Aetna 10-Q 2015 Q2 Quarterly report

Exhibit 99.1

The following sets forth the risk factors of Humana Inc. (“Humana”) and its subsidiaries described in (i) Part I, Item 1A in Humana's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") on February 18, 2015, (ii) Part II, Item 1A in Humana's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2015, and filed with the SEC on July 29, 2015, which are incorporated by reference in Aetna Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2015.

In this Exhibit 99.1, “we”, “our”, “us”, and “the Company” refer to Humana and its subsidiaries.

Part I, Item 1A in Humana's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 and filed with the SEC on February 18, 2015

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

If we do not design and price our products properly and competitively, if the premiums we charge are insufficient to cover the cost of health care services delivered to our members, if we are unable to implement clinical initiatives to provide a better health care experience for our members, lower costs and appropriately document the risk profile of our members, or if our estimates of benefits expense are inadequate, our profitability may be materially adversely affected. We estimate the costs of our benefits expense payments, and design and price our products accordingly, using actuarial methods and assumptions based upon, among other relevant factors, claim payment patterns, medical cost inflation, and historical developments such as claim inventory levels and claim receipt patterns. These estimates, however involve extensive judgment, and have considerable inherent variability because they are extremely sensitive to changes in claim payment patterns and medical cost trends.

We use a substantial portion of our revenues to pay the costs of health care services delivered to our members. These costs include claims payments, capitation payments to providers (predetermined amounts paid to cover services), and various other costs incurred to provide health insurance coverage to our members. These costs also include estimates of future payments to hospitals and others for medical care provided to our members. Generally, premiums in the health care business are fixed for one-year periods. Accordingly, costs we incur in excess of our benefit cost projections generally are not recovered in the contract year through higher premiums. We estimate the costs of our future benefit claims and other expenses using actuarial methods and assumptions based upon claim payment patterns, medical inflation, historical developments, including claim inventory levels and claim receipt patterns, and other relevant factors. We also record benefits payable for future payments. We continually review estimates of future payments relating to benefit claims costs for services incurred in the current and prior periods and make necessary adjustments to our reserves. However, these estimates involve extensive judgment, and have considerable inherent variability that is sensitive to claim payment patterns and medical cost trends. Many factors may and often do cause actual health care costs to exceed what was estimated and used to set our premiums. These factors may include:

• increased use of medical facilities and services;

• increased cost of such services;

• increased use or cost of prescription drugs, including specialty prescription drugs;

• the introduction of new or costly treatments, including new technologies;

• our membership mix;

• variances in actual versus estimated levels of cost associated with new products, benefits or lines of business, product changes or benefit level changes;

• changes in the demographic characteristics of an account or market;

• changes or reductions of our utilization management functions such as preauthorization of services, concurrent review or requirements for physician referrals;

• changes in our pharmacy volume rebates received from drug manufacturers;

• catastrophes, including acts of terrorism, public health epidemics, or severe weather (e.g. hurricanes and earthquakes);

• medical cost inflation; and

• government mandated benefits or other regulatory changes, including any that result from the Health Care Reform Law.

Key to our operational strategy is the implementation of clinical initiatives that we believe provide a better health care experience for our members, lower the cost of healthcare services delivered to our members, and appropriately document the risk profile of our members. Our profitability and competitiveness depend in large part on our ability to appropriately manage health care costs through, among other things, the application of medical management programs such as our chronic care management program.

In addition, we also estimate costs associated with long-duration insurance policies including long-term care, life insurance, annuities, and certain health and other supplemental insurance policies sold to individuals for which some of the premium received in the earlier years is intended to pay anticipated benefits to be incurred in future years. At policy issuance, these future policy benefit reserves are recognized on a net level premium method based on interest rates, mortality, morbidity, and maintenance expense assumptions. Because these policies have long-term claim payout periods, there is a greater risk of significant variability in claims costs, either positive or negative. Our actual claims experience will emerge many years after assumptions have been established. The risk of a deviation of the actual interest, morbidity, mortality, and maintenance expense assumptions from those assumed in our reserves are particularly significant to our closed block of long-term care insurance policies. We monitor the loss experience of these long-term care insurance policies, and, when necessary, apply for premium rate increases through a regulatory filing and approval process in the jurisdictions in which such products were sold. However, to the extent premium rate increases or loss experience vary from the assumptions we have locked in, additional future adjustments to reserves could be required.

While we proactively attempt to effectively manage our operating expenses, increases or decreases in staff-related expenses, additional investment in new products (including our opportunities in the Medicare programs, state-based contracts, participation in health insurance exchanges, and expansion of clinical capabilities as part of our integrated care delivery model), investments in health and well-being product offerings, acquisitions, new taxes and assessments (including the non-deductible health insurance industry fee and other assessments under the Health Care Reform Law), and implementation of regulatory requirements may increase our operating expenses.

Failure to adequately price our products or estimate sufficient benefits payable or future policy benefits payable, or effectively manage our operating expenses, may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

We are in a highly competitive industry. Some of our competitors are more established in the health care industry in terms of a larger market share and have greater financial resources than we do in some markets. In addition, other companies may enter our markets in the future, including emerging competitors in the Medicare program or competitors in the delivery of health care services. We may also face increased competition due to participation by other insurers in the health insurance exchanges implemented under the Health Care Reform Law. We believe that barriers to entry in our markets are not substantial, so the addition of new competitors can occur relatively easily, and customers enjoy significant flexibility in moving between competitors. Contracts for the sale of commercial products are generally bid upon or renewed annually. While health plans compete on the basis of many factors, including service and the quality and depth of provider networks, we expect that price will continue

to be a significant basis of competition. In addition to the challenge of controlling health care costs, we face intense competitive pressure to contain premium prices. Factors such as business consolidations, strategic alliances, legislative reform, and marketing practices create pressure to contain premium price increases, despite being faced with increasing medical costs.

The policies and decisions of the federal and state governments regarding the Medicare, military, Medicaid and health insurance exchange programs in which we participate have a substantial impact on our profitability. These governmental policies and decisions, which we cannot predict with certainty, directly shape the premiums or other revenues to us under the programs, the eligibility and enrollment of our members, the services we provide to our members, and our administrative, health care services, and other costs associated with these programs. Legislative or regulatory actions, such as those resulting in a reduction in premium payments to us, an increase in our cost of administrative and health care services, or additional fees, taxes or assessments, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Premium increases, introduction of new product designs, and our relationships with our providers in various markets, among other issues, could also affect our membership levels. Other actions that could affect membership levels include our possible exit from or entrance into Medicare or commercial markets, or the termination of a large contract.

If we do not compete effectively in our markets, if we set rates too high or too low in highly competitive markets to keep or increase our market share, if membership does not increase as we expect, if membership declines, or if we lose membership with favorable medical cost experience while retaining or increasing membership with unfavorable medical cost experience, our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows may be materially adversely affected.

If we fail to effectively implement our operational and strategic initiatives, including our Medicare initiatives, our state-based contracts strategy, and our participation in the new health insurance exchanges, our business may be materially adversely affected, which is of particular importance given the concentration of our revenues in these products.

Our future performance depends in large part upon our ability to execute our strategy, including opportunities created by the expansion of our Medicare programs, the successful implementation of our integrated care delivery model, our strategy with respect to state-based contracts, including those covering members dually eligible for the Medicare and Medicaid programs, and our participation in health insurance exchanges.

