Brighthouse breaches any of its material obligations under the Tax Receivables Agreement or undergoes a change of control as defined in the Tax Receivables Agreement, the Tax Receivables Agreement will terminate and Brighthouse will be required to make a lump sum payment equal to the present value of expected future payments under the Tax Receivables Agreement, which payment would be based on certain assumptions, including those relating to Brighthouse’s and its subsidiaries’, including our, future taxable income. Additionally, if Brighthouse or a direct or indirect subsidiary, including us, transfers any asset to a corporation with which Brighthouse does not file a consolidated tax return, Brighthouse will be treated as having sold that asset for its fair market value in a taxable transaction for purposes of determining the cash savings in income tax under the Tax Receivables Agreement. If Brighthouse sells or otherwise disposes of any of its subsidiaries, including us, in a transaction that is not a change of control, Brighthouse will be required to make a payment equal to the present value of future payments under the Tax Receivables Agreement attributable to the tax benefits of such subsidiary that is sold or disposed of, applying the assumptions described above. Any such payment resulting from a breach of material obligations, change of control, asset transfer or subsidiary disposition could be substantial and could exceed our actual cash tax savings.

Certain of our directors and officers may have actual or potential conflicts of interest because of their MetLife equity ownership or their former MetLife positions

Certain of the persons who currently are our executive officers and directors have been MetLife officers, directors or employees and, thus, will have professional relationships with MetLife’s executive officers, directors or employees. In addition, because of their former MetLife positions, certain of our directors and executive officers may own MetLife common stock, or have received equity-based awards from MetLife pursuant to which they may acquire or receive shares of MetLife common stock, and, for some of these individuals, their individual holdings may be significant compared to their total assets. These relationships and financial interests may create, or may create the appearance of, conflicts of interest when these directors and officers are faced with decisions that could have different implications for MetLife and us. For example, potential conflicts of interest could arise in connection with the resolution of any dispute that may arise between MetLife and Brighthouse regarding the terms of the agreements governing the Distribution and the Separation, and the relationship thereafter between the companies.

Table of Contents

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

Item 2. Properties

Our principal executive office is currently located in New York, New York, and is utilized by both our segments and Corporate & Other. This location is leased by Brighthouse Services, LLC (“Brighthouse Services”) from a third party. The term of that lease expires in October 2027. In connection with the Separation, BHNY entered into a service agreement with Brighthouse Services under which Brighthouse Services provides the aforementioned principal executive office to support the activities of BHNY.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

See Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

Table of Contents

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

No established public trading market exists for BHNY’s common equity; all of BHNY’s common stock is held by Brighthouse Life Insurance Company.

During both of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, BHNY paid no dividends to our then parent. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for a discussion of restrictions on BHNY’s ability to pay dividends. The maximum amount of dividends which BHNY may pay in 2018, without prior regulatory approval, is $21.0 million.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(a) of Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Index to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations



	Page
Introduction	46
Overview	46
Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates	47
Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures	51
Results of Operations	53
Effects of Inflation	57
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements	57
Liquidity and Capital Resources	57

Table of Contents

Introduction

For purposes of this discussion, “BHNY,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (formerly, “FMLI”), a New York domiciled life insurance company. BHNY is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “Brighthouse”). Management’s narrative analysis of the results of operations is presented pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(a) of Form 10-K. This discussion should be read in conjunction with “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” “Risk Factors,” “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” and the Company’s financial statements included elsewhere herein.

The following discussion may contain forward-looking statements that reflect our plans, estimates and beliefs. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to these differences include those factors discussed below and elsewhere in this report, particularly in “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors.”

This narrative analysis includes references to our performance measure, adjusted earnings, that is not based on GAAP. This measure is used by management to evaluate performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, adjusted earnings is also our GAAP measure of segment performance. Adjusted earnings allows analysis of our performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results. See “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for a definition and discussion of this and other financial measures, and “— Results of Operations” for reconciliations of historical non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.

In 2017 we allocated capital to our segments based on an internal capital model developed by MetLife, which is a model that reflects the capital required to represent the measurement of the risk profile of the business. Going forward, we will allocate capital to our segments based on the statutory-oriented funding target of each segment. The funding target will be the sum of the net statutory liabilities plus management’s allocation of statutory surplus.

We also allocate capital to our segments to meet our long-term promises to clients, to service long-term obligations and to support our credit and financial strength ratings. Segment net investment income is credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact our total company net investment income or net income (loss). Going forward, changes in allocated equity based on the new statutory-oriented internal capital methodology will also not impact our total company net investment income or net income (loss). See Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for a discussion of the internal capital model and segment accounting policies including the calculation of segment net investment income.

Overview

We offer a range of individual annuities and individual life insurance products in New York. For operating purposes we have established two reporting segments: Annuities and Life. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. See Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for further information on the Company’s segments and Corporate & Other. Management continues to evaluate the Company’s segment performance and allocated resources and may adjust related measurements in the future to better reflect segment profitability.

Table of Contents

Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported on the Financial Statements.

The most critical estimates include those used in determining:


(i)	liabilities for future policy benefits;


(ii)	accounting for reinsurance;


(iii)	capitalization and amortization of DAC and the establishment and amortization of value of business acquired (“VOBA”);


(iv)	estimated fair values of investments in the absence of quoted market values;


(v)	investment impairments;


(vi)	estimated fair values of freestanding derivatives and the recognition and estimated fair value of embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation;


(vii)	measurement of income taxes and the valuation of deferred tax assets; and


(viii)	liabilities for litigation and regulatory matters.

In applying our accounting policies, we make subjective and complex judgments that frequently require estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. Many of these policies, estimates and related judgments are common in the insurance and financial services industries; others are specific to our business and operations. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

The above critical accounting estimates are described below and in Note 1 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Liability for Future Policy Benefits

Generally, future policy benefits are payable over an extended period of time and related liabilities are calculated as the present value of future expected benefits to be paid, reduced by the present value of future expected premiums. Such liabilities are established based on methods and underlying assumptions that are in accordance with GAAP and applicable actuarial standards. The principal assumptions used in the establishment of liabilities for future policy benefits are mortality, morbidity, benefit utilization and withdrawals, policy lapse, retirement, investment returns, inflation, expenses and other contingent events as appropriate to the respective product type. These assumptions, intended to estimate the experience for the period the policy benefits are payable, are established at the time the policy is issued and locked in. Utilizing these assumptions, liabilities are established on a block of business basis. If experience is less favorable than assumed, DAC may be reduced and/or additional insurance liabilities established, resulting in a reduction in earnings.

Future policy benefit liabilities for GMDBs and GMIBs relating to certain variable annuity contracts are based on estimates of the expected value of benefits in excess of the projected account balance, recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on total expected assessments.

We regularly review our assumptions supporting our estimates of actuarial liabilities for future policy benefits. For universal life and annuity product guarantees, assumptions are updated periodically, whereas for traditional life products, such as term life and non-participating whole life insurance, assumptions are established and locked in at inception but reviewed periodically to determine whether a premium deficiency exists that would trigger an unlocking of assumptions. We also review our actuarial liabilities to determine if profits are projected in earlier years followed by losses projected in later years, which could require us to establish an additional liability. Differences between actual experience and the assumptions used in pricing our policies and guarantees, as well as adjustments to the related liabilities, result in variances in profit and could result in losses.

See Note 1 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on our accounting policy relating to variable annuity guarantees and liability for future policy benefits and Note 3 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for future policyholder benefit liabilities.

Reinsurance

Accounting for reinsurance requires extensive use of assumptions and estimates, particularly related to the future performance of the underlying business and the potential impact of counterparty credit risk with respect to reinsurance receivables. We periodically review actual and anticipated experience compared to the aforementioned assumptions used to establish assets and liabilities relating to ceded and assumed reinsurance and evaluate the financial strength of counterparties to our reinsurance agreements using criteria similar to those evaluated in our security impairment process. See “— Investment Impairments.”

Table of Contents

Additionally, for each of our reinsurance agreements, we determine whether the agreement provides indemnification against loss or liability relating to insurance risk, in accordance with applicable accounting standards. We review all contractual features, including those that may limit the amount of insurance risk to which the reinsurer is subject or features that delay the timely reimbursement of claims. We evaluate present values of projected future cash flows on blocks of policies subject to new reinsurance agreements in light of all such contractual features to determine whether our reinsurance counterparties are exposed to a reasonable possibility of significant loss. Such analysis involves management estimates as to the cash flow projections as well as management judgment as to what constitutes a reasonable possibility of significant loss. If we determine that a reinsurance agreement does not expose the reinsurer to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk, we record the agreement using the deposit method of accounting.

See Note 5 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on our reinsurance programs.

Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired

We incur significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that relate directly to the successful acquisition or renewal of insurance contracts are deferred as DAC. In addition to commissions and other direct costs, deferrable costs include the portion of an employee’s total compensation and benefits related to time spent selling, underwriting or processing the issuance of new and renewal insurance business only with respect to actual policies acquired or renewed. We utilize various techniques to estimate the portion of an employee’s time spent on qualifying acquisition activities that result in actual sales, including surveys, interviews, representative time studies and other methods. These estimates include assumptions that are reviewed and updated on a periodic basis or more frequently to reflect significant changes in processes or distribution methods.

VOBA represents the excess of book value over the estimated fair value of acquired insurance, annuity and investment-type contracts in force at the acquisition date. The estimated fair value of the acquired liabilities is based on projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operational expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. Actual experience on the purchased business may vary from these projections. The recovery of DAC and VOBA is dependent upon the future profitability of the related business.

Separate account rates of return on variable deferred annuity contracts affect in-force account balances on such contracts each reporting period, which can result in significant fluctuations in amortization of DAC and VOBA, which is based on estimated gross profits. Our practice to determine the impact of gross profits resulting from returns on separate accounts assumes that long-term appreciation in equity markets is not changed by short-term market fluctuations, but is only changed when sustained interim deviations are expected. We monitor these events and only change the assumption when our long-term expectation changes. The effect of an increase (decrease) by 100 basis points in the assumed future rate of return is reasonably likely to result in a decrease (increase) in the DAC and VOBA amortization with an offset to our unearned revenue liability which nets to approximately $16 million. We use a mean reversion approach to separate account returns where the mean reversion period is five years with a long-term separate account return after the five-year reversion period is over. The current long-term rate of return assumption for the variable deferred annuity contracts is in the mid-6% range.

We also generally review other long-term assumptions underlying the projections of estimated gross profits on an annual basis. These assumptions primarily relate to investment returns, interest crediting rates, mortality, persistency, benefit elections and withdrawals, and expenses to administer business. Assumptions used in the calculation of estimated gross profits which may have significantly changed are updated annually. If the update of assumptions causes expected future gross profits to increase, DAC and VOBA amortization will generally decrease, resulting in a current period increase to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the assumption update causes expected future gross profits to decrease.

Our most significant assumption updates resulting in a change to the expected future gross profits and the amortization of DAC and VOBA are due to revisions to expenses, in-force or persistency assumptions, benefit elections, withdrawals and expected future investment returns on annuity contracts and universal life insurance policies. We expect these assumptions to be the ones most reasonably likely to cause significant changes in the future. Changes in these assumptions can be offsetting and we are unable to predict their movement or offsetting impact over time.

In addition, we update the estimated gross profits with actual gross profits in each reporting period. When the change in estimated gross profits principally relates to the difference between actual and estimates in the current period, an increase in profits will generally result in an increase in amortization and a decrease in profits will generally result in a decrease in amortization.

See Note 4 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information related to DAC and VOBA amortization.

Table of Contents

Estimated Fair Value of Investments

In determining the estimated fair value of our investments, fair values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical investments in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. When such quoted prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar but not identical investments, or other observable inputs. If these inputs are not available, or observable inputs are not determinable, unobservable inputs and/or adjustments to observable inputs requiring management judgment are used to determine the estimated fair value of investments.

The methodologies, assumptions and inputs utilized are described in Note 8 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Financial markets are susceptible to severe events evidenced by rapid depreciation in asset values accompanied by a reduction in asset liquidity. Our ability to sell investments, or the price ultimately realized for investments, depends upon the demand and liquidity in the market and increases the use of judgment in determining the estimated fair value of certain investments.

Investment Impairments

One of the significant estimates related to AFS securities is our impairment evaluation. The assessment of whether an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) occurred is based on our case-by-case evaluation of the underlying reasons for the decline in estimated fair value on a security-by-security basis. Our review of each fixed maturity and equity security for OTTI includes an analysis of gross unrealized losses by three categories of severity and/or age of gross unrealized loss. An extended and severe unrealized loss position on a fixed maturity security may not have any impact on the ability of the issuer to service all scheduled interest and principal payments. Accordingly, such an unrealized loss position may not impact our evaluation of recoverability of all contractual cash flows or the ability to recover an amount at least equal to its amortized cost based on the present value of the expected future cash flows to be collected.

Additionally, we consider a wide range of factors about the security issuer and use our best judgment in evaluating the cause of the decline in the estimated fair value of the security and in assessing the prospects for near-term recovery. Inherent in our evaluation of the security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. Factors we consider in the OTTI evaluation process are described in Note 6 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

The determination of the amount of allowances and impairments on the remaining invested asset classes is highly subjective and is based upon our periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with the respective asset class. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.

See Notes 1 and 6 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information relating to our determination of the amount of allowances and impairments.

Derivatives

We use freestanding derivative instruments to hedge various capital market risks in our products, including: (i) certain guarantees, some of which are reported as embedded derivatives; (ii) current or future changes in the fair value of our assets and liabilities; and (iii) current or future changes in cash flows. All derivatives, whether freestanding or embedded, are required to be carried on the balance sheet at fair value with changes reflected in either net income (loss) or in OCI, depending on the type of hedge. Below is a summary of critical accounting estimates by type of derivative.

Freestanding Derivatives

The determination of the estimated fair value of freestanding derivatives, when quoted market values are not available, is based on market standard valuation methodologies and inputs that management believes are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments. Derivative valuations can be affected by changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, financial indices, credit spreads, default risk, nonperformance risk, volatility, liquidity and changes in estimates and assumptions used in the pricing models. See Note 7 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on significant inputs into the OTC derivative pricing models and credit risk adjustment.

Embedded Derivatives

We issue variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits, some of which are embedded derivatives measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity product, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The estimated fair values of these embedded derivatives are determined based on the present value of projected future benefits minus the present value of projected future fees attributable to the guarantee. The projections of future benefits and future fees require capital markets and actuarial assumptions, including expectations concerning policyholder behavior. A risk neutral valuation methodology is used under which the cash flows from the guarantees are projected under multiple capital market scenarios using observable risk-free rates.

Table of Contents

Market conditions, including, but not limited to, changes in interest rates, equity indices, market volatility and variations in actuarial assumptions, including policyholder behavior, mortality and risk margins related to non-capital market inputs, as well as changes in our nonperformance risk adjustment may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of the guarantees that could materially affect net income. Changes to actuarial assumptions, principally related to contract holder behavior such as annuitization utilization and withdrawals associated with GMIB riders, can result in a change of expected future cash outflows of a guarantee between the accrual-based model for insurance liabilities and the fair-value based model for embedded derivatives. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information relating to the determination of the accounting model. Risk margins are established to capture the non-capital market risks of the instrument which represent the additional compensation a market participant would require to assume the risks related to the uncertainties in certain actuarial assumptions. The establishment of risk margins requires the use of significant management judgment, including assumptions of the amount and cost of capital needed to cover the guarantees.

We cede the risk associated with the variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits described in the preceding paragraphs to our parent, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company. The ceded guarantees are accounted for as an embedded derivative with the value determined using a methodology consistent with that described previously for the guarantees directly written by us. However, because certain directly written GMIB riders are accounted for as insurance liabilities rather than fair value, significant fluctuations in net income may occur when the change in the fair value of the reinsurance recoverable is recorded in net income without a corresponding and offsetting change in fair value of the directly written guaranteed liability.

See Note 7 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on our embedded derivatives.

Nonperformance Risk Adjustment

The valuation of our embedded derivatives includes an adjustment for the risk that we fail to satisfy our obligations, which we refer to as our nonperformance risk. The nonperformance risk adjustment, which is captured as a spread over the risk-free rate in determining the discount rate to discount the cash flows of the liability, as well as the related reinsurance assets, was previously determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for MetLife, Inc.’s debt, including related credit default swaps.

In the third quarter of 2017, in connection with the Separation, we updated our assumptions for determining the credit spread underlying the nonperformance risk adjustment to be based on Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s creditworthiness instead of that of MetLife, Inc. The credit spread was determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s debt. These observable spreads are then adjusted, as necessary, to reflect the financial strength ratings of the issuing insurance subsidiaries as compared to the credit rating of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.

Income Taxes

We provide for federal and state income taxes currently payable, as well as those deferred due to temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Our accounting for income taxes represents our best estimate of various events and transactions. Tax laws are often complex and may be subject to differing interpretations by the taxpayer and the relevant governmental taxing authorities. In establishing a provision for income tax expense, we must make judgments and interpretations about the application of tax laws. We must also make estimates about when in the future certain items will affect taxable income in the various taxing jurisdictions.

In establishing a liability for unrecognized tax benefits, assumptions may be made in determining whether, and to what extent, a tax position may be sustained. Once established, unrecognized tax benefits are adjusted when there is more information available or when events occur requiring a change.

Valuation allowances are established against deferred tax assets, particularly those arising from carryforwards, when management determines, based on available information, that it is more likely than not that deferred income tax assets will not be realized. The realization of deferred tax assets related to carryforwards depends upon the existence of sufficient taxable income within the carryforward periods under the tax law in the applicable tax jurisdiction. Significant judgment is required in projecting future taxable income to determine whether valuation allowances should be established, as well as the amount of such allowances. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information relating to our determination of such valuation allowances.

We may be required to change our provision for income taxes when estimates used in determining valuation allowances on deferred tax assets significantly change, or when new information indicates the need for adjustment in valuation allowances. Additionally, future events, such as changes in tax laws, tax regulations, or interpretations of such laws or regulations, could have an impact on the provision for income tax and the effective tax rate. Any such changes could significantly affect the amounts reported in the financial statements in the year these changes occur.

Table of Contents

On December 22, 2017, President Trump signed the Tax Act into law. The Tax Act reduced the corporate tax rate to 21%, reduced interest expense deductibility, increased capitalization amounts for deferred acquisition costs, eliminated the corporate alternative minimum tax, provided for determining reserve deductions at 92.81% of statutory reserves, and reduced the dividend received deduction. Most of the changes in the Tax Act are effective on January 1, 2018.

The reduction in the corporate rate required a one-time remeasurement of certain deferred tax items as of December 31, 2017. For the estimated impact of the Tax Act on the financial statements, including the estimated impact resulting from the remeasurement of deferred tax assets and liabilities. See Note 11 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for more information. Actual results may materially differ from the Company’s current estimate due to, among other things, further guidance that may be issued by tax authorities or regulatory bodies and/or changes in interpretations and assumptions preliminarily made. The Company will continue to analyze the Tax Act to finalize its financial statement impact.

In December 2017, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) 118, addressing the application of GAAP in situations when a registrant does not have necessary information available to complete the accounting for certain income tax effects of the Tax Act. SAB 118 provides guidance for registrants under three scenarios: (1) the measurement of certain income tax effects is complete, (2) the measurement of certain income tax effects can be reasonably estimated, and (3) the measurement of certain income tax effects cannot be reasonably estimated. SAB 118 provides that the measurement period is complete when a company’s accounting is complete. The measurement period cannot extend beyond one year from the enactment date. SAB 118 acknowledges that a company may be able to complete the accounting for some provisions earlier than others. As such, it may need to apply all three scenarios in determining the accounting for the Tax Act based on information that is available. The Company has not fully completed its accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Act, and thus certain items relating to accounting for the Tax Act are provisional, including accounting for reserves. However, it has recorded the effects of the Tax Act as reasonable estimates due to the need for further analysis of the provisions within the Tax Act and collection, preparation and analysis of relevant data necessarily to complete the accounting.

The reduction in the corporate rate also left certain tax effects, which were originally booked using the previous corporate rate, stranded in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”). The Company adopted new accounting guidance as of December 31, 2017 that allowed the Company to reclassify the stranded tax effects from AOCI into retained earnings. The Company elected to reclassify amounts based on the difference between the previously enacted federal corporate tax rate and the newly enacted rate as applied on an aggregate basis.

See Notes 1 and 11 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information on our income taxes.

Litigation Contingencies

We are a party to a number of legal actions and are involved in a number of regulatory investigations. Given the inherent unpredictability of these matters, it is difficult to estimate the impact on our financial position. Liabilities are established when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. On a quarterly and annual basis, we review relevant information with respect to liabilities for litigation, regulatory investigations and litigation-related contingencies to be reflected in our results of operations and financial condition.

See Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for additional information regarding our assessment of litigation contingencies.

Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures

Non-GAAP Financial Disclosures

Adjusted Earnings

In this report, we present adjusted earnings as a measure of our performance that is not calculated in accordance with GAAP. We believe that this non-GAAP financial measure enhances the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of our business. However, adjusted earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for net income (loss), which is the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP. See “— Results of Operations” for a reconciliation of adjusted earnings to net income (loss). A reconciliation of adjusted earnings to net income (loss) is not accessible on a forward-looking basis because we believe it is not possible without unreasonable efforts to provide other than a range of net investment gains and losses and net derivative gains and losses, which can fluctuate significantly within or outside the range and from period to period and may have a material impact on net income (loss).

Table of Contents

Our definitions of the non-GAAP and other financial measures discussed in this report may differ from those used by other companies. For example, as indicated below, we exclude GMIB revenues and related embedded derivatives gains (losses), as well as GMIB benefits and associated DAC and VOBA offsets from adjusted earnings, thereby excluding substantially all GMLB activity from adjusted earnings.

Adjusted earnings, which may be positive or negative, is used by management to evaluate performance, allocate resources and facilitate comparisons to industry results. This financial measure focuses on our primary businesses principally by excluding the impact of market volatility, which could distort trends, as well as businesses that have been or will be sold or exited by us, referred to as divested businesses.

The following are the significant items excluded from total revenues, net of income tax, in calculating adjusted earnings:


•	Net investment gains (losses);


•	Net derivative gains (losses) except earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments or that are used to replicate certain investments, but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment (“Investment Hedge Adjustments”); and


•	Amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity GMIB fees (“GMIB Fees”).

The following are the significant items excluded from total expenses, net of income tax, in calculating adjusted earnings:


•	Amounts associated with benefits and hedging costs related to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”);


•	Amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets and market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”); and


•	Amortization of DAC and VOBA related to (i) net investment gains (losses), (ii) net derivative gains (losses), (iii) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs and (iv) Market Value Adjustments.

The tax impact of the adjustments mentioned are calculated net of the U.S. statutory tax rate, which could differ from our effective tax rate.

We present adjusted earnings in a manner consistent with management’s view of the primary business activities that drive the profitability of our core businesses. The following table illustrates how each component of adjusted earnings is calculated from the GAAP statement of operations line items:



Component of Adjusted Earnings		How Derived from GAAP (1)
(i)	Fee income	(i)	Universal life and investment-type policy fees (excluding (a) unearned revenue adjustments related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and (b) GMIB Fees) plus Other revenues (excluding other revenues associated with related party reinsurance) and amortization of deferred gain on reinsurance.
(ii)	Net investment spread	(ii)	Net investment income plus Investment Hedge Adjustments and interest received on ceded fixed annuity reinsurance deposit funds reduced by Interest credited to policyholder account balances and interest on future policy benefits.
(iii)	Insurance-related activities	(iii)	Premiums less Policyholder benefits and claims (excluding (a) GMIB Costs, (b) Market Value Adjustments, (c) interest on future policy benefits and (d) amortization of deferred gain on reinsurance plus the pass through of performance of ceded separate account assets.
(iv)	Amortization of DAC and VOBA	(iv)	Amortization of DAC and VOBA (excluding amounts related to (a) net investment gains (losses), (b) net derivative gains (losses), (c) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs and (d) Market Value Adjustments.)
(v)	Other expenses, net of DAC capitalization	(v)	Other expenses reduced by capitalization of DAC and securitization entities expense.
(vi)	Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(vi)	Tax impact of the above items.

