BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE 10-Q 2012 Q2 Quarterly report

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

(Mark One)

þ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

      FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2012

OR

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

      FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM                 TO                

Commission file number: 33-03094

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Connecticut	06-0566090
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
1300 Hall Boulevard, Bloomfield, Connecticut	06002
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

(860) 656-3000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes þ    No ¨

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

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

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

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

At August 10, 2012, 34,595,317 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $2.50 par value per share, were outstanding, of which 30,000,000 shares were owned directly by MetLife, Inc. and the remaining 4,595,317 shares were owned by MetLife Investors Group, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.

REDUCED DISCLOSURE FORMAT

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

Table of Contents

	Page
Part I — Financial Information
Item 1.     Financial Statements(at June 30, 2012 (Unaudited) and December  31, 2011 and for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June  30, 2012 and 2011 (Unaudited))	5
Interim Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets	5
Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income	6
Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity	7
Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows	8
Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	9
Item 2.     Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	97
Item 4.    Controls and Procedures	105
Part II — Other Information	106
Item 1.    Legal Proceedings	106
Item 1A. Risk Factors	107
Item 6.    Exhibits	114
Signatures	115
Exhibit Index	E-1

2

As used in this Form 10-Q, “MICC,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, a Connecticut corporation incorporated in 1863, and its subsidiaries, including MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company (“MLI-USA”). MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”).

Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, may contain or incorporate by reference information that includes or is based upon forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements give expectations or forecasts of future events. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They use words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe” and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with a discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these include statements relating to future actions, prospective services or products, future performance or results of current and anticipated services or products, sales efforts, expenses, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, trends in operations and financial results.

Any or all forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Many such factors will be important in determining the actual future results of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries. These statements are based on current expectations and the current economic environment. They involve a number of risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. These statements are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. Risks, uncertainties, and other factors that might cause such differences include the risks, uncertainties and other factors identified in MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). These factors include: (1) difficult conditions in the global capital markets; (2) concerns over U.S. fiscal policy and the “fiscal cliff” in the U.S., as well as rating agency downgrades of U.S. Treasury securities; (3) uncertainty about the effectiveness of governmental and regulatory actions to stabilize the financial system, the imposition of fees relating thereto, or the promulgation of additional regulations; (4) increased volatility and disruption of the capital and credit markets, which may affect our ability to seek financing or access MetLife’s credit facilities; (5) impact of comprehensive financial services regulation reform, including regulation of MetLife by the Federal Reserve, on us; (6) exposure to financial and capital market risk, including as a result of the disruption in Europe and possible withdrawal of one or more countries from the Euro zone; (7) changes in general economic conditions, including the performance of financial markets and interest rates, which may affect our ability to raise capital, generate fee income and market-related revenue and finance statutory reserve requirements and may require us to pledge collateral or make payments related to declines in value of specified assets; (8) potential liquidity and other risks resulting from our participation in a securities lending program and other transactions; (9) investment losses and defaults, and changes to investment valuations; (10) impairments of goodwill and realized losses or market value impairments to illiquid assets; (11) defaults on our mortgage loans; (12) the defaults or deteriorating credit of other financial institutions that could adversely affect us; (13) our ability to address unforeseen liabilities, asset impairments, or rating actions arising from acquisitions or dispositions and to successfully integrate and manage the growth of acquired businesses with minimal disruption; (14) economic, political, legal, currency and other risks relating to our international operations, including with respect to fluctuations of exchange rates; (15) downgrades in our claims paying ability, financial strength ratings or MetLife’s credit ratings; (16) ineffectiveness of MetLife’s risk management policies and procedures; (17) availability and effectiveness of reinsurance or indemnification arrangements, as well as default or failure of counterparties to perform; (18) discrepancies between actual claims experience and assumptions used in setting prices for our products and establishing the liabilities for our obligations for future policy benefits and claims; (19) catastrophe losses; (20) heightened competition, including with respect to pricing, entry of new competitors, consolidation of distributors, the development of new products by new and existing competitors, distribution of amounts available under U.S. government programs, and for personnel;

3

(21) unanticipated changes in industry trends; (22) changes in assumptions related to investment valuations, deferred policy acquisition costs, deferred sales inducements, value of business acquired or goodwill; (23) changes in accounting standards, practices and/or policies; (24) increased expenses relating to pension and postretirement benefit plans for employees and retirees of MetLife and its subsidiaries, as well as health care and other employee benefits; (25) exposure to losses related to variable annuity guarantee benefits, including from significant and sustained downturns or extreme volatility in equity markets, reduced interest rates, unanticipated policyholder behavior, mortality or longevity, and the adjustment for nonperformance risk; (26) adverse results or other consequences from litigation, arbitration or regulatory investigations; (27) inability to protect our intellectual property rights or claims of infringement of the intellectual property rights of others; (28) discrepancies between actual experience and assumptions used in establishing liabilities related to other contingencies or obligations; (29) regulatory, legislative or tax changes that may affect the cost of, or demand for, our products or services, or increase the cost or administrative burdens of providing benefits to the employees who conduct our business; (30) the effects of business disruption or economic contraction due to disasters such as terrorist attacks, cyberattacks, other hostilities, or natural catastrophes, including any related impact on our disaster recovery systems, cyber- or other information security systems and management continuity planning; (31) the effectiveness of our programs and practices in avoiding giving our associates incentives to take excessive risks; and (32) other risks and uncertainties described from time to time in MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s filings with the SEC.

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut does not undertake any obligation to publicly correct or update any forward-looking statement if MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut later becomes aware that such statement is not likely to be achieved. Please consult any further disclosures MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut makes on related subjects in reports to the SEC.

Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts

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

4

Part I — Financial Information

Item 1.    Financial Statements

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Interim Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

June 30, 2012 (Unaudited) and December 31, 2011

(In millions, except share and per share data)

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
Assets
Investments:
Fixed maturity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value (amortized cost: $46,156 and $44,215, respectively)	$	50,408	$	47,781
Equity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value (cost: $281 and $295, respectively)		267		252
Other securities, at estimated fair value		50		3,665
Mortgage loans (net of valuation allowances of $42 and $61, respectively; includes $2,932 and $3,138, respectively, at estimated fair value, relating to variable interest entities)		9,395		9,800
Policy loans		1,232		1,203
Real estate and real estate joint ventures		482		503
Other limited partnership interests		1,800		1,696
Short-term investments, principally at estimated fair value		2,525		2,578
Other invested assets, principally at estimated fair value		3,282		3,354
Total investments		69,441		70,832
Cash and cash equivalents, principally at estimated fair value		968		745
Accrued investment income (includes $14 and $14, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)		566		568
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables		20,224		20,223
Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired		3,972		4,188
Current income tax recoverable		145		140
Goodwill		953		953
Other assets		817		856
Separate account assets		79,608		72,559
Total assets	$	176,694	$	171,064
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Liabilities
Future policy benefits	$	26,063	$	25,483
Policyholder account balances		37,616		42,075
Other policy-related balances		3,089		2,989
Payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions		9,257		8,079
Long-term debt (includes $2,849 and $3,065, respectively, at estimated fair value, relating to variable interest entities)		3,641		3,857
Deferred income tax liability		1,331		935
Other liabilities (includes $14 and $14, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)		5,804		5,384
Separate account liabilities		79,608		72,559
Total liabilities		166,409		161,361
Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (Note 9)
Stockholders’ Equity
Common stock, par value $2.50 per share; 40,000,000 shares authorized; 34,595,317 shares issued and outstanding at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011		86		86
Additional paid-in capital		6,673		6,673
Retained earnings		1,343		1,173
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		2,183		1,771
Total stockholders’ equity		10,285		9,703
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	176,694	$	171,064

See accompanying notes to the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

5

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

For the Three Months and Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 (Unaudited)

(In millions)

	Three Months				Six Months
	Ended				Ended
	June 30,				June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
Revenues
Premiums	$	406	$	641	$	786	$	777
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		575		493		1,119		948
Net investment income		656		795		1,548		1,581
Other revenues		125		131		248		261
Net investment gains (losses):
Other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities		(18)		(21)		(31)		(30)
Other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities transferred to other comprehensive income (loss)		4		6		2		4
Other net investment gains (losses)		85		(12)		104		(15)
Total net investment gains (losses)		71		(27)		75		(41)
Net derivative gains (losses)		582		133		143		(23)
Total revenues		2,415		2,166		3,919		3,503
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		636		818		1,225		1,145
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		167		304		606		591
Other expenses		887		739		1,344		1,254
Total expenses		1,690		1,861		3,175		2,990
Income (loss) before provision for income tax		725		305		744		513
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		227		97		227		154
Net income	$	498	$	208	$	517	$	359
Comprehensive income (loss)	$	1,000	$	555	$	872	$	656

See accompanying notes to the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

6

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity

For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 (Unaudited)

(In millions)

							Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
	Common Stock		Additional Paid-in Capital		Retained Earnings		Net Unrealized Investment   Gains (Losses)		Other-Than- Temporary Impairments		Foreign Currency Translation   Adjustments		Total Equity
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	86	$	6,673	$	1,173	$	1,984	$	(74)	$	(139)	$	9,703
Dividend of subsidiary (Note 2)						(347)		(2)				59		(290)
Net income						517								517
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax								335		3		17		355
Balance at June 30, 2012	$	86	$	6,673	$	1,343	$	2,317	$	(71)	$	(63)	$	10,285
							Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
	Common Stock		Additional Paid-in Capital		Retained Earnings		Net Unrealized Investment   Gains (Losses)		Other-Than- Temporary Impairments		Foreign Currency Translation   Adjustments		Total Equity
Balance at December 31, 2010	$	86	$	6,719	$	934	$	388	$	(51)	$	(125)	$	7,951
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle, net of income tax (Note 1)						(477)		5						(472)
Balance at January 1, 2011		86		6,719		457		393		(51)		(125)		7,479
Return of capital				(52)										(52)
Net income						359								359
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax								285		(8)		20		297
Balance at June 30, 2011	$	86	$	6,667	$	816	$	678	$	(59)	$	(105)	$	8,083

See accompanying notes to the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

7

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Interim Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 (Unaudited)

(In millions)

	Six Months
	Ended
	June 30,
	2012		2011
Net cash provided by operating activities	$	870	$	403
Cash flows from investing activities
Sales, maturities and repayments of:
Fixed maturity securities		5,321		8,910
Equity securities		25		131
Mortgage loans		795		517
Real estate and real estate joint ventures		21		6
Other limited partnership interests		116		171
Purchases of:
Fixed maturity securities		(7,147)		(10,303)
Equity securities		(17)		(6)
Mortgage loans		(363)		(387)
Real estate and real estate joint ventures		(8)		(48)
Other limited partnership interests		(156)		(176)
Cash received in connection with freestanding derivatives		365		286
Cash paid in connection with freestanding derivatives		(186)		(250)
Dividend of subsidiary		(53)		—
Net change in policy loans		(29)		—
Net change in short-term investments		(107)		(972)
Net change in other invested assets		(28)		(250)
Other, net		—		1
Net cash used in investing activities		(1,451)		(2,370)
Cash flows from financing activities
Policyholder account balances:
Deposits		8,438		10,207
Withdrawals		(8,594)		(8,858)
Net change in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions		1,178		98
Long-term debt repaid		(207)		(170)
Financing element on certain derivative instruments		(13)		(23)
Net cash provided by financing activities		802		1,254
Effect of change in foreign currency exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents balances		2		5
Change in cash and cash equivalents		223		(708)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period		745		1,928
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	968	$	1,220
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:
Net cash paid during the period for:
Interest	$	118	$	221
Income tax	$	68	$	20
Non-cash transactions during the period:
Disposal of subsidiary (1):
Assets disposed	$	4,857	$	—
Liabilities disposed		(4,567)		—
Net assets disposed		290		—
Cash disposed		(53)		—
Dividend of interests in subsidiary		(237)		—
Loss on dividend of interests in subsidiary	$	—	$	—

(1) See Note 2.

See accompanying notes to the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

8

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)

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

Business

“MICC” or the “Company” refers to MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, a Connecticut corporation incorporated in 1863, and its subsidiaries, including MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company (“MLI-USA”). MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”). The Company offers individual annuities, individual life insurance, and institutional protection and asset accumulation products.

The Company is organized into two segments: Retail and Corporate Benefit Funding. See Note 12 for further information on the reorganization of the Company’s segments in the first quarter of 2012, which was retrospectively applied.

Basis of Presentation

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported in the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

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

The accompanying interim condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries, as well as partnerships and joint ventures in which the Company has control, and variable interest entities (“VIEs”) for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

The Company uses the equity method of accounting for investments in equity securities in which it has a significant influence or more than a 20% interest and for real estate joint ventures and other limited partnership interests in which it has more than a minor ownership interest or more than a minor influence over the joint venture’s or partnership’s operations, but does not have a controlling interest and is not the primary beneficiary. The Company uses the cost method of accounting for investments in real estate joint ventures and other limited partnership interests in which it has a minor equity investment and virtually no influence over the joint venture’s or the partnership’s operations.

Certain amounts in the prior year periods’ interim condensed consolidated financial statements and related footnotes thereto have been reclassified to conform with the 2012 presentation as discussed throughout the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. See “— Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements” for discussion of accounting pronouncements adopted in the first quarter of 2012, which were retrospectively applied.

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

9

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The accompanying interim condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments (including normal recurring adjustments) necessary to present fairly the consolidated financial position of the Company at June 30, 2012, its consolidated results of operations and comprehensive income for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, its consolidated statements of stockholders’ equity for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, and its consolidated statements of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, in conformity with GAAP. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of full year performance. The December 31, 2011 consolidated balance sheet data was derived from audited consolidated financial statements included in MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as revised by MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on May 31, 2012 (as revised, the “2011 Annual Report”), which include all disclosures required by GAAP. Therefore, these interim condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of the Company included in the 2011 Annual Report.

Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

Effective January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding comprehensive income that defers the effective date pertaining to reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The amendments in this guidance are being made to allow the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) time to re-deliberate whether to present on the face of the financial statements the effects of reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the components of net income and other comprehensive income for all periods presented. All other requirements in the new comprehensive income standard are not affected by this guidance, including the requirement to report comprehensive income either in a single continuous financial statement or in two separate but consecutive financial statements on an annual basis.

On January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding comprehensive income, which was retrospectively applied, that provides companies with the option to present the total of comprehensive income, components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements in annual financial statements. The objective of the standard is to increase the prominence of items reported in other comprehensive income and to facilitate convergence of GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). The standard eliminates the option to present components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. The amendments in this guidance do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified in net income. The Company adopted the two-statement approach for annual financial statements.

Effective January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance on goodwill impairment testing that simplifies how an entity tests goodwill for impairment. This new guidance allows an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value as a basis for determining whether it needs to perform the quantitative two-step goodwill impairment test. Only if an entity determines, based on qualitative assessment, that it is more likely than not that a reporting unit’s fair value is less than its carrying value will it be required to calculate the fair value of the reporting unit. The adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Effective January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding fair value measurements that establishes common requirements for measuring fair value and for disclosing information about fair value measurements in accordance with GAAP and IFRS. Some of the amendments clarify the FASB’s intent on the

10

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

application of existing fair value measurement requirements. Other amendments change a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or for disclosing information about fair value measurements. The adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. See also expanded disclosures in Note 5.

Effective January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding effective control in repurchase agreements. The guidance removes from the assessment of effective control the criterion requiring the transferor to have the ability to repurchase or redeem the financial assets. The adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

On January 1, 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding accounting for deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”), which was retrospectively applied. The guidance specifies that only costs related directly to successful acquisition of new or renewal contracts can be capitalized as DAC; all other acquisition-related costs must be expensed as incurred. Under the new guidance, advertising costs may only be included in DAC if the capitalization criteria in the direct-response advertising guidance in Subtopic 340-20, Other Assets and Deferred Costs—Capitalized Advertising Costs, are met. As a result, certain direct marketing, sales manager compensation and administrative costs previously capitalized by the Company will no longer be deferred.

The following table presents the effects of the retrospective application of the adoption of such new accounting guidance to the Company’s previously reported consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income:

	Three Months Ended June 30, 2011							Six Months Ended June 30, 2011
	As Previously   Reported		Adjustment			As Adjusted		As Previously   Reported		Adjustment			As Adjusted
	(In millions)
Revenues
Net investment income	$	796	$	(1	)	$	795	$	1,584	$	(3	)	$	1,581
Expenses
Other expenses	$	729	$	10		$	739	$	1,233	$	21		$	1,254
Income (loss) before provision for income tax	$	316	$	(11	)	$	305	$	537	$	(24	)	$	513
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)	$	100	$	(3	)	$	97	$	161	$	(7	)	$	154
Net income (loss)	$	216	$	(8	)	$	208	$	376	$	(17	)	$	359

The following table presents the effects of the retrospective application of the adoption of such new accounting guidance to the Company’s previously reported consolidated statement of cash flows:

	Six Months Ended June 30, 2011
	As Previously   Reported		Adjustment		As Adjusted
	(In millions)
Net cash provided by operating activities	$	406	$	(3)	$	403
Net change in other invested assets	$	(253)	$	3	$	(250)

11

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Future Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

In December 2011, the FASB issued new guidance regarding balance sheet offsetting disclosures (Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2011-11,Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities), effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods within those annual periods. The guidance should be applied retrospectively for all comparative periods presented. The amendments in ASU 2011-11 require an entity to disclose information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of its financial statements to understand the effects of those arrangements on its financial position. Entities are required to disclose both gross information and net information about both instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. The objective of ASU 2011-11 is to facilitate comparison between those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of GAAP and those entities that prepare their financial statements on the basis of IFRS. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

In December 2011, the FASB issued new guidance regarding derecognition of in substance real estate (ASU 2011-10, Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360): Derecognition of in Substance Real Estate—a Scope Clarification (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force), effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning on or after June 15, 2012. The amendments should be applied prospectively to deconsolidation events occurring after the effective date. Under the amendments in ASU 2011-10, when a parent ceases to have a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary that is in substance real estate as a result of a default on the subsidiary’s nonrecourse debt, the reporting entity should apply the guidance in Subtopic 360-20:Property, Plant, and Equipment—Real Estate Sales to determine whether it should derecognize the in substance real estate. Generally, a reporting entity would not satisfy the requirements to derecognize in substance real estate before the legal transfer of the real estate to the lender and the extinguishment of the related nonrecourse indebtedness. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.

2.  Disposition

During June 2012, the Company dividended all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of its wholly-owned subsidiary, MetLife Europe Limited (“MetLife Europe”) to MetLife. The net book value of MetLife Europe at the time of the dividend was $290 million which was recorded as a dividend of retained earnings of $347 million and an increase to other comprehensive income of $57 million, net of income tax. As of the date of dividend, the Company no longer consolidates the assets, liabilities and operations of MetLife Europe. The net income of MetLife Europe was not material for the periods prior to dividend. MetLife Europe was reported in Corporate & Other. See Note 12 for a discussion of Corporate & Other.

12

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

3.  Investments

Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities Available-for-Sale

Presented below is certain information about fixed maturity and equity securities for the periods shown. The unrealized loss amounts presented below include the noncredit loss component of other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) losses:

	June 30, 2012
	Cost or Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized						Estimated Fair Value		% of Total
			Gains		Temporary Losses		OTTI Losses
					(In millions)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	16,703	$	1,757	$	166	$	—��	$	18,294		36.3	%
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		7,832		1,325		1		—		9,156		18.2
Foreign corporate securities		7,842		624		61		—		8,405		16.7
Residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”)		6,270		359		111		126		6,392		12.7
Commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”)		2,337		124		11		—		2,450		4.8
State and political subdivision securities		1,998		309		29		—		2,278		4.5
Asset-backed securities (“ABS”)		2,100		51		29		—		2,122		4.2
Foreign government securities		1,074		240		3		—		1,311		2.6
Total fixed maturity securities	$	46,156	$	4,789	$	411	$	126	$	50,408		100.0	%
Equity Securities:
Common stock	$	137	$	10	$	4	$	—	$	143		53.6	%
Non-redeemable preferred stock		144		5		25		—		124		46.4
Total equity securities	$	281	$	15	$	29	$	—	$	267		100.0	%

	December 31, 2011
	Cost or Amortized Cost		Gross Unrealized						Estimated Fair Value		% of Total
			Gains		Temporary Losses		OTTI Losses
	(In millions)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	16,018	$	1,550	$	229	$	—	$	17,339		36.3	%
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		6,832		1,217		1		—		8,048		16.8
Foreign corporate securities		7,958		649		114		—		8,493		17.8
RMBS		6,478		330		189		125		6,494		13.6
CMBS		2,128		115		16		—		2,227		4.7
State and political subdivision securities		1,891		222		58		—		2,055		4.3
ABS		1,875		45		42		—		1,878		3.9
Foreign government securities		1,035		215		3		—		1,247		2.6
Total fixed maturity securities	$	44,215	$	4,343	$	652	$	125	$	47,781		100.0	%
Equity Securities:
Common stock	$	148	$	11	$	13	$	—	$	146		57.9	%
Non-redeemable preferred stock		147		3		44		—		106		42.1
Total equity securities	$	295	$	14	$	57	$	—	$	252		100.0	%

13

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The Company held non-income producing fixed maturity securities with an estimated fair value of $22 million and $5 million with unrealized gains (losses) of ($1) million and ($2) million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

Concentrations of Credit Risk — Summary.  The Company was not exposed to any concentrations of credit risk of any single issuer within its fixed maturity securities and equity securities greater than 10% of the Company’s stockholders’ equity, other than U.S. Treasury and agency securities summarized in the table below at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	Carrying Value (1)
	(In millions)
U.S. Treasury and agency securities included in:
Fixed maturity securities	$	9,156	$	8,048
Short-term investments		2,282		2,186
Cash equivalents		293		108
Total U.S. Treasury and agency securities	$	11,731	$	10,342

(1) Represents estimated fair value for fixed maturity securities, and for short-term investments and cash equivalents, estimated fair value or amortized cost, which approximates estimated fair value.

Maturities of Fixed Maturity Securities. The amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities, by contractual maturity date (excluding scheduled sinking funds), were as follows at:

	June 30, 2012				December 31, 2011
	Amortized Cost		Estimated Fair Value		Amortized Cost		Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Due in one year or less	$	3,358	$	3,381	$	2,946	$	2,970
Due after one year through five years		9,932		10,366		8,648		9,022
Due after five years through ten years		7,836		8,653		7,905		8,606
Due after ten years		14,323		17,044		14,235		16,584
Subtotal		35,449		39,444		33,734		37,182
RMBS, CMBS and ABS		10,707		10,964		10,481		10,599
Total fixed maturity securities	$	46,156	$	50,408	$	44,215	$	47,781

Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities due to the exercise of call or prepayment options. Fixed maturity securities not due at a single maturity date have been included in the above table in the year of final contractual maturity. RMBS, CMBS and ABS are shown separately in the table, as they are not due at a single maturity.

Evaluating Available-for-Sale Securities for Other-Than-Temporary Impairment

As described more fully in Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report, the Company performs a regular evaluation, on a security-by-security basis, of its available-for-sale

14

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

securities holdings, including fixed maturity securities, equity securities and perpetual hybrid securities, in accordance with its impairment policy in order to evaluate whether such investments are other-than-temporarily impaired.

