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.

Yesþ Noo

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitionthe definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 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).

Yeso Noþ

As of April 21,July 18, 2008, there were outstanding 314,712,088301,294,177 shares of Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share, of the registrant.

We have reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet of The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of March 31,June 30, 2008, and the related condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) for the three-month periodand six-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2008 and 2007, and changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for the three-monthsix-month periods ended March 31,June 30, 2008 and 2007. These interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management.

We conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to such condensed consolidated interim financial statements for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of the Company as of December 31, 2007, and the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders’ equity, comprehensive income, and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein); and in our report dated February 20, 2008 (which report includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s change in its method of accounting and reporting for defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans in 2006), we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2007 is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated balance sheet from which it has been derived.

The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. is a financial holding company for a group of subsidiaries that provide investment products and life and property and casualty insurance to both individual and business customers in the United States and internationally (collectively, “The Hartford” or the “Company”).

The condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the basis of accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), which differ materially from the accounting practices prescribed by various insurance regulatory authorities.

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements and notes as of March 31,June 30, 2008, and for the three and six months ended March 31,June 30, 2008 and 2007 are unaudited. These financial statements reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal accruals) which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for the fair presentation of the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows for the interim periods. These condensed consolidated financial statements and notes should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in The Hartford’s 2007 Form 10-K Annual Report. The results of operations for the interim periods should not be considered indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.

The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., companies in which the Company directly or indirectly has a controlling financial interest and those variable interest entities in which the Company is the primary beneficiary. The Company determines if it is the primary beneficiary using both qualitative and quantitative analyses. Entities in which The Hartford does not have a controlling financial interest but in which the Company has significant influence over the operating and financing decisions are reported using the equity method. All material intercompany transactions and balances between The Hartford and its subsidiaries and affiliates have been eliminated.

The preparation of financial statements, in conformity with U.S. GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

The most significant estimates include those used in determining property and casualty reserves, net of reinsurance; life estimated gross profits used in the valuation and amortization of assets and liabilities associated with variable annuity and other universal life-type contracts; living benefits required to be fair valued; valuation of investments and derivative instruments; evaluation of other-than-temporary impairments on available-for-sale securities; pension and other postretirement benefit obligations; and contingencies relating to corporate litigation and regulatory matters.

For a description of significant accounting policies, see Note 1 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in The Hartford’s 2007 Form 10-K Annual Report.

On January 1, 2008, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS 157”), which was issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) in September 2006. The Company also adopted on January 1, 2008 the SFAS 157 related FASB Staff Positions (“FSPs”) described below. For financial statement elements currently required to be measured at fair value, SFAS 157 redefines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under U.S. GAAP and enhances disclosures about fair value measurements. The new definition of fair value focuses on the price that would be received to sell the asset or paid to transfer the liability regardless of whether an observable liquid market price existed (an exit price). An exit price valuation will include margins for risk even if they are not observable. As the Company is released from risk, the margins for risk will also be released through net realized capital gains (losses) in net income. SFAS 157 provides guidance on how to measure fair value, when required, under existing accounting standards. SFAS 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels (“Level 1, 2, and 3”).

The Company applied the provisions of SFAS 157 prospectively to financial assets and financial liabilities that are required to be measured at fair value under existing U.S. GAAP. The Company also recorded in opening retained earnings the cumulative effect of applying SFAS 157 to certain customized derivatives measured at fair value in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 02-3, “Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts Held for Trading Purposes and Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities” (“EITF 02-3”). See Note 4 for additional information regarding SFAS 157. Specifically, see the SFAS 157 Transition discussion within Note 4 for information regarding the effects of applying SFAS 157 on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements in the first quarter of 2008.

In February 2008, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 157-1, “Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB Statement No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That Address Fair Value Measurements for Purposes of Lease Classification or Measurement under Statement 13” (“FSP FAS 157-1”). FSP FAS 157-1 provides a scope exception from SFAS 157 for the evaluation criteria on lease classification and capital lease measurement under SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases” and other related accounting pronouncements. Accordingly, the Company did not apply the provisions of SFAS 157 in determining the classification of and accounting for leases and the adoption of FSP FAS 157-1 did not have an impact on the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements.