______________


(1)	Italicized items indicate GAAP statement of operations line items.

Table of Contents

Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, adjusted earnings is also our GAAP measure of segment performance. Accordingly, we report adjusted earnings by segment in Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Other Financial Disclosures

The following additional information is relevant to an understanding of our performance results:

•

We sometimes refer to sales activity for various products. Statistical sales information for life sales are calculated using the LIMRA (Life Insurance Marketing and Research Association) definition of sales for core direct sales, excluding company sponsored internal exchanges, corporate-owned life insurance, bank-owned life insurance, and private placement variable universal life insurance. Annuity sales consist of 10% of direct statutory premiums, excluding company sponsored internal exchanges. These sales statistics do not correspond to revenues under GAAP, but are used as relevant measures of business activity.


•	Allocated equity is the portion of common stockholder’s equity that management allocates to each of its segments and sub-segments. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Introduction” and Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for further details regarding allocated equity and the use of an internal capital model.

Results of Operations

Results for the Years Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

Business Overview. Annuity sales increased 151% for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to 2016. This increase resulted primarily from sales of our index-linked annuities (“Shield Annuities”), previously issued by MLIC, which we began selling in the first quarter of 2017. This increase was partially offset by lower sales of our variable annuities with GMWBs and GMIBs, as well as lower sales of single-premium immediate annuities. With the exception of a limited number of term and whole life products and renewal premiums on in-force business, we are not accepting new sales of most traditional life products. In the second quarter of 2017, we began selling a new universal life product.

A significant portion of our net income is driven by separate account balances, particularly in our variable annuity business. Most directly, these balances determine asset-based fee income, but also impact DAC amortization and asset-based commissions. Separate account balances are driven by sales, movements in the market, surrenders, withdrawals, benefit payments, transfers and policy charges. Average separate account balances increased in the current period, compared to the prior period, due to favorable equity market performance which more than offset the impact of continued negative net flows.

Table of Contents

Unless otherwise noted, all amounts in the following discussions of our results of operations are stated before income tax except for adjusted earnings amounts, which are presented net of income tax.



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016
	(In thousands)
Revenues
Premiums	$	26,268		$	50,739
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees	103,736			103,000
Net investment income	86,327			57,780
Other revenues	(46,266		)	29,192
Net investment gains (losses)	(1,178		)	(3,737		)
Net derivative gains (losses)	(157,222		)	67,726
Total revenues	11,665			304,700
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims	(4,774		)	51,980
Interest credited to policyholder account balances	39,423			39,914
Capitalization of DAC	(17,089		)	(4,976		)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA	(39,997		)	23,217
Other expenses	83,042			62,003
Total expenses	60,605			172,138
Income (loss) before provision for income tax	(48,940		)	132,562
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(100,725		)	42,152
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410

The table below shows the components of our net income (loss), in addition to adjusted earnings, for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016
	(In thousands)
GMLB Riders	$	(121,508	)	$	31,465
Other derivative instruments	(1,636		)	1,368
Net investment gains (losses)	(1,178		)	(3,737		)
Other adjustments	229			385
Adjusted earnings before provision for income tax	75,153			103,081
Income (loss) before provision for income tax	(48,940		)	132,562
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(100,725		)	42,152
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410

Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2016

Overview. Income (loss) before provision for income tax decreased $181.5 million ($38.6 million, net of income tax), primarily due to unfavorable changes in our GMLBs combined with lower adjusted earnings. In the current period, we recognized a $77.3 million income tax benefit from the enactment of the Tax Act.

Guaranteed Minimum Living Benefits. We directly issue variable annuity products with GMLBs. All of the economic risk associated with these GMLBs is currently ceded under reinsurance agreements with BLIC. In the prior period, a portion of this risk was ceded to MLIC but was recaptured and novated to BLIC in the current period. Certain features of the ceded GMLBs are accounted for as embedded derivatives, even when those same features are not accounted for as embedded derivatives on the directly written GMLBs. This difference in accounting may result in significant fluctuations in net income (loss) when a change in the fair value of the reinsurance receivable is recorded in net income (loss) with only a minimal corresponding offset in the value of the directly written GMLBs. See “— Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives.”

Table of Contents

Comparative results from GMLBs, including the DAC offset, were unfavorable by $153.0 million. This decrease was recognized primarily as follows:


•	a decrease of $125.1 million, recognized in net derivatives gains (losses), driven by the recapture, from MLIC, of ceded reinsurance agreements covering certain risks of our variable annuity business; and


•	a decrease of $96.9 million recognized in net derivative gains (losses), driven by the impact of interest rates declining less in the current period than in the prior period, as well as the impact of higher equity markets, on our embedded derivatives; partially offset by


•	an increase of $63.3 million from the favorable impact from the DAC amortization offset.

The above decrease in net derivative gains (losses) includes $10.8 million of unfavorable changes from embedded derivatives related to our Shield Annuities. In connection with the transition to our new variable annuity hedging program, changes in the Shield Annuities embedded derivatives are included in the GMLB results beginning in the third quarter of 2017 on a prospective basis.

Excluding the impact of the annual actuarial assumption review, comparative results from GMLB’s were unfavorable by $95.6 million. The $57.4 million unfavorable impact of the annual actuarial review was primarily due to:


•	a decrease of $82.4 million recognized in net derivative gains (losses) driven mostly by changes regarding lapse and withdrawal rates; partially offset by


•	an increase of $25.1 million from the favorable impact from the DAC amortization offset.

For more information on the changes related to the annual actuarial assumption review see “— Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives — Embedded Derivatives.”

Other Derivative Instruments. In addition to GMLB embedded derivatives, we enter into other freestanding derivative instruments primarily to hedge foreign currency risks when we have foreign denominated fixed maturity securities backing our U.S dollar denominated liabilities. The changes in fair value of the hedges are accounted for in net income (loss), through net derivative gains (losses), while the offsetting economic impacts on the items they are hedging are either not recognized or recognized in equity through other comprehensive income. Unfavorable changes in the fair value of our foreign currency swaps had an unfavorable impact on comparative results of $2.6 million as a result of the U.S. dollar weakening more in the current period when compared to the prior period.

Changes in liability values of our index-linked annuity contracts that result from changes in the underlying equity indices are accounted for as embedded derivatives. Changes in the fair value of the related embedded derivatives for the six months ended June 30, 2017 are included in other derivative instruments and had an unfavorable impact on comparative results of $385 thousand. As noted above, changes in the fair value of the Shield Annuities embedded derivatives have been included in Guaranteed Minimum Living Benefits beginning in the third quarter of 2017.

Net Investment Gains (Losses). Net investment gains (losses) had a favorable impact on comparative results of $2.6 million, primarily due to a prior period increase in the valuation allowance on commercial mortgage loans and lower impairments on fixed maturity securities, partially offset by higher gains on foreign currency transactions in the current period.

Income Tax Expense (Benefit). Income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $100.7 million compared to income tax expense of $42.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Our effective tax rates typically differ from the U.S. statutory rates primarily due to the impacts of the dividend received deductions and utilization of tax credits. In the current period, we also recognized a $77.3 million tax benefit related to the enactment of the Tax Act. This adjustment resulted in effective tax rate percentages that are not meaningful for comparison purposes and accordingly have not been included.

Adjusted Earnings. As more fully described in “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures,” we use adjusted earnings, which does not equate to net income (loss), as determined in accordance with GAAP, to analyze our performance, evaluate segment performance, and allocate resources. We believe that the presentation of adjusted earnings, as we measure it for management purposes, enhances the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business. Adjusted earnings allows analysis of our performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results. Adjusted earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for net income (loss). Adjusted earnings before provision for income tax decreased $27.9 million (increased $61.2 million, net of income tax) for the year ended December 31, 2017, compared to 2016. Adjusted earnings is discussed in greater detail below.

Table of Contents

Reconciliation of net income (loss) to adjusted earnings



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016
	(In thousands)
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410
Add: Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(100,725		)	42,152
Net income (loss) before provision for income tax	(48,940		)	$	132,562
Less: GMLB Riders	(121,508		)	31,465
Less: Other derivative instruments	(1,636		)	1,368
Less: Net investment gains (losses)	(1,178		)	(3,737		)
Less: Other adjustments	229			385
Adjusted earnings before provision for income tax	75,153			103,081
Less: Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(57,292		)	31,834
Adjusted earnings	$	132,445		$	71,247

Results for the Years Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 - Adjusted Earnings



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016
	(In thousands)
Fee income	$	156,871		$	184,220
Net investment spread	29,672			26,624
Insurance-related activities	(46,525		)	(51,728		)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA	1,088			992
Other expenses, net of DAC capitalization	(65,953		)	(57,027		)
Adjusted earnings (loss) before provision for income tax	75,153			103,081
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(57,292		)	31,834
Adjusted earnings (loss)	$	132,445		$	71,247

Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2016

Overview. The $61.2 million increase in adjusted earnings was driven primarily by impacts of the enactment of the Tax Act, partially offset by lower fee income.

Fee Income. Fee income decreased by $27.3 million due to the unfavorable comparative impact from gains recognized in the prior period in connection with the recapture of certain term life and single premium deferred annuity contracts (“SPDA Recapture”) from MetLife, partially offset by higher fees in the current period related to the novation of a variable annuity reinsurance agreement and yearly renewable term life business previously ceded to MetLife.

Net Investment Spread. Net investment spread increased by $3.0 million, primarily due to higher net investment income resulting from a higher average invested asset base due to positive net flows in our life and annuities businesses. The average invested asset base also increased as a result of the prior period SPDA Recapture; however, much of the favorable impact from this increase was offset by a corresponding reduction from the elimination of interest credited payments on the related reinsurance receivable.

Insurance-Related Activities. Net costs from insurance-related activities decreased by $5.2 million, primarily due to lower amortization of deferred sales inducements as a result of refinements to the amortization period in connection with our annual actuarial assumption review and favorable underwriting experience in our annuities business, partially offset by unfavorable underwriting experience in our life business as a result affiliated ceded reinsurance activity.

Other Expenses, Net of DAC Capitalization. Expenses increased by $8.9 million, primarily due to higher operating expenses as a result of being a stand-alone company, partially offset by the impacts from recapture activity related to ceded affiliated reinsurance agreements in our annuities and life businesses.

Table of Contents

Income Tax Expense (Benefit). Income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2017 was $57.3 million, compared to an income tax expense of $31.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2016. Our effective tax rates typically differ from the U.S. statutory rates primarily due to the dividend received deductions and utilization of tax credits. In the current period, we also recognized a tax benefit in the current period of $77.3 million due to the enactment of the Tax Act. This adjustment resulted in effective tax rate percentages that are not meaningful for comparison purposes and accordingly have not been included.

Effects of Inflation

Management believes that inflation has not had a material effect on the Company’s results of operations, except insofar as inflation may affect interest rates.

An increase in inflation could affect our business in several ways. During inflationary periods, the value of fixed income investments falls which could increase realized and unrealized losses. Inflation also increases expenses for labor and other materials, potentially putting pressure on profitability if such costs cannot be passed through in our product prices. Prolonged and elevated inflation could adversely affect the financial markets and the economy generally, and dispelling it may require governments to pursue a restrictive fiscal and monetary policy, which could constrain overall economic activity, inhibit revenue growth and reduce the number of attractive investment opportunities.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Collateral for Derivatives

We enter into derivatives to manage various risks relating to our ongoing business operations. We had no non-cash collateral derivatives at both December 31, 2017 and 2016. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity” and Note 7 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for information regarding the earned income on and the gross notional amount, estimated fair value of assets and liabilities and primary underlying risk exposure of our derivatives.

Guarantees

See “Guarantees” in Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Other

Additionally, we enter into mortgage loan commitments in the normal course of business for the purpose of enhancing the total return on our investment portfolio. See “Net Investment Income” and “Net Investment Gains (Losses)” in Note 6 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for information on the investment income, investment expense, gains and losses from such investments. See also “Mortgage Loans” in Note 6 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for information on our investments in mortgage loans.

Other than the commitments disclosed in Note 12 of the Notes to the Financial Statements, there are no other material obligations or liabilities arising from the commitments to fund mortgage loans.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Overview

Liquidity refers to our ability to generate adequate cash flows from our normal operations to meet the cash requirements of our operating, investing and financing activities. Capital refers to our long-term financial resources available to support our business operations and contribute to future growth. Our ability to generate and maintain sufficient liquidity and capital depends on the profitability of the businesses, timing of cash flows on investments and products, general economic conditions, access to the Brighthouse Financial, Inc. facilities described below and access to the capital markets and the alternate sources of liquidity and capital described herein.

In December 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. entered into the Revolving Credit Facility. Additionally, in June 2017 and July 2017, respectively, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. issued the Senior Notes and entered into the Term Loan Facility. In the fourth quarter of 2017, Brighthouse Financial, Inc. also established internal affiliated liquidity facilities to provide liquidity within and across the combined group of Brighthouse companies. Collectively, these facilities will be a potential source of liquidity and capital to the Company.

Table of Contents

Liquidity

Liquidity Management

Based upon our capitalization, expectations regarding maintaining our ratings, business mix and funding sources available to us, we believe we have sufficient liquidity to meet business requirements under current market conditions and certain stress scenarios. We continuously monitor and adjust our liquidity and capital plans in light of market conditions, as well as changing needs and opportunities.

Sources and Uses of Liquidity and Capital

The principal cash inflows from operating activities come from insurance premiums, net investment income and annuity considerations, while the principal cash outflows from operating activities are a result of life insurance and annuity products and operating expenses, as well as income tax. We typically have a net cash outflow from investment activities because cash inflows from operating activities are reinvested in accordance with our asset and liability management discipline to fund insurance liabilities. We closely monitor and manage these risks through our comprehensive investment risk management process. The principal financing cash flows come from deposits and withdrawals on policyholder account balances and changes in collateral related to derivative activities.

Liquid Assets and Short-term Liquidity

An integral part of our liquidity management includes managing our levels of liquid assets and short-term liquidity. Liquid assets were $1,854.2 million and $1,552.2 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Short-term liquidity was $80.8 million and $9.6 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Liquid assets include cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments and publicly-traded securities, excluding assets that are pledged or otherwise committed. Short-term liquidity includes cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding assets that are pledged or otherwise committed. Assets pledged or otherwise committed include those in connection with derivatives and cash and investments on deposit with regulatory agencies.

Insurance Liabilities

Liabilities arising from our insurance activities primarily relate to benefit payments under various life insurance products and annuity products, as well as payments for policy surrenders, withdrawals and loans. For annuity or deposit type products, surrender or lapse behavior differs somewhat by segment. In the Annuities segment, lapses and surrenders tend to occur in the normal course of business. During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, general account surrenders and withdrawals from annuity products were $68.3 million and $101.5 million, respectively.

Pledged Collateral

We pledge collateral to, and have collateral pledged to us by, counterparties in connection with our derivatives. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, we had received pledged cash collateral of $5.4 million and $8.9 million, respectively. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, we had pledged no cash collateral. With respect to OTC-bilateral derivatives in a net liability position that have financial strength contingent provisions, a one-notch downgrade in the Company’s financial strength rating would not have increased our derivative collateral requirements at December 31, 2017. See Note 7 of the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Capital

We manage our capital position to maintain our financial strength ratings. See “Business — Company Ratings.” Our capital position is supported by our ability to generate strong cash flows within our businesses.

Rating Agencies

Rating agencies use an “outlook statement” of “positive,” “stable,” ‘‘negative’’ or “developing” to indicate a medium- or long-term trend in credit fundamentals which, if continued, may lead to a rating change. A rating may have a “stable” outlook to indicate that the rating is not expected to change; however, a “stable” rating does not preclude a rating agency from changing a rating at any time, without notice. Certain rating agencies assign rating modifiers such as “CreditWatch” or “under review” to indicate their opinion regarding the potential direction of a rating. These ratings modifiers are generally assigned in connection with certain events such as potential mergers, acquisitions, dispositions or material changes in a company’s results, in order for the rating agency to perform its analysis to fully determine the rating implications of the event.

The following financial strength ratings represent each rating agency’s opinion of BHNY’s ability to pay obligations under insurance policies and contracts in accordance with their terms and are not evaluations directed toward the protection of investors

Table of Contents

in BHNY’s securities. Financial strength ratings are not statements of fact nor are they recommendations to purchase, hold or sell any security, contract or policy. Each rating should be evaluated independently of any other rating.

Our financial strength ratings at the date of this filing are indicated in the following table. All financial strength ratings have a stable outlook unless otherwise indicated. Additional information about financial strength ratings can be found on the websites of the respective rating agencies.



	A.M. Best	Fitch	Moody’s	S&P
Ratings Structure	“A++ (superior)” to “S (suspended)”	“AAA (exceptionally strong)” to “C (distressed)”	“Aaa (highest quality)” to “C (lowest rated)”	“AAA (extremely strong)” to “SD (Selective Default)” or “D (Default)”
Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY	A	NR	NR	A+ (1)
Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY	3rd of 16	NR	NR	5th of 22

______________

NR = Not rated

(1) Negative outlook.

Rating agencies may continue to review and adjust our ratings. See “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — A downgrade or a potential downgrade in our financial strength ratings could result in a loss of business and materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations” for an in-depth description of the impact of a ratings downgrade.

Affiliated Reinsurance Transactions

The Company currently cedes risk through reinsurance agreements with its parent, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, as well as with unaffiliated third party reinsurers. The Company currently has no ongoing captive reinsurance arrangements.

The NAIC continues to review use of affiliated reinsurance companies. The NYDFS continues to have a moratorium on new reserve financing transactions involving affiliated reinsurance companies. We will consider obtaining reinsurance from other sources, as necessary, for capital requirement purposes when the economic impact of such arrangements makes it appropriate to do so.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Risk Management

We have an integrated process for managing risk exposures, which is coordinated among our Risk Management, Treasury, Actuarial and Investment Departments. The process is designed to assess and manage exposures on a company-wide basis. Brighthouse Financial, Inc. has established a Balance Sheet and Financial Risk Committee (“BSFRC”). The BSFRC is responsible for periodically reviewing all material financial risks to us and, in the event risks exceed desired tolerances, informs the Finance and Risk Committee of the Brighthouse Financial Inc. Board of Directors, considers possible courses of action and determines how best to resolve or mitigate such risks. In taking such actions, the BSFRC considers industry best practices and the current economic environment. The BSFRC also reviews and approves target investment portfolios in order to align them with our liability profile, and establishes guidelines and limits for various risk taking departments, such as the Investment Department. Our Treasury Department is responsible for coordinating our asset liability management (“ALM”) strategies throughout the enterprise. The membership of the BSFRC is comprised of the following members of Brighthouse’s senior management: Chief Executive Officer, Chief Risk Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Strategy Officer and Chief Investment Officer.

Our significant market risk management practices include, but are not limited to, the following:

Managing Interest Rate Risk

To manage interest rate risk, we employ product design, pricing and ALM strategies to mitigate the potential effects of interest rate movements. Product design and pricing strategies include the use of surrender charges or restrictions on withdrawals in some products and the ability to reset crediting rates for certain products. Our ALM strategies include the use of derivatives and duration mismatch limits.

Table of Contents

We analyze interest rate risk using various models, including multi-scenario cash flow projection models that forecast cash flows of the liabilities and their supporting investments, including derivatives. These projections involve evaluating the potential gain or loss on most of our in-force business under various increasing and decreasing interest rate environments. State insurance department regulations require that we perform some of these analyses annually as part of our review of the sufficiency of our regulatory reserves. We measure relative sensitivities of the value of our assets and liabilities to changes in key assumptions using internal models. These models reflect specific product characteristics and include assumptions based on current and anticipated experience regarding lapse, mortality and interest crediting rates. In addition, these models include asset cash flow projections reflecting interest payments, sinking fund payments, principal payments, bond calls, prepayments and defaults.

We also use common industry metrics, such as duration and convexity, to measure the relative sensitivity of asset and liability values to changes in interest rates. In computing the duration of liabilities, we consider all policyholder guarantees and how indeterminate policy elements such as interest credits or dividends are set. Each asset portfolio has a duration target based on the liability duration and the investment objectives of that portfolio.

Managing Equity Market and Foreign Currency Risks

We manage equity market risk in a coordinated process across our Investment and Treasury Departments primarily by holding sufficient capital to permit us to absorb modest losses, which may be temporary, from changes in equity markets and interest rates without adversely affecting our financial strength ratings. We may also employ reinsurance strategies to manage these exposures. Key management objectives include limiting losses, minimizing exposures to significant risks and providing additional capital capacity for future growth. The Investment and Treasury Departments are also responsible for managing the exposure to foreign currency denominated investments. We use foreign currency swaps and forwards to mitigate the exposure, risk of loss and financial statement volatility associated with foreign currency denominated fixed income investments.

Market Risk - Fair Value Exposures

We regularly analyze our market risk exposure to interest rate, equity market, credit spread and foreign currency exchange rate risks. As a result of that analysis, we have determined that the estimated fair values of certain assets and liabilities are significantly exposed to changes in interest rates, and to a lesser extent, to changes in equity markets and foreign currency exchange rates. We have exposure to market risk through our insurance and annuity operations and general account investment activities. For purposes of this discussion, “market risk” is defined as changes in fair value resulting from changes in interest rates, equity markets, credit spread and foreign currency exchange rates. We may have additional financial impacts, other than changes in fair value, which are beyond the scope of this discussion. See “Risk Factors” for additional disclosure regarding our market risk and related sensitivities.

Interest Rates

Our fair value exposure to changes in interest rates arises most significantly from our interest rate sensitive liabilities and our holdings of fixed maturity securities, mortgage loans and derivatives that are used to support our policyholder liabilities. Our interest rate sensitive liabilities include policyholder account balances related to certain investment type contracts, and embedded derivatives in variable annuity contracts with guaranteed minimum benefits. Our fixed maturity securities including U.S. and foreign government bonds, securities issued by government agencies, corporate bonds, mortgage-backed and other ABS, and our commercial, agricultural and residential mortgage loans, are exposed to changes in interest rates. We also use derivatives including swaps, caps, floors and options to mitigate the exposure related to interest rate risks from our product liabilities.

Equity Market

We have fair value exposure to equity market risk through certain liabilities that involve long-term guarantees on equity performance such as embedded derivatives in variable annuity contracts with guaranteed minimum benefits.

Foreign Currency Exchange Rates

Our fair value exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates against the U.S. dollar results from our holdings in non-U.S. dollar denominated fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans. The principal currencies that create foreign currency exchange rate risk in our investment portfolios and liabilities are the Euro and the British pound. We economically hedge substantially all of our foreign currency exposure.

Table of Contents

Risk Measurement: Sensitivity Analysis

In the following discussion and analysis, we measure market risk related to our market sensitive assets and liabilities based on changes in interest rates, equity market prices and foreign currency exchange rates using a sensitivity analysis. This analysis estimates the potential changes in estimated fair value based on a hypothetical 10% change (increase or decrease) in interest rates, equity market prices and foreign currency exchange rates. We believe that these changes in market rates and prices are reasonably possible in the near term. In performing the analysis summarized below, we used market rates as of December 31, 2017. We modeled the impact of changes in market rates and prices on the estimated fair values of our market sensitive assets and liabilities as follows:


•	the net present values of our interest rate sensitive exposures resulting from a 10% change (increase or decrease) in interest rates;


•	the estimated fair value of our equity positions due to a 10% change (increase or decrease) in equity market prices; and


•	the U.S. dollar equivalent of estimated fair values of our foreign currency exposures due to a 10% change (increase in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the foreign currencies or decrease in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the foreign currencies) in foreign currency exchange rates.