Net Unrealized Investment Gains (Losses)

The components of net unrealized investment gains (losses), included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), were as follows at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities	$	4,370	$	3,690
Fixed maturity securities with noncredit OTTI losses in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		(126)		(125)
Total fixed maturity securities		4,244		3,565
Equity securities		(10)		(41)
Derivatives		331		239
Short-term investments		(3)		(2)
Other		(3)		(5)
Subtotal		4,559		3,756
Amounts allocated from:
Insurance liability loss recognition		(508)		(325)
DAC and VOBA related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		14		9
DAC and VOBA		(611)		(509)
Subtotal		(1,105)		(825)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense) related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		41		42
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)		(1,249)		(1,063)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)	$	2,246	$	1,910

The changes in fixed maturity securities with noncredit OTTI losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), were as follows:

	Six Months Ended June 30, 2012		Year Ended December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Balance, beginning of period	$	(125)	$	(86)
Noncredit OTTI losses recognized (1)		(2)		5
Securities sold with previous noncredit OTTI loss		9		26
Subsequent changes in estimated fair value		(8)		(70)
Balance, end of period	$	(126)	$	(125)

(1) Noncredit OTTI losses recognized, net of DAC, were ($7) million and $8 million for the six months ended June 30, 2012 and year ended December 31, 2011, respectively.

15

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

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

	Six Months Ended June 30, 2012
	(In millions)
Balance, beginning of period	$	1,910
Fixed maturity securities on which noncredit OTTI losses have been recognized		(1)
Unrealized investment gains (losses) during the period		804
Unrealized investment gains (losses) relating to:
Insurance liability gain (loss) recognition		(183)
DAC and VOBA related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		5
DAC and VOBA		(102)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense) related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		(1)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)		(186)
Balance, end of period	$	2,246
Change in net unrealized investment gains (losses)	$	336

16

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Continuous Gross Unrealized Losses and OTTI Losses for Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities Available-for-Sale by Sector

Presented below is certain information about the estimated fair value and gross unrealized losses of fixed maturity and equity securities in an unrealized loss position. The unrealized loss amounts presented below include the noncredit component of OTTI loss. Fixed maturity securities on which a noncredit OTTI loss has been recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) are categorized by length of time as being “less than 12 months” or “equal to or greater than 12 months” in a continuous unrealized loss position based on the point in time that the estimated fair value initially declined to below the amortized cost basis and not the period of time since the unrealized loss was deemed a noncredit OTTI loss.

	June 30, 2012
	Less than 12 Months				Equal to or Greater than 12 Months				Total
	Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses
	(In millions, except number of securities)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	1,460	$	53	$	708	$	113	$	2,168	$	166
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		1,932		1		—		—		1,932		1
Foreign corporate securities		779		27		218		34		997		61
RMBS		463		64		973		173		1,436		237
CMBS		239		3		116		8		355		11
State and political subdivision securities		80		2		119		27		199		29
ABS		427		6		296		23		723		29
Foreign government securities		79		3		—		—		79		3
Total fixed maturity securities	$	5,459	$	159	$	2,430	$	378	$	7,889	$	537
Equity Securities:
Common stock	$	31	$	4	$	—	$	—	$	31	$	4
Non-redeemable preferred stock		7		3		54		22		61		25
Total equity securities	$	38	$	7	$	54	$	22	$	92	$	29
Total number of securities in an unrealized loss position		645				450

17

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	December 31, 2011
	Less than 12 Months				Equal to or Greater than 12 Months				Total
	Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Estimated Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses
	(In millions, except number of securities)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	1,699	$	71	$	786	$	158	$	2,485	$	229
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		118		—		20		1		138		1
Foreign corporate securities		1,213		68		162		46		1,375		114
RMBS		784		114		972		200		1,756		314
CMBS		152		4		111		12		263		16
State and political subdivision securities		6		—		367		58		373		58
ABS		803		12		261		30		1,064		42
Foreign government securities		70		3		4		—		74		3
Total fixed maturity securities	$	4,845	$	272	$	2,683	$	505	$	7,528	$	777
Equity Securities:
Common stock	$	35	$	13	$	—	$	—	$	35	$	13
Non-redeemable preferred stock		32		16		59		28		91		44
Total equity securities	$	67	$	29	$	59	$	28	$	126	$	57
Total number of securities in an unrealized loss position		808				479

18

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Aging of Gross Unrealized Losses and OTTI Losses for Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities Available-for-Sale

Presented below is certain information about the aging and severity of gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity and equity securities, including the portion of OTTI loss on fixed maturity securities recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) at:

	June 30, 2012
	Cost or Amortized Cost				Gross Unrealized Losses						Number of Securities
	Less than       20%		20% or       more		Less than       20%			20% or       more			Less than       20%		20% or       more
	(In millions, except number of securities)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
Less than six months	$	4,104	$	149	$	39		$	35			371		18
Six months or greater but less than nine months		378		15		14			4			102		4
Nine months or greater but less than twelve months		1,010		275		57			86			139		23
Twelve months or greater		2,137		358		175			127			368		40
Total	$	7,629	$	797	$	285		$	252
Percentage of amortized cost						4	%		32	%
Equity Securities:
Less than six months	$	8	$	14	$	1		$	4			19		5
Six months or greater but less than nine months		20		21		2			6			2		2
Nine months or greater but less than twelve months		6		22		1			8			6		3
Twelve months or greater		14		16		—			7			6		2
Total	$	48	$	73	$	4		$	25
Percentage of cost						8	%		34	%

19

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	December 31, 2011
	Cost or Amortized Cost				Gross Unrealized Losses						Number of Securities
	Less than       20%		20% or       more		Less than       20%			20% or       more			Less than       20%		20% or       more
	(In millions, except number of securities)
Fixed Maturity Securities:
Less than six months	$	4,205	$	762	$	137		$	213			652		81
Six months or greater but less than nine months		507		137		36			42			91		13
Nine months or greater but less than twelve months		131		24		8			6			21		4
Twelve months or greater		2,180		359		197			138			373		40
Total	$	7,023	$	1,282	$	378		$	399
Percentage of amortized cost						5	%		31	%
Equity Securities:
Less than six months	$	59	$	85	$	6		$	42			17		11
Six months or greater but less than nine months		—		—		—			—			—		—
Nine months or greater but less than twelve months		8		—		1			—			1		—
Twelve months or greater		14		17		1			7			6		4
Total	$	81	$	102	$	8		$	49
Percentage of cost						10	%		48	%

Equity securities with gross unrealized losses of 20% or more for twelve months or greater were $7 million at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. As shown in the section “— Evaluating Temporarily Impaired Available-for-Sale Securities” below, all of the equity securities with gross unrealized losses of 20% or more for twelve months or greater at June 30, 2012 were financial services industry investment grade non-redeemable preferred stock, of which 43% were rated A or better.

20

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Concentration of Gross Unrealized Losses and OTTI Losses for Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities Available-for-Sale

The gross unrealized losses related to fixed maturity and equity securities, including the portion of OTTI losses on fixed maturity securities recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were $566 million and $834 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The concentration, calculated as a percentage of gross unrealized losses (including OTTI losses), by sector and industry was as follows at:

	June 30, 2012			December 31, 2011
Sector:
RMBS		42	%		38	%
U.S. corporate securities		29			27
Foreign corporate securities		11			14
ABS		5			5
State and political subdivision securities		5			7
CMBS		2			2
Other		6			7
Total		100	%		100	%
Industry:
Mortgage-backed		44	%		40	%
Finance		18			24
Consumer		6			7
Asset-backed		5			5
State and political subdivision securities		5			7
Utility		4			3
Communications		4			4
Industrial		1			1
Other		13			9
Total		100	%		100	%

Evaluating Temporarily Impaired Available-for-Sale Securities

The following table presents fixed maturity and equity securities, each with gross unrealized losses of greater than $10 million, the number of securities, total gross unrealized losses and percentage of total gross unrealized losses at:

	June 30, 2012						December 31, 2011
	Fixed Maturity Securities			Equity Securities			Fixed Maturity Securities			Equity Securities
	(In millions, except number of securities)
Number of securities		8			—			9			1
Total gross unrealized losses	$	124		$	—		$	152		$	12
Percentage of total gross unrealized losses		23	%		—	%		20	%		22	%

Fixed maturity and equity securities, each with gross unrealized losses greater than $10 million, decreased $40 million during the six months ended June 30, 2012. The decline in, or improvement in, gross unrealized

21

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

losses for the six months ended June 30, 2012 was primarily attributable to a decrease in interest rates and narrowing credit spreads. These securities were included in the Company’s OTTI review process.

As of June 30, 2012, $217 million of unrealized losses were from fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss position of 20% or more of amortized cost for six months or greater. Of the $217 million, $127 million, or 59%, was related to unrealized losses on investment grade securities. Unrealized losses on investment grade securities were principally related to widening credit spreads or rising interest rates since purchase. Of the $217 million, $90 million, or 41%, was related to unrealized losses on below investment grade securities. Unrealized losses on below investment grade securities were principally related to non-agency RMBS (primarily alternative residential mortgage loans) and U.S. and foreign corporate securities (primarily financial services industry securities) and were the result of significantly wider credit spreads resulting from higher risk premiums since purchase, largely due to economic and market uncertainties including concerns over the financial services sector, unemployment levels and valuations of residential real estate supporting non-agency RMBS. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for the factors management considers in evaluating these corporate and structured securities. See “— Aging of Gross Unrealized Losses and OTTI Losses for Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities Available-for-Sale” for a discussion of equity securities with an unrealized loss position of 20% or more of cost for 12 months or greater.

In the Company’s impairment review process, the duration and severity of an unrealized loss position for equity securities are given greater weight and consideration than for fixed maturity securities. An extended and severe unrealized loss position on a fixed maturity security may not have any impact on the ability of the issuer to service all scheduled interest and principal payments and the Company’s evaluation of recoverability of all contractual cash flows or the ability to recover an amount at least equal to its amortized cost based on the present value of the expected future cash flows to be collected. In contrast, for an equity security, greater weight and consideration are given by the Company to a decline in market value and the likelihood such market value decline will recover.

The following table presents certain information about the Company’s equity securities available-for-sale with gross unrealized losses of 20% or more at June 30, 2012:

			Non-Redeemable Preferred Stock
	All Equity Securities		All Types of Non-Redeemable Preferred Stock					Investment Grade
								All Industries					Financial Services Industry
	Gross Unrealized Losses		Gross Unrealized Losses		% of All Equity Securities			Gross Unrealized Losses		% of All Non-Redeemable Preferred Stock			Gross Unrealized Losses		% of All Industries			% A Rated or Better
	(In millions)				(In millions)								(In millions)
Less than six months	$	4	$	3		75	%	$	1		33	%	$	1		100	%		100	%
Six months or greater but less than twelve months		14		14		100	%		9		64	%		9		100	%		89	%
Twelve months or greater		7		7		100	%		7		100	%		7		100	%		43	%
All equity securities with gross unrealized losses of 20% or more	$	25	$	24		96	%	$	17		71	%	$	17		100	%		71	%

In connection with the equity securities impairment review process, the Company evaluated its holdings in non-redeemable preferred stock, particularly those in the financial services sector. The Company considered

22

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

several factors including whether there has been any deterioration in credit of the issuer and the likelihood of recovery in value of non-redeemable preferred stock with a severe or an extended unrealized loss. The Company also considered whether any issuers of non-redeemable preferred stock with an unrealized loss held by the Company, regardless of credit rating, have deferred any dividend payments. No such dividend payments had been deferred.

With respect to common stock holdings, the Company considered the duration and severity of the unrealized losses for securities in an unrealized loss position of 20% or more; and the duration of unrealized losses for securities in an unrealized loss position of less than 20% in an extended unrealized loss position (i.e., 12 months or greater).

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

Future OTTIs will depend primarily on economic fundamentals, issuer performance (including changes in the present value of future cash flows expected to be collected), changes in credit ratings, changes in collateral valuation, changes in interest rates and changes in credit spreads. If economic fundamentals or any of the above factors deteriorate, additional OTTIs may be incurred in upcoming quarters.

Other Securities

The table below presents certain information about the Company’s securities for which the fair value option (“FVO”) has been elected at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
FVO general account securities	$	50	$	49
FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments (1)		—		3,616
Total other securities — at estimated fair value	$	50	$	3,665

(1) During June 2012, the Company disposed of MetLife Europe which held the FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments. See Note 2 for discussion of this disposition. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for a discussion of FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments.

See “— Net Investment Income” and “— Net Investment Gains (Losses)” for the net investment income recognized on other securities and the related changes in estimated fair value subsequent to purchase included in earnings for securities still held as of the end of the respective periods.

23

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Net Investment Gains (Losses)

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

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities:
Total OTTI losses recognized	$	(18)	$	(21)	$	(31)	$	(30)
Less: Noncredit portion of OTTI losses transferred to and recognized in other comprehensive income (loss)		4		6		2		4
Net OTTI losses on fixed maturity securities recognized in earnings		(14)		(15)		(29)		(26)
Fixed maturity securities — net gains (losses) on sales and disposals		63		2		78		(18)
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities		49		(13)		49		(44)
Other net investment gains (losses):
Equity securities		2		(24)		(3)		(23)
Other securities — FVO general account securities — changes in estimated fair value subsequent to purchase		—		—		1		—
Mortgage loans		16		14		20		18
Real estate and real estate joint ventures		—		—		(3)		—
Other limited partnership interests		—		(4)		1		(2)
Other investment portfolio gains (losses)		(1)		(1)		—		(5)
Subtotal — investment portfolio gains (losses)		66		(28)		65		(56)
FVO consolidated securitization entities (“CSEs”) — changes in estimated fair value:
Commercial mortgage loans		(7)		7		(1)		25
Long-term debt — related to commercial mortgage loans		13		(5)		11		(11)
Other gains (losses)		(1)		(1)		—		1
Subtotal FVO CSEs and other gains (losses)		5		1		10		15
Total net investment gains (losses)	$	71	$	(27)	$	75	$	(41)

See “— Variable Interest Entities” for discussion of CSEs included in the table above.

Gains (losses) from foreign currency transactions included within net investment gains (losses) were less than $1 million and $1 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and ($2) million and ($3) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

24

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

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

	Three Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011		2012		2011
	Fixed Maturity Securities				Equity Securities				Total
	(In millions)
Proceeds	$	1,079	$	2,529	$	5	$	128	$	1,084	$	2,657
Gross investment gains	$	67	$	33	$	2	$	2	$	69	$	35
Gross investment losses		(4)		(31)		—		(20)		(4)		(51)
Total OTTI losses recognized in earnings:
Credit-related		(14)		(6)		—		—		(14)		(6)
Other (1)		—		(9)		—		(6)		—		(15)
Total OTTI losses recognized in earnings		(14)		(15)		—		(6)		(14)		(21)
Net investment gains (losses)	$	49	$	(13)	$	2	$	(24)	$	51	$	(37)

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011		2012		2011
	Fixed Maturity Securities				Equity Securities				Total
	(In millions)
Proceeds	$	2,994	$	5,042	$	26	$	144	$	3,020	$	5,186
Gross investment gains	$	104	$	51	$	7	$	5	$	111	$	56
Gross investment losses		(26)		(69)		(4)		(22)		(30)		(91)
Total OTTI losses recognized in earnings:
Credit-related		(22)		(17)		—		—		(22)		(17)
Other (1)		(7)		(9)		(6)		(6)		(13)		(15)
Total OTTI losses recognized in earnings		(29)		(26)		(6)		(6)		(35)		(32)
Net investment gains (losses)	$	49	$	(44)	$	(3)	$	(23)	$	46	$	(67)

(1) Other OTTI losses recognized in earnings include impairments on equity securities, impairments on perpetual hybrid securities classified within fixed maturity securities where the primary reason for the impairment was the severity and/or the duration of an unrealized loss position and fixed maturity securities where there is an intent-to-sell or it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery of the decline in estimated fair value.

25

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Fixed maturity security OTTI losses recognized in earnings related to the following sectors and industries within the U.S. and foreign corporate securities sector:

	Three Months Ended June  30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Sector:
U.S. and foreign corporate securities — by industry:
Finance	$	—	$	9	$	7	$	9
Utility		—		—		3		—
Communications		—		—		2		4
Industrial		—		—		1		—
Other industries		6		—		6		—
Total U.S. and foreign corporate securities		6		9		19		13
RMBS (1)		8		6		10		9
CMBS		—		—		—		3
ABS (1)		—		—		—		1
Total	$	14	$	15	$	29	$	26

(1) See Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for discussion of a reclassification from the ABS sector to the RMBS sector for securities backed by sub-prime residential mortgage loans.

Equity security OTTI losses recognized in earnings related to the following sectors and industries:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Sector:
Common stock	$	—	$	—	$	6	$	—
Non-redeemable preferred stock		—		6		—		6
Total	$	—	$	6	$	6	$	6
Industry:
Financial services industry — perpetual hybrid securities	$	—	$	6	$	—	$	6
Other industries		—		—		6		—
Total	$	—	$	6	$	6	$	6

26

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Credit Loss Rollforward

Presented below is a rollforward of the cumulative credit loss component of OTTI loss recognized in earnings on fixed maturity securities still held for which a portion of the OTTI loss was recognized in other comprehensive income (loss):

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Balance, beginning of period	$	50	$	43	$	55	$	63
Additions:
Initial impairments — credit loss OTTI on securities not previously impaired		4		4		4		4
Additional impairments — credit loss OTTI on securities previously impaired		5		1		7		4
Reductions:
Sales, maturities, pay downs and prepayments during the period on securities previously impaired as credit loss OTTI		(3)		(2)		(4)		(4)
Securities impaired to net present value of expected future cash flows		—		—		—		(20)
Increases in cash flows — accretion of previous credit loss OTTI		—		—		(6)		(1)
Balance, end of period	$	56	$	46	$	56	$	46

27

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Net Investment Income

The components of net investment income were as follows:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Investment income:
Fixed maturity securities	$	531	$	538	$	1,064	$	1,073
Equity securities		5		5		7		7
Other securities — FVO general account securities (1)		—		1		—		1
Mortgage loans		87		87		177		171
Policy loans		15		15		30		31
Real estate and real estate joint ventures		54		10		68		2
Other limited partnership interests		49		40		97		120
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments		1		1		2		3
International joint ventures		(2)		1		(3)		(2)
Other		2		3		3		5
Subtotal		742		701		1,445		1,411
Less: Investment expenses		24		27		48		51
Subtotal, net		718		674		1,397		1,360
Other securities — FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments (1)		(106)		25		62		30
FVO CSEs — Commercial mortgage loans		44		96		89		191
Subtotal		(62)		121		151		221
Net investment income	$	656	$	795	$	1,548	$	1,581

(1) Changes in estimated fair value subsequent to purchase for securities still held as of the end of the respective periods included in net investment income were:

Other securities — FVO general account securities	$	—	$	1	$	1	$	1
Other securities — FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments	$	—	$	18	$	—	$	(7)

See “— Variable Interest Entities” for discussion of CSEs included in the table above.

See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for discussion of affiliated net investment income and investment expenses included in the table above.

28

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Securities Lending

As described more fully in Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report, the Company participates in a securities lending program whereby blocks of securities are loaned to third parties. These transactions are treated as financing arrangements and the associated cash collateral received is recorded as a liability. The Company is obligated to return the cash collateral received to its counterparties.

Elements of the securities lending program are presented below at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Securities on loan: (1)
Amortized cost	$	6,406	$	5,307
Estimated fair value	$	7,698	$	6,451
Cash collateral on deposit from counterparties (2)	$	7,853	$	6,456
Security collateral on deposit from counterparties	$	117	$	137
Reinvestment portfolio — estimated fair value	$	7,772	$	6,295

(1) Included within fixed maturity securities, short-term investments and equity securities.

(2) Included within payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions.

Security collateral on deposit from counterparties in connection with the securities lending transactions may not be sold or repledged, unless the counterparty is in default, and is not reflected in the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

Invested Assets on Deposit and Pledged as Collateral

Invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral are presented in the table below at estimated fair value for cash and cash equivalents and fixed maturity securities and at carrying value for mortgage loans.

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Invested assets on deposit (1)	$	56	$	51
Invested assets pledged as collateral (2)		869		897
Total invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral	$	925	$	948

(1) The Company has invested assets on deposit with regulatory agencies consisting primarily of fixed maturity securities.

(2) The Company has pledged fixed maturity securities, mortgage loans and cash and cash equivalents in connection with various agreements and transactions, including funding agreements (see Note 7 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report) and derivative transactions (see Note 4).

29

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Mortgage Loans

Mortgage loans are summarized as follows at:

	June 30, 2012					December 31, 2011
	Carrying Value		% of Total			Carrying Value		% of Total
	(In millions)					(In millions)
Mortgage loans:
Commercial	$	5,252		55.9	%	$	5,390		55.0	%
Agricultural		1,253		13.3			1,333		13.6
Subtotal		6,505		69.2			6,723		68.6
Valuation allowances		(42)		(0.4)			(61)		(0.6)
Subtotal mortgage loans, net		6,463		68.8			6,662		68.0
Commercial mortgage loans held by CSEs		2,932		31.2			3,138		32.0
Total mortgage loans, net	$	9,395		100.0	%	$	9,800		100.0	%

See “— Variable Interest Entities” for discussion of CSEs included in the table above.

See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for discussion of affiliated mortgage loans included in the table above.

The following tables present certain information about mortgage loans and valuation allowances, by portfolio segment, at:

	Commercial		Agricultural		Total
	(In millions)
June 30, 2012:
Mortgage loans:
Evaluated individually for credit losses	$	23	$	—	$	23
Evaluated collectively for credit losses		5,229		1,253		6,482
Total mortgage loans		5,252		1,253		6,505
Valuation allowances:
Specific credit losses		11		—		11
Non-specifically identified credit losses		28		3		31
Total valuation allowances		39		3		42
Mortgage loans, net of valuation allowance	$	5,213	$	1,250	$	6,463
December 31, 2011:
Mortgage loans:
Evaluated individually for credit losses	$	23	$	—	$	23
Evaluated collectively for credit losses		5,367		1,333		6,700
Total mortgage loans		5,390		1,333		6,723
Valuation allowances:
Specific credit losses		15		—		15
Non-specifically identified credit losses		43		3		46
Total valuation allowances		58		3		61
Mortgage loans, net of valuation allowance	$	5,332	$	1,330	$	6,662

30

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The following tables present the changes in the valuation allowance, by portfolio segment:

	Mortgage Loan Valuation Allowances
	Commercial			Agricultural		Total
	(In millions)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	54		$	3	$	57
Provision (release)		(15	)		—		(15	)
Charge-offs, net of recoveries		—			—		—
Balance, end of period	$	39		$	3	$	42
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	80		$	4	$	84
Provision (release)		(14	)		—		(14	)
Charge-offs, net of recoveries		—			—		—
Balance, end of period	$	66		$	4	$	70
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	58		$	3	$	61
Provision (release)		(19	)		—		(19	)
Charge-offs, net of recoveries		—			—		—
Balance, end of period	$	39		$	3	$	42
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	84		$	3	$	87
Provision (release)		(18	)		1		(17	)
Charge-offs, net of recoveries		—			—		—
Balance, end of period	$	66		$	4	$	70

See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for a discussion of all credit quality indicators presented herein. Recorded investment data presented herein is prior to valuation allowance. Unpaid principal balance data presented herein is generally prior to charge-offs.