In February 2008, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157” (“FSP FAS 157-2”) which delays the effective date of SFAS 157 to fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008 for certain nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities. Examples of applicable nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities to which FSP FAS 157-2 applies include, but are not limited to:

As a result of the issuance of FSP FAS 157-2, the Company did not apply the provisions of SFAS 157 to the nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities within the scope of FSP FAS 157-2.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” (“SFAS 159”). The objective of SFAS 159 is to improve financial reporting by providing entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported net income caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently. This statement permits entities to choose, at specified election dates, to measure eligible items at fair value (i.e., the fair value option). Items eligible for the fair value option include certain recognized financial assets and liabilities, rights and obligations under certain insurance contracts that are not financial instruments, host financial instruments resulting from the separation of an embedded nonfinancial derivative instrument from a nonfinancial hybrid instrument, and certain commitments. Business entities shall report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected in net income. The fair value option: (a) may be applied instrument by instrument, with certain exceptions; (b) is irrevocable (unless a new election date occurs); and (c) is applied only to entire instruments and not to portions of instruments. SFAS 159 is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after November 15, 2007. Companies shall report the effect of the first remeasurement to fair value as a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings. On January 1, 2008, the Company did not elect to apply the provisions of SFAS 159 to financial assets and liabilities.

In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS 161”), an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities”. This StatementSFAS 161 amends and expands disclosures about an entity’s derivative and hedging activities with the intent to provideof providing users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of a)(a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, b)(b) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for under Statement 133 and its related interpretations, and c)(c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. SFAS 161 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application encouraged. This StatementSFAS 161 encourages, but does not require, comparative disclosures. The Company expects to adopt SFAS 161 on January 1, 2009.

The effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31,June 30, 2008 and 2007 was (59)%17% and 28%25%, respectively. The negative effective tax rate infor the six months ended June 30, 2008 is a result of a tax benefit on pre-tax income, whereas 2007’s effective tax rate is a result of a tax expense on pre-tax income.and 2007 was 7% and 27%, respectively. The principal causes of the difference between the effective rate and the U.S. statutory rate of 35% were tax-exempt interest earned on invested assets and the separate account dividends received deduction (“DRD”).

The separate account DRD is estimated for the current year using information from the prior year-end, adjusted for current year equity market performance. The estimated DRD is generally updated in the third quarter for the provision-to-filed-return adjustments, and in the fourth quarter based on current year ultimate mutual fund distributions and fee income from the Company’s variable insurance products. The actual current year DRD can vary from estimates based on, but not limited to, changes in eligible dividends received by the mutual funds, amounts of distributionsdistribution from these mutual funds, amounts of short-term capital gains at the mutual fund level and the Company’s taxable income before the DRD. The Company recorded benefits of $41 and $44 related to the separate account DRD of $67 and $44 in the three months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, and $108 and $88 in the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The benefit recorded in the three months ended June 30, 2008 included prior period adjustments of $9 related to the 2007 tax return and $8 related to the three months ended March 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.2008.

In Revenue Ruling 2007-61, issued on September 25, 2007, the IRSInternal Revenue Service (“IRS”) announced its intention to issue regulations with respect to certain computational aspects of DRD on separate account assets held in connection with variable annuity contracts. Revenue Ruling 2007-61 suspended Revenue Ruling 2007-54, issued in August 2007, that had purported to change accepted industry and IRS interpretations of the statutes governing these computational questions. Any regulations that the IRS ultimately proposes for issuance in this area will be subject to public notice and comment, at which time insurance companies and other members of the public will have the opportunity to raise legal and practical questions about the content, scope and application of such regulations. As a result, the ultimate timing and substance of any such regulations are unknown, but they could result in the elimination of some or all of the separate account DRD tax benefit that the Company receives. Management believes that it is highly likely that any such regulations would apply prospectively only.

The Company’s federal income tax returns are routinely audited by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”). During 2005, the IRS commenced anIRS. The examination of the Company’s U.S. income tax returns for 2002 through 2003 that is anticipated to be completed during 2008. The 2004 through 2006 examination will beginbegan during the current quarter, and is expected to close by the end of 2010. In addition, the Company is working with the IRS on a possible settlement of a DRD issue related to prior periods which, if settled, may result in 2008.booking of tax benefits during late 2008 or early 2009. Such benefits are not expected to be material to the statement of operations.

The following tables present a reconciliation of net income and shares used in calculating basic earnings per share to those used in calculating diluted earnings per share.