The sensitivity analysis is an estimate and should not be viewed as predictive of our future financial performance. Our actual losses in any particular period may vary from the amounts indicated in the table below. Limitations related to this sensitivity analysis include:


•	interest sensitive liabilities do not include $687 million of insurance contracts, which are accounted for on a book value basis. Management believes that the changes in the economic value of those contracts under changing interest rates would offset a significant portion of the fair value changes of interest sensitive assets;


•	the market risk information is limited by the assumptions and parameters established in creating the related sensitivity analysis, including the impact of prepayment rates on mortgage loans;


•	foreign currency exchange rate risk is not isolated for certain embedded derivatives within host asset and liability contracts, as the risk on these instruments is reflected as equity;


•	for derivatives that qualify for hedge accounting, the impact on reported earnings may be materially different from the change in market values; and


•	the model assumes that the composition of assets and liabilities remains unchanged throughout the period.

Accordingly, we use such models as tools and not as substitutes for the experience and judgment of our management.

Table of Contents

The table below illustrates the potential loss in estimated fair value of our interest sensitive financial instruments due to a 10% increase in the yield curve by type of asset and liability as of:



	December 31, 2017
	Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value (1)			Assuming a 10% Increase in the Yield Curve
	(In thousands)
Financial assets with interest rate risk
Fixed maturity securities			$	2,221,563		$	(41,129	)
Mortgage loans			$	395,894		(4,815		)
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables			$	20,628		(193		)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)			$	307,698		(40,926		)
Increase (decrease) in fair value of assets						(87,063		)

Financial liabilities with interest rate risk (3)
Policyholder account balances			$	1,140,886		16,255
Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)			$	(39,935	)	10,462
(Increase) decrease in fair value of liabilities						26,717

Derivative instruments with interest rate risk
Foreign currency contracts	$	86,943	$	2,173		(1,043		)
Increase (decrease) in fair value of derivative instruments						(1,043		)
Net Change						$	(61,389	)

______________


(1)	Separate account assets and liabilities, which are interest rate sensitive, are not included herein as any interest rate risk is borne by the contract holder.


(2)	Embedded derivatives are recognized in the balance sheet in the same caption as the host contract.


(3)	Excludes $687 million of liabilities, at carrying value, pursuant to insurance contracts reported within future policy benefits and other policy-related balances. Management believes that the changes in the economic value of those contracts under changing interest rates would offset a significant portion of the fair value changes of interest sensitive assets.

Sensitivity Summary

Sensitivity to rising interest rates increased by $5 million, or 9%, to $61 million at December 31, 2017 from $56 million at December 31, 2016, primarily driven by an increase in the sensitivity to our fixed maturity securities due to increased fixed maturity security holdings and lower sensitivity of embedded derivatives within liability host contracts to changes in interest rates.

Sensitivity to a 10% rise in equity prices increased by $6 million, or 25%, to $30 million as of December 31, 2017 from $24 million at December 31, 2016, primarily driven by lower sensitivity of net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts to changes in equity prices.

Sensitivity to a 10% decrease in the U.S. dollar compared to all foreign currencies increased by $0.4 million, or 36% to $1.5 million at December 31, 2017 from $1.1 million at December 31, 2016. This increase was primarily driven by an increase in the sensitivity of our fixed maturity securities due to increased foreign currency denominated holdings that was more than offset by an increase in the sensitivity of our derivatives hedges.

Table of Contents

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Index to Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules



	Page
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm	64
Financial Statements at December 31, 2017 and 2016 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Balance Sheets	65
Statements of Operations	66
Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)	67
Statements of Stockholder’s Equity	68
Statements of Cash Flows	69
Notes to the Financial Statements
Note 1 — Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	70
Note 2 — Segment Information	80
Note 3 — Insurance	83
Note 4 — Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles	87
Note 5 — Reinsurance	89
Note 6 — Investments	94
Note 7 — Derivatives	101
Note 8 — Fair Value	107
Note 9 — Equity	117
Note 10 — Other Expenses	120
Note 11 — Income Tax	121
Note 12 — Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees	123
Note 13 — Related Party Transactions	125
Financial Statement Schedules at December 31, 2017 and 2016 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
Schedule I — Summary of Investments — Other Than Investments in Related Parties	128
Schedule III — Supplementary Insurance Information	129
Schedule IV — Reinsurance	131

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the stockholders and the Board of Directors of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the related statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), stockholder’s equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes and the schedules listed in the Index to Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures to respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Charlotte, North Carolina

March 22, 2018

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2000.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Balance Sheets

December 31, 2017 and 2016

(In thousands, except share and per share data)



	2017		2016
Assets
Investments:
Fixed maturity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value (amortized cost: $2,165,134 and $1,870,654, respectively,)	$	2,221,563	$	1,878,514
Mortgage loans (net of valuation allowances of $1,747 and $1,775, respectively)	394,863		406,085
Other invested assets, at estimated fair value	3,784		8,656
Total investments	2,620,210		2,293,255
Cash and cash equivalents, principally at estimated fair value	86,154		18,583
Accrued investment income	18,323		16,626
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	572,609		354,939
Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired	131,059		85,173
Current income tax recoverable	—		57,736
Other assets	36,317		48,285
Separate account assets	5,021,633		4,758,449
Total assets	$	8,486,305	$	7,633,046
Liabilities and Stockholder's Equity
Liabilities
Future policy benefits	$	674,046	$	627,007
Policyholder account balances	1,343,330		1,202,350
Other policy-related balances	12,733		7,285
Payables for collateral under derivative transactions	5,384		8,942
Current income tax payable	2,064		—
Deferred income tax liability	112,498		219,839
Other liabilities	471,130		112,441
Separate account liabilities	5,021,633		4,758,449
Total liabilities	7,642,818		6,936,313
Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (Note 12)
Stockholder's Equity
Common stock, par value $10 per share; 200,000 shares authorized, issued and outstanding	2,000		2,000
Additional paid-in capital	415,931		340,931
Retained earnings	395,928		349,395
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)	29,628		4,407
Total stockholder's equity	843,487		696,733
Total liabilities and stockholder's equity	$	8,486,305	$	7,633,046

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Statements of Operations

For the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(In thousands)



	2017			2016			2015
Revenues
Premiums	$	26,268		$	50,739		$	71,872
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees	103,736			103,000			110,905
Net investment income	86,327			57,780			52,944
Other revenues	(46,266		)	29,192			(9,465		)
Net investment gains (losses)	(1,178		)	(3,737		)	4,399
Net derivative gains (losses)	(157,222		)	67,726			65,000
Total revenues	11,665			304,700			295,655
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims	(4,774		)	51,980			49,400
Interest credited to policyholder account balances	39,423			39,914			52,133
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired	(39,997		)	23,217			103,826
Other expenses	65,953			57,027			65,213
Total expenses	60,605			172,138			270,572
Income (loss) before provision for income tax	(48,940		)	132,562			25,083
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	(100,725		)	42,152			1,988
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410		$	23,095

See accompanying notes to the financial statements

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)

For the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(In thousands)



	2017			2016			2015
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410		$	23,095
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Unrealized investment gains (losses), net of related offsets	34,971			(3,066		)	(55,353		)
Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives	(4,248		)	1,529			2,760
Other comprehensive income (loss), before income tax	30,723			(1,537		)	(52,593		)
Income tax (expense) benefit related to items of other comprehensive income (loss)	(5,502		)	538			18,408
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax	25,221			(999		)	(34,185		)
Comprehensive income (loss)	$	77,006		$	89,411		$	(11,090	)

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Statements of Stockholder’s Equity

For the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(In thousands)



	Common Stock		Additional Paid-in Capital		Retained Earnings			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)			Total Stockholder's Equity
Balance at December 31, 2014	$	2,000	$	340,931	$	235,890		$	39,591		$	618,412
Net income (loss)					23,095						23,095
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax								(34,185		)	(34,185		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	2,000		340,931		258,985			5,406			607,322
Net income (loss)					90,410						90,410
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax								(999		)	(999		)
Balance at December 31, 2016	2,000		340,931		349,395			4,407			696,733
Capital contribution			75,000								75,000
Net income (loss)					51,785						51,785
Effect of change in accounting principle (Note 1)					(5,252		)	5,252			—
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax								19,969			19,969
Balance at December 31, 2017	$	2,000	$	415,931	$	395,928		$	29,628		$	843,487

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Statements of Cash Flows

For the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(In thousands)



	2017			2016			2015
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income (loss)	$	51,785		$	90,410		$	23,095
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization expenses	1,826			3,534			1,408
Amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts associated with investments, net	4,390			(828		)	(1,918		)
(Gains) losses on investments, net	1,178			3,737			(4,399		)
(Gains) losses on derivatives, net	56,628			(44,031		)	(41,794		)
Interest credited to policyholder account balances	39,423			39,914			52,133
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees	(103,736		)	(103,000		)	(110,905		)
Change in accrued investment income	(1,686		)	(404		)	(1,048		)
Change in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	(290,764		)	433,724			2,601
Change in deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired, net	(57,086		)	18,241			99,059
Change in income tax	(58,293		)	44,325			(78,460		)
Change in other assets	102,321			103,403			102,648
Change in future policy benefits and other policy-related balances	52,287			77,708			68,764
Change in other liabilities	354,777			(334,195		)	12,764
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities	153,050			332,538			123,948
Cash flows from investing activities
Sales, maturities and repayments of:
Fixed maturity securities	548,721			140,236			364,194
Mortgage loans	42,363			42,446			23,593
Purchases of:
Fixed maturity securities	(845,133		)	(379,993		)	(372,108		)
Mortgage loans	(30,679		)	(44,325		)	(45,240		)
Cash received in connection with freestanding derivatives	729			54			786
Cash paid in connection with freestanding derivatives	(118		)	(25		)	(822		)
Net change in short-term investments	(12		)	18,487			(6,380		)
Net change in other invested assets	(6		)	2			414
Other, net	—			183			—
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities	(284,135		)	(222,935		)	(35,563		)
Cash flows from financing activities
Policyholder account balances:
Deposits	253,911			50,745			56,728
Withdrawals	(126,697		)	(156,717		)	(146,131		)
Net change in payables for collateral under derivative transactions	(3,558		)	5,642			3,300
Capital contribution	75,000			—			—
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities	198,656			(100,330		)	(86,103		)
Change in cash and cash equivalents	67,571			9,273			2,282
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year	18,583			9,310			7,028
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year	$	86,154		$	18,583		$	9,310
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information
Net cash paid (received) for:
Income tax	$	(42,132	)	$	(1,314	)	$	80,448
Non-cash transactions:
Transfer of fixed maturity securities from former affiliates	$	—		$	552,113		$	—
Transfer of mortgage loans from former affiliates	$	—		$	266,557		$	—

See accompanying notes to the financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Business

“BHNY” and the “Company” refer to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY, a New York domiciled life insurance company. Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, which is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “Brighthouse”). The Company markets and/or administers traditional life, universal life, variable annuity and fixed annuity products to individuals. The Company is licensed to transact business in the state of New York.

The Company is organized into two segments: Annuities and Life.

On January 12, 2016, MetLife, Inc. (MetLife, Inc., together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “MetLife”) announced its plan to pursue the separation of a substantial portion of its former U.S. retail business (the “Separation”). Additionally, on July 21, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced that the separated business would be rebranded as “Brighthouse Financial.” Effective March 6, 2017, and in connection with the Separation, the Company changed its name from First MetLife Investors Insurance Company to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY.

On October 5, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., which until the completion of the Separation on August 4, 2017, was a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc., filed a registration statement on Form 10 (as amended, the “Form 10”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) that was declared effective by the SEC on July 6, 2017. The Form 10 disclosed MetLife, Inc.’s plans to undertake several actions, including an internal reorganization involving its U.S. retail business (the “Restructuring”) and include the Company and certain affiliates in the planned separated business, and distribute at least 80.1% of the shares of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s common stock on a pro rata basis to the holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock. In connection with the Restructuring, effective April 2017, following receipt of applicable regulatory approvals, MetLife, Inc. contributed certain affiliated reinsurance companies and the Company to Brighthouse Life Insurance. On July 28, 2017, MetLife, Inc. contributed Brighthouse Holdings, LLC, an intermediate holding company, to Brighthouse Financial, Inc., resulting in the Company becoming an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. On August 4, 2017, MetLife, Inc. completed the Separation through a distribution of 96,776,670 of the 119,773,106 shares of the common stock of Brighthouse Financial, Inc, representing 80.8% of MetLife Inc.’s interest in Brighthouse, to holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock.

Basis of Presentation

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported on the financial statements. In applying these policies and estimates, management makes subjective and complex judgments that frequently require assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. Many of these policies, estimates and related judgments are common in the insurance and financial services industries; others are specific to the Company’s business and operations. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Since the Company is a member of a controlled group of affiliated companies, its results may not be indicative of those of a stand-alone entity.

Reclassifications

Certain amounts in the prior years’ financial statements and related footnotes thereto have been reclassified to conform with the current year presentation as discussed throughout the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

The following are the Company’s significant accounting policies with references to notes providing additional information on such policies and critical accounting estimates relating to such policies.



Accounting Policy	Note
Insurance	3
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles	4
Reinsurance	5
Investments	6
Derivatives	7
Fair Value	8
Income Tax	11
Litigation Contingencies	12

Insurance

Future Policy Benefit Liabilities and Policyholder Account Balances

The Company establishes liabilities for future amounts payable under insurance policies. Insurance liabilities are generally calculated as the present value of future expected benefits to be paid, reduced by the present value of future expected premiums. Such liabilities are established based on methods and underlying assumptions that are in accordance with GAAP and applicable actuarial standards. The principal assumptions used in the establishment of liabilities for future policy benefits are mortality, policy lapse, policy renewal, investment returns, inflation, expenses and other contingent events as appropriate to the respective product type. These assumptions are established at the time the policy is issued and locked in and are intended to estimate the experience for the period the policy benefits are payable. Utilizing these assumptions, liabilities are established on a block of business basis. For long duration insurance contracts, assumptions such as mortality and interest rates are locked in upon the issuance of new business. However, significant adverse changes in experience on such contracts may require the establishment of premium deficiency reserves. Such reserves are determined based on the then current assumptions and do not include a provision for adverse deviation.

The Company regularly reviews its estimates of liabilities for future policy benefits and compares them with its actual experience. Differences result in changes to the liability balances with related charges or credits to benefit expenses in the period in which the changes occur.

Policyholder account balances relate to customer deposits on universal life insurance and fixed and variable deferred annuity contracts and are equal to the sum of deposits, plus interest credited, less charges and withdrawals.

The Company issues directly, certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits that provide the policyholder a minimum return based on their initial deposit (i.e., the benefit base) less withdrawals. These guarantees are accounted for as insurance liabilities or as embedded derivatives depending on how and when the benefit is paid. Specifically, a guarantee is accounted for as an embedded derivative if a guarantee is paid without requiring (i) the occurrence of specific insurable event, or (ii) the policyholder to annuitize. Alternatively, a guarantee is accounted for as an insurance liability if the guarantee is paid only upon either (i) the occurrence of a specific insurable event, or (ii) annuitization. In certain cases, a guarantee may have elements of both an insurance liability and an embedded derivative and in such cases the guarantee is split and accounted for under both models.

Guarantees accounted for as insurance liabilities in future policy benefits include guaranteed minimum death benefits (“GMDBs”), the portion of guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIBs”) that require annuitization, and the life-contingent portion of guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits (“GMWBs”).

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Guarantees accounted for as embedded derivatives in policyholder account balances include the non life-contingent portion of GMWBs, guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits (“GMABs”) and the portion of GMIBs that do not require annuitization. At inception, the Company attributes to the embedded derivative a portion of the projected future guarantee fees to be collected from the policyholder equal to the present value of projected future guaranteed benefits. Any additional fees represent “excess” fees and are reported in universal life and investment-type product policy fees.

Recognition of Insurance Revenues and Deposits

Premiums related to traditional life insurance and annuity contracts with life contingencies are recognized as revenues when due from policyholders. Policyholder benefits and expenses are provided to recognize profits over the estimated lives of the insurance policies. When premiums are due over a significantly shorter period than the period over which policyholder benefits are incurred, any excess profit is deferred and recognized into earnings in proportion to insurance in-force or, for annuities, the amount of expected future policy benefit payments.

Deposits related to universal life insurance and investment-type products are credited to policyholder account balances. Revenues from such contracts consist of asset-based investment management fees, mortality charges, risk charges, policy administration fees, and surrender charges. These fees are recognized when assessed to the contract holder and are included in universal life and investment-type product policy fees on the statements of operations.

Premiums, policy fees, policyholder benefits and expenses are presented net of reinsurance.

Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles

The Company incurs significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that are related directly to the successful acquisition or renewal of insurance contracts are capitalized as DAC. Such costs include:


•	incremental direct costs of contract acquisition, such as commissions;


•	the portion of an employee’s total compensation and benefits related to time spent selling, underwriting or processing the issuance of new and renewal insurance business only with respect to actual policies acquired or renewed; and


•	other essential direct costs that would not have been incurred had a policy not been acquired or renewed.

All other acquisition-related costs, including those related to general advertising and solicitation, market research, agent training, product development, unsuccessful sales and underwriting efforts, as well as all indirect costs, are expensed as incurred.

Value of business acquired (“VOBA”) is an intangible asset resulting from a business combination that represents the excess of book value over the estimated fair value of acquired insurance, annuity, and investment-type contracts in-force as of the acquisition date. The estimated fair value of the acquired liabilities is based on projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operating expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. Actual experience on the purchased business may vary from these projections.

DAC and VOBA on traditional long-duration insurance contracts is amortized based on actual and expected future gross premiums while DAC and VOBA on deferred annuities is amortized based on estimated gross profits. The recoverability of DAC and VOBA is dependent upon the future profitability of the related business. DAC and VOBA are aggregated on the financial statements for reporting purposes.

See Note 4 for additional information on DAC and VOBA amortization.

The recovery of DAC and VOBA is dependent upon the future profitability of the related business. DAC and VOBA are aggregated on the financial statements for reporting purposes.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The Company also has deferred sales inducements (“DSI”) and value of distribution agreements (“VODA”) which are included in other assets. The Company defers sales inducements and amortizes them over the life of the policy using the same methodology and assumptions used to amortize DAC. The amortization of DSI is included in policyholder benefits and claims. VODA represents the present value of expected future profits associated with the expected future business derived from the distribution agreements acquired as part of a business combination. The VODA associated with past business combinations is amortized over useful lives ranging from 10 to 40 years and such amortization is included in other expenses. Each year, or more frequently if circumstances indicate a possible impairment issue exists, the Company reviews DSI and VODA to determine whether the assets are impaired.

Reinsurance

For each of its reinsurance agreements, the Company determines whether the agreement provides indemnification against loss or liability relating to insurance risk in accordance with applicable accounting standards. Cessions under reinsurance agreements do not discharge the Company’s obligations as the primary insurer. The Company reviews all contractual features, including those that may limit the amount of insurance risk to which the reinsurer is subject or features that delay the timely reimbursement of claims.

For reinsurance of existing in-force blocks of long-duration contracts that transfer significant insurance risk, the difference, if any, between the amounts paid, and the liabilities ceded related to the underlying contracts is considered the net cost of reinsurance at the inception of the reinsurance agreement. The net cost of reinsurance is recorded as an adjustment to DAC when there is a gain at inception on the ceding entity and to other liabilities when there is a loss at inception. The net cost of reinsurance is recognized as a component of other expenses when there is a gain at inception and as policyholder benefits and claims when there is a loss and is subsequently amortized on a basis consistent with the methodology used for amortizing DAC related to the underlying reinsured contracts. Subsequent amounts paid on the reinsurance of in-force blocks, as well as amounts paid related to new business, are recorded as ceded premiums and ceded premiums, reinsurance and other receivables are established.

Amounts currently recoverable under reinsurance agreements are included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and amounts currently payable are included in other liabilities. Assets and liabilities relating to reinsurance agreements with the same reinsurer may be recorded net on the balance sheet, if a right of offset exists within the reinsurance agreement. If reinsurers do not meet their obligations to the Company under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, reinsurance recoverable balances could become uncollectible. In such instances, reinsurance recoverable balances are stated net of allowances for uncollectible reinsurance.

The funds withheld liability represents amounts withheld by the Company in accordance with the terms of the reinsurance agreements. Under certain reinsurance agreements, the Company withholds the funds rather than transferring the underlying investments and, as a result, records funds withheld liability within other liabilities. The Company recognizes interest on funds withheld, included in other expenses, at rates defined by the terms of the agreement which may be contractually specified or directly related to the investment portfolio.

Premiums, fees and policyholder benefits and claims are net of reinsurance ceded. Amounts received from reinsurers for policy administration are reported in other revenues. With respect to GMIBs, a portion of the directly written GMIBs are accounted for as insurance liabilities, but the reinsured portions of these guarantees are accounted for as embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives are included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses).

If the Company determines that a reinsurance agreement does not expose the reinsurer to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk, the Company records the agreement using the deposit method of accounting. Deposits received are included in other liabilities and deposits made are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables. As amounts are paid or received, consistent with the underlying contracts, the deposit assets or liabilities are adjusted. Interest on such deposits is recorded as other revenues or other expenses, as appropriate. Periodically, the Company evaluates the adequacy of the expected payments or recoveries and adjusts the deposit asset or liability through other revenues or other expenses, as appropriate.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Investments

Net Investment Income and Net Investment Gains (Losses)

Income from investments is reported within net investment income, unless otherwise stated herein. Gains and losses on sales of investments, impairment losses and changes in valuation allowances are reported within net investment gains (losses), unless otherwise stated herein.

Fixed Maturity Securities

The Company’s fixed maturity securities are classified as available-for-sale (“AFS”) and are reported at their estimated fair value. Unrealized investment gains and losses on these securities are recorded as a separate component of other comprehensive income (loss) (“OCI”), net of policy-related amounts and deferred income taxes. All security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Investment gains and losses on sales are determined on a specific identification basis.

Interest income and prepayment fees are recognized when earned. Interest income is recognized using an effective yield method giving effect to amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts and is based on the estimated economic life of the securities, which for residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”), commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) and asset-backed securities (“ABS”) (collectively, “Structured Securities”) considers the estimated timing and amount of prepayments of the underlying loans. The amortization of premium and accretion of discount of fixed maturity securities also takes into consideration call and maturity dates.

Amortization of premium and accretion of discount on Structured Securities considers the estimated timing and amount of prepayments of the underlying loans. Actual prepayment experience is periodically reviewed and effective yields are recalculated when differences arise between the originally anticipated and the actual prepayments received and currently anticipated. Prepayment assumptions for Structured Securities are estimated using inputs obtained from third-party specialists and based on management’s knowledge of the current market. For credit-sensitive Structured Securities and certain prepayment-sensitive securities, the effective yield is recalculated on a prospective basis. For all other Structured Securities, the effective yield is recalculated on a retrospective basis

The Company periodically evaluates fixed maturity securities for impairment. The assessment of whether impairments have occurred is based on management’s case-by-case evaluation of the underlying reasons for the decline in estimated fair value, as well as an analysis of the gross unrealized losses by severity and/or age. See Note 6 “— Evaluation of AFS Securities for OTTI and Evaluating Temporarily Impaired AFS Securities.”

For fixed maturity securities in an unrealized loss position, an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) is recognized in earnings when it is anticipated that the amortized cost will not be recovered. When either: (i) the Company has the intent to sell the security; or (ii) it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery, the OTTI recognized in earnings is the entire difference between the security’s amortized cost and estimated fair value. If neither of these conditions exists, the difference between the amortized cost of the security and the present value of projected future cash flows expected to be collected is recognized as an OTTI in earnings (“credit loss”). If the estimated fair value is less than the present value of projected future cash flows expected to be collected, this portion of OTTI related to other-than-credit factors (“noncredit loss”) is recorded in OCI.

Mortgage Loans

The Company disaggregates its mortgage loan investments into two portfolio segments: commercial and agricultural. The accounting policies that are applicable to both portfolio segments are presented below and the accounting policies related to each of the portfolio segments are included in Note 6.

Mortgage loans are stated at unpaid principal balance, adjusted for any unamortized premium or discount and any deferred fees or expenses, and are net of valuation allowances. Interest income and prepayment fees are recognized when earned. Interest income is recognized using an effective yield method giving effect to amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts.