We have made substantial investments in the Medicare program to enhance our ability to participate in these programs. Over the last few years we have increased the size of our Medicare geographic reach through expanded Medicare product offerings. We offer both stand-alone Medicare prescription drug coverage and Medicare Advantage health plans with prescription drug coverage in addition to our other product offerings. We offer a Medicare prescription drug plan in 50 states as well as Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. The growth of our Medicare products is an important part of our business strategy. Any failure to achieve this growth may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. In addition, the expansion of our Medicare products in relation to our other businesses may intensify the risks to us inherent in Medicare products. There is significant concentration of our revenues in Medicare products, with approximately 72% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2014 generated from our Medicare products, in particular our contracts with CMS in Florida. These expansion efforts may result in less diversification of our revenue stream and increased risks associated with operating in a highly regulated industry, as discussed further below.

The recently implemented Health Care Reform Law created a federal Medicare-Medicaid Coordination Office to serve dual eligibles. This Medicare-Medicaid Coordination Office has initiated a series of state demonstration projects to experiment with better coordination of care between Medicare and Medicaid. Depending upon the results of those demonstration projects, CMS may change the way in which dual eligibles are serviced. If we are unable to implement our strategic initiatives to address the dual eligibles opportunity, including our participation in state-based contracts,

or if our initiatives are not successful at attracting or retaining dual eligible members, our business may be materially adversely affected.

Additionally, our strategy includes the growth of our commercial products, including participation in the new health insurance exchanges, introduction of new products and benefit designs, including HumanaVitality and other wellness products, growth of our specialty products such as dental, vision and other supplemental products, the adoption of new technologies, development of adjacent businesses, and the integration of acquired businesses and contracts.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully implement our operational and strategic initiatives, including implementing our integrated care delivery model, that are intended to position us for future growth or that the products we design will be accepted or adopted in the time periods assumed. Failure to implement this strategy may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

If we fail to properly maintain the integrity of our data, to strategically implement new information systems, or to protect our proprietary rights to our systems, our business may be materially adversely affected.

Our business depends significantly on effective information systems and the integrity and timeliness of the data we use to run our business. Our business strategy involves providing members and providers with easy to use products that leverage our information to meet their needs. Our ability to adequately price our products and services, provide effective and efficient service to our customers, and to timely and accurately report our financial results depends significantly on the integrity of the data in our information systems. As a result of our past and on-going acquisition activities, we have acquired additional information systems. We have reduced the number of systems we operate, have upgraded and expanded our information systems capabilities, and are gradually migrating existing business to fewer systems. Our information systems require an ongoing commitment of significant resources to maintain, protect, and enhance existing systems and develop new systems to keep pace with continuing changes in information processing technology, evolving industry and regulatory standards, and changing customer preferences. If the information we rely upon to run our businesses was found to be inaccurate or unreliable or if we fail to maintain effectively our information systems and data integrity, we could have operational disruptions, have problems in determining medical cost estimates and establishing appropriate pricing, have customer and physician and other health care provider disputes, have regulatory or other legal problems, have increases in operating expenses, lose existing customers, have difficulty in attracting new customers, or suffer other adverse consequences.

We depend on independent third parties for significant portions of our systems-related support, equipment, facilities, and certain data, including data center operations, data network, voice communication services and pharmacy data processing. This dependence makes our operations vulnerable to such third parties' failure to perform adequately under the contract, due to internal or external factors. A change in service providers could result in a decline in service quality and effectiveness or less favorable contract terms which may adversely affect our operating results.

We rely on our agreements with customers, confidentiality agreements with employees, and our trade secrets and copyrights to protect our proprietary rights. These legal protections and precautions may not prevent misappropriation of our proprietary information. In addition, substantial litigation regarding intellectual property rights exists in the software industry, including litigation involving end users of software products. We expect software products to be increasingly subject to third-party infringement claims as the number of products and competitors in this area grows.

There can be no assurance that our information technology, or IT, process will successfully improve existing systems, develop new systems to support our expanding operations, integrate new systems, protect our proprietary information, defend against cybersecurity attacks, or improve service levels. In addition, there can be no assurance that additional systems issues will not arise in the future. Failure to adequately protect and maintain the integrity of our information systems and data, or to defend against cybersecurity attacks, may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

If we are unable to defend our information technology security systems against cybersecurity attacks or prevent other privacy or data security incidents that result in security breaches that disrupt our operations or in the unintended dissemination of sensitive personal information or proprietary or confidential information, we could be exposed to significant regulatory fines or penalties, liability or reputational damage, or experience a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

In the ordinary course of our business, we process, store and transmit large amounts of data, including sensitive personal information as well as proprietary or confidential information relating to our business or a third-party. A cybersecurity attack may penetrate our layered security controls and misappropriate or compromise sensitive personal information or proprietary or confidential information or that of third-parties, create system disruptions, cause shutdowns, or deploy viruses, worms, and other malicious software programs that attack our systems. A cybersecurity attack that bypasses our IT security systems successfully could materially affect us due to the theft, destruction, loss, misappropriation or release of confidential data or intellectual property, operational or business delays resulting from the disruption of our IT systems, or negative publicity resulting in reputation or brand damage with our members, customers, providers, and other stakeholders.

The costs to eliminate or address cybersecurity threats and vulnerabilities before or after an incident could be substantial. Our remediation efforts may not be successful and could result in interruptions, delays, or cessation of service, and loss of existing or potential members. In addition, breaches of our security measures and the unauthorized dissemination of sensitive personal information or proprietary or confidential information about us or our members or other third-parties, could expose our members’ private information and result in the risk of financial or medical identity theft, or expose us or other third-parties to a risk of loss or misuse of this information, result in significant regulatory fines or penalties, litigation and potential liability for us, damage our brand and reputation, or otherwise harm our business.

Our business may be materially adversely impacted by the adoption of a new coding set for diagnoses.

Federal regulations related to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended (HIPAA), contain minimum standards for electronic transactions and code sets, and for the privacy and security of protected health information. ICD-9, the current system of assigning codes to diagnoses and procedures associated with hospital utilization in the United States, was scheduled to be replaced by ICD-10 code sets on October 1, 2014. However, on April 1, 2014, The Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 was signed into law, delaying implementation of ICD-10 until at least October 1, 2015. For dates of service on or after the date of final implementation, health plans and providers will be required to use ICD-10 codes for such diagnoses and procedures. While we have prepared for the transition to ICD-10, if unforeseen circumstances arise, it is possible that we could be exposed to investigations and allegations of noncompliance, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position and cash flows. In addition, if some providers continue to use ICD-9 codes on claims after the final implementation date, including providers in our network who are employees, we will have to reject such claims, which may lead to claim resubmissions, increased call volume and provider and customer dissatisfaction. Further, providers may use ICD-10 codes differently than they used ICD-9 codes in the past, which could result in lost revenues under risk adjustment. During the transition to ICD-10, certain claims processing and payment information we have historically used to establish our reserves may not be reliable or available in a timely manner. If we do not adequately implement the new ICD-10 coding set, or if providers in our network do not adequately transition to the new ICD-10 coding set, our results of operations, financial position and cash flows may be materially adversely affected.

We are involved in various legal actions and governmental and internal investigations, any of which, if resolved unfavorably to us, could result in substantial monetary damages or changes in our business practices. Increased litigation and negative publicity could increase our cost of doing business.