31

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Commercial Mortgage Loans — by Credit Quality Indicators with Estimated Fair Value. Presented below is certain information about the credit quality of the commercial mortgage loans at:

	Commercial
	Recorded Investment
	Debt Service Coverage Ratios						Total		% of Total			Estimated Fair Value		% of Total
	> 1.20x		1.00x - 1.20x		< 1.00x
			(In millions)									(In millions)
June 30, 2012:
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	3,684	$	83	$	66	$	3,833		73.0	%	$	4,108		74.2	%
65% to 75%		765		39		—		804		15.3			822		14.8
76% to 80%		129		—		26		155		2.9			158		2.9
Greater than 80%		278		159		23		460		8.8			448		8.1
Total	$	4,856	$	281	$	115	$	5,252		100.0	%	$	5,536		100.0	%
December 31, 2011:
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	3,324	$	135	$	210	$	3,669		68.1	%	$	3,888		69.9	%
65% to 75%		719		54		52		825		15.3			852		15.3
76% to 80%		199		—		26		225		4.2			221		4.0
Greater than 80%		452		181		38		671		12.4			602		10.8
Total	$	4,694	$	370	$	326	$	5,390		100.0	%	$	5,563		100.0	%

Agricultural Mortgage Loans — by Credit Quality Indicator.Presented below is certain information about the credit quality of agricultural mortgage loans. The estimated fair value of agricultural mortgage loans was $1.3 billion and $1.4 billion at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

	Agricultural
	June 30, 2012					December 31, 2011
	Recorded Investment		% of Total			Recorded Investment		% of Total
	(In millions)					(In millions)
Loan-to-value ratios:
Less than 65%	$	1,180		94.2	%	$	1,129		84.7	%
65% to 75%		72		5.7			142		10.7
76% to 80%		1		0.1			62		4.6
Total	$	1,253		100.0	%	$	1,333		100.0	%

Past Due and Interest Accrual Status of Mortgage Loans. The Company has a high quality, well performing, mortgage loan portfolio, with approximately 99% of all mortgage loans classified as performing at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The Company defines delinquent mortgage loans consistent with industry practice, when interest and principal payments are past due as follows: commercial mortgage loans — 60 days or more and agricultural mortgage loans — 90 days or more. The Company had no mortgage loans past due and no loans in non-accrual status at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.

32

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Impaired Mortgage Loans.  Presented below is certain information about impaired mortgage loans, by portfolio segment, at:

	Impaired Mortgage Loans
	Loans with a Valuation Allowance								Loans without a Valuation Allowance				All Impaired Loans
	Unpaid Principal Balance		Recorded Investment		Valuation Allowances		Carrying Value		Unpaid Principal Balance		Recorded Investment		Unpaid Principal Balance		Carrying Value
							(In millions)
June 30, 2012:
Commercial	$	23	$	23	$	11	$	12	$	—	$	—	$	23	$	12
Agricultural		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Total	$	23	$	23	$	11	$	12	$	—	$	—	$	23	$	12
December 31, 2011:
Commercial	$	23	$	23	$	15	$	8	$	15	$	15	$	38	$	23
Agricultural		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Total	$	23	$	23	$	15	$	8	$	15	$	15	$	38	$	23

The average recorded investment in impaired mortgage loans and the related interest income, by portfolio segment, was:

	Impaired Mortgage Loans
	Average Recorded Investment		Interest Income Recognized
			Cash Basis		Accrual Basis
	(In millions)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Commercial	$	23	$	—	$	—
Agricultural		—		—		—
Total	$	23	$	—	$	—
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Commercial	$	23	$	—	$	—
Agricultural		7		—		—
Total	$	30	$	—	$	—
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Commercial	$	28	$	1	$	—
Agricultural		—		—		—
Total	$	28	$	1	$	—
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Commercial	$	23	$	1	$	—
Agricultural		7		—		—
Total	$	30	$	1	$	—

33

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Mortgage Loans Modified in a Troubled Debt Restructuring.See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for a discussion of loan modifications that are classified as troubled debt restructuring and the types of concessions typically granted. There were no mortgage loans modified during the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011.

During the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011, there were no mortgage loans with subsequent payment default which were modified as a troubled debt restructuring during the previous 12 months. Payment default is determined in the same manner as delinquency status — when interest and principal payments are past due as described above.

Cash Equivalents

The carrying value of cash equivalents, which includes securities and other investments with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase, was $752 million and $583 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

Purchased Credit Impaired Investments

See Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for information about investments acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination and for which it was probable at the acquisition date that the Company would be unable to collect all contractually required payments.

Variable Interest Entities

The Company holds investments in certain entities that are VIEs. In certain instances, the Company holds both the power to direct the most significant activities of the entity, as well as an economic interest in the entity and, as such, is deemed to be the primary beneficiary or consolidator of the entity. The following table presents the total assets and total liabilities relating to VIEs for which the Company has concluded that it is the primary beneficiary and which are consolidated at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. Creditors or beneficial interest holders of VIEs where the Company is the primary beneficiary have no recourse to the general credit of the Company, as the Company’s obligation to the VIEs is limited to the amount of its committed investment.

34

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
CSEs: (1)
Assets:
Mortgage loans held-for-investment (commercial mortgage loans)	$	2,932	$	3,138
Accrued investment income		14		14
Total assets	$	2,946	$	3,152
Liabilities:
Long-term debt	$	2,849	$	3,065
Other liabilities		14		14
Total liabilities	$	2,863	$	3,079

(1) The Company consolidates former qualified special purpose entities (“QSPEs”) that are structured as CMBS. The assets of these entities can only be used to settle their respective liabilities, and under no circumstances is the Company liable for any principal or interest shortfalls should any arise. The Company’s exposure was limited to that of its remaining investment in the former QSPEs of $68 million and $59 million at estimated fair value at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The long-term debt presented above bears interest primarily at fixed rates ranging from 2.25% to 5.57%, payable primarily on a monthly basis and is expected to be repaid over the next four years. Interest expense related to these obligations, included in other expenses, was $42 million and $85 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and $94 million and $187 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

The following table presents the carrying amount and maximum exposure to loss relating to VIEs for which the Company holds significant variable interests but is not the primary beneficiary and which have not been consolidated at:

	June 30, 2012				December 31, 2011
	Carrying Amount		Maximum Exposure to Loss (1)		Carrying Amount		Maximum Exposure to Loss (1)
	(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities available-for-sale:
RMBS (2)	$	6,392	$	6,392	$	6,494	$	6,494
CMBS (2)		2,450		2,450		2,227		2,227
ABS (2)		2,122		2,122		1,878		1,878
U.S. corporate securities		440		440		424		424
Foreign corporate securities		255		255		234		234
Other limited partnership interests		1,378		1,955		1,302		1,982
Real estate joint ventures		19		23		22		26
Total	$	13,056	$	13,637	$	12,581	$	13,265

(1) The maximum exposure to loss relating to the fixed maturity securities is equal to their estimated fair value. The maximum exposure to loss relating to the other limited partnership interests and real estate joint

35

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

ventures is equal to the carrying amounts plus any unfunded commitments of the Company. Such a maximum loss would be expected to occur only upon bankruptcy of the issuer or investee.

(2) For these variable interests, the Company’s involvement is limited to that of a passive investor.

As described in Note 9, the Company makes commitments to fund partnership investments in the normal course of business. Excluding these commitments, the Company did not provide financial or other support to investees designated as VIEs during the six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011.

Related Party Investment Transactions

As more fully described in Note 2 of the Notes of the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2011 Annual Report, the Company has loans outstanding to affiliates.

The Company has loans outstanding to wholly-owned real estate subsidiaries of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MLIC”), an affiliate, which are included in mortgage loans. The carrying value of these loans was $306 million and $307 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Net investment income from these loans was $4 million and $8 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and $3 million and $7 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

The Company also has loans outstanding to Exeter Reassurance Company Ltd. (“Exeter”), an affiliate, which are included in other invested assets. The carrying value of these loans was $430 million at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. Net investment income from these loans was $6 million and $12 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively. There was no net investment income from these loans for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011.

The Company receives investment administrative services from an affiliate. These investment administrative service charges were $17 million and $34 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and $18 million and $33 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively. The Company also had affiliated net investment income of less than $1 million for both the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011.

4. Derivative Financial Instruments

Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments

Derivatives are financial instruments whose values are derived from interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, credit spreads and/or other financial indices. Derivatives may be exchange-traded or contracted in the over-the-counter (“OTC”) market. The Company uses a variety of derivatives, including swaps, forwards, futures and option contracts, to manage various risks relating to its ongoing business operations. To a lesser extent, the Company uses credit default swaps to synthetically replicate investment risks and returns which are not readily available in the cash market. The Company also purchases certain securities, issues certain insurance policies and investment contracts and engages in certain reinsurance agreements that have embedded derivatives.

Freestanding derivatives are carried in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets either as assets within other invested assets or as liabilities within other liabilities at estimated fair value as determined through the use of quoted market prices for exchange-traded derivatives or through the use of pricing models for OTC derivatives.

36

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

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

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

The Company does not offset the fair value amounts recognized for derivatives executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement.

If a derivative is not designated as an accounting hedge or its use in managing risk does not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative are generally reported in net derivative gains (losses) except for those (i) in policyholder benefits and claims for economic hedges of variable annuity guarantees included in future policy benefits; and (ii) in net investment income for economic hedges of equity method investments in joint ventures. The fluctuations in estimated fair value of derivatives which have not been designated for hedge accounting can result in significant volatility in net income.

To qualify for hedge accounting, at the inception of the hedging relationship, the Company formally documents its risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedging transaction, as well as its designation of the hedge as either (i) a hedge of the estimated fair value of a recognized asset or liability (“fair value hedge”); or (ii) a hedge of a forecasted transaction or of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability (“cash flow hedge”). In this documentation, the Company sets forth how the hedging instrument is expected to hedge the designated risks related to the hedged item and sets forth the method that will be used to retrospectively and prospectively assess the hedging instrument’s effectiveness and the method which will be used to measure ineffectiveness. A derivative designated as a hedging instrument must be assessed as being highly effective in offsetting the designated risk of the hedged item. Hedge effectiveness is formally assessed at inception and periodically throughout the life of the designated hedging relationship. Assessments of hedge effectiveness and measurements of ineffectiveness are also subject to interpretation and estimation and different interpretations or estimates may have a material effect on the amount reported in net income.

The accounting for derivatives is complex and interpretations of the primary accounting guidance continue to evolve in practice. Judgment is applied in determining the availability and application of hedge accounting designations and the appropriate accounting treatment under such accounting guidance. If it was determined that hedge accounting designations were not appropriately applied, reported net income could be materially affected.

Under a fair value hedge, changes in the estimated fair value of the hedging derivative, including amounts measured as ineffectiveness, and changes in the estimated fair value of the hedged item related to the designated risk being hedged, are reported within net derivative gains (losses). The estimated fair values of the hedging derivatives are exclusive of any accruals that are separately reported in the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income within interest income or interest expense to match the location of the hedged item.

Under a cash flow hedge, changes in the estimated fair value of the hedging derivative measured as effective are reported within other comprehensive income (loss), a separate component of stockholders’ equity, and the deferred gains or losses on the derivative are reclassified into the consolidated statement of operations and

37

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

comprehensive income when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item. Changes in the estimated fair value of the hedging instrument measured as ineffectiveness are reported within net derivative gains (losses). The estimated fair values of the hedging derivatives are exclusive of any accruals that are separately reported in the consolidated statement of operations and comprehensive income within interest income or interest expense to match the location of the hedged item.

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

When hedge accounting is discontinued because it is determined that the derivative is not highly effective in offsetting changes in the estimated fair value or cash flows of a hedged item, the derivative continues to be carried in the consolidated balance sheets at its estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized currently in net derivative gains (losses). The carrying value of the hedged recognized asset or liability under a fair value hedge is no longer adjusted for changes in its estimated fair value due to the hedged risk, and the cumulative adjustment to its carrying value is amortized into income over the remaining life of the hedged item. Provided the hedged forecasted transaction is still probable of occurrence, the changes in estimated fair value of derivatives recorded in other comprehensive income (loss) related to discontinued cash flow hedges are released into the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item.

When hedge accounting is discontinued because it is no longer probable that the forecasted transactions will occur on the anticipated date or within two months of that date, the derivative continues to be carried in the consolidated balance sheets at its estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized currently in net derivative gains (losses). Deferred gains and losses of a derivative recorded in other comprehensive income (loss) pursuant to the discontinued cash flow hedge of a forecasted transaction that is no longer probable are recognized immediately in net derivative gains (losses).

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

The Company issues certain products and purchases certain investments that contain embedded derivatives. The Company assesses each identified embedded derivative to determine whether it is required to be bifurcated. If the instrument would not be accounted for in its entirety at estimated fair value and it is determined that the terms of the embedded derivative are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the host contract, and that a separate instrument with the same terms would qualify as a derivative instrument, the embedded derivative is bifurcated from the host contract and accounted for as a freestanding derivative. Such embedded derivatives are carried in the consolidated balance sheets at estimated fair value with the host contract and changes in their estimated fair value are generally reported in net derivative gains (losses). If the Company is unable to properly identify and measure an embedded derivative for separation from its host contract, the entire contract is carried on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income. Additionally, the Company may elect to carry an entire contract on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income if that contract contains an embedded derivative that requires bifurcation.

See Note 5 for information about the fair value hierarchy for derivatives.

38

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Primary Risks Managed by Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company is exposed to various risks relating to its ongoing business operations, including interest rate risk, foreign currency risk, credit risk and equity market risk. The Company uses a variety of strategies to manage these risks, including the use of derivative instruments. The following table presents the gross notional amount, estimated fair value and primary underlying risk exposure of the Company’s derivative financial instruments, excluding embedded derivatives, held at:

		June 30, 2012						December 31, 2011
Primary Underlying Risk Exposure	Instrument Type	Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value (1)				Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value (1)
				Assets		Liabilities				Assets		Liabilities
		(In millions)
Interest rate	Interest rate swaps	$	16,708	$	1,524	$	469	$	13,074	$	1,418	$	427
	Interest rate floors		7,986		355		157		7,986		330		152
	Interest rate caps		8,613		9		—		10,133		19		—
	Interest rate futures		3,564		2		21		3,766		10		1
	Interest rate forwards		519		116		—		620		128		—
Foreign currency	Foreign currency swaps		1,334		110		53		1,792		297		62
	Foreign currency forwards		143		5		1		149		9		—
Credit	Credit default swaps		2,706		15		17		2,426		18		28
Equity market	Equity futures		1,374		—		38		1,007		4		—
	Equity options		2,869		507		—		2,111		482		—
	Variance swaps		2,503		20		26		2,430		51		8
	Total rate of return swaps (“TRRs”)		130		—		6		129		—		2
	Total	$	48,449	$	2,663	$	788	$	45,623	$	2,766	$	680

(1) The estimated fair value of all derivatives in an asset position is reported within other invested assets in the consolidated balance sheets and the estimated fair value of all derivatives in a liability position is reported within other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Interest rate swaps are used by the Company primarily to reduce market risks from changes in interest rates and to alter interest rate exposure arising from mismatches between assets and liabilities (duration mismatches). In an interest rate swap, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed rate and floating rate interest amounts as calculated by reference to an agreed notional principal amount. These transactions are entered into pursuant to master agreements that provide for a single net payment to be made by the counterparty at each due date. The Company utilizes interest rate swaps in fair value, cash flow and non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Inflation swaps are used as an economic hedge to reduce inflation risk generated from inflation-indexed liabilities. Inflation swaps are included in interest rate swaps in the preceding table. The Company utilizes inflation swaps in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Implied volatility swaps are used by the Company primarily as economic hedges of interest rate risk associated with the Company’s investments in mortgage-backed securities. In an implied volatility swap, the Company exchanges fixed payments for floating payments that are linked to certain market volatility measures. If implied volatility rises, the floating payments that the Company receives will increase, and if implied volatility falls, the

39

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

floating payments that the Company receives will decrease. Implied volatility swaps are included in interest rate swaps in the preceding table. The Company utilizes implied volatility swaps in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

The Company purchases interest rate caps and floors primarily to protect its floating rate liabilities against rises in interest rates above a specified level, and against interest rate exposure arising from mismatches between assets and liabilities (duration mismatches), as well as to protect its minimum rate guarantee liabilities against declines in interest rates below a specified level, respectively. In certain instances, the Company locks in the economic impact of existing purchased caps and floors by entering into offsetting written caps and floors. The Company utilizes interest rate caps and floors in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

In exchange-traded interest rate (Treasury and swap) futures transactions, the Company agrees to purchase or sell a specified number of contracts, the value of which is determined by the different classes of interest rate securities, and to post variation margin on a daily basis in an amount equal to the difference in the daily market values of those contracts. The Company enters into exchange-traded futures with regulated futures commission merchants that are members of the exchange. Exchange-traded interest rate (Treasury and swap) futures are used primarily to hedge mismatches between the duration of assets in a portfolio and the duration of liabilities supported by those assets, to hedge against changes in value of securities the Company owns or anticipates acquiring and to hedge against changes in interest rates on anticipated liability issuances by replicating Treasury or swap curve performance. The Company utilizes exchange-traded interest rate futures in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

The Company writes covered call options on its portfolio of U.S. Treasury securities as an income generation strategy. In a covered call transaction, the Company receives a premium at the inception of the contract in exchange for giving the derivative counterparty the right to purchase the referenced security from the Company at a predetermined price. The call option is “covered” because the Company owns the referenced security over the term of the option. Covered call options are included in interest rate options. The Company utilizes covered call options in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

The Company enters into interest rate forwards to buy and sell securities. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for such a contract is made at a specified future date. The Company utilizes interest rate forwards in cash flow and non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Foreign currency derivatives, including foreign currency swaps and foreign currency forwards, are used by the Company to reduce the risk from fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates associated with its assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies.

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

In a foreign currency forward transaction, the Company agrees with another party to deliver a specified amount of an identified currency at a specified future date. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for such a contract is made in a different currency at the specified future date. The Company utilizes foreign currency forwards in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

40

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Certain credit default swaps are used by the Company to hedge against credit-related changes in the value of its investments. In a credit default swap transaction, the Company agrees with another party, at specified intervals, to pay a premium to hedge credit risk. If a credit event, as defined by the contract, occurs, the contract may be cash settled or it may be settled gross by the delivery of par quantities of the referenced investment equal to the specified swap notional in exchange for the payment of cash amounts by the counterparty equal to the par value of the investment surrendered. The Company utilizes credit default swaps in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Credit default swaps are also used to synthetically create credit investments that are either more expensive to acquire or otherwise unavailable in the cash markets. These transactions are a combination of a derivative and one or more cash instruments such as U.S. Treasury securities, agency securities or other fixed maturity securities. These credit default swaps are not designated as hedging instruments.

The Company enters into forwards to lock in the price to be paid for forward purchases of certain securities. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for the contract is made at a specified future date. When the primary purpose of entering into these transactions is to hedge against the risk of changes in purchase price due to changes in credit spreads, the Company designates these as credit forwards. The Company utilizes credit forwards in cash flow hedging relationships.

In exchange-traded equity futures transactions, the Company agrees to purchase or sell a specified number of contracts, the value of which is determined by the different classes of equity securities, and to post variation margin on a daily basis in an amount equal to the difference in the daily market values of those contracts. The Company enters into exchange-traded futures with regulated futures commission merchants that are members of the exchange. Exchange-traded equity futures are used primarily to hedge liabilities embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. The Company utilizes exchange-traded equity futures in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Equity index options are used by the Company primarily to hedge minimum guarantees embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. To hedge against adverse changes in equity indices, the Company enters into contracts to sell the equity index within a limited time at a contracted price. The contracts will be net settled in cash based on differentials in the indices at the time of exercise and the strike price. In certain instances, the Company may enter into a combination of transactions to hedge adverse changes in equity indices within a pre-determined range through the purchase and sale of options. Equity index options are included in equity options in the preceding table. The Company utilizes equity index options in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Equity variance swaps are used by the Company primarily to hedge minimum guarantees embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. In an equity variance swap, the Company agrees with another party to exchange amounts in the future, based on changes in equity volatility over a defined period. Equity variance swaps are included in variance swaps in the preceding table. The Company utilizes equity variance swaps in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

TRRs are swaps whereby the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between the economic risk and reward of an asset or a market index and the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”), calculated by reference to an agreed notional principal amount. No cash is exchanged at the outset of the contract. Cash is paid and received over the life of the contract based on the terms of the

41

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

swap. These transactions are entered into pursuant to master agreements that provide for a single net payment to be made by the counterparty at each due date. The Company uses TRRs to hedge its equity market guarantees in certain of its insurance products. TRRs can be used as hedges or to synthetically create investments. The Company utilizes TRRs in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Hedging

The following table presents the gross notional amount and estimated fair value of derivatives designated as hedging instruments by type of hedge designation at:

	June 30, 2012						December 31, 2011
	Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value				Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments			Assets		Liabilities				Assets		Liabilities
	(In millions)
Fair value hedges:
Foreign currency swaps	$	122	$	—	$	18	$	598	$	188	$	19
Interest rate swaps		489		38		8		311		35		6
Subtotal		611		38		26		909		223		25
Cash flow hedges:
Foreign currency swaps		506		41		8		445		31		12
Interest rate swaps		733		155		—		355		96		—
Interest rate forwards		490		116		—		620		128		—
Subtotal		1,729		312		8		1,420		255		12
Total qualifying hedges	$	2,340	$	350	$	34	$	2,329	$	478	$	37

The following table presents the gross notional amount and estimated fair value of derivatives that were not designated or do not qualify as hedging instruments by derivative type at:

	June 30, 2012						December 31, 2011
Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments	Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value				Notional Amount		Estimated Fair Value
			Assets		Liabilities				Assets		Liabilities
	(In millions)
Interest rate swaps	$	15,486	$	1,331	$	461	$	12,408	$	1,287	$	421
Interest rate floors		7,986		355		157		7,986		330		152
Interest rate caps		8,613		9		—		10,133		19		—
Interest rate futures		3,564		2		21		3,766		10		1
Interest rate forwards		29		—		—		—		—		—
Foreign currency swaps		706		69		27		749		78		31
Foreign currency forwards		143		5		1		149		9		—
Credit default swaps		2,706		15		17		2,426		18		28
Equity futures		1,374		—		38		1,007		4		—
Equity options		2,869		507		—		2,111		482		—
Variance swaps		2,503		20		26		2,430		51		8
TRRs		130		—		6		129		—		2
Total non-designated or non- qualifying derivatives	$	46,109	$	2,313	$	754	$	43,294	$	2,288	$	643

42

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Net Derivative Gains (Losses)

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

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Derivatives and hedging gains (losses) (1)	$	517	$	9	$	(36)	$	(94)
Embedded derivatives		65		124		179		71
Total net derivative gains (losses)	$	582	$	133	$	143	$	(23)

(1) Includes foreign currency transaction gains (losses) on hedged items in cash flow and non-qualifying hedging relationships, which are not presented elsewhere in this note.