Other Invested Assets

Other invested assets consist of freestanding derivatives with positive estimated fair values which are described in “— Derivatives” below.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Derivatives

Freestanding Derivatives

Freestanding derivatives are carried on the Company’s balance sheet either as assets within other invested assets or as liabilities within other liabilities at estimated fair value. The Company does not offset the estimated fair value amounts recognized for derivatives executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement.

Accruals on derivatives are generally recorded in accrued investment income or within other liabilities. However, accruals that are not scheduled to settle within one year are included with the derivatives carrying value in other invested assets or other liabilities.

If a derivative is not designated as an accounting hedge or its use in managing risk does not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative are reported in net derivative gains (losses).

Hedge Accounting

The Company primarily designates derivatives as a hedge of a forecasted transaction or a variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (“cash flow hedge”). When a derivative is designated as a cash flow hedge and is determined to be highly effective, changes in fair value are recorded in OCI and subsequently reclassified into the statement of operations when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item.

To qualify for hedge accounting, at the inception of the hedging relationship, the Company formally documents its risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedging transaction, as well as its designation of the hedge. In its hedge documentation, the Company sets forth how the hedging instrument is expected to hedge the designated risks related to the hedged item and sets forth the method that will be used to retrospectively and prospectively assess the hedging instrument’s effectiveness and the method that will be used to measure ineffectiveness. A derivative designated as a hedging instrument must be assessed as being highly effective in offsetting the designated risk of the hedged item. Hedge effectiveness is formally assessed at inception and at least quarterly throughout the life of the designated hedging relationship

The Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when: (i) it is determined that the derivative is no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows of a hedged item; (ii) the derivative expires, is sold, terminated, or exercised; (iii) it is no longer probable that the hedged forecasted transaction will occur; or (iv) the derivative is de-designated as a hedging instrument.

When hedge accounting is discontinued because it is determined that the derivative is not highly effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows of a hedged item, the derivative continues to be carried on the balance sheet at its estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in net derivative gains (losses). Provided the hedged forecasted transaction is still probable of occurrence, the changes in estimated fair value of derivatives recorded in OCI related to discontinued cash flow hedges are released into the statement of operations when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item.

In all other situations in which hedge accounting is discontinued, the derivative is carried at its estimated fair value on the balance sheet, with changes in its estimated fair value recognized in the current period as net derivative gains (losses).

Embedded Derivatives

The Company sells variable annuities and is a party to certain reinsurance agreements that have embedded derivatives.

The Company assesses each identified embedded derivative to determine whether it is required to be bifurcated. The embedded derivative is bifurcated from the host contract and accounted for as a freestanding derivative if:


•	the combined instrument is not accounted for in its entirety at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value recorded in earnings;


•	the terms of the embedded derivative are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the host contract; and


•	a separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative would qualify as a derivative instrument.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Such embedded derivatives are carried on the balance sheet at estimated fair value with the host contract and changes in their estimated fair value are generally reported in net derivative gains (losses). If the Company is unable to properly identify and measure an embedded derivative for separation from its host contract, the entire contract is carried on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income. Additionally, the Company may elect to carry an entire contract on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income if that contract contains an embedded derivative that requires bifurcation. At inception, the Company attributes to the embedded derivative a portion of the projected future guarantee fees to be collected from the policyholder equal to the present value of projected future guaranteed benefits. Any additional fees represent “excess” fees and are reported in universal life and investment-type product policy fees.

Fair Value

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. In most cases, the exit price and the transaction (or entry) price will be the same at initial recognition.

In determining the estimated fair value of the Company’s investments, fair values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical investments in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. When such quoted prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar but not identical investments, or other observable inputs. If these inputs are not available, or observable inputs are not determinable, unobservable inputs and/or adjustments to observable inputs requiring management judgment are used to determine the estimated fair value of investments.

Income Tax

Income taxes as presented herein attribute current and deferred income taxes of MetLife, Inc., for periods up until the Separation, to Brighthouse Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries in a manner that is systematic, rational and consistent with the asset and liability method prescribed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) guidance Accounting Standards Codification 740 - Income Taxes (“ASC 740”). The Company’s income tax provision was prepared following the modified separate return method. The modified separate return method applies ASC 740 to the standalone financial statements of each member of the consolidated group as if the group member were a separate taxpayer and a standalone enterprise, after providing benefits for losses. The Company’s accounting for income taxes represents management’s best estimate of various events and transactions.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities resulting from temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities are measured at the balance sheet date using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years the temporary differences are expected to reverse.

The realization of deferred tax assets depends upon the existence of sufficient taxable income within the carryback or carryforward periods under the tax law in the applicable tax jurisdiction. Valuation allowances are established when management determines, based on available information, that it is more likely than not that deferred income tax assets will not be realized. Significant judgment is required in determining whether valuation allowances should be established, as well as the amount of such allowances. When making such determination, the Company considers many factors, including:


•	the nature, frequency, and amount of cumulative financial reporting income and losses in recent years;


•	the jurisdiction in which the deferred tax asset was generated;


•	the length of time that carryforward can be utilized in the various taxing jurisdiction;


•	future taxable income exclusive of reversing temporary differences and carryforwards;


•	future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences;


•	taxable income in prior carryback years; and


•	tax planning strategies.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The Company may be required to change its provision for income taxes when estimates used in determining valuation allowances on deferred tax assets significantly change or when receipt of new information indicates the need for adjustment in valuation allowances. Additionally, the effect of changes in tax laws, tax regulations, or interpretations of such laws or regulations, is recognized in net income tax expense (benefit) in the period of change.

The Company determines whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded on the financial statements. A tax position is measured at the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement. Unrecognized tax benefits due to tax uncertainties that do not meet the threshold are included within other liabilities and are charged to earnings in the period that such determination is made.

The Company classifies interest recognized as interest expense and penalties recognized as a component of income tax expense.

On December 22, 2017, President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“the Tax Act”) into law. The Tax Act reduced the corporate tax rate to 21%, reduced interest expense deductibility, increased capitalization amounts for deferred acquisition costs, eliminated the corporate alternative minimum tax, provided for determining reserve deductions as 92.81% of statutory reserves, and reduced the dividend received deduction. Most of the changes in the Tax Act are effective as of January 1, 2018.

The reduction in the corporate rate required a one-time remeasurement of certain deferred tax items as of December 31, 2017. For the estimated impact of the Tax Act on the financial statements, including the estimated impact resulting from the remeasurement of deferred tax assets and liabilities, see Note 13 for more information. Actual results may materially differ from the Company’s current estimate due to, among other things, further guidance that may be issued by U.S. tax authorities or regulatory bodies and/or changes in interpretations and assumptions preliminarily made. The Company will continue to analyze the Tax Act to finalize its financial statement impact.

In December 2017, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (“SAB”) 118, addressing the application of GAAP in situations when a registrant does not have necessary information available to complete the accounting for certain income tax effects of the Tax Act. SAB 118 provides guidance for registrants under three scenarios: (1) the measurement of certain income tax effects is complete, (2) the measurement of certain income tax effects can be reasonably estimated, and (3) the measurement of certain income tax effects cannot be reasonably estimated. SAB 118 provides that the measurement period is complete when a company’s accounting is complete. The measurement period cannot extend beyond one year from the enactment date. SAB 118 acknowledges that a company may be able to complete the accounting for some provisions earlier than others. As such, it may need to apply all three scenarios in determining the accounting for the Tax Act based on information that is available. The Company has not fully completed its accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Act, including accounting for reserves. However, it has recorded the effects of the Tax Act as reasonable estimates due to the need for further analysis of the provisions within the Tax Act and collection, preparation and analysis of relevant data necessary to complete the accounting.

The corporate rate reduction also left certain tax effects, which were originally recorded using the previous corporate rate, stranded in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”). The Company adopted new accounting guidance as of December 31, 2017 that allowed the Company to reclassify the stranded tax effects from AOCI into retained earnings. The Company elected to reclassify amounts based on the difference between the previously enacted federal corporate tax rate and the newly enacted rate as applied on an aggregate basis. See Note 11 for more information.

Litigation Contingencies

The Company may be a party to legal actions or regulatory investigations. Given the inherent unpredictability of these matters, it is difficult to estimate the impact, if any, on the Company’s financial position. Liabilities are established when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal costs are recognized as incurred. On a quarterly and annual basis, the Company reviews relevant information with respect to liabilities for litigation, regulatory investigations and litigation-related contingencies to be reflected on the Company’s financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Other Accounting Policies

Cash and Cash Equivalents

The Company considers all highly liquid securities and other investments purchased with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at amortized cost, which approximates estimated fair value.

Computer Software

Computer software, which is included in other assets, is stated at cost, less accumulated amortization. Purchased software costs, as well as certain internal and external costs incurred to develop internal-use computer software during the application development stage, are capitalized. Such costs are amortized generally over a four-year period using the straight-line method. The cost basis of computer software was $0 and $12.4 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Accumulated amortization of capitalized software was $0 and $5.9 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Related amortization expense was $544 thousand, $2.2 million and $13 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Employee Benefit Plans

Through December 31, 2016, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”), a former affiliate, provided and the Company contributed to defined benefit pension and postemployment plans for its employees and retirees. MLIC also provides and the Company contributes to a postretirement medical and life insurance benefit plan for certain retired employees. The Company accounts for these plans as multiemployer benefit plans and as a result the assets, obligations and other comprehensive gains and losses of these benefit plans are not included in the balance sheet. Within its statement of operations, the Company has included expense associated with its participants in these plans. These plans also include participants from other affiliates of MLIC. The Company’s participation in these plans ceased December 31, 2016.

Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

Changes to GAAP are established by the FASB in the form of accounting standards updates (“ASU”) to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification. The Company considers the applicability and impact of all ASUs. ASUs not listed below were assessed and determined to be either not applicable or are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements. The following table provides a description of new ASUs issued by the FASB and the expected impact of the adoption on the financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Except as noted below, the ASUs adopted by the Company during 2017 did not have a material impact on its financial statements.



Standard	Description	Effective Date	Impact on Financial Statements
ASU 2018-02, Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220)-Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income	The amendments to Topic 220 provide an option to reclassify stranded tax effects within AOCI to retained earnings in each period in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Act of 2017 (or portion thereof) is recorded.	January 1, 2019 applied in the period of adoption (with early adoption permitted)	The Company elected to early adopt the ASU as of December 31, 2017 and reclassified $5.3 million from AOCI into retained earnings related to the impact of the Tax Act of 2017. See Notes 9 and 11.
ASU 2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities	The amendments to Topic 815 (i) refine and expand the criteria for achieving hedge accounting on certain hedging strategies, (ii) require the earnings effect of the hedging instrument be presented in the same line item in which the earnings effect of the hedged item is reported, and (iii) eliminate the requirement to separately measure and report hedge ineffectiveness.	January 1, 2019 using the modified retrospective method (with early adoption permitted)	The Company does not expect a material impact on the Company's financial statements from adoption of the new guidance.
ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments	The amendments to Topic 326 replace the incurred loss impairment methodology for certain financial instruments with one that reflects expected credit losses based on historical loss information, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. The new guidance also requires that an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) on a debt security will be recognized as an allowance going forward, such that improvements in expected future cash flows after an impairment will no longer be reflected as a prospective yield adjustment through net investment income, but rather a reversal of the previous impairment and recognized through realized investment gains and losses.	January 1, 2020 using the modified retrospective method (with early adoption permitted beginning January 1, 2019)	The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its financial statements. We expect the most significant impacts to be earlier recognition of impairments on mortgage loan investments.
ASU 2014-09 Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)	For those contracts that are impacted, the guidance will require an entity to recognize revenue upon the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled, in exchange for those goods or services.	January 1, 2018 using the retrospective method	No impact on the Company’s financial statements.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

2. Segment Information

The Company is organized into two segments: Annuities and Life. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other.

Annuities

The Annuities segment consists of a variety of variable, fixed, index-linked and income annuities designed to address contract holders’ needs for protected wealth accumulation on a tax-deferred basis, wealth transfer and income security.

Life

The Life segment consists of life insurance products and services, including term, universal and whole life designed to address policyholders’ needs for financial security and protected wealth transfer, which may be provided on a tax-advantaged basis.

Corporate & Other

Financial Measures and Segment Accounting Policies

Adjusted earnings is a financial measure used by management to evaluate performance, allocate resources and facilitate comparisons to industry results. Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, adjusted earnings is also used to measure segment performance. The Company believes the presentation of adjusted earnings, as the Company measures it for management purposes, enhances the understanding of its performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business. Adjusted earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for net income (loss).

Adjusted earnings, which may be positive or negative, focuses on the Company’s primary businesses principally by excluding the impact of market volatility, which could distort trends, and revenues costs related to non-core products.

The following are the significant items excluded from total revenues in calculating adjusted earnings:


•	Net investment gains (losses);


•	Net derivative gains (losses) except earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments or that are used to replicate certain investments, but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment; and


•	Amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity GMIB fees (“GMIB Fees”).

The following are the significant items excluded from total expenses in calculating adjusted earnings:


•	Amounts associated with benefits and hedging costs related to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”);


•	Amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets and market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”); and


•	Amortization of DAC and VOBA related to: (i) net investment gains (losses), (ii) net derivative gains (losses), (iii) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs and (iv) Market Value Adjustments.

The tax impact of the adjustments mentioned above are calculated net of the U.S. statutory tax rate, which could differ from the Company’s effective tax rate.

Set forth in the tables below is certain financial information with respect to the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other, for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 and at December 31, 2017 and 2016. The segment accounting policies are the same as those used to prepare the Company’s financial statements, except for adjusted earnings adjustments as defined above. In addition, segment accounting policies include the method of capital allocation described below.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

2. Segment Information (continued)

The internal capital model is a risk capital model that reflects management’s judgment and view of required capital to represent the measurement of the risk profile of the business, to meet the Company’s long term promises to clients, to service long-term obligations and to support the credit ratings of the Company. It accounts for the unique and specific nature of the risks inherent in the Company’s business. Management is responsible for the ongoing production and enhancement of the internal capital model and reviewed its approach periodically to ensure that it remained consistent with emerging industry practice standards.

Beginning in 2018, the Company will allocate equity to the segments based on its new statutory capital oriented internal capital allocation model, which considers capital requirements and aligns with emerging standards and consistent risk principles.

In 2017 and prior years, segment net investment income was credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact the Company’s net investment income or net income (loss). Going forward, investment portfolios will be funded to support both liabilities and allocated surplus of each segment, requiring no allocated equity adjustments to net investment income. The impact to segment results is not expected to be material. Net investment income is based upon the actual results of each segment’s specifically identifiable investment portfolios adjusted for allocated equity. Other costs are allocated to each of the segments based upon: (i) a review of the nature of such costs; (ii) time studies analyzing the amount of employee time incurred by each segment; and (iii) cost estimates included in the Company’s product pricing.



	Operating Results
Year Ended December 31, 2017	Annuities		Life		Corporate & Other			Total
	(In thousands)
Pre-tax adjusted earnings	$	65,637	$	2,692	$	6,824		$	75,153
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	16,104		1,533		(74,929		)	(57,292		)
Adjusted earnings	$	49,533	$	1,159	$	81,753		132,445
Adjustments for:
Net investment gains (losses)								(1,178		)
Net derivative gains (losses)								(157,222		)
Other adjustments to net income								34,307
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								43,433
Net income (loss)								$	51,785

Interest revenue	$	57,142	$	19,078	$	10,433



At December 31, 2017	Annuities		Life		Corporate & Other		Total
	(In thousands)
Total assets	$	7,219,139	$	662,546	$	604,620	$	8,486,305
Separate account assets	$	5,021,633	$	—	$	—	$	5,021,633
Separate account liabilities	$	5,021,633	$	—	$	—	$	5,021,633

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

2. Segment Information (continued)



	Operating Results
Year Ended December 31, 2016	Annuities		Life		Corporate & Other		Total
	(In thousands)
Pre-tax adjusted earnings	$	52,855	$	40,561	$	9,665	$	103,081
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	14,623		14,197		3,014		31,834
Adjusted earnings	$	38,232	$	26,364	$	6,651	$	71,247
Adjustments for:
Net investment gains (losses)							(3,737		)
Net derivative gains (losses)							67,726
Other adjustments to net income							(34,508		)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit							(10,318		)
Net income (loss)							$	90,410

Interest revenue	$	27,747	$	17,108	$	13,204



At December 31, 2016	Annuities		Life		Corporate & Other		Total
	(In thousands)
Total assets	$	6,708,803	$	342,592	$	581,651	$	7,633,046
Separate account assets	$	4,758,449	$	—	$	—	$	4,758,449
Separate account liabilities	$	4,758,449	$	—	$	—	$	4,758,449



	Operating Results
Year Ended December 31, 2015	Annuities		Life			Corporate & Other		Total
	(In thousands)
Pre-tax adjusted earnings	$	20,794	(60,934		)	$	11,842	$	(28,298	)
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	1,139		(21,327		)	3,493		(16,695		)
Adjusted earnings	$	19,655	$	(39,607	)	$	8,349	$	(11,603	)
Adjustments for:
Net investment gains (losses)								4,399
Net derivative gains (losses)								65,000
Other adjustments to net income								(16,018		)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								(18,683		)
Net income (loss)								$	23,095

Interest revenue	$	23,210	$	15,432		$	14,516

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

2. Segment Information (continued)

The following table presents total revenues with respect to the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016		2015
	(In thousands)
Annuities	$	106,762		$	125,308	$	139,102
Life	36,646			86,089		56,322
Corporate & Other	12,789			15,135		16,771
Adjustments	(144,532		)	78,168		83,460
Total	$	11,665		$	304,700	$	295,655

The following table presents total premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues by major product groups of the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017		2016		2015
	(In thousands)
Annuity products	$	63,813	$	112,018	$	130,167
Life insurance products	19,925		70,913		43,145
Total	$	83,738	$	182,931	$	173,312

All of the Company’s premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues originated in the U.S.

Revenues derived from any customer did not exceed 10% of premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.

3. Insurance

Insurance Liabilities

Insurance liabilities, including affiliated insurance liabilities on reinsurance ceded, are comprised of future policy benefits, policyholder account balances and other policy-related balances. Information regarding insurance liabilities by segment, as well as Corporate & Other, was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Annuities	$	1,675,039	$	1,504,773
Life	346,084		322,319
Corporate & Other	8,986		9,550
Total	$	2,030,109	$	1,836,642

See Note 5 for discussion of affiliated reinsurance liabilities included in the table above.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

3. Insurance (continued)

Future policy benefits are measured as follows:



Product Type:		Measurement Assumptions:
Nonparticipating life insurance		Aggregate of the present value of expected future benefit payments and related expenses less the present value of expected future net premiums. Assumptions as to mortality and persistency are based upon the Company’s experience when the basis of the liability is established. Interest rate assumptions for the aggregate future policy benefit liabilities range from 3% to 5%.
Individual and group fixed annuities after annuitization		Present value of expected future payments. Interest rate assumptions used in establishing such liabilities range from 3% to 6%.

Policyholder account balances are equal to: (i) policy account values, which consist of an accumulation of gross premium payments; and (ii) credited interest, ranging from 1% to 7%, less expenses, mortality charges and withdrawals.

Guarantees

The Company issues variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. GMABs, the non-life-contingent portion of GMWBs and the portion of certain GMIBs that do not require annuitization are accounted for as embedded derivatives in policyholder account balances and are further discussed in Note 7. Guarantees accounted for as insurance liabilities include:



Guarantee:				Measurement Assumptions:
GMDBs	•	A return of purchase payment upon death even if the account value is reduced to zero.	•	Present value of expected death benefits in excess of the projected account balance recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on the present value of total expected assessments.
	•	An enhanced death benefit may be available for an additional fee.	•	Assumptions are consistent with those used for amortizing DAC, and are thus subject to the same variability and risk.
			•	Investment performance and volatility assumptions are consistent with the historical experience of the appropriate underlying equity index, such as the Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings (“S&P”) 500 Index.
			•	Benefit assumptions are based on the average benefits payable over a range of scenarios.
GMIBs	•	After a specified period of time determined at the time of issuance of the variable annuity contract, a minimum accumulation of purchase payments, even if the account value is reduced to zero, that can be annuitized to receive a monthly income stream that is not less than a specified amount.	•	Present value of expected income benefits in excess of the projected account balance at any future date of annuitization and recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on present value of total expected assessments.
	•	Certain contracts also provide for a guaranteed lump sum return of purchase premium in lieu of the annuitization benefit.	•	Assumptions are consistent with those used for estimating GMDB liabilities.
			•	Calculation incorporates an assumption for the percentage of the potential annuitizations that may be elected by the contract holder.
GMWBs	•	A return of purchase payment via partial withdrawals, even if the account value is reduced to zero, provided that cumulative withdrawals in a contract year do not exceed a certain limit.	•	Expected value of the life contingent payments and expected assessments using assumptions consistent with those used for estimating the GMDB liabilities.
	•	Certain contracts include guaranteed withdrawals that are life contingent.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

3. Insurance (continued)

Information regarding the liabilities for guarantees (excluding base policy liabilities and embedded derivatives) relating to annuity contracts was as follows:



	Annuity Contracts
	GMDBs			GMIBs		Total
	(In thousands)
Direct
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	7,152		$	96,726	$	103,878
Incurred guaranteed benefits	1,175			20,004		21,179
Paid guaranteed benefits	(238		)	—		(238		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	8,089			116,730		124,819
Incurred guaranteed benefits	2,272			32,338		34,610
Paid guaranteed benefits	(560		)	1		(559		)
Balance at December 31, 2016	9,801			149,069		158,870
Incurred guaranteed benefits	2,675			22,559		25,234
Paid guaranteed benefits	(11		)	—		(11		)
Balance at December 31, 2017	$	12,465		$	171,628	$	184,093
Ceded
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	7,152		$	32,487	$	39,639
Incurred guaranteed benefits	1,664			7,433		9,097
Paid guaranteed benefits	(238		)	—		(238		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	8,578			39,920		48,498
Incurred guaranteed benefits	2,215			11,570		13,785
Paid guaranteed benefits	(560		)	—		(560		)
Balance at December 31, 2016	10,233			51,490		61,723
Incurred guaranteed benefits	2,547			9,386		11,933
Paid guaranteed benefits	(11		)	—		(11		)
Balance at December 31, 2017	$	12,769		$	60,876	$	73,645
Net
Balance at January 1, 2015	$	—		$	64,239	$	64,239
Incurred guaranteed benefits	(489		)	12,571		12,082
Paid guaranteed benefits	—			—		—
Balance at December 31, 2015	(489		)	76,810		76,321
Incurred guaranteed benefits	57			20,768		20,825
Paid guaranteed benefits	—			1		1
Balance at December 31, 2016	(432		)	97,579		97,147
Incurred guaranteed benefits	128			13,173		13,301
Paid guaranteed benefits	—			—		—
Balance at December 31, 2017	$	(304	)	$	110,752	$	110,448

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

3. Insurance (continued)

Information regarding the Company’s guarantee exposure was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017						2016
	In the Event of Death			At Annuitization			In the Event of Death			At Annuitization
	(Dollars in thousands)
Annuity Contracts (1), (2)
Variable Annuity Guarantees
Total account value (3)	$	5,026,927		$	4,149,482		$	4,763,943		$	3,969,485
Separate account value	$	5,020,107		$	4,149,482		$	4,753,638		$	3,968,482
Net amount at risk	$	5,262	(4)	$	166,788	(5)	$	36,827	(4)	$	209,926	(5)
Average attained age of contract holders	66 years			66 years			66 years			65 years

______________


(1)	The Company’s annuity contracts with guarantees may offer more than one type of guarantee in each contract. Therefore, the amounts listed above may not be mutually exclusive.


(2)	Includes direct business, but excludes offsets from hedging or reinsurance, if any. Therefore, the net amount at risk presented reflects the economic exposures of living and death benefit guarantees associated with variable annuities, but not necessarily their impact on the Company. See Note 7 for a discussion of guaranteed minimum benefits which have been reinsured.