We are or may become a party to a variety of legal actions that affect our business, including breach of contract actions, employment and employment discrimination-related suits, employee benefit claims, securities laws claims, and tort claims.

In addition, because of the nature of the health care business, we are subject to a variety of legal actions relating to our business operations, including the design, management, and offering of products and services. These include and could include in the future:

• claims relating to the methodologies for calculating premiums;

• claims relating to the denial of health care benefit payments;

• claims relating to the denial or rescission of insurance coverage;

• challenges to the use of some software products used in administering claims;

• claims relating to our administration of our Medicare Part D offerings;

• medical malpractice actions based on our medical necessity decisions or brought against us on the theory that we are liable for providers' alleged malpractice;

• claims arising from any adverse medical consequences resulting from our recommendations about the appropriateness of providers’ proposed medical treatment plans for patients;

• allegations of anti-competitive and unfair business activities;

• provider disputes over compensation or non-acceptance or termination of provider contracts or provider contract disputes relating to rate adjustments resulting from the Balance Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended (commonly referred to as “sequestration”);

• disputes related to ASO business, including actions alleging claim administration errors;

• qui tam litigation brought by individuals who seek to sue on behalf of the government, alleging that we, as a government contractor, submitted false claims to the government including, among other allegations, resulting from coding and review practices under the Medicare risk-adjustment model;

• claims related to the failure to disclose some business practices;

• claims relating to customer audits and contract performance;

• claims relating to dispensing of drugs associated with our in-house mail-order pharmacy; and

• professional liability claims arising out of the delivery of healthcare and related services to the public.

In some cases, substantial non-economic or punitive damages as well as treble damages under the federal False Claims Act, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and other statutes may be sought.

While we currently have insurance coverage for some of these potential liabilities, other potential liabilities may not be covered by insurance, insurers may dispute coverage, or the amount of our insurance may not be enough to cover the damages awarded. In addition, some types of damages, like punitive damages, may not be covered by insurance. In some jurisdictions, coverage of punitive damages is prohibited. Insurance coverage for all or some forms of liability may become unavailable or prohibitively expensive in the future.

The health benefits industry continues to receive significant negative publicity reflecting the public perception of the industry. This publicity and perception have been accompanied by increased litigation, including some large jury awards, legislative activity, regulation, and governmental review of industry practices. These factors may materially adversely affect our ability to market our products or services, may require us to change our products or services or otherwise change our business practices, may increase the regulatory burdens under which we operate, and may require

us to pay large judgments or fines. Any combination of these factors could further increase our cost of doing business and adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

See "Legal Proceedings and Certain Regulatory Matters" in Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8. - Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. We cannot predict the outcome of these matters with certainty.

As a government contractor, we are exposed to risks that may materially adversely affect our business or our willingness or ability to participate in government health care programs.

A significant portion of our revenues relates to federal and state government health care coverage programs, including the Medicare, military, and Medicaid programs. These programs accounted for approximately 76% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2014. These programs involve various risks, as described further below.

• At December 31, 2014, under our contracts with CMS we provided health insurance coverage to approximately 542,400 individual Medicare Advantage members in Florida. These contracts accounted for approximately 15% of our total premiums and services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2014. The loss of these and other CMS contracts or significant changes in the Medicare program as a result of legislative or regulatory action, including reductions in premium payments to us or increases in member benefits without corresponding increases in premium payments to us, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

• At December 31, 2014, our military services business primarily consisted of the TRICARE South Region contract which covers approximately 3,090,400 beneficiaries. For the year ended December 31, 2014, premiums and services revenue associated with the TRICARE South Region contract accounted for approximately 1% of our total premiums and services revenue. On April 1, 2012, we began delivering services under the current TRICARE South Region contract that the Defense Health Agency, or DHA (formerly known as the TRICARE Management Activity), awarded to us on February 25, 2011. The current 5-year South Region contract, which expires March 31, 2017, is subject to annual renewals on April 1 of each year during its term at the government’s option. On January 27, 2015, we received notice from the DHA of its intent to exercise its option to extend the TRICARE South Region contract through March 31, 2016. The loss of the TRICARE South Region contract, should it occur, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

• There is a possibility of temporary or permanent suspension from participating in government health care programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, if we are convicted of fraud or other criminal conduct in the performance of a health care program or if there is an adverse decision against us under the federal False Claims Act. As a government contractor, we may be subject to qui tam litigation brought by individuals who seek to sue on behalf of the government, alleging that the government contractor submitted false claims to the government. Litigation of this nature is filed under seal to allow the government an opportunity to investigate and to decide if it wishes to intervene and assume control of the litigation. If the government does not intervene, the lawsuit is unsealed, and the individual may continue to prosecute the action on his or her own.

• CMS uses a risk-adjustment model which apportions premiums paid to Medicare Advantage, or MA, plans according to health severity. The risk-adjustment model pays more for enrollees with predictably higher costs. Under this model, rates paid to MA plans are based on actuarially determined bids, which include a process that bases our prospective payments on a comparison of our beneficiaries’ risk scores, derived from medical diagnoses, to those enrolled in the government’s traditional fee-for-service Medicare program (referred to as “Medicare FFS”). Under the risk-adjustment methodology, all MA plans must collect and submit the necessary diagnosis code information from hospital

inpatient, hospital outpatient, and physician providers to CMS within prescribed deadlines. The CMS risk-adjustment model uses this diagnosis data to calculate the risk-adjusted premium payment to MA plans. We generally rely on providers, including certain providers in our network who are our employees, to code their claim submissions with appropriate diagnoses, which we send to CMS as the basis for our payment received from CMS under the actuarial risk-adjustment model. We also rely on providers to appropriately document all medical data, including the diagnosis data submitted with claims. In addition, we conduct medical record reviews, as part of our data and payment accuracy compliance efforts, to more accurately reflect diagnosis conditions under the risk adjustment model. These compliance efforts include the internal contract level audits described in more detail below.

CMS is continuing to perform audits of various companies’ selected MA contracts related to this risk adjustment diagnosis data. These audits are referred to herein as Risk-Adjustment Data Validation Audits, or RADV audits. RADV audits review medical records in an attempt to validate provider medical record documentation and coding practices which influence the calculation of premium payments to MA plans.

In 2012, CMS released a “Notice of Final Payment Error Calculation Methodology for Part C Medicare Advantage Risk Adjustment Data Validation (RADV) Contract-Level Audits.” The payment error calculation methodology provides that, in calculating the economic impact of audit results for an MA contract, if any, the results of the audit sample will be extrapolated to the entire MA contract based upon a comparison to “benchmark” audit data in Medicare FFS (which we refer to as the "FFS Adjuster"). This comparison to the Medicare FFS benchmark audit is necessary to determine the economic impact, if any, of audit results because the government program data set, including any attendant errors that are present in that data set, provides the basis for MA plans’ risk adjustment to payment rates. CMS already makes other adjustments to payment rates based on a comparison of coding pattern differences between MA plans and Medicare FFS data (such as for frequency of coding for certain diagnoses in MA plan data versus the government program data set).

The final methodology, including the first application of extrapolated audit results to determine audit settlements, is expected to be applied to the current round of RADV contract level audits being conducted on 2011 premium payments. Selected MA contracts will be notified of an audit at some point after the close of the final reconciliation for the payment year being audited. The final reconciliation occurs in August of the calendar year following the payment year. We have been notified that certain of our Medicare Advantage contracts have been selected for audit for contract year 2011.