The following table presents earned income on derivatives for the:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Qualifying hedges:
Net investment income	$	1	$	—	$	1	$	1
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		6		12		16		23
Non-qualifying hedges:
Net derivative gains (losses)		47		7		55		17
Policyholder benefits and claims		(2)		—		(2)		—
Total	$	52	$	19	$	70	$	41

Fair Value Hedges

The Company designates and accounts for the following as fair value hedges when they have met the requirements of fair value hedging: (i) interest rate swaps to convert fixed rate investments to floating rate investments; (ii) interest rate swaps to convert fixed rate liabilities to floating rate liabilities; and (iii) foreign currency swaps to hedge the foreign currency fair value exposure of foreign currency denominated liabilities.

43

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The Company recognizes gains and losses on derivatives and the related hedged items in fair value hedges within net derivative gains (losses). The following table presents the amount of such net derivative gains (losses):

Derivatives in Fair Value Hedging Relationships	Hedged Items in Fair Value Hedging Relationships	Net Derivative Gains (Losses) Recognized for Derivatives		Net Derivative Gains (Losses) Recognized for Hedged Items		Ineffectiveness Recognized in Net Derivative Gains (Losses)
				(In millions)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps:	Fixed maturity securities	$	(2)	$	1	$	(1)
	Policyholder account balances (“PABs”) (1)		15		(15)		—
Foreign currency swaps:	Foreign-denominated PABs (2)		(44)		40		(4)
Total		$	(31)	$	26	$	(5)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps:	Fixed maturity securities	$	(4)	$	3	$	(1)
	PABs (1)		5		(5)		—
Foreign currency swaps:	Foreign-denominated PABs (2)		14		(17)		(3)
Total		$	15	$	(19)	$	(4)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps:	Fixed maturity securities	$	(2)	$	1	$	(1)
	PABs (1)		2		(3)		(1)
Foreign currency swaps:	Foreign-denominated PABs (2)		(32)		24		(8)
Total		$	(32)	$	22	$	(10)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps:	Fixed maturity securities	$	(3)	$	2	$	(1)
	PABs (1)		—		(1)		(1)
Foreign currency swaps:	Foreign-denominated PABs (2)		36		(43)		(7)
Total		$	33	$	(42)	$	(9)

(1) Fixed rate liabilities.

(2) Fixed rate or floating rate liabilities.

All components of each derivative’s gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.

Cash Flow Hedges

The Company designates and accounts for the following as cash flow hedges when they have met the requirements of cash flow hedging: (i) interest rate swaps to convert floating rate investments to fixed rate investments; (ii) foreign currency swaps to hedge the foreign currency cash flow exposure of foreign currency denominated investments and liabilities; (iii) interest rate forwards and credit forwards to lock in the price to be paid for forward purchases of investments; and (iv) interest rate swaps and interest rate forwards to hedge the forecasted purchases of fixed-rate investments.

44

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

In certain instances, the Company discontinued cash flow hedge accounting because the forecasted transactions did not occur on the anticipated date, within two months of that date, or were no longer probable of occurring. There were no amounts reclassified into net derivative gains (losses) for both the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, related to such discontinued cash flow hedges. The net amounts reclassified into net derivative gains (losses) were $1 million for both the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, related to such discontinued cash flow hedges.

At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the maximum length of time over which the Company was hedging its exposure to variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions did not exceed seven years and five years, respectively.

The following table presents the components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), before income tax, related to cash flow hedges:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), balance at beginning of period	$	142	$	(132)	$	239	$	(109)
Gains (losses) deferred in other comprehensive income (loss) on the effective portion of cash flow hedges		187		35		91		14
Amounts reclassified to net derivative gains (losses)		2		(2)		1		(4)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), balance at end of period	$	331	$	(99)	$	331	$	(99)

At June 30, 2012, $4 million of deferred net gains (losses) on derivatives in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were expected to be reclassified to earnings within the next 12 months.

45

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The following table presents the effects of derivatives in cash flow hedging relationships on the interim condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income and the interim condensed consolidated statements of stockholders’ equity:

Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging Relationships	Amount of Gains (Losses) Deferred in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) on Derivatives		Amount and Location of Gains (Losses) Reclassified from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) into Income (Loss)		Amount and Location of Gains (Losses) Recognized in Income (Loss) on Derivatives
	(Effective Portion)		(Effective Portion)		(Ineffective Portion and Amount Excluded from Effectiveness Testing)
			Net Derivative Gains (Losses)		Net Derivative Gains (Losses)
	(In millions)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps	$	96	$	—	$	—
Foreign currency swaps		19		(2)		—
Interest rate forwards		72		—		(1)
Credit forwards		—		—		—
Total	$	187	$	(2)	$	(1)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps	$	15	$	1	$	—
Foreign currency swaps		—		—		—
Interest rate forwards		20		—		(8)
Credit forwards		—		1		—
Total	$	35	$	2	$	(8)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps	$	62	$	—	$	—
Foreign currency swaps		14		(1)		—
Interest rate forwards		15		—		—
Credit forwards		—		—		—
Total	$	91	$	(1)	$	—
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps	$	4	$	1	$	—
Foreign currency swaps		(1)		2		—
Interest rate forwards		11		—		(8)
Credit forwards		—		1		—
Total	$	14	$	4	$	(8)

All components of each derivative’s gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.

Non-Qualifying Derivatives and Derivatives for Purposes Other Than Hedging

The Company enters into the following derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting or for purposes other than hedging: (i) interest rate swaps, implied volatility swaps, caps and floors and interest rate futures to economically hedge its exposure to interest rates; (ii) foreign currency forwards and swaps to economically hedge its exposure to adverse movements in exchange rates; (iii) credit default swaps to economically hedge exposure to adverse movements in credit; (iv) equity futures, equity index options, interest rate futures and equity variance swaps to economically hedge liabilities embedded in certain variable annuity products; (v) credit default swaps to synthetically create investments; (vi) interest rate forwards to buy and sell securities to economically

46

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

hedge its exposure to interest rates; (vii) inflation swaps to reduce risk generated from inflation-indexed liabilities; (viii) covered call options for income generation; and (ix) equity options to economically hedge certain invested assets against adverse changes in equity indices.

The following tables present the amount and location of gains (losses) recognized in income for derivatives that were not designated or qualifying as hedging instruments:

	Net Derivative Gains (Losses)		Net Investment Income (1)		Policyholder Benefits and Claims (2)
	(In millions)
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps	$	217	$	—	$	—
Interest rate floors		52		—		—
Interest rate caps		(10)		—		—
Interest rate futures		140		—		—
Equity futures		17		—		7
Foreign currency swaps		10		—		—
Foreign currency forwards		5		—		—
Equity options		48		(1)		—
Interest rate options		(11)		—		—
Interest rate forwards		4		—		—
Variance swaps		11		—		—
Credit default swaps		(14)		—		—
Total	$	469	$	(1)	$	7
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps	$	28	$	—	$	—
Interest rate floors		18		—		—
Interest rate caps		(16)		—		—
Interest rate futures		(11)		—		—
Equity futures		4		—		(1)
Foreign currency swaps		(1)		—		—
Foreign currency forwards		(5)		—		—
Equity options		1		(1)		—
Interest rate options		—		—		—
Interest rate forwards		—		—		—
Variance swaps		(4)		—		—
Credit default swaps		2		—		—
Total	$	16	$	(1)	$	(1)

47

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Net Derivative Gains (Losses)		Net Investment Income (1)		Policyholder Benefits and Claims (2)
	(In millions)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Interest rate swaps	$	39	$	—	$	—
Interest rate floors		20		—		—
Interest rate caps		(12)		—		—
Interest rate futures		79		—		—
Equity futures		(93)		—		(23)
Foreign currency swaps		5		—		—
Foreign currency forwards		3		—		—
Equity options		(73)		(2)		—
Interest rate options		(11)		—		—
Interest rate forwards		2		—		—
Variance swaps		(49)		—		—
Credit default swaps		6		—		—
Total	$	(84)	$	(2)	$	(23)
For the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Interest rate swaps	$	4	$	—	$	—
Interest rate floors		1		—		—
Interest rate caps		(17)		—		—
Interest rate futures		(12)		—		—
Equity futures		4		—		(1)
Foreign currency swaps		2		—		—
Foreign currency forwards		(16)		—		—
Equity options		(21)		(2)		—
Interest rate options		—		—		—
Interest rate forwards		—		—		—
Variance swaps		(10)		—		—
Credit default swaps		2		—		—
Total	$	(63)	$	(2)	$	(1)

(1) Changes in estimated fair value related to economic hedges of equity method investments in joint ventures.

(2) Changes in estimated fair value related to economic hedges of variable annuity guarantees included in future policy benefits.

Credit Derivatives

In connection with synthetically created credit investment transactions, the Company writes credit default swaps for which it receives a premium to insure credit risk. Such credit derivatives are included within the non-qualifying derivatives and derivatives for purposes other than hedging table. If a credit event occurs, as defined by the contract, the contract may be cash settled or it may be settled gross by the Company paying the counterparty the specified swap notional amount in exchange for the delivery of par quantities of the referenced credit obligation. The Company’s maximum amount at risk, assuming the value of all referenced credit

48

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

obligations is zero, was $2.5 billion and $2.1 billion at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Company can terminate these contracts at any time through cash settlement with the counterparty at an amount equal to the then current fair value of the credit default swaps. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company would have paid $4 million and $11 million, respectively, to terminate all of these contracts.

The following table presents the estimated fair value, maximum amount of future payments and weighted average years to maturity of written credit default swaps at:

	June 30, 2012						December 31, 2011
Rating Agency Designation of Referenced Credit Obligations (1)	Estimated Fair Value of Credit Default Swaps		Maximum Amount of Future Payments under Credit Default Swaps (2)		Weighted Average Years to Maturity (3)		Estimated Fair Value of Credit Default Swaps		Maximum Amount of Future Payments under Credit Default Swaps (2)		Weighted Average Years to Maturity (3)
	(In millions)						(In millions)
Aaa/Aa/A
Single name credit default swaps (corporate)	$	1	$	167		3.7	$	2	$	212		4.3
Credit default swaps referencing indices		7		661		2.6		—		661		3.1
Subtotal		8		828		2.8		2		873		3.4
Baa
Single name credit default swaps (corporate)		(4)		539		4.2		(6)		434		4.6
Credit default swaps referencing indices		(7)		1,124		5.0		(7)		793		4.8
Subtotal		(11)		1,663		4.8		(13)		1,227		4.7
Ba
Single name credit default swaps (corporate)		—		—		—		—		—		—
Credit default swaps referencing indices		—		—		—		—		—		—
Subtotal		—		—		—		—		—		—
B
Single name credit default swaps (corporate)		—		—		—		—		—		—
Credit default swaps referencing indices		(1)		36		5.0		—		—		—
Subtotal		(1)		36		5.0		—		—		—
Total	$	(4)	$	2,527		4.1	$	(11)	$	2,100		4.2

(1) The rating agency designations are based on availability and the midpoint of the applicable ratings among Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”), Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (“S&P”) and Fitch Ratings. If no rating is available from a rating agency, then an internally developed rating is used.

(2) Assumes the value of the referenced credit obligations is zero.

49

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

(3) The weighted average years to maturity of the credit default swaps is calculated based on weighted average notional amounts.

Credit Risk on Freestanding Derivatives

The Company may be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to derivative financial instruments. Generally, the current credit exposure of the Company’s derivative contracts is limited to the net positive estimated fair value of derivative contracts at the reporting date after taking into consideration the existence of netting agreements and any collateral received pursuant to credit support annexes.

The Company manages its credit risk related to OTC derivatives by entering into transactions with creditworthy counterparties, maintaining collateral arrangements and through the use of master agreements that provide for a single net payment to be made by one counterparty to another at each due date and upon termination. Because exchange-traded futures are effected through regulated exchanges, and positions are marked to market on a daily basis, the Company has minimal exposure to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to such derivative instruments. See Note 5 for a description of the impact of credit risk on the valuation of derivative instruments.

The Company enters into various collateral arrangements which require both the pledging and accepting of collateral in connection with its OTC derivative instruments. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company was obligated to return cash collateral under its control of $1.4 billion and $1.6 billion, respectively. This cash collateral is included in cash and cash equivalents or in short-term investments and the obligation to return it is included in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions in the consolidated balance sheets. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company had received collateral consisting of various securities with a fair market value of $592 million and $315 million, respectively, which were held in separate custodial accounts. Subject to certain constraints, the Company is permitted by contract to sell or repledge this collateral, but at June 30, 2012, none of the collateral had been sold or repledged.

The Company’s collateral arrangements for its OTC derivatives generally require the counterparty in a net liability position, after considering the effect of netting agreements, to pledge collateral when the fair value of that counterparty’s derivatives reaches a pre-determined threshold. Certain of these arrangements also include credit-contingent provisions that provide for a reduction of these thresholds (on a sliding scale that converges toward zero) in the event of downgrades in the credit ratings of the Company and/or the counterparty. In addition, certain of the Company’s netting agreements for derivative instruments contain provisions that require both the Company and the counterparty to maintain a specific investment grade credit rating from each of Moody’s and S&P. If a party’s credit ratings were to fall below that specific investment grade credit rating, that party would be in violation of these provisions, and the other party to the derivative instruments could terminate the transactions and demand immediate settlement and payment based on such party’s reasonable valuation of the derivative instruments.

50

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The following table presents the estimated fair value of the Company’s OTC derivatives that are in a net liability position after considering the effect of netting agreements, together with the estimated fair value and balance sheet location of the collateral pledged. The table also presents the incremental collateral that the Company would be required to provide if there was a one notch downgrade in the Company’s credit rating at the reporting date or if the Company’s credit rating sustained a downgrade to a level that triggered full overnight collateralization or termination of the derivative position at the reporting date. Derivatives that are not subject to collateral agreements are not included in the scope of this table.

			Estimated Fair Value of Collateral Provided:		Fair Value of Incremental Collateral Provided Upon:
	Estimated Fair Value of Derivatives in Net   Liability  Position (1)		Fixed Maturity     Securities (2)		One Notch     Downgrade     in the Company’s Credit Rating		Downgrade in the   Company’s Credit Rating   to  a Level that Triggers Full Overnight Collateralization or Termination of the Derivative Position
	(In millions)
June 30, 2012	$	25	$	7	$	2	$	17
December 31, 2011	$	14	$	9	$	1	$	10

(1) After taking into consideration the existence of netting agreements.

(2) Included in fixed maturity securities in the consolidated balance sheets. Subject to certain constraints, the counterparties are permitted by contract to sell or repledge this collateral. At both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company did not provide any cash collateral.

Without considering the effect of netting agreements, the estimated fair value of the Company’s OTC derivatives with credit-contingent provisions that were in a gross liability position at June 30, 2012 was $86 million. At June 30, 2012, the Company provided collateral of $7 million in connection with these derivatives. In the unlikely event that both: (i) the Company’s credit rating was downgraded to a level that triggers full overnight collateralization or termination of all derivative positions; and (ii) the Company’s netting agreements were deemed to be legally unenforceable, then the additional collateral that the Company would be required to provide to its counterparties in connection with its derivatives in a gross liability position at June 30, 2012 would be $79 million. This amount does not consider gross derivative assets of $61 million for which the Company has the contractual right of offset.

The Company also has exchange-traded futures, which may require the pledging of collateral. At both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company did not pledge any securities collateral for exchange-traded futures. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company provided cash collateral for exchange-traded futures of $123 million and $140 million, respectively, which is included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables.

Embedded Derivatives

The Company issues certain products or purchases certain investments that contain embedded derivatives that are required to be separated from their host contracts and accounted for as freestanding derivatives. These host contracts principally include: variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits, including guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits (“GMWBs”), guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits (“GMABs”) and certain

51

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIBs”); affiliated ceded reinsurance of guaranteed minimum benefits related to GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs; affiliated assumed reinsurance of guaranteed minimum benefits related to GMWBs and certain GMIBs; ceded reinsurance written on a funds withheld basis; and options embedded in debt or equity securities.

The following table presents the estimated fair value of the Company’s embedded derivatives at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Net embedded derivatives within asset host contracts:
Ceded guaranteed minimum benefits	$	2,846	$	2,815
Options embedded in debt or equity securities		(10)		(2)
Net embedded derivatives within asset host contracts	$	2,836	$	2,813
Net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts:
Direct guaranteed minimum benefits	$	1,062	$	1,363
Assumed guaranteed minimum benefits		5		4
Funds withheld on ceded reinsurance		565		416
Net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts	$	1,632	$	1,783

The following table presents changes in estimated fair value related to embedded derivatives:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Net derivative gains (losses) (1), (2)	$	65	$	124	$	179	$	71

(1) The valuation of direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits includes an adjustment for nonperformance risk. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses), in connection with this adjustment, were $136 million and ($102) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and $1 million and ($28) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively. In addition, the valuation of ceded guaranteed minimum benefits includes an adjustment for nonperformance risk. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses), in connection with this adjustment, were ($292) million and $39 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and ($18) million and $23 million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

(2) See Note 13 for discussion of affiliated net derivative gains (losses) included in the table above.

5. Fair Value

Considerable judgment is often required in interpreting market data to develop estimates of fair value, and the use of different assumptions or valuation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.

52

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Recurring Fair Value Measurements

The assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis, including those items for which the Company has elected the FVO, were determined as described below. These estimated fair values and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy are summarized as follows:

	June 30, 2012
	Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
	Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets and Liabilities (Level 1)		Significant  Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Assets:
Fixed maturity securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	—	$	16,772	$	1,522	$	18,294
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		4,850		4,306		—		9,156
Foreign corporate securities		—		7,707		698		8,405
RMBS		—		6,159		233		6,392
CMBS		—		2,292		158		2,450
State and political subdivision securities		—		2,253		25		2,278
ABS		—		1,833		289		2,122
Foreign government securities		—		1,309		2		1,311
Total fixed maturity securities		4,850		42,631		2,927		50,408
Equity securities:
Common stock		48		73		22		143
Non-redeemable preferred stock		—		33		91		124
Total equity securities		48		106		113		267
Other securities:
FVO general account securities		—		50		—		50
FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments (1)		—		—		—		—
Total other securities		—		50		—		50
Short-term investments (2)		1,837		593		22		2,452
Mortgage loans held by CSEs		—		2,932		—		2,932
Derivative assets: (3)
Interest rate contracts		2		1,821		183		2,006
Foreign currency contracts		—		115		—		115
Credit contracts		—		7		8		15
Equity market contracts		—		507		20		527
Total derivative assets		2		2,450		211		2,663
Net embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (4)		—		—		2,846		2,846
Separate account assets (5)		213		79,246		149		79,608
Total assets	$	6,950	$	128,008	$	6,268	$	141,226
Liabilities:
Derivative liabilities: (3)
Interest rate contracts	$	21	$	612	$	14	$	647
Foreign currency contracts		—		54		—		54
Credit contracts		—		15		2		17
Equity market contracts		38		6		26		70
Total derivative liabilities		59		687		42		788
Net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (4)		—		—		1,632		1,632
Long-term debt of CSEs		—		2,849		—		2,849
Total liabilities	$	59	$	3,536	$	1,674	$	5,269

53

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	December 31, 2011
	Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
	Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets and Liabilities (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Assets:
Fixed maturity securities:
U.S. corporate securities	$	—	$	15,907	$	1,432	$	17,339
U.S. Treasury and agency securities		4,326		3,722		—		8,048
Foreign corporate securities		—		7,913		580		8,493
RMBS		—		6,255		239		6,494
CMBS		—		2,080		147		2,227
State and political subdivision securities		—		2,032		23		2,055
ABS		—		1,658		220		1,878
Foreign government securities		—		1,245		2		1,247
Total fixed maturity securities		4,326		40,812		2,643		47,781
Equity securities:
Common stock		51		74		21		146
Non-redeemable preferred stock		—		30		76		106
Total equity securities		51		104		97		252
Other securities:
FVO general account securities		—		49		—		49
FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments		3,616		—		—		3,616
Total other securities		3,616		49		—		3,665
Short-term investments (2)		865		1,684		10		2,559
Mortgage loans held by CSEs		—		3,138		—		3,138
Derivative assets: (3)
Interest rate contracts		10		1,708		187		1,905
Foreign currency contracts		—		306		—		306
Credit contracts		—		12		6		18
Equity market contracts		4		482		51		537
Total derivative assets		14		2,508		244		2,766
Net embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (4)		—		—		2,815		2,815
Separate account assets (5)		185		72,244		130		72,559
Total assets	$	9,057	$	120,539	$	5,939	$	135,535
Liabilities:
Derivative liabilities: (3)
Interest rate contracts	$	1	$	566	$	13	$	580
Foreign currency contracts		—		62		—		62
Credit contracts		—		21		7		28
Equity market contracts		—		2		8		10
Total derivative liabilities		1		651		28		680
Net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (4)		—		—		1,783		1,783
Long-term debt of CSEs		—		3,065		—		3,065
Total liabilities	$	1	$	3,716	$	1,811	$	5,528

(1) During June 2012, the Company disposed of MetLife Europe which held the FVO contractholder-directed unit-linked investments. See Note 2 for discussion of this disposition.

(2) Short-term investments as presented in the tables above differ from the amounts presented in the consolidated balance sheets because certain short-term investments are not measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis.

54

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

(3) Derivative assets are presented within other invested assets in the consolidated balance sheets and derivative liabilities are presented within other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets. The amounts are presented gross in the tables above to reflect the presentation in the consolidated balance sheets, but are presented net for purposes of the rollforward in the Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) tables.

(4) Net embedded derivatives within asset host contracts are presented within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables in the consolidated balance sheets. Net embedded derivatives within liability host contracts are presented primarily within PABs and other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets. At June 30, 2012, fixed maturity securities and equity securities also included embedded derivatives of $0 and ($10) million, respectively. At December 31, 2011, fixed maturity securities and equity securities included embedded derivatives of $1 million and ($3) million, respectively.

(5) Separate account assets are measured at estimated fair value. Investment performance related to separate account assets is fully offset by corresponding amounts credited to contractholders whose liability is reflected within separate account liabilities. Separate account liabilities are set equal to the estimated fair value of separate account assets.

Investments

On behalf of the Company’s chief investment officer and chief financial officer, a pricing and valuation committee that is independent of the trading and investing functions and comprised of senior management, provides oversight of control systems and valuation policies for securities, mortgage loans and derivatives. On a monthly basis, this committee reviews and approves new transaction types and markets, ensures that observable market prices and market-based parameters are used for valuation, wherever possible, determines that judgmental valuation adjustments, when applied, are based upon established policies and are applied consistently over time and provides oversight of the selection of independent third party pricing providers and the controls and procedures to evaluate third party pricing. Periodically, the chief accounting officer reports to the audit committee on compliance with fair value accounting standards.