(3)	Includes the contract holder’s investments in the general account and separate account, if applicable.


(4)	Defined as the death benefit less the total account value, as of the balance sheet date. It represents the amount of the claim that the Company would incur if death claims were filed on all contracts on the balance sheet date and includes any additional contractual claims associated with riders purchased to assist with covering income taxes payable upon death.

(5)

Defined as the amount (if any) that would be required to be added to the total account value to purchase a lifetime income stream, based on current annuity rates, equal to the minimum amount provided under the guaranteed benefit. This amount represents the Company’s potential economic exposure to such guarantees in the event all contract holders were to annuitize on the balance sheet date, even though the contracts contain terms that allow annuitization of the guaranteed amount only after the 10th anniversary of the contract, which not all contract holders have achieved.

Account balances of contracts with guarantees were invested in separate account asset classes as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Fund Groupings:
Balanced	$	3,099,888	$	2,945,952
Equity	1,513,408		1,403,276
Bond	359,929		359,993
Money Market	48,408		49,228
Total	$	5,021,633	$	4,758,449

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

4. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles

See Note 1 for a description of capitalized acquisition costs.

Nonparticipating and Non-Dividend-Paying Traditional Contracts

The Company amortizes DAC and VOBA related to these contracts (primarily term insurance) over the appropriate premium paying period in proportion to the actual and expected future gross premiums that were set at contract issue. The expected premiums are based upon the premium requirement of each policy and assumptions for mortality, persistency and investment returns at policy issuance, or policy acquisition (as it relates to VOBA), include provisions for adverse deviation, and are consistent with the assumptions used to calculate future policy benefit liabilities. These assumptions are not revised after policy issuance or acquisition unless the DAC or VOBA balance is deemed to be unrecoverable from future expected profits. Absent a premium deficiency, variability in amortization after policy issuance or acquisition is caused only by variability in premium volumes.

Fixed and Variable Deferred Annuity Contracts

The Company amortizes DAC and VOBA related to these contracts over the estimated lives of the contracts in proportion to actual and expected future gross profits. The amortization includes interest based on rates in effect at inception or acquisition of the contracts. The amount of future gross profits is dependent principally upon returns in excess of the amounts credited to policyholders, mortality, persistency, interest crediting rates, expenses to administer the business, creditworthiness of reinsurance counterparties, the effect of any hedges used and certain economic variables, such as inflation. Of these factors, the Company anticipates that investment returns, expenses and persistency are reasonably likely to significantly impact the rate of DAC and VOBA amortization. Each reporting period, the Company updates the estimated gross profits with the actual gross profits for that period. When the actual gross profits change from previously estimated gross profits, the cumulative DAC and VOBA amortization is re-estimated and adjusted by a cumulative charge or credit to current operations. When actual gross profits exceed those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the actual gross profits are below the previously estimated gross profits. Each reporting period, the Company also updates the actual amount of business remaining in-force, which impacts expected future gross profits. When expected future gross profits are below those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the expected future gross profits are above the previously estimated expected future gross profits. Each period, the Company also reviews the estimated gross profits for each block of business to determine the recoverability of DAC and VOBA balances.

Factors Impacting Amortization

Separate account rates of return on variable deferred annuity contracts affect in-force account balances on such contracts each reporting period, which can result in significant fluctuations in amortization of DAC and VOBA. Returns that are higher than the Company’s long-term expectation produce higher account balances, which increases the Company’s future fee expectations and decreases future benefit payment expectations on minimum death and living benefit guarantees, resulting in higher expected future gross profits. The opposite result occurs when returns are lower than the Company’s long-term expectation. The Company’s practice to determine the impact of gross profits resulting from returns on separate accounts assumes that long-term appreciation in equity markets is not changed by short-term market fluctuations, but is only changed when sustained interim deviations are expected. The Company monitors these events and only changes the assumption when its long-term expectation changes.

The Company also periodically reviews other long-term assumptions underlying the projections of estimated gross profits. These assumptions primarily relate to investment returns, interest crediting rates, mortality, persistency and expenses to administer business. Management annually updates assumptions used in the calculation of estimated gross profits which may have significantly changed. If the update of assumptions causes expected future gross profits to increase, DAC and VOBA amortization will generally decrease, resulting in a current period increase to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the assumption update causes expected future gross profits to decrease.

Periodically, the Company modifies product benefits, features, rights or coverages that occur by the exchange of a contract for a new contract, or by amendment, endorsement, or rider to a contract, or by election or coverage within a contract. If such modification, referred to as an internal replacement, substantially changes the contract, the associated DAC or VOBA is written off immediately through income and any new deferrable costs associated with the replacement contract are deferred. If the modification does not substantially change the contract, the DAC or VOBA amortization on the original contract will continue and any acquisition costs associated with the related modification are expensed.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

4. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles (continued)

Amortization of DAC and VOBA is attributed to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), and to other expenses for the amount of gross profits originating from transactions other than investment gains and losses. Unrealized investment gains and losses represent the amount of DAC and VOBA that would have been amortized if such gains and losses had been recognized.

Information regarding DAC and VOBA was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
DAC
Balance at January 1,	$	85,032		$	107,474		$	204,321
Capitalizations	17,089			4,976			4,768
Amortization related to:
Net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)	50,228			(12,163		)	(16,372		)
Other expenses	(10,182		)	(11,155		)	(87,443		)
Total amortization	40,046			(23,318		)	(103,815		)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)	(11,200		)	(4,100		)	2,200
Balance at December 31,	130,967			85,032			107,474
VOBA
Balance at January 1,	141			40			51
Amortization related to:
Net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)	—			—			5
Other expenses	(49		)	101			(16		)
Total amortization	(49		)	101			(11		)
Balance at December 31,	92			141			40
Total DAC and VOBA
Balance at December 31,	$	131,059		$	85,173		$	107,514

Information regarding total DAC and VOBA by segment, as well as Corporate & Other, was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Annuities	$	107,760	$	60,689
Life	23,101		24,265
Corporate & Other	198		219
Total	$	131,059	$	85,173

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

4. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles (continued)

Information regarding other intangibles was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
DSI
Balance at January 1,	$	29,647		$	37,114		$	41,176
Capitalization	155			350			452
Amortization	(479		)	(7,017		)	(5,014		)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)	(2,400		)	(800		)	500
Balance at December 31,	$	26,923		$	29,647		$	37,114
VODA
Balance at January 1,	$	9,862		$	11,222		$	12,616
Amortization	(1,283		)	(1,360		)	(1,394		)
Balance at December 31,	$	8,579		$	9,862		$	11,222
Accumulated amortization	$	10,935		$	9,652		$	8,292

The estimated future amortization expense to be reported in other expenses for the next five years is as follows:



	VOBA		VODA
	(In thousands)
2018	$	46	$	1,184
2019	$	46	$	1,073
2020	$	—	$	956
2021	$	—	$	841
2022	$	—	$	730

5. Reinsurance

The Company enters into reinsurance agreements primarily as a purchaser of reinsurance for its various insurance products. The Company participates in reinsurance activities in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to significant risks and provide additional capacity for future growth.

Accounting for reinsurance requires extensive use of assumptions and estimates, particularly related to the future performance of the underlying business and the potential impact of counterparty credit risks. The Company periodically reviews actual and anticipated experience compared to the aforementioned assumptions used to establish assets and liabilities relating to ceded and assumed reinsurance and evaluates the financial strength of counterparties to its reinsurance agreements using criteria similar to that evaluated in the security impairment process discussed in Note 6.

Annuities

For annuities, the Company currently reinsures to its parent Brighthouse Life Insurance Company and formerly reinsured to MLIC, 100% of the certain variable annuity risks or 100% of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with variable annuities. Under the benefit guarantees reinsurance agreements, the Company pays a reinsurance premium generally based on fees associated with the guarantees collected from policyholders, and receives reimbursement for benefits paid or accrued in excess of account values, subject to certain limitations.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

5. Reinsurance (continued)

Life

For its individual life insurance products, the Company has historically reinsured the mortality risk primarily on an excess of retention basis or on a quota share basis. The Company currently retains up to $100,000 per life and reinsures 100% of amounts in excess of the amount the Company retains. In addition to reinsuring mortality risk as described above, the Company reinsures other risks, as well as specific coverages. Placement of reinsurance is done primarily on an automatic basis and also on a facultative basis for risks with specified characteristics. The Company evaluates its reinsurance programs routinely and may increase or decrease its retention at any time.

Catastrophe Coverage

The Company has exposure to catastrophes, which could contribute to significant fluctuations in the Company’s results of operations. The Company uses excess of retention and quota share reinsurance agreements to provide greater diversification of risk and minimize exposure to larger risks.

Reinsurance Recoverables

The Company reinsures its business through a diversified group of reinsurers. The Company analyzes recent trends in arbitration and litigation outcomes in disputes, if any, with its reinsurers. The Company monitors ratings and evaluates the financial strength of its reinsurers by analyzing their financial statements. In addition, the reinsurance recoverable balance due from each reinsurer is evaluated as part of the overall monitoring process. Recoverability of reinsurance recoverable balances is evaluated based on these analyses. The Company generally secures large reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts and irrevocable letters of credit. These reinsurance recoverable balances are stated net of allowances for uncollectible reinsurance, which at both December 31, 2017 and 2016, were not significant.

The Company has secured certain reinsurance recoverable balances with irrevocable letters of credit. The Company had $17.0 million and $11.9 million of unsecured reinsurance recoverable balances with third-parties at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

At December 31, 2017, the Company had $17.1 million of net ceded reinsurance recoverables with third-parties. Of this total, $15.0 million, or 88%, were with the Company’s five largest ceded reinsurers, all of which were unsecured. At December 31, 2016, the Company had $11.9 million of net ceded reinsurance recoverables with third-parties. Of this total, $10.5 million, or 88%, were with the Company’s five largest ceded reinsurers, all of which were unsecured.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

5. Reinsurance (continued)

The amounts on the statements of operations include the impact of reinsurance. Information regarding the significant effects of reinsurance was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Premiums
Direct premiums	$	93,196		$	109,733		$	122,110
Reinsurance ceded	(66,928		)	(58,994		)	(50,238		)
Net premiums	$	26,268		$	50,739		$	71,872
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
Direct universal life and investment-type product policy fees	$	107,605		$	106,830		$	114,850
Reinsurance ceded	(3,869		)	(3,830		)	(3,945		)
Net universal life and investment-type product policy fees	$	103,736		$	103,000		$	110,905
Other revenues
Direct other revenues	$	13,016		$	12,494		$	12,754
Reinsurance ceded	(59,282		)	16,698			(22,219		)
Net other revenues	$	(46,266	)	$	29,192		$	(9,465	)
Policyholder benefits and claims
Direct policyholder benefits and claims	$	105,551		$	128,420		$	138,574
Reinsurance ceded	(110,325		)	(76,440		)	(89,174		)
Net policyholder benefits and claims	$	(4,774	)	$	51,980		$	49,400

The amounts on the balance sheets include the impact of reinsurance. Information regarding the significant effects of reinsurance was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017						2016
	Direct		Ceded		Total Balance Sheet		Direct		Ceded		Total Balance Sheet
	(In thousands)
Assets
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	20,852	$	551,757	$	572,609	$	19,005	$	335,934	$	354,939

Liabilities
Other policy-related balances	$	12,733	$	—	$	12,733	$	7,285	$	—	$	7,285
Other liabilities	$	21,643	$	449,487	$	471,130	$	10,637	$	101,804	$	112,441

Reinsurance agreements that do not expose the Company to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. Deposit assets and deposit liabilities, if any, are the result of related party reinsurance transactions. See “— Related Party Reinsurance Transactions.”

Related Party Reinsurance Transactions

The Company has reinsurance agreements with its parent, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, and certain MetLife, Inc. subsidiaries, including MLIC and MetLife Reinsurance Company of Vermont (“MRV”), all of which were related parties at December 31, 2017.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

5. Reinsurance (continued)

Information regarding the significant effects of related party reinsurance included on the statements of operations was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Premiums
Reinsurance ceded	$	(51,944	)	$	(44,259	)	$	(37,119	)
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
Reinsurance ceded	$	(3,680	)	$	(3,645	)	$	(3,784	)
Other revenues
Reinsurance ceded	$	(59,272	)	$	16,701		$	(22,212	)
Policyholder benefits and claims
Reinsurance ceded	$	(99,990	)	$	(71,948	)	$	(76,410	)

Information regarding the significant effects of ceded related party reinsurance included on the balance sheets was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Assets
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	533,388	$	321,868
Liabilities
Other liabilities	$	448,210	$	99,641

The Company ceded risks to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company related to guaranteed minimum benefit guarantees written directly by the Company. These ceded reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives and changes in their estimated fair value are included within net derivative gains (losses). The embedded derivatives associated with the cessions are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and were $307.7 million and $211.2 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were ($73.6) million, $24.2 million and $12.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

The Company ceded 100% of certain variable annuities including guaranteed minimum benefit on a modified coinsurance basis to MLIC. In January 2017, the Company executed a novation and reassigned this reinsurance agreement with Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, as reinsurer. These transactions were treated as a termination of the existing reinsurance agreement with recognition of a loss and a new reinsurance agreement with no recognition of a gain or loss. These transactions resulted in an increase in other liabilities of $129.8 million. The Company recognized a loss of $84.4 million, net of income tax, as a result of these transactions. Certain contractual features of this agreement qualify as embedded derivatives, which are separately accounted for at estimated fair value on the Company’s balance sheets. The embedded derivatives associated with this cession are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and were $0 and $168.1 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were ($125.1) million, $46.2 million and $54.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

5. Reinsurance (continued)

In May 2017, the Company recaptured from MLIC risks related to multiple life products under yearly renewable term and coinsurance agreements. This recapture resulted in an increase in cash and cash equivalents of $25.6 million and a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $22.4 million. The Company recognized a gain of $2.1 million, net of income tax, as a result of reinsurance termination. Concurrent with the recapture from MLIC, the Company executed a reinsurance agreement with Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, as reinsurer to cede on a yearly renewable term basis risks related to multiple life products. The transaction resulted in an increase in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $24.7 million, an increase in other liabilities of $22.7 million a decrease in premiums of $22.7 million and a reduction in policyholder benefits and claims of $24.7 million. The Company recognized a gain of $1.3 million, net of income tax, as a result of this transaction.

In December 2016, the Company recaptured level premium term business previously reinsured to MRV. This recapture resulted in a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $27.2 million, a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $93.7 million and a decrease in other liabilities of $158.1 million. The Company recognized a gain of $24.2 million, net of income tax, as a result of this recapture.

In November 2016, the Company recaptured certain single premium deferred annuity contracts previously reinsured to MLIC. This recapture resulted in an increase in investments and cash and cash equivalents of $933.4 million and an increase in DAC of $22.9 million, offset by a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $922.6 million. The Company recognized a gain of $21.9 million, net of income tax, as a result of this recapture.

The Company has secured certain reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts and irrevocable letters of credit. The Company had $92.6 million and $199.0 million of unsecured related party reinsurance recoverable balances at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Related party reinsurance agreements that do not expose the Company to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. The deposit assets on related party reinsurance were $19.6 million and $28.0 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. There were no deposit liabilities on related party reinsurance at both December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments

See Note 8 for information about the fair value hierarchy for investments and the related valuation methodologies.

Fixed Maturity Securities AFS

Fixed Maturity Securities AFS by Sector

The following table presents the fixed maturity securities AFS by sector.



	December 31, 2017										December 31, 2016
	Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized						Estimated Fair Value		Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized						Estimated Fair Value
	Amortized Cost		Gains		Temporary Losses		OTTI Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Amortized Cost		Gains		Temporary Losses		OTTI Losses		Estimated Fair Value
	(In thousands)
Fixed maturity securities: (1)
U.S. corporate	$	770,385	$	29,246	$	2,007	$	—	$	797,624	$	709,694	$	20,400	$	8,283	$	—	$	721,811
U.S. government and agency	535,757		17,023		5,717		—		547,063		410,504		9,560		13,519		—		406,545
Foreign corporate	304,650		8,168		3,704		—		309,114		237,412		2,998		8,070		—		232,340
RMBS	217,857		5,626		1,703		—		221,780		238,676		2,033		2,322		—		238,387
CMBS	197,931		3,533		1,043		—		200,421		177,719		2,724		1,487		—		178,956
State and political subdivision	64,056		6,596		366		—		70,286		52,739		4,345		764		—		56,320
ABS	58,665		305		98		—		58,872		26,695		152		177		—		26,670
Foreign government	15,833		597		27		—		16,403		17,215		543		273		—		17,485
Total fixed maturity securities	$	2,165,134	$	71,094	$	14,665	$	—	$	2,221,563	$	1,870,654	$	42,755	$	34,895	$	—	$	1,878,514

__________________


(1)	Redeemable preferred stock is reported within U.S. corporate fixed maturity securities. Included within fixed maturity securities are Structured Securities.

The Company did not hold non-income producing fixed maturity securities at both December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Maturities of Fixed Maturity Securities

The amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities, by contractual maturity date, were as follows at December 31, 2017:



	Due in One Year or Less		Due After One Year Through Five Years		Due After Five Years Through Ten Years		Due After Ten Years		Structured Securities		Total Fixed Maturity Securities
	(In thousands)
Amortized cost	$	40,231	$	333,428	$	760,665	$	556,357	$	474,453	$	2,165,134
Estimated fair value	$	40,633	$	338,857	$	768,084	$	592,916	$	481,073	$	2,221,563

Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities due to the exercise of call or prepayment options. Fixed maturity securities not due at a single maturity date have been presented in the year of final contractual maturity. Structured Securities are shown separately, as they are not due at a single maturity.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

Continuous Gross Unrealized Losses for Fixed Maturity Securities AFS by Sector

The following table presents the estimated fair value and gross unrealized losses of fixed maturity securities AFS in an unrealized loss position, aggregated by sector and by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position.



	December 31, 2017								December 31, 2016
	Less than 12 Months				Equal to or Greater than 12 Months				Less than 12 Months				Equal to or Greater than 12 Months
	Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses
	(Dollars in thousands)
Fixed maturity securities
U.S. corporate	$	118,514	$	898	$	46,372	$	1,109	$	250,559	$	6,667	$	17,745	$	1,616
U.S. government and agency	248,434		2,895		107,253		2,822		342,150		13,519		—		—
Foreign corporate	88,724		1,540		29,552		2,164		129,093		3,541		22,965		4,529
RMBS	24,060		162		38,454		1,541		137,470		2,089		6,822		233
CMBS	18,430		176		27,958		867		42,661		1,068		3,729		419
State and political subdivision	9,232		110		8,111		256		20,709		764		—		—
ABS	7,361		23		8,076		75		17,504		177		—		—
Foreign government	4,484		27		—		—		7,189		148		868		125
Total fixed maturity securities	$	519,239	$	5,831	$	265,776	$	8,834	$	947,335	$	27,973	$	52,129	$	6,922
Total number of securities in an unrealized loss position	131				58				203				35

Evaluation of AFS Securities for OTTI and Evaluating Temporarily Impaired AFS Securities

Evaluation and Measurement Methodologies

Management considers a wide range of factors about the security issuer and uses its best judgment in evaluating the cause of the decline in the estimated fair value of the security and in assessing the prospects for near-term recovery. Inherent in management’s evaluation of the security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. Considerations used in the impairment evaluation process include, but are not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the estimated fair value has been below amortized cost; (ii) the potential for impairments when the issuer is experiencing significant financial difficulties; (iii) the potential for impairments in an entire industry sector or sub-sector; (iv) the potential for impairments in certain economically depressed geographic locations; (v) the potential for impairments where the issuer, series of issuers or industry has suffered a catastrophic loss or has exhausted natural resources; (vi) whether the Company has the intent to sell or will more likely than not be required to sell a particular security before the decline in estimated fair value below amortized cost recovers; (vii) with respect to Structured Securities, changes in forecasted cash flows after considering the quality of underlying collateral, expected prepayment speeds, current and forecasted loss severity, consideration of the payment terms of the underlying assets backing a particular security, and the payment priority within the tranche structure of the security; (viii) the potential for impairments due to weakening of foreign currencies on non-functional currency denominated fixed maturity securities that are near maturity; and (ix) other subjective factors, including concentrations and information obtained from regulators and rating agencies.

Current Period Evaluation

Based on the Company’s current evaluation of its AFS securities in an unrealized loss position in accordance with its impairment policy, and the Company’s current intentions and assessments (as applicable to the type of security) about holding, selling and any requirements to sell these securities, the Company concluded that these securities were not other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2017.

Gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities decreased $20.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2017 to $14.7 million. The decrease in gross unrealized losses for the year ended December 31, 2017, was primarily attributable to narrowing credit spreads and decreasing longer-term interest rates.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

At December 31, 2017, there were no gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss position of 20% or more of amortized cost for six months or greater.

Mortgage Loans

Mortgage Loans by Portfolio Segment

Mortgage loans are summarized as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017					2016
	Carrying Value			% of Total		Carrying Value			% of Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Mortgage loans:
Commercial	$	276,626		70.0	%	$	286,002		70.4	%
Agricultural	119,984			30.4		121,858			30.0
Subtotal (1)	396,610			100.4		407,860			100.4
Valuation allowances (2)	(1,747		)	(0.4	)	(1,775		)	(0.4	)
Total mortgage loans, net	$	394,863		100.0	%	$	406,085		100.0	%

__________________

(1)

The Company purchases unaffiliated mortgage loans under a master participation agreement from a former affiliate, simultaneously with the former affiliate’s origination or acquisition of mortgage loans. The aggregate amount of unaffiliated mortgage loan participation interests purchased by the Company from the former affiliate during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 were $22.2 million, $100.2 million and $44.9 million, respectively. In connection with the mortgage loan participations, the former affiliate collected mortgage loan principal and interest payments on the Company’s behalf and the former affiliate remitted such payments to the Company in the amount of $58.5 million, $63.7 million and $30.3 million during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.


(2)	The valuation allowances were primarily from collective evaluation (non-specific loan related).

Information on commercial and agricultural mortgage loans is presented in the tables below.

Valuation Allowance Methodology

Mortgage loans are considered to be impaired when it is probable that, based upon current information and events, the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due under the loan agreement. Specific valuation allowances are established using the same methodology for both portfolio segments as the excess carrying value of a loan over either (i) the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s original effective interest rate, (ii) the estimated fair value of the loan’s underlying collateral if the loan is in the process of foreclosure or otherwise collateral dependent, or (iii) the loan’s observable market price. A common evaluation framework is used for establishing non-specific valuation allowances for both loan portfolio segments; however, a separate non-specific valuation allowance is calculated and maintained for each loan portfolio segment that is based on inputs unique to each loan portfolio segment. Non-specific valuation allowances are established for pools of loans with similar risk characteristics where a property-specific or market-specific risk has not been identified, but for which the Company expects to incur a credit loss. These evaluations are based upon several loan portfolio segment-specific factors, including the Company’s experience for loan losses, defaults and loss severity, and loss expectations for loans with similar risk characteristics. These evaluations are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

Credit Quality of Commercial Mortgage Loans

The credit quality of commercial mortgage loans was as follows at:



	Recorded Investment
	Debt Service Coverage Ratios						Total		% of Total
	> 1.20x		1.00x - 1.20x		< 1.00x		Total		% of Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
December 31, 2017
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	243,217	$	17,425	$	—	$	260,642	94.2	%
65% to 75%	12,957		—		—		12,957		4.7
76% to 80%	3,027		—		—		3,027		1.1
Total	$	259,201	$	17,425	$	—	$	276,626	100.0	%
December 31, 2016
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	259,711	$	15,614	$	999	$	276,324	96.6	%
65% to 75%	9,678		—		—		9,678		3.4
Total	$	269,389	$	15,614	$	999	$	286,002	100.0	%

Credit Quality of Agricultural Mortgage Loans

The credit quality of agricultural mortgage loans was as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017				2016
	Recorded Investment		% of Total		Recorded Investment		% of Total
	(Dollars in thousands)
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	119,077	99.2	%	$	119,974	98.4	%
65% to 75%	907		0.8		1,884		1.6
Total	$	119,984	100.0	%	$	121,858	100.0	%

Past Due, Nonaccrual and Modified Mortgage Loans

The Company has a high quality, well performing mortgage loan portfolio, with all mortgage loans classified as performing at both December 31, 2017 and 2016. The Company defines delinquency consistent with industry practice, when mortgage loans are past due as follows: commercial mortgage loans – 60 days and agricultural mortgage loans – 90 days. The Company had no commercial or agricultural mortgage loans past due and no commercial or agricultural mortgage loans in nonaccrual status at both December 31, 2017 and 2016. During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company did not have any mortgage loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring.