Estimated audit settlements are recorded as a reduction of premiums revenue in our consolidated statements of income, based upon available information. We perform internal contract level audits based on the RADV audit methodology prescribed by CMS. Included in these internal contract level audits is an audit of our Private Fee-For-Service business which we used to represent a proxy of the benchmark audit data in Medicare FFS which has not yet been released. We based our accrual of estimated audit settlements for contract years 2011 (the first year that application of extrapolated audit results is applicable) through 2014 on the results of these internal contract level audits and update our estimates as each audit is completed. Estimates derived from these results were not material to our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. However, as indicated, we are awaiting additional guidance from CMS regarding the benchmark audit data in Medicare FFS. Accordingly, we cannot determine whether such RADV audits will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

In addition, CMS’ recent comments in formalized guidance regarding “overpayments” to Medicare Advantage plans appear to be inconsistent with CMS’ prior RADV audit guidance. These statements, contained in the preamble to CMS’ final rule release regarding Medicare Advantage and Part D prescription drug benefit program regulations for Contract Year 2015, appear to equate each Medicare Advantage risk adjustment data error with an “overpayment” without reconciliation to the principles underlying the FFS Adjuster referenced above. We will continue to work with CMS to ensure that

Medicare Advantage plans are paid accurately and that payment model principles are in accordance with the requirements of the Social Security Act, which if not implemented correctly, could have material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

• Our CMS contracts which cover members’ prescription drugs under Medicare Part D contain provisions for risk sharing and certain payments for prescription drug costs for which we are not at risk. These provisions, certain of which are described below, affect our ultimate payments from CMS.

The premiums from CMS are subject to risk corridor provisions which compare costs targeted in our annual bids to actual prescription drug costs, limited to actual costs that would have been incurred under the standard coverage as defined by CMS. Variances exceeding certain thresholds may result in CMS making additional payments to us or require us to refund to CMS a portion of the premiums we received (known as a “risk corridor”). We estimate and recognize an adjustment to premiums revenue related to the risk corridor payment settlement based upon pharmacy claims experience. The estimate of the settlement associated with these risk corridor provisions requires us to consider factors that may not be certain, including member eligibility differences with CMS. Our estimate of the settlement associated with the Medicare Part D risk corridor provisions was a net receivable of $69 million at December 31, 2014.

Reinsurance and low-income cost subsidies represent payments from CMS in connection with the Medicare Part D program for which we assume no risk. Reinsurance subsidies represent payments for CMS’s portion of claims costs which exceed the member’s out-of-pocket threshold, or the catastrophic coverage level. Low-income cost subsidies represent payments from CMS for all or a portion of the deductible, the coinsurance and co-payment amounts above the out-of-pocket threshold for low-income beneficiaries. Monthly prospective payments from CMS for reinsurance and low-income cost subsidies are based on assumptions submitted with our annual bid. A reconciliation and settlement of CMS’s prospective subsidies against actual prescription drug costs we paid is made after the end of the year.

Settlement of the reinsurance and low-income cost subsidies as well as the risk corridor payment is based on a reconciliation made approximately 9 months after the close of each calendar year. This reconciliation process requires us to submit claims data necessary for CMS to administer the program. Our claims data may not pass CMS’s claims edit processes due to various reasons, including discrepancies in eligibility or classification of low-income members. To the extent our data does not pass CMS’s claim edit processes, we may bear the risk for all or a portion of the claim which otherwise may have been subject to the risk corridor provision or payment which we would have otherwise received as a low-income subsidy or reinsurance claim. In addition, in the event the settlement represents an amount CMS owes us, there is a negative impact on our cash flows and financial condition as a result of financing CMS’s share of the risk. The opposite is true in the event the settlement represents an amount we owe CMS.

• The Budget Control Act of 2011, enacted on August 2, 2011, increased the United States debt ceiling conditioned on deficit reductions to be achieved over the next ten years. The Budget Control Act of 2011 also established a twelve-member joint committee of Congress known as the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to propose legislation to reduce the United States federal deficit by $1.5 trillion for fiscal years 2012-2021. The failure of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to achieve a targeted deficit reduction by December 23, 2011 triggered an automatic reduction, including aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2 percent per fiscal year. These reductions took effect on April 1, 2013, and the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, enacted on December 26, 2013, extended the reductions for two years. We expect a corresponding substantial reduction in our obligations to providers. Due to the uncertainty around the application of any such reductions, there can be no assurances that we can completely offset any reductions to the Medicare healthcare programs applied by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

• We are also subject to various other governmental audits and investigations. Under state laws, our HMOs and health insurance companies are audited by state departments of insurance for financial and contractual compliance. Our HMOs are audited for compliance with health services by state departments of health. Audits and investigations are also conducted by state attorneys general, CMS, the Office of the Inspector General of Health and Human Services, the Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Justice, the Department of Labor, and the Defense Contract Audit Agency. All of these activities could result in the loss of licensure or the right to participate in various programs, including a limitation on our ability to market or sell products, the imposition of fines, penalties and other civil and criminal sanctions, or changes in our business practices. The outcome of any current or future governmental or internal investigations cannot be accurately predicted, nor can we predict any resulting penalties, fines or other sanctions that may be imposed at the discretion of federal or state regulatory authorities. Nevertheless, it is reasonably possible that any such outcome of litigation, penalties, fines or other sanctions could be substantial, and the outcome of these matters may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows. Certain of these matters could also affect our reputation. In addition, disclosure of any adverse investigation or audit results or sanctions could negatively affect our industry or our reputation in various markets and make it more difficult for us to sell our products and services.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations (including restricting revenue, enrollment and premium growth in certain products and market segments, restricting our ability to expand into new markets, increasing our medical and operating costs by, among other things, requiring a minimum benefit ratio on insured products, lowering our Medicare payment rates and increasing our expenses associated with a non-deductible health insurance industry fee and other assessments); our financial position (including our ability to maintain the value of our goodwill); and our cash flows.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (which we collectively refer to as the Health Care Reform Law) enacted significant reforms to various aspects of the U.S. health insurance industry. The provisions of the Health Care Reform Law include, among others, imposing a significant new non-deductible health insurance industry fee and other assessments on health insurers, limiting Medicare Advantage payment rates, stipulating a prescribed minimum ratio for the amount of premiums revenue to be expended on medical costs for insured products, additional mandated benefits and guarantee issuance associated with commercial medical insurance, requirements that limit the ability of health plans to vary premiums based on assessments of underlying risk, and heightened scrutiny by state and federal regulators of our business practices, including our Medicare bid and pricing practices. The Health Care Reform Law also specifies benefit design guidelines, limits rating and pricing practices, encourages additional competition (including potential incentives for new market entrants), establishes federally-facilitated or state-based exchanges for individuals and small employers (with up to 100 employees) coupled with programs designed to spread risk among insurers (subject to federal administrative action), and expands eligibility for Medicaid programs (subject to state-by-state implementation of this expansion). In addition, the Health Care Reform Law has increased and will continue to increase federal oversight of health plan premium rates and could adversely affect our ability to appropriately adjust health plan premiums on a timely basis. Financing for these reforms will come, in part, from material additional fees and taxes on us and other health plans and individuals which began in 2014, as well as reductions in certain levels of payments to us and other health plans under Medicare. Implementation dates of the provisions of the Health Care Reform Law began in September 2010 and continue through 2018. If we fail to effectively implement our operational and strategic initiatives with respect to the implementation of the Health Care Reform Law, our business may be materially adversely affected. For additional information, please refer to the section entitled, “Health Care Reform” in “Item 7 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” appearing in this annual report.