The Company reviews its valuation methodologies on an ongoing basis and revises those methodologies when necessary based on changing market conditions. Assurance is gained on the overall reasonableness and consistent application of input assumptions, valuation methodologies and compliance with fair value accounting standards through controls designed to ensure valuations represent an exit price. Several controls are utilized, including certain monthly controls, which include, but are not limited to, analysis of portfolio returns to corresponding benchmark returns, comparing a sample of executed prices of securities sold to the fair value estimates, comparing fair value estimates to management’s knowledge of the current market, reviewing the bid/ask spreads to assess activity, comparing prices from multiple independent pricing services and ongoing due diligence to confirm that independent pricing services use market-based parameters. The process includes a determination of the observability of inputs used in estimated fair values received from independent pricing services or brokers by assessing whether these inputs can be corroborated by observable market data. The Company ensures that prices received from independent brokers, also referred to herein as “consensus pricing,” represent a reasonable estimate of fair value by reviewing such pricing with the Company’s knowledge of the current market dynamics and current pricing for similar financial instruments. While independent non-binding broker quotations are utilized, they are not used for a significant portion of the portfolio. For example, fixed maturity securities priced using independent non-binding broker quotations represent less than 0.5% of the total estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities and represent 7% of the total estimated fair value of Level 3 fixed maturity securities.

55

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The Company also applies a formal process to challenge any prices received from independent pricing services that are not considered representative of estimated fair value. If prices received from independent pricing services are not considered reflective of market activity or representative of estimated fair value, independent non-binding broker quotations are obtained, or an internally developed valuation is prepared. Internally developed valuations of current estimated fair value, which reflect internal estimates of liquidity and nonperformance risks, compared with pricing received from the independent pricing services, did not produce material differences in the estimated fair values for the majority of the portfolio; accordingly, overrides have not been material. This is, in part, because internal estimates of liquidity and nonperformance risks are generally based on available market evidence and estimates used by other market participants. In the absence of such market-based evidence, management’s best estimate is used.

Securities, Short-term Investments and Long-term Debt of CSEs

When available, the estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities, equity securities, other securities and short-term investments are based on quoted prices in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. Generally, these are the most liquid of the Company’s securities holdings and valuation of these securities does not involve management’s judgment.

When quoted prices in active markets are not available, the determination of estimated fair value is based on market standard valuation methodologies, giving priority to observable inputs. The significant inputs to the market standard valuation methodologies for certain types of securities with reasonable levels of price transparency are inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. When observable inputs are not available, the market standard valuation methodologies for determining the estimated fair value of certain types of securities that trade infrequently, and therefore have little or no price transparency, rely on inputs that are significant to the estimated fair value that are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. These unobservable inputs can be based in large part on management’s judgment or estimation and cannot be supported by reference to market activity. Even though these inputs are unobservable, management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such securities and are considered appropriate given the circumstances.

The estimated fair value of long-term debt of CSEs is determined on a basis consistent with the methodologies described herein for securities.

The use of different methodologies, assumptions and inputs may have a material effect on the estimated fair values of the Company’s securities holdings.

Level 2 Measurements:

This level includes fixed maturity securities and equity securities priced principally by independent pricing services using observable inputs. Other securities and short-term investments within this level are of a similar nature and class to the Level 2 fixed maturity securities and equity securities described below.

U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities

These securities are principally valued using the market and income approaches. Valuations are based primarily on quoted prices in markets that are not active, or using matrix pricing or other similar techniques that use standard market observable inputs such as benchmark yields, spreads off benchmark yields, new issuances, issuer rating, duration, and trades of identical or comparable securities. Investment

56

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

grade privately placed securities are valued using discounted cash flow (“DCF”) methodologies using standard market observable inputs, and inputs derived from, or corroborated by, market observable data including market yield curve, duration, call provisions, observable prices and spreads for similar publicly traded or privately traded issues that incorporate the credit quality and industry sector of the issuer. This level also includes certain below investment grade privately placed fixed maturity securities priced by independent pricing services that use observable inputs.

U.S. Treasury and agency securities

These securities are principally valued using the market approach. Valuation is based primarily on quoted prices in markets that are not active, or using matrix pricing or other similar techniques using standard market observable inputs such as benchmark U.S. Treasury yield curve, the spread off the U.S. Treasury yield curve for the identical security and comparable securities that are actively traded.

Foreign government and state and political subdivision securities

These securities are principally valued using the market approach. Valuation is based primarily on matrix pricing or other similar techniques using standard market observable inputs including benchmark U.S. Treasury yield or other yields, issuer ratings, broker-dealer quotes, issuer spreads and reported trades of similar securities, including those within the same sub-sector or with a similar maturity or credit rating.

Structured securities comprised of RMBS, CMBS and ABS

These securities are principally valued using the market approach and income approach. Valuation is based primarily on matrix pricing, DCF methodologies or other similar techniques using standard market inputs including spreads for actively traded securities, spreads off benchmark yields, expected prepayment speeds and volumes, current and forecasted loss severity, rating, weighted average coupon, weighted average maturity, average delinquency rates, geographic region, debt-service coverage ratios and issuance-specific information including, but not limited to: collateral type, payment terms of the underlying assets, payment priority within the tranche, structure of the security, deal performance and vintage of loans.

Common and non-redeemable preferred stock

These securities are principally valued using the market approach where market quotes are available but are not considered actively traded. Valuation is based principally on observable inputs including quoted prices in markets that are not considered active.

Level 3 Measurements:

In general, fixed maturity securities and equity securities classified within Level 3 use many of the same valuation techniques and inputs as described in Level 2 Measurements. However, if key inputs are unobservable, or if the investments are less liquid and there is very limited trading activity, the investments are generally classified as Level 3. The use of independent non-binding broker quotations to value investments generally indicates there is a lack of liquidity or a lack of transparency in the process to develop the valuation estimates generally causing these investments to be classified in Level 3.

57

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Short-term investments within this level are of a similar nature and class to the Level 3 securities described below; accordingly, the valuation techniques and significant market standard observable inputs used in their valuation are also similar to those described below.

U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities

These securities, including financial services industry hybrid securities classified within fixed maturity securities, are principally valued using the market approach. Valuations are based primarily on matrix pricing or other similar techniques that utilize unobservable inputs or inputs that cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data, including illiquidity premium, delta spread adjustments or spreads over below investment grade curves to reflect industry trends or specific credit-related issues; and inputs including quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2. Certain valuations are based on independent non-binding broker quotations.

Foreign government and state and political subdivision securities

These securities are principally valued using the market approach. Valuation is based primarily on independent non-binding broker quotations and inputs including quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2.

Structured securities comprised of RMBS, CMBS and ABS

These securities are principally valued using the market approach and income approach. Valuation is based primarily on matrix pricing, DCF methodologies or other similar techniques that utilize inputs that are unobservable or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data including spreads over below investment grade curves to reflect industry trends on specific credit-related issues. Below investment grade securities, alternative residential mortgage loan RMBS and RMBS supported by sub-prime mortgage loans included in this level are valued based on inputs including quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2. Certain of these valuations are based on independent non-binding broker quotations.

Common and non-redeemable preferred stock

These securities, including privately held securities and financial services industry hybrid securities classified within equity securities, are principally valued using the market and income approaches. Valuations are based primarily on matrix pricing, DCF methodologies or other similar techniques using inputs such as comparable credit rating and issuance structure. Certain of these securities are valued based on inputs including quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2 and independent non-binding broker quotations.

Mortgage Loans Held by CSEs

The Company consolidates certain securitization entities that hold mortgage loans.

58

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Level 2 Measurements:

These investments are principally valued using the market approach. The principal market for these investments is the securitization market. The Company uses the quoted securitization market price of the obligations of the CSEs to determine the estimated fair value of these commercial loan portfolios. These market prices are determined principally by independent pricing services using observable inputs.

Separate Account Assets

Separate account assets are carried at estimated fair value and reported as a summarized total on the consolidated balance sheets. The estimated fair value of separate account assets is based on the estimated fair value of the underlying assets. Assets within the Company’s separate accounts include: mutual funds, fixed maturity securities, equity securities, derivatives, other limited partnership interests, short-term investments and cash and cash equivalents.

Level 2 Measurements:

These assets are comprised of investments that are similar in nature to the instruments described under “— Securities, Short-term Investments and Long-term Debt of CSEs.” Also included are certain mutual funds without readily determinable fair values given prices are not published publicly. Valuation of the mutual funds is based upon quoted prices or reported net asset values (“NAVs”) provided by the fund managers.

Level 3 Measurements:

These assets are comprised of investments that are similar in nature to the instruments described under “— Securities, Short-term Investments and Long-term Debt of CSEs.” Separate account assets within this level also include other limited partnership interests. Other limited partnership interests are valued giving consideration to the value of the underlying holdings of the partnerships and by applying a premium or discount, if appropriate, for factors such as liquidity, bid/ask spreads, the performance record of the fund manager or other relevant variables which may impact the exit value of the particular partnership interest.

Derivatives

The estimated fair value of derivatives is determined through the use of quoted market prices for exchange-traded derivatives or through the use of pricing models for OTC derivatives. The determination of estimated fair value, when quoted market values are not available, is based on market standard valuation methodologies and inputs that management believes are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments. Derivative valuations can be affected by changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, financial indices, credit spreads, default risk, nonperformance risk, volatility, liquidity and changes in estimates and assumptions used in the pricing models. The valuation process for derivatives is described above in “— Investments.”

The significant inputs to the pricing models for most OTC derivatives are inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Significant inputs that are observable generally include: interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, interest rate curves, credit curves

59

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

and volatility. However, certain OTC derivatives may rely on inputs that are significant to the estimated fair value that are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Significant inputs that are unobservable generally include references to emerging market currencies and inputs that are outside the observable portion of the interest rate curve, credit curve, volatility or other relevant market measure. These unobservable inputs may involve significant management judgment or estimation. Even though unobservable, these inputs are based on assumptions deemed appropriate given the circumstances and management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments.

The credit risk of both the counterparty and the Company are considered in determining the estimated fair value for all OTC derivatives, and any potential credit adjustment is based on the net exposure by counterparty after taking into account the effects of netting agreements and collateral arrangements. The Company values its derivative positions using the standard swap curve which includes a spread to the risk free rate. This credit spread is appropriate for those parties that execute trades at pricing levels consistent with the standard swap curve. As the Company and its significant derivative counterparties consistently execute trades at such pricing levels, additional credit risk adjustments are not currently required in the valuation process. The Company’s ability to consistently execute at such pricing levels is in part due to the netting agreements and collateral arrangements that are in place with all of its significant derivative counterparties. An evaluation of the requirement to make additional credit risk adjustments is performed by the Company each reporting period.

Most inputs for OTC derivatives are mid-market inputs but, in certain cases, bid level inputs are used when they are deemed more representative of exit value. Market liquidity, as well as the use of different methodologies, assumptions and inputs, may have a material effect on the estimated fair values of the Company’s derivatives and could materially affect net income.

Freestanding Derivatives

Level 2 Measurements:

This level includes all types of derivative instruments utilized by the Company with the exception of exchange-traded derivatives included within Level 1 and those derivative instruments with unobservable inputs as described in Level 3. These derivatives are principally valued using the income approach.

Interest rate contracts

Non-option-based. —Valuations are based on present value techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve and LIBOR basis curves.

Option-based. — Valuations are based on option pricing models, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve, LIBOR basis curves and interest rate volatility.

Foreign currency contracts

Non-option-based. — Valuations are based on present value techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve, LIBOR basis curves, currency spot rates and cross currency basis curves.

60

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Credit contracts

Non-option-based. — Valuations are based on present value techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve, credit curves and recovery rates.

Equity market contracts

Non-option-based. — Valuations are based on present value techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve, spot equity index levels and dividend yield curves.

Option-based. — Valuations are based on option pricing models, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curve, spot equity index levels, dividend yield curves and equity volatility.

Level 3 Measurements:

These derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. Valuations of non-option-based derivatives utilize present value techniques, whereas valuations of option-based derivatives utilize option pricing models. These valuation methodologies generally use the same inputs as described in the corresponding sections above for Level 2 measurements of derivatives. However, these derivatives result in Level 3 classification because one or more of the significant inputs are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data.

Interest rate contracts

Non-option-based. — Significant unobservable inputs may include the extrapolation beyond observable limits of the swap yield curve and LIBOR basis curves.

Credit contracts

Non-option-based. —Significant unobservable inputs may include credit spreads, repurchase rates and the extrapolation beyond observable limits of the swap yield curve and credit curves. Certain of these derivatives are valued based on independent non-binding broker quotations.

Equity market contracts

Non-option-based. —Significant unobservable inputs may include the extrapolation beyond observable limits of dividend yield curves.

Embedded Derivatives

Embedded derivatives principally include certain direct, assumed and ceded variable annuity guarantees and embedded derivatives related to funds withheld on ceded reinsurance. Embedded derivatives are recorded at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value reported in net income.

The Company issues and assumes certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs are embedded derivatives, which are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). These embedded derivatives are classified within PABs in the consolidated balance sheets.

61

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The fair value of these embedded derivatives, estimated as the present value of projected future benefits minus the present value of projected future fees using actuarial and capital market assumptions including expectations concerning policyholder behavior, is calculated by the Company’s actuarial department. The calculation is based on in-force business, and is performed using standard actuarial valuation software which projects future cash flows from the embedded derivative over multiple risk neutral stochastic scenarios using observable risk free rates.

Capital market assumptions, such as risk free rates and implied volatilities, are based on market prices for publicly traded instruments to the extent that prices for such instruments are observable. Implied volatilities beyond the observable period are extrapolated based on observable implied volatilities and historical volatilities. Actuarial assumptions, including mortality, lapse, withdrawal and utilization, are unobservable and are reviewed at least annually based on actuarial studies of historical experience.

The valuation of these guarantee liabilities includes adjustments for nonperformance risk and for a risk margin related to non-capital market inputs.

The nonperformance adjustment is determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for MetLife’s debt, including related credit default swaps. These observable spreads are then adjusted, as necessary, to reflect the priority of these liabilities and the claims paying ability of the issuing insurance subsidiaries compared to MetLife.

Risk margins are established to capture the non-capital market risks of the instrument which represent the additional compensation a market participant would require to assume the risks related to the uncertainties of such actuarial assumptions as annuitization, premium persistency, partial withdrawal and surrenders. The establishment of risk margins requires the use of significant management judgment, including assumptions of the amount and cost of capital needed to cover the guarantees. These guarantees may be more costly than expected in volatile or declining equity markets. Market conditions including, but not limited to, changes in interest rates, equity indices, market volatility and foreign currency exchange rates; changes in nonperformance risk; and variations in actuarial assumptions regarding policyholder behavior, mortality and risk margins related to non-capital market inputs may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of the guarantees that could materially affect net income.

The Company assumed, from an affiliated insurance company, the risk associated with certain GMIBs and GMWBs. These embedded derivatives are included in other policy-related balances in the consolidated balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The value of the embedded derivatives on these assumed risks is determined using a methodology consistent with that described previously for the guarantees directly written by the Company.

The Company ceded, to an affiliated reinsurance company, the risk associated with certain of the GMIBs, GMABs and GMWBs described above that are also accounted for as embedded derivatives. In addition to ceding risks associated with guarantees that are accounted for as embedded derivatives, the Company also cedes, to the same affiliated reinsurance company, certain directly written GMIBs that are accounted for as insurance (i.e., not as embedded derivatives), but where the reinsurance agreement contains an embedded derivative. These embedded derivatives are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables in the consolidated balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The value of the embedded derivatives on these ceded risks is determined using a methodology consistent with that described

62

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

previously for the guarantees directly written by the Company with the exception of the input for nonperformance risk that reflects the credit of the reinsurer.

The estimated fair value of the embedded derivatives within funds withheld related to certain ceded reinsurance is determined based on the change in estimated fair value of the underlying assets held by the Company in a reference portfolio backing the funds withheld liability. The estimated fair value of the underlying assets is determined as previously described in “— Securities, Short-term Investments and Long-term Debt of CSEs.” The estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives is included, along with their funds withheld hosts, in other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). Changes in the credit spreads on the underlying assets, interest rates and market volatility may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives that could materially affect net income.

Embedded Derivatives Within Asset and Liability Host Contracts

Level 3 Measurements:

Direct and Assumed Guaranteed Minimum Benefits

These embedded derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. Valuations are based on option pricing techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include swap yield curve, currency exchange rates and implied volatilities. These embedded derivatives result in Level 3 classification because one or more of the significant inputs are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Significant unobservable inputs generally include: the extrapolation beyond observable limits of the swap yield curve and implied volatilities, actuarial assumptions for policyholder behavior and mortality and the potential variability in policyholder behavior and mortality, nonperformance risk and cost of capital for purposes of calculating the risk margin.

Reinsurance Ceded on Certain Guaranteed Minimum Benefits

These embedded derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. The valuation techniques and significant market standard unobservable inputs used in their valuation are similar to those described above in “— Direct and Assumed Guaranteed Minimum Benefits” and also include counterparty credit spreads.

Transfers between Levels:

Overall, transfers between levels occur when there are changes in the observability of inputs and market activity. Transfers into or out of any level are assumed to occur at the beginning of the period.

Transfers between Levels 1 and 2:

During the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, there were no transfers between Levels 1 and 2. During the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, transfers between Levels 1 and 2 were not significant. Any amounts for transfers between Levels 1 and 2 relate to assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value and still held at June 30, 2012 and 2011.

63

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Transfers into or out of Level 3:

Transfers into or out of Level 3 are presented in the tables which follow. Assets and liabilities are transferred into Level 3 when a significant input cannot be corroborated with market observable data. This occurs when market activity decreases significantly and underlying inputs cannot be observed, current prices are not available, and/or when there are significant variances in quoted prices, thereby affecting transparency. Assets and liabilities are transferred out of Level 3 when circumstances change such that a significant input can be corroborated with market observable data. This may be due to a significant increase in market activity, a specific event, or one or more significant input(s) becoming observable.

Transfers into Level 3 for fixed maturity securities and separate account assets were due primarily to a lack of trading activity, decreased liquidity and credit ratings downgrades (e.g., from investment grade to below investment grade) which have resulted in decreased transparency of valuations and an increased use of independent non-binding broker quotations and unobservable inputs to determine estimated fair value.

Transfers out of Level 3 for fixed maturity securities and separate account assets resulted primarily from increased transparency of both new issuances that subsequent to issuance and establishment of trading activity, became priced by independent pricing services and existing issuances that, over time, the Company was able to obtain pricing from, or corroborate pricing received from, independent pricing services with observable inputs or increases in market activity and upgraded credit ratings.

64

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)

The following table presents certain quantitative information about the significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement for the more significant asset and liability classes measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).

	Valuation Techniques	Significant Unobservable Inputs	Range						Weighted Average
Fixed maturity securities:
U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities	•  Matrix pricing	•  Delta spread adjustments (1)		(100	)	–	420			51
		•  Illiquidity premium (1)		30		–	30
		•  Spreads from below investment grade curves (1)		(158	)	–	1,776			538
	•  Consensus pricing	•  Offered quotes (2)		—		–	200
RMBS	•  Market pricing	•  Quoted prices (2)		100		–	300			200
CMBS	•  Matrix pricing and DCF	•  Spreads from below investment grade curves (1)		—		–	18,555			9,838
ABS	•  Matrix pricing and DCF	•  Spreads from below investment grade curves (1)		—		–	31,443			5,587
	•  Market pricing	•  Quoted prices (2)		97		–	300			192
	•  Consensus pricing	•  Offered quotes (2)		—		–	107
Foreign government securities	•  Consensus pricing	•  Offered quotes (2)		192		–	198
Derivatives:
Interest rate contracts	•  Present value techniques	•  Swap yield (1)		228		–	340
Credit contracts	•  Present value techniques	•  Credit spreads (1)		—		–	100
	•  Consensus pricing	•  Offered quotes (3)
Equity market contracts	•  Present value techniques	•  Volatility		19	%	–	30	%
Embedded derivatives:
Direct and ceded guaranteed minimum benefits	•  Option pricing techniques	•  Mortality rates:
		Ages 0 - 40		0	%	–	0.10	%
		Ages 41 - 60		0.05	%	–	0.64	%
		Ages 61 - 115		0.32	%	–	100	%
		•  Lapse rates:
		Durations 1 - 10		0.50	%	–	100	%
		Durations 11 - 20		3	%	–	100	%
		Durations 21 - 116		3	%	–	100	%
		•  Utilization rates (4)		20	%	–	50	%
		•  Withdrawal rates		0.07	%	–	10	%
		•  Long-term equity volatilities		17.40	%	–	25	%
		•  Nonperformance risk spread		0.35	%	–	1.05	%

(1) For this unobservable input, range and weighted average are presented in basis points.

(2) For this unobservable input, range and weighted average are presented in accordance with the market convention for fixed maturity securities of dollars per hundred dollars of par.

(3) At June 30, 2012, independent non-binding broker quotations were used in the determination of less than 1% of the total net derivative estimated fair value.

(4) This range is attributable to certain GMIB and lifetime withdrawal benefits.

The following is a summary of the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement for other types of financial instruments classified within Level 3. These financial instruments

65

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

are subject to the controls described under “— Investments.” Generally, equity securities, other securities, short-term investments and securities included within separate account assets and embedded derivatives within funds withheld related to certain ceded reinsurance classified within Level 3 use the same valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs as previously described for fixed maturity securities. This includes matrix pricing and DCF methodologies, inputs such as quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2, as well as independent non-binding broker quotations.

A description of the sensitivity of the estimated fair value to changes in the significant unobservable inputs for certain of the major asset and liability classes described above is as follows:

U.S. corporate and foreign corporate securities

Significant spread widening in isolation will adversely impact the overall valuation, while significant spread tightening will lead to substantial valuation increases. Significant increases (decreases) in illiquidity premiums in isolation would result in substantially lower (higher) valuations. Significant increases (decreases) in expected default rates in isolation would result in substantially lower (higher) valuations. Significant increases (decreases) in offered quotes in isolation would result in substantially higher (lower) valuations.

Foreign government securities

Significant spread widening in isolation will adversely impact the overall valuation, while significant spread tightening will lead to substantial valuation increases. Significant increases (decreases) in expected default rates in isolation would result in substantially lower (higher) valuations. Significant increases (decreases) in offered quotes in isolation would result in substantially higher (lower) valuations.

Structured securities comprised of RMBS, CMBS and ABS

Significant spread widening in isolation will adversely impact the overall valuation, while significant spread tightening will lead to substantial valuation increases. Significant increases (decreases) in offered quotes in isolation would result in substantially higher (lower) valuations. In general, changes in the assumptions used for the probability of default is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumption used for prepayment rates.

Interest rate contracts

Significant increases (decreases) in the unobservable portion of the swap yield curve in isolation will result in substantial valuation changes.

Credit contracts

Credit contracts with significant unobservable inputs are primarily comprised of credit default swaps written by the Company. Significant credit spread widening in isolation will result in substantially higher adverse valuations, while significant spread tightening will result in substantially lower adverse valuations. Significant increases (decreases) in offered quotes in isolation will result in substantially higher (lower) valuations.

66

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Equity market contracts

Significant decreases in the equity volatility in isolation will adversely impact overall valuation, while significant increases in equity volatility will result in substantial valuation increases.

Direct and ceded guaranteed minimum benefits

For any increase (decrease) in mortality and lapse rates, the fair value of the guarantees will decrease (increase). For any increase (decrease) in utilization and volatility, the fair value of the guarantees will increase (decrease). Specifically for GMWBs, for any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates, the fair value of the guarantees will increase (decrease). Specifically for GMABs and GMIBs, for any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates, the fair value of the guarantees will decrease (increase).