Cash Equivalents

The carrying value of cash equivalents, which includes securities and other investments with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase, was $60.7 million and $9.2 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

Net Unrealized Investment Gains (Losses)

Unrealized investment gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities AFS and the effect on DAC, DSI and future policy benefits, that would result from the realization of the unrealized gains (losses), are included in net unrealized investment gains (losses) in AOCI.

The components of net unrealized investment gains (losses), included in AOCI, were as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Fixed maturity securities	$	56,432		$	7,862		$	6,028
Derivatives	471			4,718			3,189
Subtotal	56,903			12,580			9,217
Amounts allocated from:
DAC and DSI	(19,400		)	(5,800		)	(900		)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	(7,875		)	(2,373		)	(2,911		)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)	$	29,628		$	4,407		$	5,406

The changes in net unrealized investment gains (losses) were as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Balance at January 1,	$	4,407		$	5,406		$	39,591
Unrealized investment gains (losses) during the year	44,323			3,363			(55,293		)
Unrealized investment gains (losses) relating to:
DAC and DSI	(13,600		)	(4,900		)	2,700
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	(5,502		)	538			18,408
Balance at December 31,	$	29,628		$	4,407		$	5,406
Change in net unrealized investment gains (losses)	$	25,221		$	(999	)	$	(34,185	)

Concentrations of Credit Risk

There were no investments in any counterparty that were greater than 10% of the Company’s equity, other than the U.S. government and its agencies, at both December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Invested Assets on Deposit and Pledged as Collateral

Invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral are presented below at estimated fair value at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Invested assets on deposit (regulatory deposits)	$	1,549	$	1,507
Invested assets pledged as collateral (1)	$	707	$	—
Total invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral	$	2,256	$	1,507

__________________


(1)	The Company has pledged invested assets in connection with derivative transactions (see Note 7).

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

Variable Interest Entities

The Company has invested in certain entities that are VIEs. In certain instances, the Company may hold both the power to direct the most significant activities of the entity, as well as an economic interest in the entity and, as such, it would be deemed the primary beneficiary or consolidator of the entity. The determination of the VIE’s primary beneficiary requires an evaluation of the contractual and implied rights and obligations associated with each party’s relationship with or involvement in the entity, an estimate of the entity’s expected losses and expected residual returns and the allocation of such estimates to each party involved in the entity.

Consolidated VIEs

There were no VIEs for which the Company has concluded that it is the primary beneficiary and which are consolidated at either December 31, 2017 or 2016.

Unconsolidated VIEs

The carrying amount and maximum exposure to loss relating to VIEs in which the Company holds a significant variable interest but is not the primary beneficiary and which have not been consolidated were as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017				2016
	Carrying Amount		Maximum Exposure to Loss (1)		Carrying Amount		Maximum Exposure to Loss (1)
	(In thousands)
Fixed maturity securities AFS:
Structured Securities (2)	$	431,406	$	431,406	$	444,013	$	444,013
Foreign corporate	6,394		6,394		5,884		5,884
Total	$	437,800	$	437,800	$	449,897	$	449,897

_____________


(1)	The maximum exposure to loss relating to fixed maturity securities AFS is equal to their carrying amounts or the carrying amounts of retained interests. Such a maximum loss would be expected to occur only upon bankruptcy of the issuer or investee.


(2)	For these variable interests, the Company’s involvement is limited to that of a passive investor in mortgage-backed or asset-backed securities issued by trusts that do not have substantial equity.

Net Investment Income

The components of net investment income were as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017		2016		2015
	(In thousands)
Investment income:
Fixed maturity securities	$	71,779	$	50,386	$	47,069
Mortgage loans	16,665		8,734		6,904
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments	261		102		38
Other	778		516		401
Subtotal	89,483		59,738		54,412
Less: Investment expenses	3,156		1,958		1,468
Net investment income	$	86,327	$	57,780	$	52,944

See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for discussion of affiliated investment expenses.

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

6. Investments (continued)

Net Investment Gains (Losses)

Components of Net Investment Gains (Losses)

The components of net investment gains (losses) were as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities:
Total OTTI losses recognized:
U.S. and foreign corporate securities — by industry:
Industrial	$	—		$	(870	)	$	—
OTTI losses on fixed maturity securities recognized in earnings	—			(870		)	—
Fixed maturity securities — net gains (losses) on sales and disposals	(1,749		)	(1,884		)	4,547
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities	(1,749		)	(2,754		)	4,547
Equity securities - net gains (losses) on sales and disposals	—			6			—
Mortgage loans	(42		)	(1,129		)	(146		)
Other	613			140			(2		)
Total net investment gains (losses)	$	(1,178	)	$	(3,737	)	$	4,399

Gains (losses) from foreign currency transactions included within net investment gains (losses) were $467 thousand, ($54) thousand and $458 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Sales or Disposals and Impairments of Fixed Maturity Securities

Investment gains and losses on sales of securities are determined on a specific identification basis. Proceeds from sales or disposals of fixed maturity securities and the components of fixed maturity securities net investment gains (losses) were as shown in the table below.



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015			2017		2016		2015
	Fixed Maturity Securities									Equity Securities
	(In thousands)
Proceeds	$	462,993		$	74,657		$	292,993		$	—	$	183	$	—
Gross investment gains	$	1,879		$	1,006		$	8,204		$	—	$	6	$	—
Gross investment losses	(3,628		)	(2,890		)	(3,657		)	—		—		—
OTTI losses	—			(870		)	—			—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	(1,749	)	$	(2,754	)	$	4,547		$	—	$	6	$	—

Related Party Investment Transactions

During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company transferred invested assets to affiliates with an estimated fair value of $1.5 million and amortized cost of $1.4 million. Net investment gains (losses) recognized on these transfers was $64 thousand.

In November 2016, the Company received a transfer of investments and cash and cash equivalents totaling $933.4 million for the recapture of risks related to certain single premium deferred annuity contracts previously reinsured to MLIC, a former affiliate. See Note 5 for additional information related to this transfer.

The Company receives investment administrative services from MetLife Investment Advisors, LLC (“MLIA”), a related party investment advisor. The related investment administrative service charges were $2.8 million, $1.9 million and $1.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

100

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives

Accounting for Derivatives

See Note 1 for a description of the Company’s accounting policies for derivatives and Note 8 for information about the fair value hierarchy for derivatives.

Derivatives are financial instruments with values derived from interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, credit spreads and/or other financial indices. Derivatives may be exchange-traded or contracted in the over-the-counter (“OTC”) market. Certain of the Company’s OTC derivatives are bilateral contracts between two counterparties (“OTC-bilateral”). The Company primarily uses foreign currency swaps.

Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Derivatives

The Company uses foreign currency swaps to reduce the risk from fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates associated with its assets denominated in foreign currencies.

In a foreign currency swap transaction, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between one currency and another at a fixed exchange rate, generally set at inception, calculated by reference to an agreed upon notional amount. The notional amount of each currency is exchanged at the inception and termination of the currency swap by each party. The Company utilizes foreign currency swaps in cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships.

Primary Risks Managed by Derivatives

The following table presents the primary underlying risk exposure, gross notional amount, and estimated fair value of the Company’s derivatives, excluding embedded derivatives, held at:



	Primary Underlying Risk Exposure	December 31,
		2017						2016
				Estimated Fair Value						Estimated Fair Value
		Gross Notional Amount		Assets		Liabilities		Gross Notional Amount		Assets		Liabilities
		(In thousands)
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments
Cash flow hedges:
Foreign currency swaps	Foreign currency exchange rate	$	70,307	$	1,571	$	1,357	$	33,930	$	4,947	$	—
Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments
Foreign currency swaps	Foreign currency exchange rate	16,636		2,213		254		14,063		3,709		—
Total		$	86,943	$	3,784	$	1,611	$	47,993	$	8,656	$	—

The Company recognized net investment income from settlement payments related to qualifying hedges of $604 thousand, $581 thousand and $394 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

The Company recognized net derivative gains (losses) from settlement payments related to non-qualifying hedges of $326 thousand, $279 thousand and $215 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

101

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives (continued)

The following tables present the amount and location of gains (losses) recognized for derivatives and gains (losses) pertaining to hedged items presented in net derivative gains (losses):



	Year Ended December 31, 2017
	Net Derivative Gains (Losses) Recognized for Derivatives (1)			Net Derivatives Gains (Losses) Recognized for Hedged Items (2)		Amount of Gains (Losses) deferred in AOCI
	(In thousands)
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments:
Cash flow hedges (3):
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	$	(9	)	$	—	$	(4,257	)
Total cash flow hedges	(9		)	—		(4,257		)
Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments:
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	(1,609		)	373		—
Embedded derivatives	(156,297		)	—		—
Total non-qualifying hedges	(157,906		)	373		—
Total	$	(157,915	)	$	373	$	(4,257	)



	Year Ended December 31, 2016
	Net Derivative Gains (Losses) Recognized for Derivatives (1)		Net Derivatives Gains (Losses) Recognized for Hedged Items (2)			Amount of Gains (Losses) deferred in AOCI
	(In thousands)
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments:
Cash flow hedges (3):
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	$	55	$	(44	)	$	1,584
Total cash flow hedges	55		(44		)	1,584
Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments:
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	2,114		(757		)	—
Embedded derivatives	66,079		—			—
Total non-qualifying hedges	68,193		(757		)	—
Total	$	68,248	$	(801	)	$	1,584

102

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives (continued)



	Year Ended December 31, 2015
	Net Derivative Gains (Losses) Recognized for Derivatives (1)		Net Derivatives Gains (Losses) Recognized for Hedged Items (2)			Amount of Gains (Losses) deferred in AOCI
	(In thousands)
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments:
Cash flow hedges (3):
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	$	—	$	(32	)	$	2,760
Total cash flow hedges	—		(32		)	2,760
Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments:
Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives	1,557		(456		)	—
Embedded derivatives	63,716		—			—
Total non-qualifying hedges	65,273		(456		)	—
Total	$	65,273	$	(488	)	$	2,760

______________


(1)	Includes gains (losses) reclassified from AOCI for cash flow hedges. Ineffective portion of the gains (losses) recognized in income is not significant.


(2)	Includes foreign currency transaction gains (losses) on hedged items in cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships.


(3)	All components of each derivative's gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.

In certain instances, the Company discontinued cash flow hedge accounting because the forecasted transactions were no longer probable of occurring. Because certain of the forecasted transactions also were not probable of occurring within two months of the anticipated date, the Company reclassified amounts from AOCI into net derivative gains (losses). For the year ended December 31, 2017, there were no amounts reclassified into net derivative gains (losses) related to such discontinued cash flow hedges. For the year ended December 31, 2016, $49 thousand was reclassified into net derivative gains (losses) related to such discontinued cash flow hedges. For the year ended December 31, 2015, there were no amounts reclassified into net derivative gains (losses) related to such discontinued cash flow hedges.

There were no hedged forecasted transactions, other than the receipt or payment of variable interest payments, for both the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.

At December 31, 2017 and 2016, the balance in AOCI associated with foreign currency swaps designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges was $471 thousand and $4.7 million, respectively.

103

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives (continued)

Counterparty Credit Risk

The Company may be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by its counterparties to derivatives. Generally, the current credit exposure of the Company’s derivatives is limited to the net positive estimated fair value of derivatives at the reporting date after taking into consideration the existence of master netting or similar agreements and any collateral received pursuant to such agreements.

The Company manages its credit risk related to derivatives by entering into transactions with creditworthy counterparties and establishing and monitoring exposure limits. The Company’s OTC-bilateral derivative transactions are generally governed by International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (“ISDA”) Master Agreements which provide for legally enforceable set-off and close-out netting of exposures to specific counterparties in the event of early termination of a transaction, which includes, but is not limited to, events of default and bankruptcy. In the event of an early termination, the Company is permitted to set off receivables from the counterparty against payables to the same counterparty arising out of all included transactions. Substantially all of the Company’s ISDA Master Agreements also include Credit Support Annex provisions which require both the pledging and accepting of collateral in connection with its OTC-bilateral derivatives.

See Note 8 for a description of the impact of credit risk on the valuation of derivatives.

104

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives (continued)

The estimated fair values of the Company’s net derivative assets and net derivative liabilities after the application of master netting agreements and collateral were as follows at:



	December 31,
	2017						2016
Derivatives Subject to a Master Netting Arrangement or a Similar Arrangement	Assets			Liabilities			Assets			Liabilities
	(In thousands)
Gross estimated fair value of derivatives:
OTC-bilateral (1)	$	3,903		$	1,482		$	8,850		$	—
Total gross estimated fair value of derivatives (1)	3,903			1,482			8,850			—
Amounts offset on the balance sheets	—			—			—			—
Estimated fair value of derivatives presented on the balance sheets (1)	3,903			1,482			8,850			—
Gross amounts not offset on the balance sheets:
Gross estimated fair value of derivatives: (2)
OTC-bilateral	(1,482		)	(1,482		)	—			—
Cash collateral: (3)
OTC-bilateral	(2,367		)	—			(8,672		)	—
Securities collateral: (4)
OTC-bilateral	—			—			—			—
Net amount after application of master netting agreements and collateral	$	54		$	—		$	178		$	—

______________


(1)	At December 31, 2017 and 2016, derivative assets included income or (expense) accruals reported in accrued investment income or in other liabilities of $119 thousand and $194 thousand, respectively and derivative liabilities included (income) or expense accruals reported in accrued investment income or in other liabilities of ($129) thousand and $0, respectively.


(2)	Estimated fair value of derivatives is limited to the amount that is subject to set-off and includes income or expense accruals.

(3)

Cash collateral received is included in cash and cash equivalents or in short-term investments, and the obligation to return it is included in payables for collateral transactions on the balance sheet. The amount of cash collateral offset in the table above is limited to the net estimated fair value of derivatives after application of netting agreements. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company received excess cash collateral of $3.0 million and $270 thousand, respectively, and did not provide any excess cash collateral, which is not included in the table above due to the foregoing limitation.

(4)

Securities collateral received by the Company is held in separate custodial accounts and is not recorded on the balance sheet. Subject to certain constraints, the Company is permitted by contract to sell or re-pledge this collateral, but at December 31, 2017, none of the collateral had been sold or re-pledged. Securities collateral pledged by the Company is reported in fixed maturity securities on the balance sheet. Subject to certain constraints, the counterparties are permitted by contract to sell or re-pledge this collateral. The amount of securities collateral offset in the table above is limited to the net estimated fair value of derivatives after application of netting agreements and cash collateral. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company did not receive excess securities collateral, and provided excess securities collateral with an estimated fair value of $707 thousand and $0, respectively, for its OTC-bilateral derivatives.

The Company’s collateral arrangements for its OTC-bilateral derivatives generally require the counterparty in a net liability position, after considering the effect of netting agreements, to pledge collateral when the collateral amount owed by that counterparty reaches a minimum transfer amount. In addition, the Company’s netting agreements for derivatives contain provisions that require both the Company and the counterparty to maintain a specific investment grade credit rating from each of Moody’s and S&P. If a party’s credit or financial strength ratings, as applicable, were to fall below that specific investment grade credit rating, that party would be in violation of these provisions, and the other party to the derivatives could terminate the transactions and demand immediate settlement and payment based on such party’s reasonable valuation of the derivatives.

105

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

7. Derivatives (continued)

At both December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company held no OTC-bilateral derivatives that were in a net liability position after considering the effect of netting agreements. The Company’s collateral arrangements require both parties to be fully collateralized, as such, the Company would not be required to post additional collateral as a result of a downgrade in its financial strength rating.

Embedded Derivatives

The Company issues certain products that contain embedded derivatives that are required to be separated from their host contracts and accounted for as freestanding derivatives. These host contracts principally include: variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits, including GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs; related party ceded reinsurance of guaranteed minimum benefits related to GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs; and fixed annuities with equity-indexed returns.

The following table presents the estimated fair value and balance sheet location of the Company’s embedded derivatives that have been separated from their host contracts at:



		December 31,
	Balance Sheet Location	2017			2016
		(In thousands)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts:
Ceded guaranteed minimum benefits	Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	307,698		$	379,297

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts:
Direct guaranteed minimum benefits	Policyholder account balances	$	(51,130	)	$	(23,740	)
Fixed annuities with equity indexed returns	Policyholder account balances	11,195			—
Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts		$	(39,935	)	$	(23,740	)

The following table presents changes in estimated fair value related to embedded derivatives:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016		2015
	(In thousands)
Net derivative gains (losses) (1), (2)	$	(156,297	)	$	66,079	$	63,716

______________

(1)

The valuation of direct guaranteed minimum benefits includes a nonperformance risk adjustment. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses) in connection with this adjustment were $466 thousand, ($57) thousand and $1.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In addition, the valuation of ceded guaranteed minimum benefits includes a nonperformance risk adjustment. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses) in connection with this adjustment were ($24.7) million, ($19.0) million and ($2.6) million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.


(2)	See Note 5 for discussion of related party net derivative gains (losses).

106

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value

When developing estimated fair values, the Company considers three broad valuation techniques: (i) the market approach, (ii) the income approach, and (iii) the cost approach. The Company determines the most appropriate valuation technique to use, given what is being measured and the availability of sufficient inputs, giving priority to observable inputs. The Company categorizes its assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value into a three-level hierarchy, based on the significant input with the lowest level in its valuation. The input levels are as follows:



Level 1	Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. The size of the bid/ask spread is used as an indicator of market activity for fixed maturity securities.



Level 2	Quoted prices in markets that are not active or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly. These inputs can include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities other than quoted prices in Level 1, quoted prices in markets that are not active, or other significant inputs that are observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.



Level 3	Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and are significant to the determination of estimated fair value of the assets or liabilities. Unobservable inputs reflect the reporting entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.

107

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

Recurring Fair Value Measurements

The assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy, including those items for which the Company has elected the FVO, are presented below at:



	December 31, 2017
	Fair Value Hierarchy
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3			Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In thousands)
Assets
Fixed maturity securities:
U.S. corporate	$	—	$	750,891	$	46,733		$	797,624
U.S. government and agency	420,084		126,979		—			547,063
Foreign corporate	—		259,897		49,217			309,114
RMBS	—		207,338		14,442			221,780
CMBS	—		195,306		5,115			200,421
State and political subdivision	—		70,286		—			70,286
ABS	—		58,872		—			58,872
Foreign government	—		16,403		—			16,403
Total fixed maturity securities	420,084		1,685,972		115,507			2,221,563
Derivative assets: (1)
Foreign currency exchange rate	—		3,784		—			3,784
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)	—		—		307,698			307,698
Separate account assets	—		5,021,633		—			5,021,633
Total assets	$	420,084	$	6,711,389	$	423,205		$	7,554,678
Liabilities
Derivative liabilities: (1)
Foreign currency exchange rate	$	—	$	1,611	$	—		$	1,611
Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)	—		—		(39,935		)	(39,935		)
Total liabilities	$	—	$	1,611	$	(39,935	)	$	(38,324	)

108

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)



	December 31, 2016
	Fair Value Hierarchy
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3			Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In thousands)
Assets
Fixed maturity securities:
U.S. corporate	$	—	$	681,406	$	40,405		$	721,811
U.S. government and agency	289,186		117,359		—			406,545
Foreign corporate	—		200,454		31,886			232,340
RMBS	—		217,091		21,296			238,387
CMBS	—		173,763		5,193			178,956
State and political subdivision	—		56,320		—			56,320
ABS	—		21,736		4,934			26,670
Foreign government	—		17,485		—			17,485
Total fixed maturity securities	289,186		1,485,614		103,714			1,878,514
Derivative assets: (1)
Foreign currency exchange rate	—		8,656		—			8,656
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)	—		—		379,297			379,297
Separate account assets	—		4,758,449		—			4,758,449
Total assets	$	289,186	$	6,252,719	$	483,011		$	7,024,916
Liabilities
Derivative liabilities: (1)
Foreign currency exchange rate	$	—	$	—	$	—		$	—
Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)	—		—		(23,740		)	(23,740		)
Total liabilities	$	—	$	—	$	(23,740	)	$	(23,740	)

______________


(1)	Derivative assets are presented within other invested assets on the balance sheets and derivative liabilities are presented within other liabilities on the balance sheets. The amounts are presented gross in the tables above to reflect the presentation on the balance sheets.


(2)	Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts are presented within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables on the balance sheets. Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts are presented within policyholder account balances on the balance sheets.

Valuation Controls and Procedures

The Company monitors and provides oversight of valuation controls and policies for securities, mortgage loans and derivatives, which are primarily executed by MLIA. The valuation methodologies used to determine fair values prioritize the use of observable market prices and market-based parameters and determines that judgmental valuation adjustments, when applied, are based upon established policies and are applied consistently over time. The valuation methodologies for securities, mortgage loans and derivatives are reviewed on an ongoing basis and revised when necessary, based on changing market conditions. In addition, the Chief Accounting Officer periodically reports to the Audit Committee of Brighthouse’s Board of Directors regarding compliance with fair value accounting standards.

109

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

The fair value of financial assets and financial liabilities is based on quoted market prices, where available. The Company assesses whether prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value through controls designed to ensure valuations represent an exit price. MLIA performs several controls, including certain monthly controls, which include, but are not limited to, analysis of portfolio returns to corresponding benchmark returns, comparing a sample of executed prices of securities sold to the fair value estimates, reviewing the bid/ask spreads to assess activity, comparing prices from multiple independent pricing services and ongoing due diligence to confirm that independent pricing services use market-based parameters. The process includes a determination of the observability of inputs used in estimated fair values received from independent pricing services or brokers by assessing whether these inputs can be corroborated by observable market data. Independent non-binding broker quotes, also referred to herein as “consensus pricing”, are used for non-significant portion of the portfolio. Prices received from independent brokers are assessed to determine if they represent a reasonable estimate of fair value by considering such pricing relative to the current market dynamics and current pricing for similar financial instruments. Fixed maturity securities priced using independent non-binding broker quotations represent less than 1% of the total estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities and 4% of the total estimated fair value of Level 3 fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2017.

MLIA also applies a formal process to challenge any prices received from independent pricing services that are not considered representative of estimated fair value. If prices received from independent pricing services are not considered reflective of market activity or representative of estimated fair value, independent non-binding broker quotations are obtained. If obtaining an independent non-binding broker quotation is unsuccessful, MLIA will use the last available price.

The Company reviews outputs of MLIA’s controls and performs additional controls, including certain monthly controls, which include but are not limited to, performing balance sheet analytics to assess reasonableness of period to period pricing changes, including any price adjustments. Price adjustments are applied if prices or quotes received from independent pricing services or brokers are not considered reflective of market activity or representative of estimated fair value. The Company did not have significant price adjustments during the year ended December 31, 2017.

Determination of Fair Value

Fixed maturities

The fair values for actively traded marketable bonds, primarily U.S. government and agency securities, are determined using the quoted market prices and are classified as Level 1 assets. For fixed maturities classified as Level 2 assets, fair values are determined using either a market or income approach and are valued based on a variety of observable inputs as described below.

U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being quoted prices in markets that are not active, benchmark yields, spreads off benchmark yields, new issuances, issuer rating, trades of identical or comparable securities, or duration. Privately-placed securities are valued using the additional key inputs: market yield curve, call provisions, observable prices and spreads for similar public or private securities that incorporate the credit quality and industry sector of the issuer, and delta spread adjustments to reflect specific credit-related issues.