Our participation in the new federal and state health insurance exchanges, which entail uncertainties associated with mix, volume of business and the operation of premium stabilization programs, which are subject to federal administrative action, could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

The Health Care Reform Law required the establishment of health insurance exchanges for individuals and small employers to purchase health insurance that became effective January 1, 2014, with an annual open enrollment period. Insurers participating on the health insurance exchanges must offer a minimum level of benefits and are subject to guidelines on setting premium rates and coverage limitations. We may be adversely selected by individuals who have a higher acuity level than the anticipated pool of participants in this market. In addition, the risk corridor, reinsurance, and risk adjustment provisions of the Health Care Reform Law, established to apportion risk for insurers, may not be effective in appropriately mitigating the financial risks related to our products. In addition, regulatory changes to the implementation of the Health Care Reform Law that allowed individuals to remain in plans that are not compliant with the Health Care Reform Law may have an adverse effect on our pool of participants in the health insurance exchange. All of these factors may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows if our premiums are not adequate or do not appropriately reflect the acuity of these individuals. Any variation from our expectations regarding acuity, enrollment levels, adverse selection, or other assumptions used in setting premium rates could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Our business activities are subject to substantial government regulation. New laws or regulations, or changes in existing laws or regulations or their manner of application, including reductions in Medicare Advantage payment rates, could increase our cost of doing business and may adversely affect our business, profitability, financial condition, and cash flows.

In addition to the Health Care Reform Law, the health care industry in general and health insurance are subject to substantial federal and state government regulation:

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act)

The use of individually identifiable health data by our business is regulated at federal and state levels. These laws and rules are changed frequently by legislation or administrative interpretation. Various state laws address the use and maintenance of individually identifiable health data. Most are derived from the privacy provisions in the federal Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA. HIPAA includes administrative provisions directed at simplifying electronic data interchange through standardizing transactions, establishing uniform health care provider, payer, and employer identifiers, and seeking protections for confidentiality and security of patient data. The rules do not provide for complete federal preemption of state laws, but rather preempt all inconsistent state laws unless the state law is more stringent.

These regulations set standards for the security of electronic health information. Violations of these rules could subject us to significant criminal and civil penalties, including significant monetary penalties. Compliance with HIPAA regulations requires significant systems enhancements, training and administrative effort. HIPAA can also expose us to additional liability for violations by our business associates (e.g., entities that provide services to health plans and providers).

The HITECH Act, one part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, significantly broadened the scope of the privacy and security regulations of HIPAA. On January 17, 2013, HHS issued the omnibus final rule on HIPAA privacy, security, breach notification requirements and enforcement requirements under the HITECH Act, and a final regulation for required changes to the HIPAA Privacy Rule for the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act, or GINA. The omnibus final rule became effective on March 26, 2013, with a compliance date of September 23, 2013. Among other requirements, the HITECH Act and Omnibus final rule mandates individual notification in the event of a breach of unsecured, individually identifiable health information, provides enhanced penalties for HIPAA violations, requires business associates to comply with certain provisions of the HIPAA privacy and security rule, and grants enforcement authority to state attorneys general in addition to the HHS Office of Civil Rights.

In addition, there are numerous federal and state laws and regulations addressing patient and consumer privacy concerns, including unauthorized access or theft of personal information. State statutes and regulations vary from state to state and could impose additional penalties. Violations of HIPAA or applicable federal or state laws or regulations could subject us to significant criminal or civil penalties, including significant monetary penalties. Compliance with HIPAA and other privacy regulations requires significant systems enhancements, training and administrative effort.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

On February 17, 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, or ARRA, was enacted into law. In addition to including a temporary subsidy for health care continuation coverage issued pursuant to the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, or COBRA, ARRA also expands and strengthens the privacy and security provisions of HIPAA and imposes additional limits on the use and disclosure of protected health information, or PHI. Among other things, ARRA requires us and other covered entities to report any unauthorized release or use of or access to PHI to any impacted individuals and to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in those instances where the unauthorized activity poses a significant risk of financial, reputational or other harm to the individuals, and to notify the media in any states where 500 or more people are impacted by any unauthorized release or use of or access to PHI. ARRA also requires business associates to comply with certain HIPAA provisions. ARRA also establishes higher civil and criminal penalties for covered entities and business associates who fail to comply with HIPAA’s provisions and requires the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to issue regulations implementing its privacy and security enhancements. 

Corporate Practice of Medicine and Other Laws

As a corporate entity, Humana Inc. is not licensed to practice medicine. Many states in which we operate through our subsidiaries limit the practice of medicine to licensed individuals or professional organizations comprised of licensed individuals, and business corporations generally may not exercise control over the medical decisions of physicians. Statutes and regulations relating to the practice of medicine, fee-splitting between physicians and referral sources, and similar issues vary widely from state to state. Under management agreements between certain of our subsidiaries and affiliated physician-owned professional groups, these groups retain sole responsibility for all medical decisions, as well as for hiring and managing physicians and other licensed healthcare providers, developing operating policies and procedures, implementing professional standards and controls, and maintaining malpractice insurance. We believe that our health services operations comply with applicable state statutes regarding corporate practice of medicine, fee-splitting, and similar issues. However, any enforcement actions by governmental officials alleging non-compliance with these statutes, which could subject us to penalties or restructuring or reorganization of our business, may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Anti-Kickback, Physician Self-Referral, and Other Fraud and Abuse Laws

A federal law commonly referred to as the “Anti-Kickback Statute” prohibits the offer, payment, solicitation, or receipt of any form of remuneration to induce, or in return for, the referral of Medicare or other governmental health program patients or patient care opportunities, or in return for the purchase, lease, or order of items or services that are covered by Medicare or other federal governmental health programs. Because the prohibitions contained in the Anti-Kickback Statute apply to the furnishing of items or services for which payment is made in “whole or in part,” the Anti-Kickback Statute could be implicated if any portion of an item or service we provide is covered by any of the state or federal health benefit programs described above. Violation of these provisions constitutes a felony criminal offense and applicable sanctions could include exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Section 1877 of the Social Security Act, commonly known as the “Stark Law,” prohibits physicians, subject to certain exceptions described below, from referring Medicare or Medicaid patients to an entity providing “designated health services” in which the physician, or an immediate family member, has an ownership or investment interest or with which the physician, or an immediate family member, has entered into a compensation arrangement. These prohibitions, contained in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, commonly known as “Stark II,”

amended prior federal physician self-referral legislation known as “Stark I” by expanding the list of designated health services to a total of 11 categories of health services. The professional groups with which we are affiliated provide one or more of these designated health services. Persons or entities found to be in violation of the Stark Law are subject to denial of payment for services furnished pursuant to an improper referral, civil monetary penalties, and exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.

Many states also have enacted laws similar in scope and purpose to the Anti-Kickback Statute and, in more limited instances, the Stark Law, that are not limited to services for which Medicare or Medicaid payment is made. In addition, most states have statutes, regulations, or professional codes that restrict a physician from accepting various kinds of remuneration in exchange for making referrals. These laws vary from state to state and have seldom been interpreted by the courts or regulatory agencies. In states that have enacted these statutes, we believe that regulatory authorities and state courts interpreting these statutes may regard federal law under the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark Law as persuasive.