Property & Casualty is organized into five reporting segments: the underwriting segments of Personal Lines, Small Commercial, Middle Market and Specialty Commercial (collectively, “Ongoing Operations”); and the Other Operations segment. For the three months ended March 31,June 30, 2008 and 2007, AARP accounted for earned premiums of $687$691 and $653,$663, respectively, in Personal Lines. For the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, AARP accounted for earned premiums of $1.4 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, in Personal Lines.

Through inter-segment arrangements, Specialty Commercial reimburses Personal Lines, Small Commercial and Middle Market for losses incurred from uncollectible reinsurance and losses incurred under certain liability claims. Earned premiums assumed (ceded) under the inter-segment arrangements were as follows:

The following tables present revenues and net income (loss). by segment. Underwriting results are presented for the Personal Lines, Small Commercial, Middle Market and Specialty Commercial segments, while net income is presented for each of Life’s reporting segments, total Property & Casualty, Ongoing Operations, Other Operations, and Corporate.

The following financial instruments are carried at fair value in the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements: fixed maturities, equity securities, short-term investments, freestanding and embedded derivatives, and separate account assets. These fair value disclosures include information regarding the valuation of the Company’s guaranteed benefits products and the impact of the adoption of SFAS 157, followed by the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements of SFAS 157.

Many of the variable annuity contracts issued by the Company offer various guaranteed minimum death, withdrawal, income and accumulation benefits. Those benefits are accounted for under SFAS 133 or AICPA Statement of Position No. 03-1 “Accounting and Reporting by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Nontraditional Long-Duration Contracts and for Separate Accounts” (“SOP 03-1”). Guaranteed minimum benefits often meet the definition of an embedded derivative under SFAS 133 as they have notional amounts (the guaranteed balance) and underlyings (the investment fund options), they require no initial net investment and they may have terms that require or permit net settlement. However, certain guaranteed minimum benefits settle only upon a single insurable event, such as death (guaranteed minimum death benefits or “GMDB”) or living (life contingent portion of guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits or “GMWB”), and as such are scoped out of SFAS 133 under the “insurance contract exception”. Other guaranteed minimum benefits require settlement in the form of a long-term financing transaction, such as is typical with guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIB”), and as such do not meet the net settlement requirement in SFAS 133. Guaranteed minimum benefits that do not meet the requirements of SFAS 133 are accounted for as insurance benefits under SOP 03-1.

The non-life-contingent portion of the Company’s GMWBs and guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits (“GMAB”) meet the definition of an embedded derivative under SFAS 133, and as such are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value recorded in net realized capital gains (losses) in net income. In bifurcating the embedded derivative, the Company attributes to the derivative a portion of total fees collected from the contract holder. Those fees attributed wereholder (the “Attributed Fees”). Attributed Fees are set equal to the present value of future claims (excluding margins for risk) expected to be paid for the guaranteed living benefit embedded derivative at the inception of the contract (the “Attributed Fees”).contract. The excess of total fees collected from the contract holder over the Attributed Fees are associated with the host variable annuity contract and recorded in fee income. In subsequent valuations, both the present value of future claims expected to be paid and the present value of attributed fees expected to be collected are revalued based on current market conditions and policyholder behavior assumptions. The difference between each of the two components represents the fair value of the embedded derivative.

GMWBs provide the policyholder with a guaranteed remaining balance (“GRB”) if the account value is reduced to zeroa contractually specified minimum level, through a combination of market declines and withdrawals. The GRB is generally equal to premiums less withdrawals. For most of the Company’s GMWB “for life riders”, the GRB is reset on an annual basis to the maximum anniversary account value, subject to a cap. If the GRB exceeds the account value for any policy, the contract is “in-the-money” by the difference between the GRB and the account value.

During the first quarter of 2007, the Company launched a GMAB rider attached to certain Japanese variable annuity contracts. The GMAB provides the policyholder with the GRB if the account value is less than premiums after an accumulation period, generally 10 years, and if the account value has not dropped below 80% of the initial deposit at which point a GMIB can be exercised. The GRB is generally equal to premiums less surrenders.

Changes in capital markets or policyholder behavior may increase or decrease the Company’s exposure to benefits under the guarantees. The Company uses derivative transactions, including GMWB reinsurance (described below) which meets the definition of a derivative under SFAS 133 and customized derivative transactions, to mitigate some of that exposure. Derivatives are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value recorded in net realized capital gains (losses) in net income.