The following tables summarize the change of all assets and (liabilities) measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), including realized and unrealized gains (losses) of all assets and (liabilities) and realized and unrealized gains (losses) of all assets and (liabilities) still held at the end of the respective periods:

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Fixed Maturity Securities:
	U.S. Corporate Securities		U.S. Treasury and Agency Securities		Foreign Corporate Securities		RMBS		CMBS		State and Political Subdivision Securities		ABS		Foreign Government Securities
	(In millions)
Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	1,493	$	—	$	622	$	356	$	152	$	25	$	257	$	2
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		2		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		(6)		(3)		(1)		—		—		—
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		14		—		19		9		1		—		—		—
Purchases (3)		30		—		77		1		20		—		52		—
Sales (3)		(31)		—		(11)		(99)		(19)		—		(1)		—
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		���		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		17		—		37		—		15		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		(3)		—		(40)		(31)		(10)		—		(19)		—
Balance, end of period	$	1,522	$	—	$	698	$	233	$	158	$	25	$	289	$	2
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2012 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	2	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	(6)	$	(2)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

67

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Equity Securities:						Net Derivatives: (5)
	Common Stock		Non- redeemable Preferred Stock		Short-term Investments		Interest Rate Contracts		Credit Contracts		Equity Market Contracts		Net Embedded Derivatives (6)		Separate Account Assets (7)
	(In millions)
Three Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	25	$	92	$	20	$	95	$	9	$	(17)	$	1,148	$	149
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		22		(3)		11		69		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		(1)		(1)		—		71		—		—		—		—
Purchases (3)		—		—		22		—		—		—		—		1
Sales (3)		(2)		—		(20)		—		—		—		—		(1)
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		(19)		—		—		(3)		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Balance, end of period	$	22	$	91	$	22	$	169	$	6	$	(6)	$	1,214	$	149
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2012 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	19	$	(3)	$	11	$	72	$	—

68

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Fixed Maturity Securities:
	U.S. Corporate Securities		U.S. Treasury and Agency Securities		Foreign Corporate Securities		RMBS (8)		CMBS		State and Political Subdivision Securities		ABS (8)		Foreign Government Securities
	(In millions)
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	1,428	$	32	$	782	$	255	$	152	$	32	$	324	$	2
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		—		—		1		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		4		—		(19)		(2)		2		—		—		—
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		12		—		18		(2)		—		(7)		(1)		—
Purchases (3)		64		—		293		5		18		—		4		—
Sales (3)		(42)		—		(286)		(2)		(9)		—		(18)		—
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		3		—		11		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		(24)		(32)		(44)		(4)		(8)		—		(232)		—
Balance, end of period	$	1,445	$	—	$	756	$	250	$	155	$	25	$	77	$	2
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2011 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	—	$	—	$	1	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	(6)	$	(2)	$	—	$	—	$	(1)	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

69

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Equity Securities:						Net Derivatives: (5)
	Common Stock		Non- redeemable Preferred Stock		Short-term Investments		Interest Rate Contracts		Credit Contracts		Equity Market Contracts		Net Embedded Derivatives (6)		Separate Account Assets (7)
	(In millions)
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	31	$	219	$	82	$	(75)	$	11	$	6	$	647	$	130
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		—		(24)		—		—		—		—		—		(1)
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		1		—		(4)		126		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		1		24		—		12		—		—		—		—
Purchases (3)		—		—		58		—		—		—		—		2
Sales (3)		—		(98)		(48)		—		—		—		—		—
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		(1)		—		9		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		(1)
Balance, end of period	$	32	$	121	$	92	$	(62)	$	10	$	2	$	782	$	130
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2011 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	(5)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	1	$	—	$	(4)	$	126	$	—

70

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Fixed Maturity Securities:
	U.S. Corporate Securities		U.S. Treasury and Agency Securities		Foreign Corporate Securities		RMBS		CMBS		State and Political Subdivision Securities		ABS		Foreign Government Securities
	(In millions)
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	1,432	$	—	$	580	$	239	$	147	$	23	$	220	$	2
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		3		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		(8)		(2)		(2)		—		—		—
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		(2)		—		20		16		6		2		1		—
Purchases (3)		122		—		80		—		21		—		95		—
Sales (3)		(55)		—		(16)		(20)		(29)		—		(9)		—
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		27		—		53		—		15		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		(5)		—		(11)		—		—		—		(18)		—
Balance, end of period	$	1,522	$	—	$	698	$	233	$	158	$	25	$	289	$	2
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2012 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	4	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	(6)	$	(2)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

71

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Equity Securities:						Net Derivatives: (5)
	Common Stock		Non- redeemable Preferred Stock		Short-term Investments		Interest Rate Contracts		Credit Contracts		Equity Market Contracts		Net Embedded Derivatives (6)		Separate Account Assets (7)
	(In millions)
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012:
Balance, beginning of period	$	21	$	76	$	10	$	174	$	(1)	$	43	$	1,032	$	130
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		(3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		19
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		10		7		(49)		181		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		4		15		—		14		—		—		—		—
Purchases (3)		—		—		22		—		—		—		—		2
Sales (3)		—		—		(10)		—		—		—		—		(2)
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		(29)		—		—		1		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Balance, end of period	$	22	$	91	$	22	$	169	$	6	$	(6)	$	1,214	$	149
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2012 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	(3)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	7	$	7	$	(49)	$	186	$	—

72

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Fixed Maturity Securities:
	U.S. Corporate Securities		U.S. Treasury and Agency Securities		Foreign Corporate Securities		RMBS (8)		CMBS		State and Political Subdivision Securities		ABS (8)		Foreign Government Securities
	(In millions)
Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	1,510	$	34	$	880	$	282	$	130	$	32	$	321	$	14
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		2		—		1		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		3		—		(17)		(2)		—		—		(6)		—
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		21		—		35		1		17		(7)		7		—
Purchases (3)		88		—		296		—		18		—		16		—
Sales (3)		(91)		(1)		(392)		(15)		(10)		—		(34)		(12)
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers into Level 3(4)		3		—		11		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3(4)		(91)		(33)		(58)		(16)		—		—		(227)		—
Balance, end of period	$	1,445	$	—	$	756	$	250	$	155	$	25	$	77	$	2
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2011 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	2	$	—	$	1	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	(6)	$	(2)	$	—	$	—	$	(3)	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

73

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
	Equity Securities:				Short-term Investments		Net Derivatives: (5)						Net Embedded Derivatives (6)		Separate Account Assets (7)
	Common Stock		Non- redeemable Preferred Stock				Interest Rate Contracts		Credit Contracts		Equity Market Contracts
	(In millions)
Six Months Ended June 30, 2011:
Balance, beginning of period	$	22	$	214	$	173	$	(61)	$	11	$	12	$	677	$	133
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in:
Net income (loss): (1), (2)
Net investment income		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Net investment gains (losses)		1		(24)		(1)		—		—		—		—		(5)
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		2		1		(10)		73		—
Other comprehensive income (loss)		5		28		—		4		—		—		—		—
Purchases (3)		9		—		92		—		—		—		—		3
Sales (3)		(5)		(97)		(172)		—		—		—		—		(1)
Issuances (3)		—		—		—		—		(1)		—		—		—
Settlements (3)		—		—		—		—		(1)		—		32		—
Transfers into Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		—		—		—		—		—
Transfers out of Level 3 (4)		—		—		—		(7)		—		—		—		—
Balance, end of period	$	32	$	121	$	92	$	(62)	$	10	$	2	$	782	$	130
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets and liabilities still held at June 30, 2011 included in net income (loss):
Net investment income	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net investment gains (losses)	$	—	$	(5)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	2	$	1	$	(10)	$	75	$	—

(1) Amortization of premium/discount is included within net investment income. Impairments charged to earnings on securities are included in net investment gains (losses). Lapses associated with net embedded derivatives are included in net derivative gains (losses).

(2) Interest and dividend accruals, as well as cash interest coupons and dividends received, are excluded from the rollforward.

(3) The amount reported within purchases, sales, issuances and settlements is the purchase or issuance price and the sales or settlement proceeds based upon the actual date purchased or issued and sold or settled, respectively. Items purchased/issued and sold/settled in the same period are excluded from the rollforward. Fees attributed to embedded derivatives are included in settlements.

(4) Total gains and losses (in earnings and other comprehensive income (loss)) are calculated assuming transfers into and/or out of Level 3 occurred at the beginning of the period. Items transferred into and/or out of Level 3 in the same period are excluded from the rollforward.

(5) Freestanding derivative assets and liabilities are presented net for purposes of the rollforward.

(6) Embedded derivative assets and liabilities are presented net for purposes of the rollforward.

74

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

(7) Investment performance related to separate account assets is fully offset by corresponding amounts credited to contractholders within separate account liabilities. Therefore, such changes in estimated fair value are not recorded in net income. For the purpose of this disclosure, these changes are presented within net investment gains (losses).

(8) See Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for discussion of a reclassification from the ABS sector to the RMBS sector for securities backed by sub-prime residential mortgage loans.

Fair Value Option

Assets and Liabilities Held by CSEs

The Company has elected the FVO for the following assets and liabilities held by CSEs: commercial mortgage loans and long-term debt. The following table presents these commercial mortgage loans accounted for under the FVO at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Unpaid principal balance	$	2,814	$	3,019
Difference between estimated fair value and unpaid principal balance		118		119
Carrying value at estimated fair value	$	2,932	$	3,138

The following table presents the long-term debt accounted for under the FVO related to commercial mortgage loans at:

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Contractual principal balance	$	2,719	$	2,925
Difference between estimated fair value and unpaid principal balance		130		140
Carrying value at estimated fair value	$	2,849	$	3,065

Interest income on commercial mortgage loans held by CSEs is recorded in net investment income. Interest expense on long-term debt of CSEs is recorded in other expenses. Gains and losses from initial measurement, subsequent changes in estimated fair value and gains or losses on sales of both the commercial mortgage loans and the long-term debt are recognized in net investment gains (losses). See Note 3.

75

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Non-Recurring Fair Value Measurements

Certain assets are measured at estimated fair value on a non-recurring basis and are not included in the tables presented above. The amounts below relate to certain investments measured at estimated fair value during the period and still held at the reporting dates and which are categorized as Level 3 measurements.

	Three Months Ended June 30,
	2012						2011
	Carrying Value Prior to Measurement		Estimated Fair Value  After Measurement		Net Investment Gains (Losses)		Carrying Value Prior to Measurement		Estimated Fair Value After Measurement		Net Investment Gains (Losses)
	(In millions)
Mortgage loans, net (1)	$	8	$	12	$	4	$	—	$	8	$	8
Other limited partnership interests (2)	$	5	$	4	$	(1)	$	3	$	2	$	(1)
Real estate joint ventures (3)	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012						2011
	Carrying Value Prior to Measurement		Estimated Fair Value After Measurement		Net Investment Gains (Losses)		Carrying Value Prior to Measurement		Estimated Fair Value After Measurement		Net Investment Gains (Losses)
	(In millions)
Mortgage loans, net (1)	$	8	$	12	$	4	$	—	$	8	$	8
Other limited partnership interests (2)	$	6	$	4	$	(2)	$	3	$	2	$	(1)
Real estate joint ventures (3)	$	5	$	2	$	(3)	$	—	$	—	$	—

(1) Mortgage loans —These impaired mortgage loans are written down to their estimated fair values which are reported as losses. Subsequent improvements in estimated fair value on previously impaired loans recorded through a reduction in the previously established valuation allowance are reported as gains. Estimated fair values for impaired mortgage loans are based on market prices or, if the loans are in foreclosure or are otherwise determined to be collateral dependent, on the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral, or the present value of the expected future cash flows.

(2) Other limited partnership interests — These impaired investments were accounted for using the cost method. Impairments were recognized at estimated fair value determined from information provided in the financial statements of the underlying entities. These investments include private equity and debt funds that typically invest primarily in various strategies including domestic and international leveraged buyout funds; power, energy, timber and infrastructure development funds; venture capital funds; and below investment grade debt and mezzanine debt funds. The estimated fair values of these investments have been determined using NAV data. Distributions will be generated from investment gains, from operating income from the underlying investments of the funds and from liquidation of the underlying assets of the funds. It is estimated that the underlying assets of the funds will be liquidated over the next two to 10 years. Unfunded commitments for these investments were $2 million and less than $1 million at June 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

76

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

(3) Real estate joint ventures — These impaired investments were accounted for using the cost method. Impairments were recognized at estimated fair value determined from information provided in the financial statements of the underlying entities. These investments include several real estate funds that typically invest primarily in commercial real estate. The estimated fair values of these investments have been determined using NAV data. Distributions will be generated from investment gains, from operating income from the underlying investments of the funds and from liquidation of the underlying assets of the funds. It is estimated that the underlying assets of the funds will be liquidated over the next two to 10 years. Unfunded commitments for these investments were $3 million at June 30, 2012. There were no unfunded commitments for these investments at June 30, 2011.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The tables below exclude certain financial instruments. The excluded financial instruments are as follows: cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income, payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions and those short-term investments that are not securities, such as time deposits, and are excluded from the preceding three level hierarchy table. The estimated fair value of these financial instruments, which are primarily classified in Level 2, approximate carrying value as they are short-term in nature such that the Company believes there is minimal risk of material changes in interest rates or credit quality. The table below also excludes financial instruments reported at estimated fair value on a recurring basis. See “— Recurring Fair Value Measurements.” All remaining balance sheet amounts excluded from the table below are not considered financial instruments subject to this disclosure.

The carrying values, estimated fair values and, for June 30, 2012, their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy, for such financial instruments, are summarized as follows:

	June 30, 2012
			Fair Value Measurements at Reporting Date Using
	Carrying Value		Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets and Liabilities (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Total Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Assets:
Mortgage loans, net	$	6,463	$	—	$	—	$	6,859	$	6,859
Policy loans	$	1,232	$	—	$	863	$	475	$	1,338
Real estate joint ventures	$	61	$	—	$	—	$	105	$	105
Other limited partnership interests	$	101	$	—	$	—	$	121	$	121
Other invested assets	$	430	$	—	$	—	$	511	$	511
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	5,972	$	—	$	123	$	6,813	$	6,936
Liabilities:
PABs	$	22,851	$	—	$	—	$	24,533	$	24,533
Long-term debt	$	792	$	—	$	961	$	—	$	961
Other liabilities	$	379	$	—	$	230	$	149	$	379
Separate account liabilities	$	1,286	$	—	$	1,286	$	—	$	1,286
Commitments:(1)
Mortgage loan commitments	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	5	$	5
Commitments to fund bank credit facilities and private corporate bond investments	$	—	$	—	$	5	$	—	$	5

77

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	December 31, 2011
	Carrying Value		Estimated Fair Value
	(In millions)
Assets:
Mortgage loans, net	$	6,662	$	6,946
Policy loans	$	1,203	$	1,307
Real estate joint ventures	$	69	$	107
Other limited partnership interests	$	98	$	126
Other invested assets	$	430	$	477
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	5,973	$	6,880
Liabilities:
PABs	$	23,144	$	24,732
Long-term debt	$	792	$	970
Other liabilities	$	224	$	224
Separate account liabilities	$	1,240	$	1,240
Commitments:(1)
Mortgage loan commitments	$	—	$	—
Commitments to fund bank credit facilities and private corporate bond investments	$	—	$	7

(1) Commitments are off-balance sheet obligations. Negative estimated fair values represent off-balance sheet liabilities. See Note 9 for additional information on these off-balance sheet obligations.

The methods, assumptions and significant valuation techniques and inputs used to estimate the fair value of financial instruments are summarized as follows:

Mortgage Loans

The estimated fair value of mortgage loans was primarily determined by estimating expected future cash flows and discounting them using current interest rates for similar mortgage loans with similar credit risk.

Policy Loans

Policy loans with fixed interest rates are classified within Level 3. The estimated fair values for these loans are determined using a DCF model applied to groups of similar policy loans determined by the nature of the underlying insurance liabilities. Cash flow estimates are developed by applying a weighted-average interest rate to the outstanding principal balance of the respective group of policy loans and an estimated average maturity determined through experience studies of the past performance of policyholder repayment behavior for similar loans. These cash flows are discounted using current risk-free interest rates with no adjustment for borrower credit risk as these loans are fully collateralized by the cash surrender value of the underlying insurance policy. Policy loans with variable interest rates are classified within Level 2 and the estimated fair value approximates carrying value due to the absence of borrower credit risk and the short time period between interest rate resets, which presents minimal risk of a material change in estimated fair value due to changes in market interest rates.

Real Estate Joint Ventures and Other Limited Partnership Interests

The amounts disclosed in the preceding tables consist of those investments accounted for using the cost method.

78

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

The estimated fair values for cost method real estate joint ventures and other limited partnership interests are generally based on the Company’s share of the NAV as provided in the financial statements of the investees. In certain circumstances, management may adjust the NAV by a premium or discount when it has sufficient evidence to support applying such adjustments.

Other Invested Assets

Other invested assets within the preceding tables are comprised of loans to affiliates. The estimated fair value of loans to affiliates is determined by discounting the expected future cash flows using market interest rates currently available for instruments with similar terms and remaining maturities.

Premiums, Reinsurance and Other Receivables

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables in the preceding tables are principally comprised of certain amounts recoverable under reinsurance agreements, amounts on deposit with financial institutions to facilitate daily settlements related to certain derivative positions and amounts receivable for securities sold but not yet settled.

Amounts recoverable under ceded reinsurance agreements, which the Company has determined do not transfer significant risk such that they are accounted for using the deposit method of accounting, have been classified within Level 3. The valuation is based on DCF methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using interest rates determined to reflect the appropriate credit standing of the assuming counterparty.

The amounts on deposit for derivative settlements, classified within Level 2, essentially represent the equivalent of demand deposit balances and amounts due for securities sold are generally received over short periods such that the estimated fair value approximates carrying value.

PABs

PABs in the preceding tables include investment contracts. Embedded derivatives on investment contracts and certain variable annuity guarantees accounted for as embedded derivatives are excluded from this caption in the preceding tables as they are separately presented in “— Recurring Fair Value Measurements.”

The investment contracts primarily include certain funding agreements, fixed deferred annuities, modified guaranteed annuities, fixed term payout annuities and total control accounts. The valuation of these investment contracts is based on DCF methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using current market risk-free interest rates adding a spread to reflect the nonperformance risk in the liability.

Long-term Debt

The estimated fair values of long-term debt are principally valued using market standard valuation methodologies. Valuations are based primarily on quoted prices in markets that are not active or using matrix pricing or other similar techniques that use standard market observable inputs such as quoted prices in markets that are not active and observable yields and spreads in the market. Instruments valued using DCF methodologies use standard market observable inputs including market yield curve, duration, observable prices and spreads for similar publicly traded or privately traded issues.

79

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Other Liabilities

Other liabilities consist primarily of interest payable, amounts due for securities purchased but not yet settled and funds withheld amounts payable, which are contractually withheld by the Company in accordance with the terms of the reinsurance agreements and are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. The Company evaluates the specific terms, facts and circumstances of each instrument to determine the appropriate estimated fair values, which are not materially different from the carrying values.

Separate Account Liabilities

Separate account liabilities included in the preceding tables represent those balances due to policyholders under contracts that are classified as investment contracts.

Separate account liabilities classified as investment contracts primarily represent variable annuities with no significant mortality risk to the Company such that the death benefit is equal to the account balance and certain contracts that provide for benefit funding.

Since separate account liabilities are fully funded by cash flows from the separate account assets which are recognized at estimated fair value as described in the section “— Recurring Fair Value Measurements,” the value of those assets approximates the estimated fair value of the related separate account liabilities. The valuation techniques and inputs for separate account liabilities are similar to those described for separate account assets.

Mortgage Loan Commitments and Commitments to Fund Bank Credit Facilities and Private Corporate Bond Investments

The estimated fair values for mortgage loan commitments that will be held for investment and commitments to fund bank credit facilities and private corporate bonds that will be held for investment reflected in the above tables represent the difference between the discounted expected future cash flows using interest rates that incorporate current credit risk for similar instruments on the reporting date and the principal amounts of the commitments.

80

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

6.  Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired

Information regarding DAC and value of business acquired (“VOBA”) was as follows:

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012						2011
	DAC		VOBA		Total		DAC		VOBA		Total
					(In millions)
Balance, beginning of period	$	3,182	$	1,006	$	4,188	$	2,705	$	1,686	$	4,391
Capitalizations		494		—		494		631		—		631
Subtotal		3,676		1,006		4,682		3,336		1,686		5,022
Amortization related to:
Net investment gains (losses)		(65)		(3)		(68)		(52)		1		(51)
Other expenses		(280)		(106)		(386)		(214)		(137)		(351)
Total amortization		(345)		(109)		(454)		(266)		(136)		(402)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)		(19)		(78)		(97)		(14)		(68)		(82)
Disposition and other (1)		(159)		—		(159)		2		—		2
Balance, end of period	$	3,153	$	819	$	3,972	$	3,058	$	1,482	$	4,540

(1) See Note 2 for discussion of the disposition.

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

See Note 1 for information on the retrospective application of the adoption of new accounting guidance related to DAC.

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

	DAC				VOBA				Total
	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011		June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011		June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Retail	$	3,145	$	3,042	$	819	$	1,005	$	3,964	$	4,047
Corporate Benefit Funding		8		12		—		1		8		13
Corporate & Other		—		128		—		—		—		128
Total	$	3,153	$	3,182	$	819	$	1,006	$	3,972	$	4,188

81

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

7.  Goodwill

In the first quarter of 2012, the Company reorganized its business into two segments: Retail and Corporate Benefit Funding. See Note 12 for a discussion of the Company’s new segments. As a result of the reorganization, the Company reallocated goodwill from the former segments to the new segments as shown in the below table under “Goodwill Transfers.”

The Company tests goodwill for impairment at least annually at the reporting unit level. A reporting unit is the operating segment or a business one level below the operating segment, if discrete financial information is prepared and regularly reviewed by management at that level. For each operating segment, the reporting units were determined to be either the operating segment or the components thereof.

The following table presents the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill in each of the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other, and the balances at:

	December 31, 2011		Goodwill     Transfers		June 30, 2012
	(In millions)
2011
Insurance Products	$	22	$	(22)	$	—
Retirement Products		219		(219)		—
Corporate Benefit Funding		307		(307)		—
Corporate & Other		405		(405)		—
2012
Retail		—		236		236
Corporate Benefit Funding		—		307		307
Corporate & Other		—		410		410
Total	$	953	$	—	$	953

The Company had no accumulated goodwill impairment at June 30, 2012. In 2012, Corporate & Other includes goodwill associated with the non-medical health business (see Note 12).

8.  Insurance

Insurance Liabilities

Insurance liabilities, including affiliated insurance liabilities on reinsurance assumed and ceded, were as follows:

	Future  Policy Benefits				Policyholder  Account Balances				Other  Policy-Related Balances
	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011		June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011		June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Retail	$	5,689	$	5,175	$	28,994	$	30,001	$	2,727	$	2,577
Corporate Benefit Funding		14,401		14,028		8,621		8,375		16		14
Corporate & Other (1)		5,973		6,280		1		3,699		346		398
Total	$	26,063	$	25,483	$	37,616	$	42,075	$	3,089	$	2,989

(1) See Note 2 for discussion of a disposition.

See Note 13 for discussion of affiliated reinsurance liabilities included in the table above.