We believe that our operations comply with the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Stark Law, and similar federal or state laws addressing fraud and abuse. These laws are subject to modification and changes in interpretation, and are enforced by authorities vested with broad discretion. We continually monitor developments in this area. If these laws are interpreted in a manner contrary to our interpretation or are reinterpreted or amended, or if new legislation is enacted with respect to healthcare fraud and abuse, illegal remuneration, or similar issues, we may be required to restructure our affected operations to maintain compliance with applicable law. There can be no assurances that any such restructuring will be possible or, if possible, would not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

Environmental

We are subject to various federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of human health and the environment. If an environmental regulatory agency finds any of our facilities to be in violation of environmental laws, penalties and fines may be imposed for each day of violation and the affected facility could be forced to cease operations. We could also incur other significant costs, such as cleanup costs or claims by third parties, as a result of violations of, or liabilities under, environmental laws. Although we believe that our environmental practices, including waste handling and disposal practices, are in material compliance with applicable laws, future claims or violations, or changes in environmental laws, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

State Regulation of Insurance-Related Products

Laws in each of the states (and Puerto Rico) in which we operate our HMOs, PPOs and other health insurance-related services regulate our operations including: licensing requirements, policy language describing benefits, mandated benefits and processes, entry, withdrawal or re-entry into a state or market, rate increases, delivery systems, utilization review procedures, quality assurance, complaint systems, enrollment requirements, claim payments, marketing, and advertising. The HMO, PPO, and other health insurance-related products we offer are sold under licenses issued by the applicable insurance regulators.

Our licensed insurance subsidiaries are also subject to regulation under state insurance holding company and Puerto Rico regulations. These regulations generally require, among other things, prior approval and/or notice of new products, rates, benefit changes, and certain material transactions, including dividend payments, purchases or sales of assets, intercompany agreements, and the filing of various financial and operational reports.

Any failure by us to manage acquisitions, divestitures and other significant transactions successfully may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

As part of our business strategy, we frequently engage in discussions with third parties regarding possible investments, acquisitions, divestitures, strategic alliances, joint ventures, and outsourcing transactions and often

enter into agreements relating to such transactions in order to further our business objectives. In order to pursue our acquisition strategy successfully, we must identify suitable candidates for and successfully complete transactions, some of which may be large and complex, and manage post-closing issues such as the integration of acquired companies or employees. Integration and other risks can be more pronounced for larger and more complicated transactions, transactions outside of our core business space, or if multiple transactions are pursued simultaneously. The failure to successfully integrate acquired entities and businesses or failure to produce results consistent with the financial model used in the analysis of our acquisitions may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows. If we fail to identify and complete successfully transactions that further our strategic objectives, we may be required to expend resources to develop products and technology internally. In addition, from time to time, we evaluate alternatives for our businesses that do not meet our strategic, growth or profitability objectives. Among the businesses that we are currently evaluating is our closed block of long-term care insurance policies business.  While no decision has been made with respect to any course of action, if we were to divest this business it is reasonably likely that we would have to recognize a material loss that will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. The divestiture of certain other businesses could also result, individually or in the aggregate, in the recognition of material losses and a material adverse effect on our results of operations. There can be no assurance that we will be able to complete any such divestitures on terms favorable to us.

If we fail to develop and maintain satisfactory relationships with the providers of care to our members, our business may be adversely affected.

We employ or contract with physicians, hospitals and other providers to deliver health care to our members. Our products encourage or require our customers to use these contracted providers. A key component of our integrated care delivery strategy is to increase the number of providers who share medical cost risk with us or have financial incentives to deliver quality medical services in a cost-effective manner.

In any particular market, providers could refuse to contract with us, demand higher payments, or take other actions that could result in higher health care costs for us, less desirable products for customers and members or difficulty meeting regulatory or accreditation requirements. In some markets, some providers, particularly hospitals, physician specialty groups, physician/hospital organizations, or multi-specialty physician groups, may have significant market positions and negotiating power. In addition, physician or practice management companies, which aggregate physician practices for administrative efficiency and marketing leverage, may compete directly with us. If these providers refuse to contract with us, use their market position to negotiate unfavorable contracts with us or place us at a competitive disadvantage, or do not enter into contracts with us that encourage the delivery of quality medical services in a cost-effective manner, our ability to market products or to be profitable in those areas may be adversely affected.

In some situations, we have contracts with individual or groups of primary care providers for an actuarially determined, fixed fee per month to provide a basket of required medical services to our members. This type of contract is referred to as a “capitation” contract. The inability of providers to properly manage costs under these capitation arrangements can result in the financial instability of these providers and the termination of their relationship with us. In addition, payment or other disputes between a primary care provider and specialists with whom the primary care provider contracts can result in a disruption in the provision of services to our members or a reduction in the services available to our members. The financial instability or failure of a primary care provider to pay other providers for services rendered could lead those other providers to demand payment from us even though we have made our regular fixed payments to the primary provider. There can be no assurance that providers with whom we contract will properly manage the costs of services, maintain financial solvency or avoid disputes with other providers. Any of these events may have a material adverse effect on the provision of services to our members and our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Our pharmacy business is highly competitive and subjects us to regulations in addition to those we face with our core health benefits businesses.

Our pharmacy mail order business competes with locally owned drugstores, retail drugstore chains, supermarkets, discount retailers, membership clubs, Internet companies and other mail-order and long-term care pharmacies. Our pharmacy business also subjects us to extensive federal, state, and local regulation. The practice of pharmacy is generally regulated at the state level by state boards of pharmacy. Many of the states where we deliver pharmaceuticals, including controlled substances, have laws and regulations that require out-of-state mail-order pharmacies to register with that state’s board of pharmacy. Federal agencies further regulate our pharmacy operations, requiring registration with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and individual state controlled substance authorities in order to dispense controlled substances. In addition, the FDA inspects facilities in connection with procedures to effect recalls of prescription drugs. The Federal Trade Commission also has requirements for mail-order sellers of goods. The U.S. Postal Service, or USPS, has statutory authority to restrict the transmission of drugs and medicines through the mail to a degree that may have an adverse effect on our mail-order operations. The USPS historically has exercised this statutory authority only with respect to controlled substances. If the USPS restricts our ability to deliver drugs through the mail, alternative means of delivery are available to us. However, alternative means of delivery could be significantly more expensive. The Department of Transportation has regulatory authority to impose restrictions on drugs inserted in the stream of commerce. These regulations generally do not apply to the USPS and its operations. In addition, we are subject to CMS rules regarding the administration of our PDP plans and intercompany pricing between our PDP plans and our pharmacy business.

We are also subject to risks inherent in the packaging and distribution of pharmaceuticals and other health care products, and the application of state laws related to the operation of internet and mail-order pharmacies. The failure to adhere to these laws and regulations may expose us to civil and criminal penalties.

Changes in the prescription drug industry pricing benchmarks may adversely affect our financial performance.