For all U.S. GMWB contracts in effect through July 2003, the Company entered into a reinsurance arrangement to offset its exposure to the GMWB for the remaining lives of those contracts. Substantially all of the Company’s reinsurance capacity was utilized as of the third quarter of 2003. Substantially all U.S. GMWB riders sold since July 2003 are not covered by reinsurance.

In June and July of 2007 and again in April of 2008, the Company entered into two customized swap contracts to hedge certain risk components for the remaining term of certain blocks of non-reinsured GMWB riders. These customized derivative contracts provide protection from capital markets risks based on policyholder behavior assumptions specified by the Company at the inception of the derivative transactions. Due to the significance of the non-observable inputs associated with pricing these derivatives,the swap contracts entered into in 2007, the initial difference between the transaction price and modeled value of $51 was deferred in accordance with EITF 02-3 and included in other assets in the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

The Company uses other hedging instruments to hedge its unreinsured GMWB exposure. These instruments include interest rate futures and swaps, variance swaps, S&P 500 and NASDAQ index put options and futures contracts. The Company also uses EAFE Index swaps to hedge GMWB exposure to international equity markets.

Fair values for GMWB and GMAB contracts and the related reinsurance and customized derivatives that hedge certain equity markets exposure for GMWB contracts are calculated based upon internally developed models because active, observable markets do not exist for those items. Below is a description of the Company’s fair value methodologies for guaranteed benefit liabilities, the related reinsurance and customized derivatives, all accounted for under SFAS 133, prior to the adoption of SFAS 157 and subsequent to adoption of SFAS 157.

Prior to January 1, 2008, the Company used the guidance prescribed in SFAS 133 and other related accounting literature on fair value which represented the amount for which a financial instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between knowledgeable, unrelated willing parties. However, under that accounting literature, when an estimate of fair value was made for liabilities where no market observable transactions exist for that liability or similar liabilities, market risk margins were only included in the valuation if the margin was identifiable, measurable and significant. If a reliable estimate of market risk margins was not obtainable, the present value of expected future cash flows under a risk neutral framework, discounted at the risk free rate of interest, was the best available estimate of fair value in the circumstances (“Pre-SFAS 157 Fair Value”).

The Pre-SFAS 157 Fair Value was calculated based on actuarial and capital market assumptions related to projected cash flows, including benefits and related contract charges, over the lives of the contracts, incorporating expectations concerning policyholder behavior such as lapses, fund selection, resets and withdrawal utilization (for the customized derivatives, policyholder behavior is prescribed in the derivative contract). Because of the dynamic and complex nature of these cash flows, best estimate assumptions and a Monte Carlo stochastic process involving the generation of thousands of scenarios that assume risk neutral returns consistent with swap rates and a blend of observable implied index volatility levels were used. Estimating these cash flows involved numerous estimates and subjective judgments including those regarding expected markets rates of return, market volatility, correlations of market index returns to funds, fund performance, discount rates and policyholder behavior. At each valuation date, the Company assumed expected returns based on:

As GMWB obligations are relatively new in the marketplace, actual policyholder behavior experience is limited. As a result, estimates of future policyholder behavior are subjective and based on analogous internal and external data. As markets change, mature and evolve and actual policyholder behavior emerges, management continually evaluates the appropriateness of its assumptions for this component of the fair value model.

The Company’s SFAS 157 fair value is calculated as an aggregation of the following components: Pre-SFAS 157 Fair Value; Actively-Managed Volatility Adjustment; Credit Standing Adjustment; Market Illiquidity Premium; and Behavior Risk Margin. The resulting aggregation is reconciled or calibrated, if necessary, to market information that is, or may be, available to the Company, but may not be observable by other market participants, including reinsurance discussions and transactions. The Company believes the aggregation of each of these components, as necessary and as reconciled or calibrated to the market information available to the Company, results in an amount that the Company would be required to transfer for a liability, or receive for an asset, to market participants in an active liquid market, if one existed, for those market participants to assume the risks associated with the guaranteed minimum benefits and the related reinsurance and customized derivatives required to be fair valued. The SFAS 157 fair value is likely to materially diverge from the ultimate settlement of the liability as the Company believes settlement will be based on our best estimate assumptions rather than those best estimate assumptions plus risk margins. ReleaseIn the absence of any transfer of the GMWB liability to a third party, the release of risk margins willis likely to be reflected as realized gains in future periods’ net income. Each of the components described below are unobservable in the marketplace and require subjectivity by the Company in determining their value.