82

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Guarantees

As discussed in Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report, the Company issues variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. The non-life-contingent portion of GMWB, GMAB and the portion of certain GMIB that does not require annuitization are accounted for as embedded derivatives in PABs. These guarantees are recorded at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses), and are excluded from the net amount at risk and other disclosures below.

Based on the type of guarantee, the Company defines net amount at risk as listed below.

• In the Event of Death — Defined as the guaranteed minimum death benefit less the total contract account value, as of the balance sheet date. It represents the amount of the claim that the Company would incur if death claims were filed on all contracts on the balance sheet date.

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

• Universal and Variable Life Contracts —Defined as the guarantee amount less the account value, as of the balance sheet date. It represents the amount of the claim that the Company would incur if death claims were filed on all contracts on the balance sheet date.

These amounts include direct business, but exclude offsets from hedging or reinsurance, if any. As discussed in Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report, the Company has reinsured substantially all of these living and death benefit guarantees associated with its variable annuities issued since 2006 to an affiliated reinsurer, and certain portions of the living and death benefit guarantees associated with its variable annuities issued prior to 2006 to affiliated and unaffiliated reinsurers. Therefore, the net amounts at risk presented below reflect the economic exposures of the living and death benefit guarantees associated with the variable annuities, but not necessarily their impact to the Company.

83

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

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

	June 30, 2012				December 31, 2011
	In the Event of Death		At Annuitization		In the Event of Death		At Annuitization
	(In millions)
Annuity Contracts (1)
Variable Annuity Guarantees
Total contract account value	$	83,063	$	46,654	$	76,550	$	41,713
Separate account value	$	77,613	$	44,858	$	70,635	$	39,454
Net amount at risk	$	4,326	$	1,781(2)	$	5,515	$	1,444(2)
Average attained age of contractholders		63 years		63 years		62 years		62 years

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	Secondary Guarantees
	(In millions)
Universal and Variable Life Contracts (1)
Account value (general and separate account)	$	5,559	$	5,177
Net amount at risk	$	83,991	$	80,477
Average attained age of policyholders		58 years		58 years

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

(2) The Company has previously disclosed the net amount at risk based on the excess of the benefit base over the contractholder’s total contract account value on the balance sheet date. Such amounts were $6.3 billion and $6.6 billion at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Company has provided, in the table above, the net amount as risk as defined above. The Company believes that this definition is more representative of the potential economic exposures of these guarantees as the contractholders do not have access to this difference other than through annuitization.

See Note 7 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report.

9.  Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees

Contingencies

Litigation

The Company is a defendant in a number of litigation matters. In some of the matters, large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Modern pleading practice in the U.S. permits considerable variation in the assertion of monetary damages or other relief. Jurisdictions may permit claimants not to specify the monetary damages sought or may permit claimants to state only that the amount sought is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the trial court. In addition, jurisdictions may permit plaintiffs to allege monetary damages in amounts well exceeding reasonably possible verdicts in the jurisdiction for similar matters. This variability in pleadings, together with the actual experience of the Company in litigating or resolving through settlement numerous claims over an extended period of time, demonstrates to management that the monetary relief which may be specified in a lawsuit or claim bears little relevance to its merits or disposition value.

84

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may normally be difficult to ascertain. Uncertainties can include how fact finders will evaluate documentary evidence and the credibility and effectiveness of witness testimony, and how trial and appellate courts will apply the law in the context of the pleadings or evidence presented, whether by motion practice, or at trial or on appeal. Disposition valuations are also subject to the uncertainty of how opposing parties and their counsel will themselves view the relevant evidence and applicable law.

The Company establishes liabilities for litigation and regulatory loss contingencies when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities have been established for some of the matters below. It is possible that some of the matters could require the Company to pay damages or make other expenditures or establish accruals in amounts that could not be estimated at June 30, 2012.

Matters as to Which an Estimate Can Be Made

For some of the matters discussed below, the Company is able to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss. For such matters where a loss is believed to be reasonably possible, but not probable, no accrual has been made. As of June 30, 2012, the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses in excess of amounts accrued for these matters was not material for the Company.

Matters as to Which an Estimate Cannot Be Made

For other matters disclosed below, the Company is not currently able to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss. The Company is often unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss until developments in such matters have provided sufficient information to support an assessment of the range of possible loss, such as quantification of a damage demand from plaintiffs, discovery from other parties and investigation of factual allegations, rulings by the court on motions or appeals, analysis by experts, and the progress of settlement negotiations. On a quarterly and annual basis, the Company reviews relevant information with respect to litigation contingencies and updates its accruals, disclosures and estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of loss based on such reviews.

Sales Practices Claims

Over the past several years, the Company has faced claims, including class action lawsuits, alleging improper marketing or sales of individual life insurance policies, annuities, mutual funds or other products. Some of the current cases seek substantial damages, including punitive and treble damages and attorneys’ fees. The Company continues to vigorously defend against the claims in these matters. The Company believes adequate provision has been made in its consolidated financial statements for all probable and reasonably estimable losses for sales practices matters.

Connecticut General Life Insurance Company and MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut are engaged in an arbitration proceeding to determine whether MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut is owed money from Connecticut General Life Insurance Company or is required to refund several million dollars it collected and/or should stop submitting certain claims under reinsurance contracts in which Connecticut General Life Insurance Company reinsured death benefits payable under certain MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut annuities.

A former Tower Square Securities, Inc. (“Tower Square”) financial services representative is alleged to have misappropriated funds from customers. The Illinois Securities Division, the U.S. Postal Inspector, the Internal Revenue Service, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. and the U.S. Attorney’s Office have

85

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

conducted inquiries. Tower Square has made remediation to all the affected customers. The Illinois Securities Division has issued a Statement of Violations to Tower Square, and Tower Square is conducting discussions with the Illinois Securities Division.

Unclaimed Property Inquiries

In April 2012, MetLife, for itself and on behalf of entities including MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, reached agreements with representatives of the U.S. jurisdictions that were conducting audits of MetLife and certain of its affiliates for compliance with unclaimed property laws, and with state insurance regulators directly involved in a multistate targeted market conduct examination relating to claim-payment practices and compliance with unclaimed property laws. The effectiveness of each agreement was conditioned upon the approval of a specified number of jurisdictions. In each case, the threshold for effectiveness has been reached. Pursuant to the agreements, MetLife will, among other things, take specified action to identify liabilities under life insurance, annuity, and retained asset contracts, to adopt specified procedures for seeking to contact and pay owners of the identified liabilities, and, to the extent that it is unable to locate such owners, to escheat these amounts with interest at a specified rate to the appropriate states. Additionally, MetLife has agreed to accelerate the final date of certain industrial life policies and to escheat unclaimed benefits of such policies. It is possible that other jurisdictions may pursue similar exams or audits and that such exams or audits may result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws, administrative penalties, interest, and/or further changes to the Company’s procedures. The Company is not currently able to estimate these additional possible costs.

Summary

Various litigation, claims and assessments against the Company, in addition to those discussed previously and those otherwise provided for in the Company’s consolidated financial statements, have arisen in the course of the Company’s business, including, but not limited to, in connection with its activities as an insurer, employer, investor, investment advisor and taxpayer. Further, state insurance regulatory authorities and other federal and state authorities regularly make inquiries and conduct investigations concerning the Company’s compliance with applicable insurance and other laws and regulations.

It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of all pending investigations and legal proceedings. In some of the matters referred to previously, large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Although, in light of these considerations it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain cases could have a material effect upon the Company’s financial position, based on information currently known by the Company’s management, in its opinion, the outcomes of such pending investigations and legal proceedings are not likely to have such an effect. However, given the large and/or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters and the inherent unpredictability of litigation, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

Commitments

 Commitments to Fund Partnership Investments

The Company makes commitments to fund partnership investments in the normal course of business. The amounts of these unfunded commitments were $1.1 billion and $1.2 billion at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Company anticipates that these amounts will be invested in partnerships over the next five years.

86

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

 Mortgage Loan Commitments

The Company commits to lend funds under mortgage loan commitments. The amounts of these mortgage loan commitments were $191 million and $167 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

 Commitments to Fund Bank Credit Facilities and Private Corporate Bond Investments

The Company commits to lend funds under bank credit facilities and private corporate bond investments. The amounts of these unfunded commitments were $195 million and $248 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.

 Other Commitments

The Company has entered into collateral arrangements with affiliates, which require the transfer of collateral in connection with secured demand notes. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company had agreed to fund up to $86 million and $90 million, respectively, of cash upon the request by these affiliates and had transferred collateral consisting of various securities with a fair market value of $107 million and $109 million, respectively, to custody accounts to secure the notes. Each of these affiliates is permitted by contract to sell or repledge this collateral.

Guarantees

The Company has provided a guarantee on behalf of MetLife International Insurance Company, Ltd. (“MLII”), a former affiliate, that is triggered if MLII cannot pay claims because of insolvency, liquidation or rehabilitation. Life insurance coverage in-force, representing the maximum potential obligation under this guarantee, was $241 million and $272 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Company does not hold any collateral related to this guarantee, but has a recorded liability of $1 million that was based on the total account value of the guaranteed policies plus the amounts retained per policy at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The remainder of the risk was ceded to external reinsurers.

10. Equity

Dividend Restrictions

During June 2012, the Company distributed all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of MetLife Europe to MetLife as an in-kind extraordinary dividend of $202 million, as calculated on a statutory basis. Regulatory approval for this extraordinary dividend was obtained due to the timing of payment. Remaining dividends permitted to be paid in 2012 without regulatory approval total $302 million. See Note 2.

See Note 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report for additional information on dividend restrictions.

87

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

11. Other Expenses

Information on other expenses was as follows:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Compensation	$	83	$	76	$	176	$	151
Commissions		246		368		526		674
Volume-related costs		39		44		98		82
Affiliated interest costs on ceded reinsurance		98		51		147		105
Capitalization of DAC		(217)		(349)		(494)		(631)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		416		302		454		402
Interest expense on debt and debt issuance costs		59		110		119		220
Premium taxes, licenses and fees		16		13		40		28
Professional services		6		20		12		29
Rent		8		8		17		15
Other		133		96		249		179
Total other expenses	$	887	$	739	$	1,344	$	1,254

Capitalization of DAC and Amortization of DAC and VOBA

See Note 6 for DAC and VOBA by segment and a rollforward of each including impacts of capitalization and amortization. See Note 1 for information on the retrospective application of the adoption of new accounting guidance related to DAC.

Affiliated Expenses

Commissions, capitalization of DAC and amortization of DAC include the impact of affiliated reinsurance transactions. See Note 13 for a discussion of affiliated expenses included in the table above.

12.  Segment Information

As announced in November 2011, MetLife reorganized its business into three broad geographic regions. As a result, in the first quarter of 2012, the Company reorganized into two segments: Retail and Corporate Benefit Funding. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. Prior period results have been revised in connection with this reorganization.

The Retail segment offers a broad range of protection products and a variety of annuities primarily to individuals, and is organized into two businesses: Annuities and Life. Annuities include a variety of variable and fixed annuities which provide for both asset accumulation and asset distribution needs. Life insurance products include variable life, universal life, term life and whole life products. Additionally, through our broker-dealer affiliates, we offer a full range of mutual funds and other securities products.

The Corporate Benefit Funding segment includes an array of annuity and investment products, including guaranteed interest products and other stable value products, income annuities, and separate account contracts for the investment management of defined benefit and defined contribution plan assets. This segment also includes certain products to fund company-, bank- or trust-owned life insurance used to finance non-qualified benefit programs for executives.

88

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Corporate & Other contains the excess capital not allocated to the segments, run-off business, the Company’s ancillary international operations and non-medical health business, interest expense related to the majority of the Company’s outstanding debt, expenses associated with certain legal proceedings and income tax audit issues. Corporate & Other also includes the elimination of intersegment amounts.

Operating earnings is the measure of segment profit or loss the Company uses to evaluate segment performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP accounting guidance for segment reporting, operating earnings is the Company’s measure of segment performance and is reported below. Operating earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for GAAP net income (loss). The Company believes the presentation of operating earnings as the Company measures it for management purposes enhances the understanding of its performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business.

Operating earnings is defined as operating revenues less operating expenses, both net of income tax.

Operating revenues excludes net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses). The following additional adjustments are made to GAAP revenues, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating revenues:

• Universal life and investment-type product policy fees excludes the amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity GMIB fees (“GMIB Fees”); and

• Net investment income: (i) includes amounts for scheduled periodic settlement payments and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, (ii) excludes certain amounts related to contractholder-directed unit-linked investments, and (iii) excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP.

The following adjustments are made to GAAP expenses, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating expenses:

• Policyholder benefits and claims excludes: (i) amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets, (ii) benefits and hedging costs related to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”), and (iii) market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”);

• Interest credited to policyholder account balances includes adjustments for scheduled periodic settlement payments and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of PABs but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment and excludes amounts related to net investment income earned on contractholder-directed unit-linked investments;

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

• Interest expense on debt excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP; and

• Other expenses excludes costs related to implementation of new insurance regulatory requirements and acquisition and integration costs.

89

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Set forth in the tables below is certain financial information with respect to the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012 and 2011. The segment accounting policies are the same as those used to prepare the Company’s consolidated financial statements, except for operating earnings adjustments as defined above. In addition, segment accounting policies include the method of capital allocation described below.

Economic capital is an internally developed risk capital model, the purpose of which is to measure the risk in the business and to provide a basis upon which capital is deployed. The economic capital model accounts for the unique and specific nature of the risks inherent in MetLife’s business.

MetLife’s economic capital model aligns segment allocated equity with emerging standards and consistent risk principles. Segment net investment income is credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact the Company’s consolidated net investment income, operating earnings or net income.

	Operating Earnings								Adjustments		Total Consolidated
Three Months Ended June 30, 2012	Retail		Corporate Benefit Funding		Corporate & Other		Total
	(In millions)
Revenues
Premiums	$	116	$	236	$	54	$	406	$	—	$	406
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		528		7		6		541		34		575
Net investment income		383		317		60		760		(104)		656
Other revenues		123		2		—		125		—		125
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		71		71
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		582		582
Total revenues		1,150		562		120		1,832		583		2,415
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		169		369		50		588		48		636
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		235		41		—		276		(109)		167
Capitalization of DAC		(204)		—		(13)		(217)		—		(217)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		207		1		1		209		207		416
Interest expense on debt		—		—		17		17		42		59
Other expenses		585		9		26		620		9		629
Total expenses		992		420		81		1,493		197		1,690
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		56		50		(13)		93		134		227
Operating earnings	$	102	$	92	$	52		246
Adjustments to:
Total revenues								583
Total expenses								(197)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								(134)
Net income							$	498			$	498

90

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Operating Earnings
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011	Retail		Corporate Benefit Funding		Corporate & Other		Total		Adjustments		Total   Consolidated
	(In millions)
Revenues
Premiums	$	164	$	475	$	2	$	641	$	—	$	641
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		453		6		13		472		21		493
Net investment income		356		299		44		699		96		795
Other revenues		129		2		—		131		—		131
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		(27)		(27)
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		133		133
Total revenues		1,102		782		59		1,943		223		2,166
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		199		595		1		795		23		818
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		244		45		—		289		15		304
Capitalization of DAC		(331)		(1)		(17)		(349)		—		(349)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		185		1		1		187		115		302
Interest expense on debt		—		—		16		16		94		110
Other expenses		621		7		37		665		11		676
Total expenses		918		647		38		1,603		258		1,861
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		64		47		(4)		107		(10)		97
Operating earnings	$	120	$	88	$	25		233
Adjustments to:
Total revenues								223
Total expenses								(258)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								10
Net income							$	208			$	208

91

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Operating Earnings								Adjustments		Total   Consolidated
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012	Retail		Corporate Benefit Funding		Corporate & Other		Total
	(In millions)
Revenues
Premiums	$	297	$	353	$	136	$	786	$	—	$	786
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		1,028		15		14		1,057		62		1,119
Net investment income		755		600		113		1,468		80		1,548
Other revenues		245		3		—		248		—		248
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		75		75
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		143		143
Total revenues		2,325		971		263		3,559		360		3,919
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		399		606		131		1,136		89		1,225
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		475		86		—		561		45		606
Capitalization of DAC		(457)		(3)		(34)		(494)		—		(494)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		377		8		3		388		66		454
Interest expense on debt		—		—		34		34		85		119
Other expenses		1,160		19		82		1,261		4		1,265
Total expenses		1,954		716		216		2,886		289		3,175
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		130		89		(26)		193		34		227
Operating earnings	$	241	$	166	$	73		480
Adjustments to:
Total revenues								360
Total expenses								(289)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								(34)
Net income							$	517			$	517

92

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

	Operating Earnings
Six Months Ended June 30, 2011	Retail		Corporate Benefit Funding		Corporate & Other		Total		Adjustments		Total   Consolidated
	(In millions)
Revenues
Premiums	$	237	$	537	$	3	$	777	$	—	$	777
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		870		17		20		907		41		948
Net investment income		716		597		92		1,405		176		1,581
Other revenues		258		3		—		261		—		261
Net investment gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		(41)		(41)
Net derivative gains (losses)		—		—		—		—		(23)		(23)
Total revenues		2,081		1,154		115		3,350		153		3,503
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		329		783		3		1,115		30		1,145
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		484		95		—		579		12		591
Capitalization of DAC		(596)		(6)		(29)		(631)		—		(631)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		344		2		3		349		53		402
Interest expense on debt		—		—		33		33		187		220
Other expenses		1,162		23		67		1,252		11		1,263
Total expenses		1,723		897		77		2,697		293		2,990
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		124		90		(15)		199		(45)		154
Operating earnings	$	234	$	167	$	53		454
Adjustments to:
Total revenues								153
Total expenses								(293)
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit								45
Net income							$	359			$	359

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

	June 30, 2012		December 31, 2011
	(In millions)
Retail	$	128,752	$	120,633
Corporate Benefit Funding		32,012		30,836
Corporate & Other		15,930		19,595
Total	$	176,694	$	171,064

Net investment income is based upon the actual results of each segment’s specifically identifiable asset portfolio adjusted for allocated equity. Other costs are allocated to each of the segments based upon: (i) a review of the nature of such costs; (ii) time studies analyzing the amount of employee compensation costs incurred by each segment; and (iii) cost estimates included in the Company’s product pricing.

93

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

13.  Related Party Transactions

Service Agreements

The Company has entered into various agreements with affiliates for services necessary to conduct its activities. Typical services provided under these agreements include management, policy administrative functions, personnel, investment advice and distribution services. For certain agreements, charges are based on various performance measures or activity-based costing. The bases for such charges are modified and adjusted by management when necessary or appropriate to reflect fairly and equitably the actual incidence of cost incurred by the Company and/or affiliate. The aforementioned expenses and fees incurred with affiliates were comprised of the following:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Compensation	$	85	$	64	$	175	$	127
Commissions		137		241		291		426
Volume-related costs		58		61		133		109
Professional services		5		5		10		9
Rent		8		6		17		12
Other		130		80		236		151
Total other expenses	$	423	$	457	$	862	$	834

Revenues received from affiliates related to these agreements were recorded as follows:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees	$	44	$	36	$	86	$	69
Other revenues	$	40	$	34	$	80	$	65

The Company had net receivables from affiliates of $37 million and $93 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, related to the items discussed above. These amounts exclude affiliated reinsurance balances discussed below. See Note 3 for expenses related to investment advice under these agreements, recorded in net investment income.

Reinsurance Transactions

The Company has reinsurance agreements with certain MetLife subsidiaries, including MLIC, MetLife Reinsurance Company of South Carolina, Exeter, General American Life Insurance Company, MetLife Investors Insurance Company and MetLife Reinsurance Company of Vermont, all of which are related parties.

94

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Information regarding the effect of affiliated reinsurance included in the interim condensed consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income was as follows:

	Three Months Ended June 30,				Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		2012		2011
	(In millions)
Premiums:
Reinsurance assumed	$	3	$	6	$	6	$	4
Reinsurance ceded		(105)		(55)		(197)		(109)
Net premiums	$	(102)	$	(49)	$	(191)	$	(105)
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees:
Reinsurance assumed	$	23	$	23	$	44	$	43
Reinsurance ceded		(94)		(97)		(205)		(188)
Net universal life and investment-type product policy fees	$	(71)	$	(74)	$	(161)	$	(145)
Other revenues:
Reinsurance assumed	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	—
Reinsurance ceded		67		78		134		158
Net other revenues	$	67	$	78	$	134	$	158
Policyholder benefits and claims:
Reinsurance assumed	$	3	$	9	$	6	$	12
Reinsurance ceded		(187)		(113)		(320)		(228)
Net policyholder benefits and claims	$	(184)	$	(104)	$	(314)	$	(216)
Interest credited to policyholder account balances:
Reinsurance assumed	$	17	$	17	$	35	$	33
Reinsurance ceded		(26)		(19)		(52)		(37)
Net interest credited to policyholder account balances	$	(9)	$	(2)	$	(17)	$	(4)
Other expenses:
Reinsurance assumed	$	8	$	13	$	21	$	28
Reinsurance ceded		83		37		98		82
Net other expenses	$	91	$	50	$	119	$	110

95

MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut

(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)

Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited) — (Continued)

Information regarding the effect of affiliated reinsurance included in the interim condensed consolidated balance sheets was as follows at:

	June 30, 2012				December 31, 2011
	Assumed		Ceded		Assumed		Ceded
			(In millions)
Assets:
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables	$	34	$	12,565	$	34	$	12,345
Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired		126		(616)		134		(585)
Total assets	$	160	$	11,949	$	168	$	11,760
Liabilities:
Future policy benefits	$	46	$	—	$	44	$	—
Other policy-related balances		1,551		833		1,515		758
Other liabilities		12		4,202		10		3,903
Total liabilities	$	1,609	$	5,035	$	1,569	$	4,661

The Company ceded risks to affiliates related to guaranteed minimum benefit guarantees written directly by the Company. These ceded reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives and changes in their fair value are also included within net derivative gains (losses). The embedded derivatives associated with the cessions are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and were assets of $2.8 billion at both June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were $990 million and ($13) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and $195 million and ($248) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

MLI-USA cedes two blocks of business to an affiliate on a 90% coinsurance with funds withheld basis. Certain contractual features of this agreement qualify as embedded derivatives, which are separately accounted for at estimated fair value on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The embedded derivative related to the funds withheld associated with this reinsurance agreement is included within other liabilities and increased the funds withheld balance by $565 million and $416 million at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were ($226) million and ($149) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2012, respectively, and ($50) million and ($25) million for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2011, respectively.

96

Item 2.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

For purposes of this discussion, “MICC,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, a Connecticut corporation incorporated in 1863, and its subsidiaries, including MetLife Investors USA Insurance Company (“MLI-USA”). MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut is a wholly- owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“MetLife”). Management’s narrative analysis of the results of operations is presented pursuant to General Instruction H(2)(a) of Form 10-Q. This discussion should be read in conjunction with MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as revised by MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on May 31, 2012 (as revised, the “2011 Annual Report”), the forward-looking statement information included below, the “Risk Factors” set forth in Part II, Item 1A, and the additional risk factors referred to therein, and the Company’s interim condensed consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein.