Contracts in the prescription drug industry generally use certain published benchmarks to establish pricing for prescription drugs. These benchmarks include average wholesale price, which is referred to as “AWP,” average selling price, which is referred to as “ASP,” and wholesale acquisition cost. It is uncertain whether payors, pharmacy providers, pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, and others in the prescription drug industry will continue to utilize AWP as it has previously been calculated, or whether other pricing benchmarks will be adopted for establishing prices within the industry. Legislation may lead to changes in the pricing for Medicare and Medicaid programs. Regulators have conducted investigations into the use of AWP for federal program payment, and whether the use of AWP has inflated drug expenditures by the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Federal and state proposals have sought to change the basis for calculating payment of certain drugs by the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Adoption of ASP in lieu of AWP as the measure for determining payment by Medicare or Medicaid programs for the drugs sold in our mail-order pharmacy business may reduce the revenues and gross margins of this business which may result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

If we do not continue to earn and retain purchase discounts and volume rebates from pharmaceutical manufacturers at current levels, our gross margins may decline.

We have contractual relationships with pharmaceutical manufacturers or wholesalers that provide us with purchase discounts and volume rebates on certain prescription drugs dispensed through our mail-order and specialty pharmacies. These discounts and volume rebates are generally passed on to clients in the form of steeper price discounts. Changes in existing federal or state laws or regulations or in their interpretation by courts and agencies or the adoption of new laws or regulations relating to patent term extensions, and purchase discount and volume rebate arrangements with pharmaceutical manufacturers, may reduce the discounts or volume rebates we receive and materially adversely impact our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows.

Our ability to obtain funds from certain of our licensed subsidiaries is restricted by state insurance regulations.

Because we operate as a holding company, we are dependent upon dividends and administrative expense reimbursements from our subsidiaries to fund the obligations of Humana Inc., our parent company. Certain of our insurance subsidiaries operate in states that regulate the payment of dividends, loans, administrative expense reimbursements or other cash transfers to Humana Inc., and require minimum levels of equity as well as limit investments to approved securities. The amount of dividends that may be paid to Humana Inc. by these insurance subsidiaries, without prior approval by state regulatory authorities, or ordinary dividends, is limited based on the entity's level of statutory income and statutory capital and surplus. In most states, prior notification is provided before paying a dividend even if approval is not required. Actual dividends paid may vary due to consideration of excess statutory capital and surplus and expected future surplus requirements related to, for example, premium volume and product mix. Dividends from our non-insurance companies such as in our Healthcare Services segment are generally not restricted by Departments of Insurance. In the event that we are unable to provide sufficient capital to fund the obligations of Humana Inc., our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows may be materially adversely affected.

Downgrades in our debt ratings, should they occur, may adversely affect our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Claims paying ability, financial strength, and debt ratings by recognized rating organizations are an increasingly important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies. Ratings information is broadly disseminated and generally used throughout the industry. We believe our claims paying ability and financial strength ratings are an important factor in marketing our products to certain of our customers. In addition, our debt ratings impact both the cost and availability of future borrowings. Each of the rating agencies reviews its ratings periodically and there can be no assurance that current ratings will be maintained in the future. Our ratings reflect each rating agency’s opinion of our financial strength, operating performance, and ability to meet our debt obligations or obligations to policyholders, but are not evaluations directed toward the protection of investors in our common stock and should not be relied upon as such.

Historically, rating agencies take action to lower ratings due to, among other things, perceived concerns about liquidity or solvency, the competitive environment in the insurance industry, the inherent uncertainty in determining reserves for future claims, the outcome of pending litigation and regulatory investigations, and possible changes in the methodology or criteria applied by the rating agencies. In addition, rating agencies have come under regulatory and public scrutiny over the ratings assigned to various fixed-income products. As a result, rating agencies may (i) become more conservative in their methodology and criteria, (ii) increase the frequency or scope of their credit reviews, (iii) request additional information from the companies that they rate, or (iv) adjust upward the capital and other requirements employed in the rating agency models for maintenance of certain ratings levels.

We believe that some of our customers place importance on our credit ratings, and we may lose customers and compete less successfully if our ratings were to be downgraded. In addition, our credit ratings affect our ability to obtain investment capital on favorable terms. If our credit ratings were to be lowered, our cost of borrowing likely would increase, our sales and earnings could decrease, and our results of operations, financial position, and cash flows may be materially adversely affected.

The securities and credit markets may experience volatility and disruption, which may adversely affect our business.

Volatility or disruption in the securities and credit markets could impact our investment portfolio. We evaluate our investment securities for impairment on a quarterly basis. This review is subjective and requires a high degree of judgment. For the purpose of determining gross realized gains and losses, the cost of investment securities sold is based upon specific identification. For debt securities held, we recognize an impairment loss in income when the fair value of the debt security is less than the carrying value and we have the intent to sell the debt security or it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of our amortized cost basis, or

if a credit loss has occurred. When we do not intend to sell a security in an unrealized loss position, potential other-than-temporary impairments are considered using variety of factors, including the length of time and extent to which the fair value has been less than cost; adverse conditions specifically related to the industry, geographic area or financial condition of the issuer or underlying collateral of a security; payment structure of the security; changes in credit rating of the security by the rating agencies; the volatility of the fair value changes; and changes in fair value of the security after the balance sheet date. For debt securities, we take into account expectations of relevant market and economic data. We continuously review our investment portfolios and there is a continuing risk that declines in fair value may occur and additional material realized losses from sales or other-than-temporary impairments may be recorded in future periods.

We believe our cash balances, investment securities, operating cash flows, and funds available under our credit agreement or from other public or private financing sources, taken together, provide adequate resources to fund ongoing operating and regulatory requirements, acquisitions, future expansion opportunities, and capital expenditures for at least the next twelve months, as well as to refinance or repay debt, and repurchase shares. However, continuing adverse securities and credit market conditions may significantly affect the availability of credit. While there is no assurance in the current economic environment, we have no reason to believe the lenders participating in our credit agreement will not be willing and able to provide financing in accordance with the terms of the agreement.

Our access to additional credit will depend on a variety of factors such as market conditions, the general availability of credit, both to the overall market and our industry, our credit ratings and debt capacity, as well as the possibility that customers or lenders could develop a negative perception of our long or short-term financial prospects. Similarly, our access to funds could be limited if regulatory authorities or rating agencies were to take negative actions against us. If a combination of these factors were to occur, we may not be able to successfully obtain additional financing on favorable terms or at all.

Part II, Item 1A in Humana's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2015 and filed with the SEC on July 29, 2015

Item 1A.     Risk Factors

Except as set forth below, there have been no changes to the risk factors included in our 2014 Form 10-K:

Risks Relating to the Proposed Merger with Aetna

The merger with Aetna is subject to various closing conditions, including governmental, regulatory and stockholder approvals as well as other uncertainties and there can be no assurances as to whether and when it may be completed.

On July 2, 2015, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (which we refer to as the “Merger Agreement”), with Aetna Inc. (or “Aetna”), Echo Merger Sub, Inc. (or “Sub 1”) and Echo Merger Sub, LLC (or “Sub 2”), each a wholly owned subsidiary of Aetna. Under the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, Sub 1 will merge with and into us (the “Merger”). In the Merger, each outstanding share of our common stock will be converted into the right to receive (i) 0.8375 of a share of Aetna common stock and (ii) $125 in cash without interest, subject to any required withholding taxes. Immediately after the Merger, we (as the surviving corporation in the Merger) will be merged with and into Sub 2, with Sub 2 remaining as the surviving entity of that merger and as a wholly owned subsidiary of Aetna, to be renamed Humana LLC. The Merger is expected to close in the second half of 2016.