U.S. government and agency, state and political subdivision and foreign government securities: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being quoted prices in markets that are not active, benchmark U.S. Treasury yield or other yields, spread off the U.S. Treasury yield curve for the identical security, issuer ratings and issuer spreads, broker dealer quotes, and comparable securities that are actively traded.

Structured securities: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being quoted prices in markets that are not active, spreads for actively traded securities, spreads off benchmark yields, expected prepayment speeds and volumes, current and forecasted loss severity, ratings, geographic region, weighted average coupon and weighted average maturity, average delinquency rates and debt-service coverage ratios. Other issuance-specific information is also used, including, but not limited to; collateral type, structure of the security, vintage of the loans, payment terms of the underlying asset, payment priority within tranche, and deal performance.

110

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

Derivatives

The fair values for OTC-bilateral derivatives and OTC-cleared derivatives classified as Level 2 assets or liabilities, fair values are determined using the income approach. Valuations of non-option-based derivatives utilize present value techniques, whereas valuations of option-based derivatives utilize option pricing models pricing models which are based on market standard valuation methodologies and a variety of observable inputs.

The significant inputs to the pricing models for most OTC-bilateral derivatives are inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Certain OTC-bilateral derivatives may rely on inputs that are significant to the estimated fair value that are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. These unobservable inputs may involve significant management judgment or estimation. Even though unobservable, these inputs are based on assumptions deemed appropriate given the circumstances and management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments.

Most inputs for OTC-bilateral derivatives are mid-market inputs but, in certain cases, liquidity adjustments are made when they are deemed more representative of exit value. Market liquidity, as well as the use of different methodologies, assumptions and inputs, may have a material effect on the estimated fair values of the Company’s derivatives and could materially affect net income.

The credit risk of both the counterparty and the Company are considered in determining the estimated fair value for all OTC-bilateral derivatives, and any potential credit adjustment is based on the net exposure by counterparty after taking into account the effects of netting agreements and collateral arrangements. The Company values its OTC-bilateral derivatives using standard swap curves which may include a spread to the risk-free rate, depending upon specific collateral arrangements. This credit spread is appropriate for those parties that execute trades at pricing levels consistent with similar collateral arrangements. As the Company and its significant derivative counterparties generally execute trades at such pricing levels and hold sufficient collateral, additional credit risk adjustments are not currently required in the valuation process. The Company’s ability to consistently execute at such pricing levels is in part due to the netting agreements and collateral arrangements that are in place with all of its significant derivative counterparties. An evaluation of the requirement to make additional credit risk adjustments is performed by the Company each reporting period.

Embedded Derivatives

Embedded derivatives principally include certain direct variable annuity guarantees and certain affiliated ceded reinsurance agreements related to such variable annuity guarantees. Embedded derivatives are recorded at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value reported in net income.

The Company issues certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs contain embedded derivatives, which are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). These embedded derivatives are classified within policyholder account balances on the balance sheets.

The Company’s actuarial department calculates the fair value of these embedded derivatives, which are estimated as the present value of projected future benefits minus the present value of projected future fees using actuarial and capital market assumptions including expectations concerning policyholder behavior. The calculation is based on in-force business, and is performed using standard actuarial valuation software which projects future cash flows from the embedded derivative over multiple risk neutral stochastic scenarios using observable risk-free rates.

Capital market assumptions, such as risk-free rates and implied volatilities, are based on market prices for publicly traded instruments to the extent that prices for such instruments are observable. Implied volatilities beyond the observable period are extrapolated based on observable implied volatilities and historical volatilities. Actuarial assumptions, including mortality, lapse, withdrawal and utilization, are unobservable and are reviewed at least annually based on actuarial studies of historical experience.

111

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

The valuation of these guarantee liabilities includes nonperformance risk adjustments and adjustments for a risk margin related to non-capital market inputs. The nonperformance adjustment is determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s debt. These observable spreads are then adjusted to reflect the priority of these liabilities and claims paying ability of the issuing insurance subsidiaries as compared to Brighthouse Financial, Inc.’s overall financial strength.

Risk margins are established to capture the non-capital market risks of the instrument which represent the additional compensation a market participant would require to assume the risks related to the uncertainties of such actuarial assumptions as annuitization, premium persistency, partial withdrawal and surrenders. The establishment of risk margins requires the use of significant management judgment, including assumptions of the amount and cost of capital needed to cover the guarantees. These guarantees may be more costly than expected in volatile or declining equity markets. Market conditions including, but not limited to, changes in interest rates, equity indices, market volatility and foreign currency exchange rates; changes in nonperformance risk; and variations in actuarial assumptions regarding policyholder behavior, mortality and risk margins related to non-capital market inputs, may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of the guarantees that could materially affect net income.

The Company ceded to a former affiliate the risk associated with certain of the GMIBs, GMABs and GMWBs described above. These reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives and are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables on the balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The value of the embedded derivatives on the ceded risk is determined using a methodology consistent with that described previously for the guarantees directly written by the Company with the exception of the input for nonperformance risk that reflects the credit of the reinsurer.

Transfers between Levels

Overall, transfers between levels occur when there are changes in the observability of inputs and market activity. Transfers into or out of any level are assumed to occur at the beginning of the period.

Transfers between Levels 1 and 2:

There were no transfers between Levels 1 and 2 for assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value and still held at both December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Transfers into or out of Level 3:

Assets and liabilities are transferred into Level 3 when a significant input cannot be corroborated with market observable data. This occurs when market activity decreases significantly and underlying inputs cannot be observed, current prices are not available, and/or when there are significant variances in quoted prices, thereby affecting transparency. Assets and liabilities are transferred out of Level 3 when circumstances change such that a significant input can be corroborated with market observable data. This may be due to a significant increase in market activity, a specific event, or one or more significant input(s) becoming observable.

112

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)

The following table presents certain quantitative information about the significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement, and the sensitivity of the estimated fair value to changes in those inputs, for the more significant asset and liability classes measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) at:



					December 31, 2017				December 31, 2016				Impact of Increase in Input on Estimated Fair Value (2)
	Valuation Techniques		Significant Unobservable Inputs		Range			Weighted Average (1)	Range			Weighted Average (1)	Impact of Increase in Input on Estimated Fair Value (2)
Fixed maturity securities (3)
U.S. corporate and foreign corporate	•	Matrix pricing	•	Offered quotes (4)	98	-	142	108	94	-	136	107	Increase
	•	Market pricing	•	Quoted prices (4)	87	-	109	99	75	-	110	97	Increase
RMBS	•	Market pricing	•	Quoted prices (4)	70	-	101	85	56	-	111	86	Increase (5)
CMBS	•	Market pricing	•	Quoted prices (4)					104	-	104	104	Increase (5)
Embedded derivatives
Direct, assumed and ceded guaranteed minimum benefits	•	Option pricing techniques	•	Mortality rates:
				Ages 0 - 40	0%	-	0.09%		0%	-	0.09%		Decrease (6)
				Ages 41 - 60	0.04%	-	0.65%		0.04%	-	0.65%		Decrease (6)
				Ages 61 - 115	0.26%	-	100%		0.26%	-	100%		Decrease (6)
			•	Lapse rates:
				Durations 1 - 10	0.25%	-	100%		0.25%	-	100%		Decrease (7)
				Durations 11 - 20	2%	-	100%		2%	-	100%		Decrease (7)
				Durations 21 - 116	2%	-	100%		2%	-	100%		Decrease (7)
			•	Utilization rates	0%	-	25%		0%	-	25%		Increase (8)
			•	Withdrawal rates	0.25%	-	10%		0.25%	-	10%		(9)
			•	Long-term equity volatilities	17.40%	-	25%		17.40%	-	25%		Increase (10)
			•	Nonperformance risk spread	0.64%	-	1.43%		0.04%	-	0.57%		Decrease (11)

______________


(1)	The weighted average for fixed maturity securities is determined based on the estimated fair value of the securities.


(2)	The impact of a decrease in input would have the opposite impact on estimated fair value. For embedded derivatives, changes to direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits are based on liability positions; changes to ceded guaranteed minimum benefits are based on asset positions.


(3)	Significant increases (decreases) in expected default rates in isolation would result in substantially lower (higher) valuations.


(4)	Range and weighted average are presented in accordance with the market convention for fixed maturity securities of dollars per hundred dollars of par.


(5)	Changes in the assumptions used for the probability of default is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumptions used for prepayment rates.


(6)	Mortality rates vary by age and by demographic characteristics such as gender. Mortality rate assumptions are based on company experience. A mortality improvement assumption is also applied. For any given contract, mortality rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.

(7)

Base lapse rates are adjusted at the contract level based on a comparison of the actuarially calculated guaranteed values and the current policyholder account value, as well as other factors, such as the applicability of any surrender charges. A dynamic lapse function reduces the base lapse rate when the guaranteed amount is greater than the account value as in the money contracts are less likely to lapse. Lapse rates are also generally assumed to be lower in periods when a surrender charge applies. For any given contract, lapse rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.

113

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

(8)

The utilization rate assumption estimates the percentage of contract holders with a GMIB or lifetime withdrawal benefit who will elect to utilize the benefit upon becoming eligible. The rates may vary by the type of guarantee, the amount by which the guaranteed amount is greater than the account value, the contract’s withdrawal history and by the age of the policyholder. For any given contract, utilization rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.

(9)

The withdrawal rate represents the percentage of account balance that any given policyholder will elect to withdraw from the contract each year. The withdrawal rate assumption varies by age and duration of the contract, and also by other factors such as benefit type. For any given contract, withdrawal rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative. For GMWBs, any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates results in an increase (decrease) in the estimated fair value of the guarantees. For GMABs and GMIBs, any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates results in a decrease (increase) in the estimated fair value.


(10)	Long-term equity volatilities represent equity volatility beyond the period for which observable equity volatilities are available. For any given contract, long-term equity volatility rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.


(11)	Nonperformance risk spread varies by duration and by currency. For any given contract, multiple nonperformance risk spreads will apply, depending on the duration of the cash flow being discounted for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.

The following is a summary of the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of assets and liabilities classified within Level 3 that are not included in the preceding table. Generally, all other classes of securities classified within Level 3, including those within separate account assets and embedded derivatives, use the same valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs as previously described for Level 3 securities. This includes matrix pricing and discounted cash flow methodologies, inputs such as quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2, as well as independent non-binding broker quotations. The sensitivity of the estimated fair value to changes in the significant unobservable inputs for these other assets and liabilities is similar in nature to that described in the preceding table.

114

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

The following tables summarize the change of all assets and (liabilities) measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):



	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Fixed Maturity Securities						Net Embedded Derivatives (2)
	Corporate (1)			Structured Securities			Net Embedded Derivatives (2)
	(In thousands)
Balance, January 1, 2016	$	55,189		$	13,862		$	360,381
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) (3) (4)	(64		)	249			66,079
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI	(1,769		)	152			—
Purchases (5)	21,260			23,916			—
Sales (5)	(462		)	(1,901		)	—
Issuances (5)	—			—			—
Settlements (5)	—			—			(23,423		)
Transfers into Level 3 (6)	—			—			—
Transfers out of Level 3 (6)	(1,863		)	(4,855		)	—
Balance, December 31, 2016	72,291			31,423			403,037
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) (3) (4)	3			415			(156,297		)
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI	5,969			1,051			—
Purchases (5)	26,542			—			—
Sales (5)	(2,320		)	(8,398		)	—
Issuances (5)	—			—			—
Settlements (5)	—			—			100,893
Transfers into Level 3 (6)	—			—			—
Transfers out of Level 3 (6)	(6,535		)	(4,934		)	—
Balance, December 31, 2017	$	95,950		$	19,557		$	347,633
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for the instruments still held at December 31, 2015 (7)	$	23		$	83		$	67,551
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for the instruments still held at December 31, 2016 (7)	$	(64	)	$	249		$	71,709
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for the instruments still held at December 31, 2017 (7)	$	1		$	441		$	(141,133	)
Gains (Losses) Data for the year ended December 31, 2015
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) (3) (4)	$	79		$	83		$	63,716
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI	$	(1,849	)	$	55		$	—

______________


(1)	Comprised of U.S. and foreign corporate securities.


(2)	Embedded derivative assets and liabilities are presented net for purposes of the rollforward.

(3)

Amortization of premium/accretion of discount is included within net investment income. Impairments charged to net income (loss) on securities are included in net investment gains (losses). Lapses associated with net embedded derivatives are included in net derivative gains (losses). Substantially all realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for net embedded derivatives are reported in net derivatives gains (losses).


(4)	Interest accruals, as well as cash interest coupons received, are excluded from the rollforward.


(5)	Items purchased/issued and then sold/settled in the same period are excluded from the rollforward. Fees attributed to embedded derivatives are included in settlements.

115

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)


(6)	Gains and losses, in net income (loss) and OCI, are calculated assuming transfers into and/or out of Level 3 occurred at the beginning of the period. Items transferred into and then out of Level 3 in the same period are excluded from the rollforward.


(7)	Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) relate to assets and liabilities still held at the end of the respective periods. Substantially all changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for net embedded derivatives are reported in net derivative gains (losses).

Fair Value of Financial Instruments Carried at Other Than Fair Value

The following tables provide fair value information for financial instruments that are carried on the balance sheet at amounts other than fair value. These tables exclude the following financial instruments: cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income and payables for collateral under derivative transactions. The estimated fair value of the excluded financial instruments, which are primarily classified in Level 2, approximates carrying value as they are short-term in nature such that the Company believes there is minimal risk of material changes in interest rates or credit quality. All remaining balance sheet amounts excluded from the tables below are not considered financial instruments subject to this disclosure.

The carrying values and estimated fair values for such financial instruments, and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy, are summarized as follows at:



	December 31, 2017
			Fair Value Hierarchy
	Carrying Value		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In thousands)
Assets
Mortgage loans	$	394,863	$	—	$	—	$	395,894	$	395,894
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	20,489	$	—	$	900	$	19,728	$	20,628
Liabilities
Policyholder account balances	$	1,154,733	$	—	$	—	$	1,140,886	$	1,140,886



	December 31, 2016
			Fair Value Hierarchy
	Carrying Value		Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In thousands)
Assets
Mortgage loans	$	406,085	$	—	$	—	$	404,079	$	404,079
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	30,122	$	—	$	2,095	$	30,272	$	32,367
Liabilities
Policyholder account balances	$	1,214,186	$	—	$	—	$	1,283,338	$	1,283,338

The methods, assumptions and significant valuation techniques and inputs used to estimate the fair value of financial instruments are summarized as follows:

Mortgage Loans

The estimated fair value of mortgage loans is primarily determined by estimating expected future cash flows and discounting them using current interest rates for similar mortgage loans with similar credit risk, or is determined from pricing for similar loans.

116

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

8. Fair Value (continued)

Premiums, Reinsurance and Other Receivables

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables are principally comprised of certain amounts recoverable under reinsurance agreements, which the Company has determined do not transfer significant risk such that they are accounted for using the deposit method of accounting, and have been classified as Level 3. The valuation is based on discounted cash flow methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using interest rates determined to reflect the appropriate credit standing of the assuming counterparty.

Policyholder Account Balances

These policyholder account balances include investment contracts which primarily include fixed deferred annuities, fixed term payout annuities and total control accounts. The valuation of these investment contracts is based on discounted cash flow methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using current market risk-free interest rates adding a spread to reflect the nonperformance risk in the liability.

9. Equity

Capital Transactions

In December 2017, the Company received a cash capital contribution of $75.0 million from Brighthouse Life Insurance Company.

Statutory Equity and Income

The state of domicile of the Company imposes risk-based capital (“RBC”) requirements that were developed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”). Regulatory compliance is determined by a ratio of a company’s total adjusted capital, calculated in the manner prescribed by the NAIC (“TAC”) to its authorized control level RBC, calculated in the manner prescribed by the NAIC (“ACL RBC”), based on the statutory-based filed financial statements. Companies below specific trigger levels or ratios are classified by their respective levels, each of which requires specified corrective action. The minimum level of TAC before corrective action commences is twice ACL RBC. The RBC ratio for the Company was in excess of 400% for all periods presented.

The Company prepares statutory-basis financial statements in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the New York State Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”). The NAIC has adopted the Codification of Statutory Accounting Principles (“Statutory Codification”). Statutory Codification is intended to standardize regulatory accounting and reporting to state insurance departments. However, statutory accounting principles continue to be established by individual state laws and permitted practices. Modifications by the state insurance department may impact the effect of Statutory Codification on the statutory capital and surplus of the Company.

Statutory accounting principles differ from GAAP primarily by charging policy acquisition costs to expense as incurred, establishing future policy benefit liabilities using different actuarial assumptions, reporting of reinsurance agreements and valuing securities on a different basis.

In addition, certain assets are not admitted under statutory accounting principles and are charged directly to surplus. The most significant assets not admitted by the Company are net deferred income tax assets resulting from temporary differences between statutory accounting principles basis and tax basis not expected to reverse and become recoverable within three years.

New York has adopted certain prescribed accounting practices, primarily consisting of the continuous Commissioners’ Annuity Reserve Valuation Method, which impacts deferred annuities, NYDFS Circular Letter No 11, which impacts deferred premiums, and NYDFS Seventh Amendment to Regulation 172, which impacts admitted unearned reinsurance premiums. The collective impact of these prescribed accounting practices decreased the statutory capital and surplus of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 by an amount of $47.7 million and $53.0 million, respectively, in excess of the amount of the decrease had capital and surplus been measured under NAIC guidance.

The tables below present amounts from the Company, which are derived from the statutory-basis financial statements as filed with the NYDFS.

117

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

9. Equity (continued)

Statutory net income (loss) was as follows:



		Years Ended December 31,
Company	State of Domicile	2017		2016			2015
		(In thousands)
Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY	New York	$	22,166	$	(87,290	)	$	17,194

Statutory capital and surplus was as follows at:



	December 31,
Company	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY	$	294,298	$	195,824

Dividend Restrictions

The Company is able to pay $21.0 million of dividends in 2018 to its parent without insurance regulatory approval from the NYDFS. The Company did not pay any dividends in 2017 or 2016 to its parent.

Effective for dividends paid during 2016 and going forward, the New York Insurance Law was amended permitting the Company, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, to pay stockholder dividends to its parent. in any calendar year based on either of two standards. Under one standard, the Company is permitted, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, to pay dividends out of earned surplus (defined as positive “unassigned funds (surplus)” excluding 85% of the change in net unrealized capital gains or losses (less capital gains tax), for the immediately preceding calendar year), in an amount up to the greater of: (i) 10% of its surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) its statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains), not to exceed 30% of surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year. In addition, under this standard, the Company may not, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, pay any dividends in any calendar year immediately following a calendar year for which its net gain from operations, excluding realized capital gains, was negative. Under the second standard, if dividends are paid out of other than earned surplus, the Company may, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, pay an amount up to the lesser of: (i) 10% of its surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) its statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains). In addition, the Company will be permitted to pay a dividend to its parent. in excess of the amounts allowed under both standards only if it files notice of its intention to declare such a dividend and the amount thereof with the New York Superintendent of Financial Services (the “Superintendent”) and the Superintendent either approves the distribution of the dividend or does not disapprove the dividend within 30 days of its filing. Under New York Insurance Law, the Superintendent has broad discretion in determining whether the financial condition of a stock life insurance company would support the payment of such dividends to its stockholders.

118

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

9. Equity (continued)

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Information regarding changes on the balances of each component of AOCI was as follows:



	Unrealized Investment Gains (Losses), Net of Related Offsets (1)			Unrealized Gains (Losses) on Derivatives			Total
	(In thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2014	$	39,312		$	279		$	39,591
OCI before reclassifications	(50,792		)	2,760			(48,032		)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	17,778			(966		)	16,812
AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax	6,298			2,073			8,371
Amounts reclassified from AOCI	(4,561		)	—			(4,561		)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	1,596			—			1,596
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax	(2,965		)	—			(2,965		)
Balance at December 31, 2015	3,333			2,073			5,406
OCI before reclassifications	(5,777		)	1,584			(4,193		)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	2,022			(554		)	1,468
AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax	(422		)	3,103			2,681
Amounts reclassified from AOCI	2,711			(55		)	2,656
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	(949		)	19			(930		)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax	1,762			(36		)	1,726
Balance at December 31, 2016	1,340			3,067			4,407
OCI before reclassifications	33,257			(4,257		)	29,000
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)	(11,640		)	1,490			(10,150		)
AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax	22,957			300			23,257
Amounts reclassified from AOCI	1,714			9			1,723
Deferred income tax benefit (expense) (2)	4,652			(4		)	4,648
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax	6,366			5			6,371
Balance at December 31, 2017	$	29,323		$	305		$	29,628

______________


(1)	See Note 6 for information on offsets to investments related to future policy benefits, DAC and DSI.


(2)	Includes the $5.3 million impact of the Tax Act related to unrealized investments gains (losses), net of related offsets. See Note 1 for more information.

119

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

9. Equity (continued)

Information regarding amounts reclassified out of each component of AOCI was as follows:



AOCI Components	Amounts Reclassified from AOCI									Statement of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) Location
	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses):
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)	$	(1,761	)	$	(2,745	)	$	4,550		Net investment gains (losses)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)	47			79			228			Net investment income
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)	—			(45		)	(217		)	Net derivative gains (losses)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses), before income tax	(1,714		)	(2,711		)	4,561
Income tax (expense) benefit	(4,652		)	949			(1,596		)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses), net of income tax	$	(6,366	)	$	(1,762	)	$	2,965
Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives - cash flow hedges:
Foreign currency swaps	$	(9	)	$	55		$	—		Net derivative gains (losses)
Gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, before income tax	(9		)	55			—
Income tax (expense) benefit	4			(19		)	—
Gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, net of income tax	$	(5	)	$	36		$	—
Total reclassifications, net of income tax	$	(6,371	)	$	(1,726	)	$	2,965

10. Other Expenses

Information on other expenses was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Compensation	$	13,508		$	8,535		$	13,421
Pension, postretirement and postemployment benefit costs	—			796			1,334
Commissions	33,129			17,586			21,291
Volume-related costs	3,171			4,943			6,123
Related party expenses on ceded reinsurance	4,743			10,535			11,276
Capitalization of DAC	(17,089		)	(4,976		)	(4,768		)
Premium taxes, licenses and fees	3,795			2,590			3,607
Professional services	5,209			1,529			373
Rent and related expenses	481			1,096			1,065
Other	19,006			14,393			11,491
Total other expenses	$	65,953		$	57,027		$	65,213

Capitalization of DAC

See Note 4 for additional information on the capitalization of DAC.

120

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

10. Other Expenses (continued)

Related Party Expenses

See Note 13 for a discussion of related party expenses included in the table above.

11. Income Tax

The provision for income tax was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Current:
Federal	$	17,352		$	(57,108	)	$	1,148
Foreign	17			—			—
Subtotal	17,369			(57,108		)	1,148
Deferred:
Federal	(118,094		)	99,260			840
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	$	(100,725	)	$	42,152		$	1,988

The reconciliation of the income tax provision at the U.S. statutory rate to the provision for income tax as reported was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Tax provision at U.S. statutory rate	$	(17,129	)	$	46,397		$	8,779
Tax effect of:
Rate revaluation due to tax reform (1)	(77,308		)	—			—
Dividend received deduction	(5,159		)	(4,732		)	(5,589		)
Prior year tax	(493		)	1,282			(624		)
Tax credits	(636		)	(797		)	(580		)
Other, net	—			2			2
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	$	(100,725	)	$	42,152		$	1,988

__________________

(1) For the year ended December 31, 2017, the Company recognized a $77.3 million benefit in net income from remeasurement of our net deferred tax liability in connection with the Tax Act discussed in Note 1. As the Company completes the analysis of data relevant to the Tax Act, as well as interpret any additional guidance issued by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), U.S. Department of the Treasury, or other relevant organizations, it may make adjustments to these amounts.