Consummation of the Merger is subject to customary closing conditions, a number of which are not within our or Aetna’s control, and it is possible that such conditions may prevent, delay or otherwise materially adversely affect the completion of the Merger. These conditions include, among other things, (i) approval of the holders of our outstanding shares of common stock entitled to vote on the Merger, (ii) approval of the holders of Aetna outstanding shares to the issuance of Aetna common stock in the Merger, (iii) the expiration or termination of the applicable

waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended, and the receipt of necessary approvals under state insurance and healthcare laws and regulations and pursuant to certain licenses of certain of Humana’s subsidiaries, (iv) the absence of legal restraints and prohibitions on the consummation of the Merger, (v) the effectiveness of the registration statement in respect of the Aetna common stock to be issued in the Merger, (vi) listing of the Aetna common stock to be issued in the Merger on the New York Stock Exchange, (vii) subject to the relevant standards set forth in the Merger Agreement, the accuracy of the representations and warranties made by each party, (viii) material compliance by each party with its covenants in the Merger Agreement, and (viii) no “Company Material Adverse Effect” with respect to us and no “Parent Material Adverse Effect” with respect to Aetna, in each case since the execution of and as defined in the Merger Agreement. In addition, Aetna’s obligation to consummate the Merger is subject to (x) the condition that the required regulatory approvals do not impose any condition that, individually or in the aggregate, would reasonably be expected to have a “Regulatory Material Adverse Effect” (as such term is defined in the Merger Agreement), and (b) the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, has not imposed any sanctions with respect to our Medicare Advantage business that, individually or in the aggregate, is or would reasonably be expected to be material and adverse to us and its subsidiaries, taken as a whole. We cannot predict with certainty whether and when any of the required closing conditions will be satisfied or if another uncertainty may arise.

If the Merger does not receive, or timely receive, the required regulatory approvals and clearances, or if any regulatory agencies impose certain conditions relating to the required regulatory approvals that would reasonably be expected to have a "Regulatory Material Adverse Effect", or if an event occurs that delays or prevents the Merger, such failure or delay to complete the Merger may cause uncertainty or other negative consequences that may materially and adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, cash flows and the price per share for our common stock.

The Merger Agreement limits our ability to pursue alternative transactions to the proposed Merger.

The Merger Agreement prohibits us from initiating, soliciting, knowingly encouraging, knowingly facilitating or entering into discussions or negotiations with any third party regarding alternative acquisition proposals. This prohibition limits our ability to affirmatively seek offers from other possible acquirers that may be superior to the pending Merger, although we are permitted, subject to compliance with certain procedures specified in the Merger Agreement, to respond to certain unsolicited proposals from third parties to allow our Board of Directors to comply with its fiduciary duties. If we receive an unsolicited proposal from a third party that our Board of Directors determines is a superior proposal (as defined in the Merger Agreement), our Board of Directors may withdraw or otherwise change its recommendation of the Merger. However, we do not have the ability to terminate the Merger Agreement in order to accept a superior proposal. If our Board of Directors withdraws or otherwise changes its recommendation of the Merger, or if we materially breach our obligation not to solicit alternative acquisition proposals, Aetna may terminate the Merger Agreement and we would be contractually obligated to pay a termination fee of $1.314 billion to Aetna. This termination fee may make it less likely that a third party will make an alternative acquisition proposal for us.

The number of shares of Aetna common stock that our stockholders will receive in the Merger is based on a fixed exchange ratio. Because the market price of Aetna’s common stock will fluctuate, our stockholders cannot be certain of the value of the portion of the merger consideration to be paid in Aetna common stock.

Upon completion of the Merger, each outstanding share of our common stock will be converted into the right to receive (i) 0.8375 of a share of Aetna common stock and (ii) $125 in cash without interest, subject to any required withholding taxes. The exchange ratio for determining the number of shares of Aetna common stock that our stockholders will receive in the Merger is fixed and will not be adjusted for changes in the market price of Aetna’s common stock, which will likely fluctuate before and after the completion of the Merger. Fluctuations in the value of Aetna’s common stock could result from changes in the business, operations or prospects of Aetna prior to or following the closing of the Merger, regulatory considerations, general market and economic conditions and other factors both within and beyond the control of us or Aetna. In addition, the Merger is expected to be completed a considerable amount of time after the date of our special meeting of stockholders to consider and vote on the

Merger. As such, at the time of our special meeting of stockholders to consider and vote on the Merger, our stockholders will not have known the value of the Aetna share consideration that they will receive in the Merger for each of our common shares.

While the Merger is pending, we are subject to business uncertainties and contractual restrictions that could materially adversely affect our results of operations, financial position and cash flows or result in a loss of employees, customers, members or suppliers.

The Merger Agreement includes restrictions on the conduct of our business prior to the completion or termination of the Merger, generally requiring us to conduct our business in the ordinary course and subjecting us to a variety of specified limitations absent Aetna’s prior written consent. We may find that these and other contractual restrictions in the Merger Agreement may delay or prevent us from responding, or limit our ability to respond, effectively to competitive pressures, industry developments and future business opportunities that may arise during such period, even if our management believes they may be advisable. The pendency of the proposed Merger may also divert management’s attention and our resources from ongoing business and operations.

Our employees, customers, members and suppliers may experience uncertainties about the effects of the Merger. In connection with the pending Merger, it is possible that some customers, members, suppliers and other parties with whom we have a business relationship may delay or defer certain business decisions or might decide to seek to terminate, change or renegotiate their relationship with us as a result of the Merger. Similarly, current and prospective employees may experience uncertainty about their future roles with us following completion of the Merger, which may materially adversely affect our ability to attract and retain key employees. If any of these effects were to occur, it could materially and adversely impact our results of operations, financial position, cash flows and the price per share for our common stock.

If the Merger Agreement is terminated, we may, under certain circumstances, be obligated to pay a termination fee to Aetna.

If the Merger Agreement is terminated, in certain circumstances, we would be required to pay a termination fee of $1.314 billion to Aetna. If the Merger Agreement is terminated under such circumstances, the termination fee we may be required to pay under the Merger Agreement may require us to use available cash that would have otherwise been available for general corporate purposes and other matters.

Failure to consummate the Merger could negatively impact our results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

If the Merger is not consummated, our ongoing businesses may be materially and adversely affected and, we will not have realized any of the potential benefits of having consummated the transaction, and we will be subject to a number of risks, including the following:

• matters relating to the proposed Merger (including integration planning) may require substantial commitments of time and resources by our management, which could otherwise have been devoted to other opportunities that may have been beneficial to us;

• the Merger Agreement includes restrictions on the conduct of our business prior to the completion or termination of the Merger, generally requiring us to conduct our business in the ordinary course and subjecting us to a variety of specified limitations absent Aetna's prior written consent. We may find that these and other contractual restrictions in the Merger Agreement may delay or prevent us from responding, or limit our ability to respond, effectively to competitive pressures, industry developments and future business opportunities that may arise during such period, even if our management believes they may be advisable. The pendency of the proposed Merger may also divert management’s attention and our resources from ongoing business and operations;

• we may be required to pay a termination fee to Aetna and would have incurred expenses relating to the Merger; and

• we also could be subject to litigation related to our failure to consummate the Merger or to perform our obligations under the Merger Agreement.

If the Merger is not consummated, these risks may materially and adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, cash flows and the price per share for our common stock.