121

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

11. Income Tax (continued)

Deferred income tax represents the tax effect of the differences between the book and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Net deferred income tax assets and liabilities consisted of the following at:



	December 31,
	2017			2016
	(In thousands)
Deferred income tax assets:
Tax credit carryforwards	$	3,463		$	4,491
Net operating loss carryforwards	3,661			—
Other	2,973			2,206
Total deferred income tax assets	10,097			6,697
Deferred income tax liabilities:
Investments, including derivatives	958			1,102
Policyholder liabilities and receivables	94,717			210,814
Intangibles	1,384			1,850
Net unrealized investment gains	7,875			2,373
DAC	17,661			10,397
Total deferred income tax liabilities	122,595			226,536
Net deferred income tax asset (liability)	$	(112,498	)	$	(219,839	)

At December 31, 2017, the Company had net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $17.4 million and the Company had recorded a related deferred tax asset of $3.7 million which expires in years 2033-2037.

Tax credit carryforwards of $3.5 million at December 31, 2017 have an indefinite expiration date.

The Company’s liability for unrecognized tax benefits may increase or decrease in the next 12 months. A reasonable estimate of the increase or decrease cannot be made at this time. However, the Company continues to believe that the ultimate resolution of the pending issues will not result in a material change to its financial statements, although the resolution of income tax matters could impact the Company’s effective tax rate for a particular future period.

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits was as follows:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Balance at January 1,	$	1,204		$	983		$	983
Additions for tax positions of prior years	49			300			—
Reductions for tax positions of prior years	(62		)	(23		)	—
Additions for tax positions of current year	169			300			—
Reductions for tax positions of current year	(318		)	—			—
Settlements with tax authorities	(66		)	(356		)	—
Balance at December 31,	$	976		$	1,204		$	983
Unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized would impact the effective rate	$	976		$	1,130		$	909

The Company classifies interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense, included within other expenses, while penalties are included in income tax expense. Interest related to unrecognized tax benefits was not significant. The Company had no penalties for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.

122

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

11. Income Tax (continued)

The Dividend Received Deduction (“DRD”) reduces the amount of dividend income subject to tax and is a significant component of the difference between the actual tax expense and expected amount determined using the federal statutory tax rate. The Tax Act has changed the DRD amount applicable to insurance companies to a 70% company share and a 50% dividend received deduction for eligible dividends.

For the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, the Company recognized an income tax benefit of $5.6 million, $3.9 million and $5.6 million, respectively, related to the separate account DRD. The 2017 benefit included an expense of $400 thousand related to a true-up of the 2016 tax return. The 2016 and 2015 benefit included a benefit of $900 thousand and $600 thousand related to a true-up of the 2015 and 2014 tax returns, respectively.

The Company is under continuous examination by the IRS and other tax authorities in jurisdictions in which the Company has significant business operations. The income tax years under examination vary by jurisdiction and subsidiary. The Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal, state or local income tax examinations for years prior to 2007. Management believes it has established adequate tax liabilities, and final resolution of the audit for the years 2007 and forward is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.

Tax Sharing Agreements

For the periods prior to the Separation from MetLife, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY will be included in a consolidated U.S. life and non-life federal income tax return in accordance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Current taxes (and the benefits of tax attributes such as losses) are allocated to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY under the consolidated tax return regulations and a tax sharing agreement with MetLife. This tax sharing agreement states that federal taxes will be computed on a separate return basis with benefits for losses.

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company and any directly owned life insurance and reinsurance company subsidiaries (including the Company and BRCD) entered in a tax sharing agreement to join a life consolidated federal income tax return. The tax sharing agreements state that federal taxes are generally allocated to the Company as if each entity were filing its own separate company tax return, except that net operating losses and certain other tax attributes are characterized as realized (or realizable) when those tax attributes are realized (or realizable) by the Company.

Related Party Income Tax Transactions

The Company also entered into a tax separation agreement with MetLife (the “Tax Separation Agreement”). Among other things, the Tax Separation Agreement governs the allocation between MetLife and us of the responsibility for the taxes of the MetLife group. The Tax Separation Agreement also allocates rights, obligations and responsibilities in connection with certain administrative matters relating to the preparation of tax returns and control of tax audits and other proceedings relating to taxes. In October 2017, MetLife paid $55.6 million to Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY under the Tax Separation Agreement. At December 31, 2017, a $958 thousand receivable related to this agreement is included in other assets.

12. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees

Contingencies

Litigation

Sales Practices Claims

Over the past several years, the Company has faced claims and regulatory inquiries and investigations, alleging improper marketing or sales of individual life insurance policies, or annuities. The Company continues to defend vigorously against the claims in these matters. The Company believes adequate provision has been made in its financial statements for all probable and reasonably estimable losses for sales practices matters or other products.

123

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

12. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Unclaimed Property Litigation

Total Asset Recovery Services, LLC on its own behalf and on behalf of the State of New York v. Brighthouse Financial, Inc. et al (Supreme Court, New York County, NY, second amended complaint filed November 17, 2017). Total Asset Recovery Services, LLC. (the “Relator”) has brought a qui tam action against Brighthouse Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates under the New York False Claims Act seeking to recover damages on behalf of the State of New York. The action originally was filed under seal on or about December 3, 2010. The State of New York declined to intervene in the action, and the Relator is now prosecuting the action. The Relator alleges that from on or about April 1, 1986 and continuing annually through on or about September 10, 2017, the defendants violated New York State Finance Law Section 189 (1) (g) by failing to timely report and deliver unclaimed insurance property to the State of New York. The Relator is seeking, among other things, treble damages, penalties, expenses and attorneys’ fees and prejudgment interest. No specific dollar amount of damages is specified by the Relator who also is suing numerous insurance companies and John Doe defendants. The Brighthouse defendants intend to defend this action vigorously.

Summary

Various litigation, claims and assessments against the Company, in addition to those discussed previously and those otherwise provided for in the Company’s financial statements, have arisen in the course of the Company's business, including, but not limited to, in connection with its activities as an insurer, investor, and taxpayer. Further, state insurance regulatory authorities and other federal and state authorities regularly make inquiries and conduct investigations concerning the Company's compliance with applicable insurance and other laws and regulations.

It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of all pending investigations and legal proceedings. In some of the matters referred to previously, large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Although in light of these considerations it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain cases could have a material effect upon the Company's financial position, based on information currently known by the Company's management, in its opinion, the outcomes of such pending investigations and legal proceedings are not likely to have such an effect. However, given the large and/or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters and the inherent unpredictability of litigation, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company's net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

Insolvency Assessments

Most of the jurisdictions in which the Company is admitted to transact business require insurers doing business within the jurisdiction to participate in guaranty associations, which are organized to pay contractual benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed insurers. These associations levy assessments, up to prescribed limits, on all member insurers in a particular state on the basis of the proportionate share of the premiums written by member insurers in the lines of business in which the impaired, insolvent or failed insurer engaged. Some states permit member insurers to recover assessments paid through full or partial premium tax offsets.

Assets and liabilities held for insolvency assessments were as follows:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Other Assets:
Premium tax offset for future discounted and undiscounted assessments	$	300	$	300
Premium tax offsets currently available for paid assessments	51		1,829
Total	$	351	$	2,129
Other Liabilities:
Insolvency assessments	$	400	$	400

124

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

12. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Commitments

Mortgage Loan Commitments

The Company commits to lend funds under mortgage loan commitments. The amounts of these mortgage loan commitments were $355 thousand and $42 thousand at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively.

Commitments to Fund Private Corporate Bond Investments

The Company commits to lend funds under private corporate bond investments. The amounts of these unfunded commitments were $11.6 million at December 31, 2017. The Company did not have commitments to lend funds under private corporate bond investments at December 31, 2016.

Guarantees

In the normal course of its business, the Company has provided certain indemnities, guarantees and commitments to third parties such that it may be required to make payments now or in the future. In the context of acquisition, disposition, investment and other transactions, the Company has provided indemnities and guarantees, including those related to tax, environmental and other specific liabilities and other indemnities and guarantees that are triggered by, among other things, breaches of representations, warranties or covenants provided by the Company. In addition, in the normal course of business, the Company provides indemnifications to counterparties in contracts with triggers similar to the foregoing, as well as for certain other liabilities, such as third-party lawsuits. These obligations are often subject to time limitations that vary in duration, including contractual limitations and those that arise by operation of law, such as applicable statutes of limitation. In some cases, the maximum potential obligation under the indemnities and guarantees is subject to a contractual limitation, while in other cases such limitations are not specified or applicable. Since certain of these obligations are not subject to limitations, the Company does not believe that it is possible to determine the maximum potential amount that could become due under these guarantees in the future. Management believes that it is unlikely the Company will have to make any material payments under these indemnities, guarantees, or commitments.

In addition, the Company indemnifies its directors and officers as provided in its charters and by-laws. Also, the Company indemnifies its agents for liabilities incurred as a result of their representation of the Company’s interests. Since these indemnities are generally not subject to limitation with respect to duration or amount, the Company does not believe that it is possible to determine the maximum potential amount that could become due under these indemnities in the future.

The Company had no liability for indemnities, guarantees and commitments at both December 31, 2017 and 2016.

13. Related Party Transactions

The Company has various existing arrangements with its Brighthouse affiliates and MetLife for services necessary to conduct its activities. Subsequent to the Separation, certain of the MetLife services continued, as provided for under a master service agreement and various transition services agreements entered into in connection with the Separation.

Non-Broker-Dealer Transactions

The following table summarizes income and expense from transactions with related parties (excluding broker-dealer transactions) for the years indicated:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017			2016			2015
	(In thousands)
Income	$	(303,626	)	$	50,358		$	16,759
Expense	$	(66,252	)	$	(76,613	)	$	(44,358	)

125

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

13. Related Party Transactions (continued)

The following table summarizes assets and liabilities from transactions with related parties (excluding broker-dealer transactions) at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Assets	$	536,843	$	322,394
Liabilities	$	448,237	$	99,641

The material arrangements between the Company and its related parties are as follows:

Reinsurance Agreements

The Company has reinsurance agreements with its parent, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company, and certain of MetLife, Inc.’s subsidiaries. See Note 5 for further discussion of the related party reinsurance agreements.

Capital Support Arrangement

MetLife previously had a net worth maintenance agreement with the Company, pursuant to which MetLife agreed to cause the Company to meet specified capital and surplus levels and had guaranteed liquidity necessary to enable it to meet its current obligations on a timely basis. In connection with the Separation, this net worth maintenance agreement was terminated on August 4, 2017.

Investment Transactions

Prior to the Separation, the Company had extended loans to certain subsidiaries of MetLife, Inc. Additionally, in the ordinary course of business, the Company had previously transferred invested assets, primarily consisting of fixed maturity securities, to and from former affiliates. See Note 6 for further discussion of the related party investment transactions.

Shared Services and Overhead Allocations

Brighthouse affiliates and MetLife provide the Company certain services, which include, but are not limited to, treasury, financial planning and analysis, legal, human resources, tax planning, internal audit, financial reporting, and information technology. In 2017, the Company is charged for the MetLife services through a transition services agreement and allocated to the legal entities and products within the Company. When specific identification to a particular legal entity and/or product is not practicable, an allocation methodology based on various performance measures or activity-based costing, such as sales, new policies/contracts issued, reserves, and in-force policy counts is used. The bases for such charges are modified and adjusted by management when necessary or appropriate to reflect fairly and equitably the actual incidence of cost incurred by the Company and/or affiliate. Management believes that the methods used to allocate expenses under these arrangements are reasonable. Expenses incurred with the Brighthouse affiliates and MetLife related to these arrangements, recorded in other expenses, were $38.0 million, $19.9 million and $30.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Broker-Dealer Transactions

Beginning in March 2017, Brighthouse Securities, LLC, a registered broker-dealer affiliate, began distributing certain of the Company’s existing and future variable insurance products, and the MetLife broker-dealers discontinued such distributions. Prior to March 2017, the Company recognized related party revenues and expenses arising from transactions with MetLife broker-dealers that previously sold the Company’s variable annuity and life products. The related party expense for the Company was commissions collected on the sale of variable products by the Company and passed through to the broker-dealer. The related party revenue for the Company was fee income from trusts and mutual funds whose shares serve as investment options of policyholders of the Company.

126

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Notes to the Financial Statements (continued)

13. Related Party Transactions (continued)

The following table summarizes income and expense from transactions with related party broker-dealers for the years indicated:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2017		2016		2015
	(In thousands)
Fee income	$	12,393	$	9,968	$	10,515
Commission expense	$	39,306	$	32,191	$	30,672

The following table summarizes assets and liabilities from transactions with related party broker-dealers as follow at:



	December 31,
	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Fee income receivables	$	1,090	$	934
Secured demand notes	$	—	$	—

127

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Schedule I

Summary of Investments —

Other Than Investments in Related Parties

December 31, 2017

(In thousands)



Types of Investments	Amortized Cost (1)		Estimated Fair Value		Amount at Which Shown on Balance Sheet
Fixed maturity securities:
Bonds:
U.S. government and agency securities	$	535,757	$	547,063	$	547,063
Public utilities	53,821		56,323		56,323
State and political subdivision securities	64,056		70,286		70,286
Foreign government securities	15,833		16,403		16,403
All other corporate bonds	1,021,214		1,050,415		1,050,415
Total bonds	1,690,681		1,740,490		1,740,490
Mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities	474,453		481,073		481,073
Total fixed maturity securities	2,165,134		2,221,563		2,221,563
Mortgage loans	394,863				394,863
Other invested assets	3,784				3,784
Total investments	$	2,563,781			$	2,620,210

______________


(1)	Amortized cost for fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans represents original cost reduced by repayments, valuation allowances and impairments from other-than-temporary declines in estimated fair value that are charged to earnings and adjusted for amortization of premiums or accretion of discounts.

128

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Schedule III

Supplementary Insurance Information

December 31, 2017 and 2016

(In thousands)



Segment	DAC and VOBA		Future Policy Benefits and Other Policy-Related Balances		Policyholder Account Balances		Unearned Premiums (1), (2)		Unearned Revenue (1)
2017
Annuities	$	107,760	$	350,512	$	1,324,527	$	—	$	2,347
Life	23,101		327,281		18,803		1,033		—
Corporate & Other	198		8,986		—		17		—
Total	$	131,059	$	686,779	$	1,343,330	$	1,050	$	2,347
2016
Annuities	$	60,689	$	325,468	$	1,179,305	$	—	$	2,164
Life	24,265		299,274		23,045		1,064		—
Corporate & Other	219		9,550		—		22		—
Total	$	85,173	$	634,292	$	1,202,350	$	1,086	$	2,164

______________


(1)	Amounts are included within the future policy benefits and other policy-related balances column.


(2)	Includes premiums received in advance.

129

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Schedule III

Supplementary Insurance Information — (continued)

December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(In thousands)



Segment	Premiums and Universal Life and Investment-Type Product Policy Fees		Net Investment Income (1)		Policyholder Benefits and Claims and Interest Credited to Policyholder Account Balances		Amortization of DAC and VOBA			Other Expenses
2017
Annuities	$	113,225	$	56,936	$	15,118	$	(42,603	)	$	48,171
Life	14,425		19,018		18,501		2,585			12,868
Corporate & Other	2,354		10,373		1,030		21			4,914
Total	$	130,004	$	86,327	$	34,649	$	(39,997	)	$	65,953
2016
Annuities	$	122,830	$	27,632	$	62,676	$	20,927		$	37,537
Life	28,978		17,033		27,122		2,272			16,134
Corporate & Other	1,931		13,115		2,096		18			3,356
Total	$	153,739	$	57,780	$	91,894	$	23,217		$	57,027
2015
Annuities	$	139,905	$	23,127	$	65,764	$	36,788		$	45,835
Life	40,617		15,379		34,118		66,568			16,570
Corporate & Other	2,255		14,438		1,651		470			2,808
Total	$	182,777	$	52,944	$	101,533	$	103,826		$	65,213

______________


(1)	See Note 2 of the Notes to the Financial Statements for the basis of allocation of net investment income.

130

Table of Contents

Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

(An Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc.)

Schedule IV

Reinsurance

December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

(Dollars in thousands)



	Gross Amount		Ceded		Assumed		Net Amount		% Amount Assumed to Net
2017
Life insurance in-force	$	48,509,917	$	41,167,006	$	—	$	7,342,911	—	%
Insurance premium
Life insurance (1)	$	93,196	$	66,928	$	—	$	26,268	—	%
Accident & health insurance	—		—		—		—		—	%
Total insurance premium	$	93,196	$	66,928	$	—	$	26,268	—	%
2016
Life insurance in-force	$	50,748,993	$	43,894,276	$	—	$	6,854,717	—	%
Insurance premium
Life insurance (1)	$	109,733	$	58,994	$	—	$	50,739	—	%
Accident & health insurance	—		—		—		—		—	%
Total insurance premium	$	109,733	$	58,994	$	—	$	50,739	—	%
2015
Life insurance in-force	$	53,017,387	$	48,212,042	$	—	$	4,805,345	—	%
Insurance premium
Life insurance (1)	$	122,110	$	50,238	$	—	$	71,872	—	%
Accident & health insurance	—		—		—		—		—	%
Total insurance premium	$	122,110	$	50,238	$	—	$	71,872	—	%

______________


(1)	Includes annuities with life contingencies.

For the year ended December 31, 2017, reinsurance ceded included related party transactions for life insurance in-force of $30.6 billion, and life insurance premiums of $51.9 million. For the year ended December 31, 2016, reinsurance ceded included related party transactions for life insurance in-force of $32.5 billion, and life insurance premiums of $44.2 million. For the year ended December 31, 2015, reinsurance ceded included related party transactions for life insurance in-force of $36.3 billion, and life insurance premiums of $37.1 million.

131

Table of Contents

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

None.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

Management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2017.

Historically, the Company relied on certain financial, administrative and other resources of MetLife, Inc. to operate our business until the Separation on August 4, 2017. In connection with the Separation, the Company redesigned several business processes and continues to change business processes as a subsidiary of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. The Company identifies, documents and evaluates controls to ensure controls over our financial reporting are effective. MetLife, through services agreements, continues to provide certain services on a transitional basis. We consider these to be a material change in our internal control over financial reporting.

Other than as noted above, there were no changes to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended December 31, 2017 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the internal control over financial reporting.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Management of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of control procedures. The objectives of internal control include providing management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management’s authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP.

Due to its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Management has completed an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017. In making the assessment, management used the criteria set forth in “Internal Control — Integrated Framework” (“COSO 2013”) promulgated by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”).

Based upon the assessment performed under that framework, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2017.

Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has audited the financial statements and financial statement schedules included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017. The Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on their audit of the financial statements and financial statement schedules is included on page 66.

Item 9B. Other Information

None.

132

Table of Contents

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.

Item 11. Executive Compensation

Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”), the independent auditor of Brighthouse Financial, Inc., has served as the independent auditor of the Company since 2000, and as auditor of current and former affiliates of the Company for more than 75 years. Its long-term knowledge of the Brighthouse group of companies, combined with its insurance industry expertise and global presence, has enabled it to carry out its audits of the Company’s financial statements with effectiveness and efficiency. Deloitte is a registered public accounting firm with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”) and the Rules of the PCAOB.

Independent Auditor’s Fees for 2017 and 2016

The table below presents fees for professional services rendered by Deloitte for the audit of the Company’s annual financial statements, audit-related services, tax services and all other services for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016. Prior to our separation from MetLife, Inc., our former parent paid all audit, audit-related, tax and other fees of Deloitte. As a result, the amounts reported below for fiscal year 2016 represent an allocation and are not directly comparable to the fees we paid for fiscal year 2017. All fees shown in the table for 2017 were related to services that were approved by the Audit Committee of Brighthouse Financial, Inc. (“Audit Committee”).



	2017		2016
	(In thousands)
Audit fees (1)	$	875	$	646
Audit-related fees (2)	$	—	$	—
Tax fees (3)	$	—	$	—
All other fees (4)	$	—	$	—

____________


(1)	Fees for services to perform an audit or review in accordance with auditing standards of the PCAOB and services that generally only the Company’s independent auditor can reasonably provide, such as comfort letters, statutory audits, attest services, consents and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.

(2)

Fees for assurance and related services that are traditionally performed by the Company’s independent auditor, such as audit and related services for due diligence related to mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, accounting consultations and audits in connection with proposed or consummated acquisitions and divestitures, control reviews, attest services not required by statute or regulation, and consultation concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.

(3)

Fees for tax compliance, consultation and planning services. Tax compliance generally involves preparation of original and amended tax returns, claims for refunds and tax payment planning services. Tax consultation and tax planning encompass a diverse range of advisory services, including assistance in connection with tax audits and filing appeals, tax advice related to mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, and requests for rulings or technical advice from taxing authorities.


(4)	Fees for other types of permitted services, including risk and other consulting services, financial advisory services and valuation services.

133

Table of Contents

Approval of Fees

The Audit Committee approves Deloitte’s audit and non-audit services to Brighthouse and its subsidiaries, including the Company, in advance as required under Sarbanes-Oxley and SEC rules. Before the commencement of each fiscal year, the Audit Committee appoints the independent auditor to perform audit services that Brighthouse expects to be performed for the fiscal year and appoints the auditor to perform audit-related, tax and other permitted non-audit services. The Audit Committee or a designated member of the Audit Committee to whom authority has been delegated may, from time to time, pre-approve additional audit and non-audit services to be performed by Brighthouse’s independent auditor. Any pre-approval of services between Audit Committee meetings must be reported to the full Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting.

The Audit Committee is responsible for approving fees for the audit and for any audit-related, tax or other permitted non-audit services. If the audit, audit-related, tax and other permitted non-audit fees for a particular period or service exceed the amounts previously approved, the Audit Committee determines whether or not to approve the additional fees.

The Audit Committee ensures the regular rotation of the audit engagement team partners as required by law.

134

Table of Contents

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a) The following documents are filed as part of this report:

1. Financial Statements: See “Index to Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules.”

2. Financial Statement Schedules: See “Index to Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules.”

3. Exhibits: The exhibits are listed in the “Exhibit Index” below.

135

Table of Contents

Exhibit Index

(Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts: In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, please remember that they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY, or the other parties to the agreements. The agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and (i) should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate; (ii) have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement; (iii) may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to investors; and (iv) were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments. Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY may be found elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY’s other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.)



Exhibit No.		Description

3.1		Charter of First MetLife Investors Insurance Company (now Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Amendment No. 1 to Form 10, filed by Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY on December 23, 2016).

3.2		Certificate of Amendment of Charter of First MetLife Investors Insurance Company (now Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Form 8-K, filed by Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY on March 6, 2017).

3.3		Amended and Restated By-laws of Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY, as effective March 6, 2017 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Form 8-K, filed by Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY on March 6, 2017).

10.1		Investment Management Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2017, between MetLife Investment Advisors, LLC and Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (formerly known as First MetLife Investors Insurance Company) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K, filed by Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY on August 10, 2017).

23.1*		Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.

31.1*		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2*		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1*		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.2*		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101.INS*		XBRL Instance Document.

101.SCH*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.

101.CAL*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.

101.LAB*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.

101.PRE*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.

101.DEF*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.

* Filed herewith

136

Table of Contents

Signatures

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Date: March 22, 2018



Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY

By:	/s/ Lynn A. Dumais
	Name:	Lynn A. Dumais
	Title:	Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
		(Authorized Signatory and Principal Financial Officer)

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.



Signature	Title	Date

/s/ Kimberly A. Berwanger	Director	March 22, 2018
Kimberly A. Berwanger

/s/ Norse N. Blazzard	Director	March 22, 2018
Norse N. Blazzard

/s/ Peter M. Carlson	Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer	March 22, 2018
Peter M. Carlson

/s/ David W. Chamberlin	Director	March 22, 2018
David W. Chamberlin

/s/ Richard A. Hemmings	Director	March 22, 2018
Richard A. Hemmings

/s/ Conor E. Murphy	Director	March 22, 2018
Conor E. Murphy

/s/ Mayer Naiman	Director	March 22, 2018
Mayer Naiman

/s/ Richard C. Pearson	Director	March 22, 2018
Richard C. Pearson

/s/ Lynn A. Dumais	Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)	March 22, 2018
Lynn A. Dumais

137

Attached files

BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE Co OF NY Reports

Also read