This narrative analysis may contain or incorporate by reference information that includes or is based upon forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements give expectations or forecasts of future events. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They use words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe” and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with a discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these include statements relating to future actions, prospective services or products, future performance or results of current and anticipated services or products, sales efforts, expenses, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, trends in operations and financial results. Any or all forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. See “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

The following discussion includes references to our performance measure, operating earnings, that is not based on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). Operating earnings is the measure of segment profit or loss we use to evaluate segment performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP accounting guidance for segment reporting, operating earnings is our measure of segment performance.

Operating earnings is defined as operating revenues less operating expenses, both net of income tax.

Operating revenues excludes net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses). The following additional adjustments are made to GAAP revenues, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating revenues:

• Universal life and investment-type product policy fees excludes the amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIB”) fees (“GMIB Fees”); and

• Net investment income: (i) includes amounts for scheduled periodic settlement payments and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, (ii) excludes certain amounts related to contractholder-directed unit-linked investments, and (iii) excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are variable interest entities (“VIEs”) consolidated under GAAP.

The following adjustments are made to GAAP expenses, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating expenses:

• Policyholder benefits and claims excludes: (i) amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets, (ii) benefits and hedging costs related

97

to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”), and (iii) market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”);

• Interest credited to policyholder account balances includes adjustments for scheduled periodic settlement payments and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of policyholder account balances (“PABs”) but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment and excludes amounts related to net investment income earned on contractholder-directed unit-linked investments;

• Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”) and value of business acquired (“VOBA”) excludes amounts related to: (i) net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), (ii) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs, and (iii) Market Value Adjustments;

• Interest expense on debt excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP; and

• Other expenses excludes costs related to implementation of new insurance regulatory requirements and acquisition and integration costs.

We believe the presentation of operating earnings, as we measure it for management purposes, enhances the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of our business. Operating revenues, operating expenses and operating earnings should not be viewed as substitutes for the following financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP: GAAP revenues, GAAP expenses and GAAP net income, respectively. Reconciliations of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are included in “— Results of Operations.”

In this discussion, we sometimes refer to sales activity for various products. These sales statistics do not correspond to revenues under GAAP, but are used as relevant measures of business activity.

Business

As announced in November 2011, MetLife reorganized its business into three broad geographic regions. As a result, in the first quarter of 2012, MICC reorganized into two segments: Retail and Corporate Benefit Funding. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. Management continues to evaluate the Company’s segment performance and allocated resources and may adjust such measurements in the future to better reflect segment profitability.

Our Retail segment offers a broad range of protection products and a variety of annuities primarily to individuals, and is organized into two businesses: Annuities and Life. Annuities include a variety of variable and fixed annuities which provide for both asset accumulation and asset distribution needs. Our Life insurance products include variable life, universal life, term life and whole life products. Additionally, through our broker-dealer affiliates, we offer a full range of mutual funds and other securities products.

Our Corporate Benefit Funding segment includes an array of annuity and investment products, including guaranteed interest products and other stable value products, income annuities, and separate account contracts for the investment management of defined benefit and defined contribution plan assets. This segment also includes certain products to fund company-, bank- or trust-owned life insurance used to finance non-qualified benefit programs for executives.

Corporate & Other contains the excess capital not allocated to the segments, run-off business, the Company’s ancillary international operations and non-medical health business, interest expense related to the majority of the Company’s outstanding debt, expenses associated with certain legal proceedings and income tax audit issues. Corporate & Other also includes the elimination of intersegment amounts.

98

Also in the first quarter of 2012, the Company adopted new guidance regarding accounting for DAC. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Financial Statements for further information. As a result, prior period results have been revised in connection with MetLife’s reorganization and the retrospective application of the first quarter 2012 adoption of new guidance regarding accounting for DAC.

Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported in the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. The most critical estimates include those used in determining:

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

(ii) investment impairments;

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

(iv) capitalization and amortization of DAC and the establishment and amortization of VOBA;

(v) measurement of goodwill and related impairment, if any;

(vi) liabilities for future policyholder benefits and the accounting for reinsurance;

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

(viii) liabilities for litigation and regulatory matters.

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

The above critical accounting estimates are described in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates” and Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2011 Annual Report.

Also, for a discussion of the new accounting guidance on DAC, see Note 1 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Economic Capital

Economic capital is an internally developed risk capital model, the purpose of which is to measure the risk in the business and to provide a basis upon which capital is deployed. The economic capital model accounts for the unique and specific nature of the risks inherent in MetLife’s business.

MetLife’s economic capital model aligns segment allocated equity with emerging standards and consistent risk principles. Segment net investment income is credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact the Company’s consolidated net investment income, operating earnings or net income.

99

Disposition

During June 2012, the Company disposed of its wholly-owned subsidiary, MetLife Europe Limited (“MetLife Europe”) to MetLife. As a result of this disposition, the net worth maintenance agreement between MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and MetLife Europe terminated automatically in accordance with its terms. See Note 2 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

Results of Operations

Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 Compared with the Six Months Ended June 30, 2011

Consolidated Results

We have experienced growth and an increase in market share, specifically, in our variable and universal life and term life businesses. Pension closeout sales in the United Kingdom remain strong, however, premiums decreased $183 million, before income tax, due to a significant sale in the prior period. While premiums for this business were almost entirely offset by the related change in policyholder benefits, the favorable results contributed to the growth in our investment portfolio. Sales of annuities declined $2.5 billion, before income tax, or 28% compared to the prior period, in response to actions taken to manage sales volume in order to strike the right balance among growth, profitability and risk.

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		Change		% Change
	(In millions)
Revenues
Premiums	$	786	$	777	$	9		1.2	%
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		1,119		948		171		18.0	%
Net investment income		1,548		1,581		(33)		(2.1)	%
Other revenues		248		261		(13)		(5.0)	%
Net investment gains (losses)		75		(41)		116
Net derivative gains (losses)		143		(23)		166
Total revenues		3,919		3,503		416		11.9	%
Expenses
Policyholder benefits and claims		1,225		1,145		80		7.0	%
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		606		591		15		2.5	%
Capitalization of DAC		(494)		(631)		137		21.7	%
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		454		402		52		12.9	%
Interest expense on debt		119		220		(101)		(45.9)	%
Other expenses		1,265		1,263		2		0.2	%
Total expenses		3,175		2,990		185		6.2	%
Income (loss) before provision for income tax		744		513		231		45.0	%
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		227		154		73		47.4	%
Net income	$	517	$	359	$	158		44.0	%

During the six months ended June 30, 2012, income (loss) before provision for income tax, increased $231 million ($158 million, net of income tax) over the prior period primarily driven by a favorable change in net derivative gains (losses) and a favorable change in net investment gains (losses).

We manage our investment portfolio using disciplined Asset/Liability Management principles, focusing on cash flow and duration to support our current and future liabilities. Our intent is to match the timing and amount of liability cash outflows with invested assets that have cash inflows of comparable timing and amount, while optimizing risk-adjusted net investment income and risk-adjusted total return. Our investment portfolio is heavily

100

weighted toward fixed income investments, with over 80% of our portfolio invested in fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans. These securities and loans have varying maturities and other characteristics which cause them to be generally well suited for matching the cash flow and duration of insurance liabilities. Other invested asset classes including, but not limited to, equity securities, other limited partnership interests and real estate and real estate joint ventures, provide additional diversification and opportunity for long-term yield enhancement in addition to supporting the cash flow and duration objectives of our investment portfolio. We also use derivatives as an integral part of our management of the investment portfolio to hedge certain risks, including changes in interest rates, foreign currencies, credit spreads and equity market levels. Additional considerations for our investment portfolio include current and expected market conditions and expectations for changes within our specific mix of products and business segments. In addition, the general account investment portfolio included, within other securities, contractholder-directed unit-linked investments supporting variable annuity type liabilities, which did not qualify as separate account assets. The returns on these contractholder-directed unit-linked investments, which can vary significantly period to period, included changes in estimated fair value subsequent to purchase, inure to contractholders and are offset in earnings by a corresponding change in PABs through interest credited to policyholder account balances. During June 2012, the Company disposed of MetLife Europe, which held these contractholder-directed unit-linked investments.

The composition of the investment portfolio of each business segment is tailored to the specific characteristics of its insurance liabilities, causing certain portfolios to be shorter in duration and others to be longer in duration. Accordingly, certain portfolios are more heavily weighted in longer duration, higher yielding fixed maturity securities, or certain sub-sectors of fixed maturity securities, than other portfolios.

Investments are purchased to support our insurance liabilities and not to generate net investment gains and losses. However, net investment gains and losses are incurred and can change significantly from period to period due to changes in external influences, including changes in market factors such as interest rates, foreign currencies, credit spreads and equity markets; counterparty specific factors such as financial performance, credit rating and collateral valuation; and internal factors such as portfolio rebalancing. Changes in these factors from period to period can significantly impact the levels of both impairments and realized gains and losses on investments sold.

We use freestanding interest rate, equity, credit and currency derivatives to hedge certain invested assets and insurance liabilities. Certain of these hedges are designated and qualify as accounting hedges, which reduce volatility in earnings. For those hedges not designated as accounting hedges, changes in market factors lead to the recognition of fair value changes in net derivative gains (losses) generally without an offsetting gain or loss recognized in earnings for the item being hedged.

Certain direct or assumed variable annuity products with minimum benefit guarantees contain embedded derivatives that are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). The Company hedges certain of the market risks inherent in these variable annuity guarantees through a combination of reinsurance and freestanding derivatives. Ceded reinsurance of direct or assumed variable annuity products with minimum benefit guarantees generally contain embedded derivatives that are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). The valuation of these embedded derivatives includes a nonperformance risk adjustment, which is unhedged, and can be a significant driver of net derivative gains (losses) but does not have an economic impact on the Company.

101

Direct, assumed, and ceded variable annuity embedded derivatives and the associated freestanding derivative hedges are collectively referred to as “VA program derivatives” in the following table. All other derivatives that are economic hedges of certain invested assets and insurance liabilities are referred to as “non-VA program derivatives” in the following table. The table below presents the impact on net derivative gains (losses) from non-VA program derivatives and VA program derivatives:

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		Change
	(In millions)
Non-VA program derivatives
Interest rate	$	55	$	(28)	$	83
Foreign currency		2		(55)		57
Credit		15		4		11
Total non-VA program derivatives		72		(79)		151
VA program derivatives
Embedded derivatives-direct/assumed guarantees:
Market and other risks		327		262		65
Nonperformance risk		(102)		(28)		(74)
Total		225		234		(9)
Embedded derivatives-ceded reinsurance:
Market and other risks		(82)		(185)		103
Nonperformance risk		39		23		16
Total		(43)		(162)		119
Freestanding derivatives hedging direct/assumed embedded derivatives		(111)		(16)		(95)
Total VA program derivatives		71		56		15
Net derivative gains (losses)	$	143	$	(23)	$	166

The favorable change in net derivative gains (losses) on non-VA program derivatives was $151 million ($98 million, net of income tax). This reflects long-term interest rates decreasing more in the current period than in the prior period, which primarily impacted receive-fixed interest rate swaps, long interest rate floors and long interest rate futures, partially offset by lower interest rates in the U.K. which impacted our pay-fixed inflation swaps. These freestanding derivatives are primarily hedging interest rate risk in long duration liability portfolios and hedging inflation-indexed liabilities. In addition, a strengthening of the U.S. dollar relative to other key currencies favorably impacted foreign currency swaps and forwards, which primarily hedge certain foreign denominated bonds. Because certain of these hedging strategies are not designated or do not qualify as accounting hedges, the changes in the estimated fair value of these freestanding derivatives are recognized in net derivative gains (losses) without an offsetting gain or loss recognized in earnings for the item being hedged.

The favorable change in net derivative gains (losses) on VA program derivatives was $15 million ($10 million, net of income tax). This was due to a favorable change of $73 million ($47 million, net of income tax) related to market and other risks on direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives, net of the impact of market and other risks on the ceded reinsurance embedded derivatives and net of freestanding derivatives hedging these risks; partially offset by a net unfavorable change of $58 million ($38 million, net of income tax) related to the changes in the nonperformance risk adjustment on the direct, assumed, and ceded variable annuity embedded derivatives.

Generally, a higher portion of the ceded reinsurance for GMIBs is accounted for as an embedded derivative as compared to the direct guarantees since the settlement provisions of the reinsurance contracts generally meet the

102

accounting criteria of “net settlement.” This mismatch in accounting can lead to significant volatility in earnings, even though the risks inherent in these direct guarantees are fully covered by the ceded reinsurance.

The foregoing favorable change of $73 million ($47 million, net of income tax) was driven by changes in market factors. As discussed in the preceding paragraph, changes in market and other risks lead to volatility in earnings due to the mismatch in accounting on GMIBs. The primary changes in market factors are summarized as follows:

• Equity index levels improved more in the current period than in the prior period and equity volatility decreased more in the current period than in the prior period. These changes contributed to an unfavorable change in our ceded reinsurance asset and our freestanding equity derivatives and favorable changes in our embedded derivatives; and

• Long-term interest rates decreased more in the current period than in the prior period and contributed to a favorable change in our ceded reinsurance asset and our freestanding interest rate derivatives and unfavorable changes in our embedded derivatives.

The favorable change in net investment gains of $116 million ($75 million, net of income tax) was primarily due to higher net gains on sales of fixed maturity securities.

Income tax expense for the six months ended June 30, 2012 was $227 million, or 31% of income (loss) before provision for income tax, compared with income tax expense of $154 million, or 30% of income (loss) before provision for income tax, for the prior period. The Company’s 2012 and 2011 effective tax rates differ from the U.S. statutory rate of 35% primarily due to the impact of certain permanent tax differences, including non-taxable investment income and tax credits for investments in low income housing, in relation to income (loss) before provision for income tax.

As more fully described in the discussion of performance measures above, we use operating earnings, which does not equate to net income, as determined in accordance with GAAP, to analyze our performance, evaluate segment performance, and allocate resources. We believe that the presentation of operating earnings, as we measure it for management purposes, enhances the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business. Operating earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for GAAP net income. Operating earnings increased $26 million, net of income tax, to $480 million, net of income tax, for the six months ended June 30, 2012 from $454 million, net of income tax, in the prior period.

Reconciliation of net income to operating earnings

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011
	(In millions)
Net income	$	517	$	359
Less: Net investment gains (losses)		75		(41)
Less: Net derivative gains (losses)		143		(23)
Less: Other adjustments to net income (1)		(147)		(76)
Less: Provision for income tax (expense) benefit		(34)		45
Operating earnings	$	480	$	454

(1) See definitions of operating revenues and operating expenses for the components of such adjustments.

103

Reconciliation of GAAP revenues to operating revenues and GAAP expenses to operating expenses

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011
	(In millions)
Total revenues	$	3,919	$	3,503
Less: Net investment gains (losses)		75		(41)
Less: Net derivative gains (losses)		143		(23)
Less: Adjustments related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)		1		(2)
Less: Other adjustments to revenues (1)		141		219
Total operating revenues	$	3,559	$	3,350
Total expenses	$	3,175	$	2,990
Less: Adjustments related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)		68		51
Less: Other adjustments to expenses (1)		221		242
Total operating expenses	$	2,886	$	2,697

(1) See definitions of operating revenues and operating expenses for the components of such adjustments.

Consolidated Results – Operating

	Six Months Ended June 30,
	2012		2011		Change		% Change
			(In millions)
OPERATING REVENUES
Premiums	$	786	$	777	$	9		1.2 %
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees		1,057		907		150		16.5 %
Net investment income		1,468		1,405		63		4.5 %
Other revenues		248		261		(13)		(5.0)%
Total operating revenues		3,559		3,350		209		6.2 %
OPERATING EXPENSES
Policyholder benefits and claims		1,136		1,115		21		1.9 %
Interest credited to policyholder account balances		561		579		(18)		(3.1)%
Capitalization of DAC		(494)		(631)		137		21.7 %
Amortization of DAC and VOBA		388		349		39		11.2 %
Interest expense on debt		34		33		1		3.0 %
Other expenses		1,261		1,252		9		0.7 %
Total operating expenses		2,886		2,697		189		7.0 %
Provision for income tax expense (benefit)		193		199		(6)		(3.0)%
Operating earnings	$	480	$	454	$	26		5.7 %

Unless otherwise stated, all amounts discussed below are net of income tax.

104

The $26 million increase in operating earnings was driven by growth in most of our businesses, which increased our policy fees, favorable impacts from changes in market factors and a higher income tax benefit, partially offset by increased expenses.

Positive net cash flows, generated from the majority of our businesses, were the primary driver of increases in both invested assets and separate account assets. This growth in separate account assets, in turn, generated an increase in operating earnings of $90 million, primarily from higher policy fees and other revenues from our annuity business. In our variable annuity products, policy fees are calculated as a percentage of the average assets in separate accounts. In addition to positive net cash flows, invested assets increased from higher collateral posted by our derivative counterparties, which, combined, generated higher net investment earnings of $12 million. Consistent with our increase in invested assets, the growth in insurance liabilities resulted in higher interest credited on long-duration contracts and on our PABs, which resulted in a decrease in operating earnings of $8 million. Reduced annuity sales in the current period resulted in lower DAC capitalization, which was offset by a decline in deferrable expenses. However, strong annuity sales in the prior period significantly increased our in-force business which contributed to an increase in non-deferrable expenses of $66 million.

Market factors, including improved real estate markets on our real estate joint venture investments, net of lower returns on our private equity investments, favorably impacted investment yields and contributed a $29 million increase in operating earnings. As a result of the decline in interest rates, average crediting rates on annuity fixed rate funds declined, contributing an increase of $5 million to operating earnings. The favorable equity market performance increased our average separate account balances, triggering an increase in policy fees and other revenues, most notably in our annuity business, resulting in a $5 million increase in operating earnings.

The aforementioned business growth, combined with favorable market impacts, resulted in a $25 million increase in DAC, VOBA and deferred sales inducements amortization and a $27 million increase in affiliated reinsurance–related expenses. In addition, we experienced favorable mortality in our life, pension and structured settlement businesses, which improved operating earnings by $3 million, while certain insurance-related liabilities and reserve refinements decreased operating earnings by $7 million.

The Company also benefited from a higher income tax benefit in the first half of 2012 of $13 million over the prior period, as a result of a higher utilization of tax-preferenced investments which provided tax credits and deductions.

Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 1 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Future Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 1 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Item 4.Controls and Procedures

Management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rule 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

There were no changes to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as defined in Exchange Act Rule 15d-15(f) during the quarter ended June 30, 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

105

Part II — Other Information

Item 1.  Legal Proceedings

The following should be read in conjunction with (i) Part I, Item 3, of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, as revised by MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on May 31, 2012 (as revised, the “2011 Annual Report”); (ii) Part II, Item 1, of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012, and (iii) Note 9 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in Part I of this report.

Unclaimed Property Inquiries

In April 2012, MetLife, for itself and on behalf of entities including MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, reached agreements with representatives of the U.S. jurisdictions that were conducting audits of MetLife and certain of its affiliates for compliance with unclaimed property laws, and with state insurance regulators directly involved in a multistate targeted market conduct examination relating to claim-payment practices and compliance with unclaimed property laws. The effectiveness of each agreement was conditioned upon the approval of a specified number of jurisdictions. In each case, the threshold for effectiveness has been reached. Pursuant to the agreements, MetLife will, among other things, take specified action to identify liabilities under life insurance, annuity, and retained asset contracts, to adopt specified procedures for seeking to contact and pay owners of the identified liabilities and, to the extent that it is unable to locate such owners, to escheat these amounts with interest at a specified rate to the appropriate states. Additionally, MetLife has agreed to accelerate the final date of certain industrial life policies and to escheat unclaimed benefits of such policies. It is possible that other jurisdictions may pursue similar exams or audits and that such exams or audits may result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws, administrative penalties, interest, and/or further changes to the Company’s procedures.

Summary

Various litigation, claims and assessments against the Company, in addition to those discussed previously and those otherwise provided for in the Company’s consolidated financial statements, have arisen in the course of the Company’s business, including, but not limited to, in connection with its activities as an insurer, employer, investor, investment advisor and taxpayer. Further, state insurance regulatory authorities and other federal and state authorities regularly make inquiries and conduct investigations concerning the Company’s compliance with applicable insurance and other laws and regulations.

It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of all pending investigations and legal proceedings. In some of the matters referred to previously, large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Although, in light of these considerations it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain cases could have a material effect upon the Company’s financial position, based on information currently known by the Company’s management, in its opinion, the outcomes of such pending investigations and legal proceedings are not likely to have such an effect. However, given the large and/or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters and the inherent unpredictability of litigation, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

106

Item 1A.  Risk Factors

The following, together with the information under “Risk Factors” in Part II, Item 1A, of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2012, which is incorporated herein by reference, should be read in conjunction with, and supplements and amends, the factors that may affect the Company’s business or operations described under “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A, of the 2011 Annual Report.

Concerns Over U.S. Fiscal Policy and the “Fiscal Cliff” in the U.S., as well as Rating Agency Downgrades of U.S. Treasury Securities, Could Have an Adverse Effect on Our Business, Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Financial markets have recently been affected by concerns over U.S. fiscal policy, including the uncertainty regarding the “fiscal cliff” composed of tax increases and automatic spending cuts that will become effective at the end of 2012 unless steps are taken to delay or offset them, as well as the need to again raise the U.S. federal government’s debt ceiling by the end of 2012 and reduce the federal deficit. These issues could, on their own, or combined with the slowing of the global economy generally, send the U.S. into a new recession, have severe repercussions to the U.S. and global credit and financial markets, further exacerbate concerns over sovereign debt of other countries and disrupt economic activity in the U.S. and elsewhere. All of these factors could affect our ability to meet liquidity needs and obtain capital. In addition, a recession in the U.S. could adversely impact the demand for our products, negatively impact earnings, adversely affect the performance of our investments or result in impairments and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See “Risk Factors – Difficult Conditions in the Global Capital Markets and the Economy Generally May Materially Adversely Affect Our Business and Results of Operations and These Conditions May Not Improve in the Near Future” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

In August 2011, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services downgraded the AAA rating on U.S. Treasury securities to AA+ with a negative outlook, while Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) affirmed the Aaa rating on U.S. Treasury securities, but with a negative outlook. In October 2011, Moody’s affirmed its August 2011 ratings, but revised its negative outlook to stable. In November 2011, Fitch Ratings affirmed its AAA rating on U.S. Treasury securities but changed its U.S. credit rating outlook to negative from stable, citing the failure of a special Congressional committee to agree on certain deficit reduction measures. Further rating agency downgrades of U.S. Treasury securities are possible.

As a result of downgrades of U.S. Treasury securities, the market value of some of our investments may decrease, and our capital adequacy could be adversely affected, which could require us to raise additional capital during a period of distress in financial markets, potentially at a higher cost. Further downgrades, together with uncertainty regarding the fiscal cliff, would significantly exacerbate the risks we face and any resulting adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including those described under “Risk Factors — Difficult Conditions in the Global Capital Markets and the Economy Generally May Materially Adversely Affect Our Business and Results of Operations and These Conditions May Not Improve in the Near Future,” “Risk Factors — Adverse Capital and Credit Market Conditions May Significantly Affect Our Ability to Meet Liquidity Needs, Access to Capital and Cost of Capital,” “Risk Factors — Our Participation in a Securities Lending Program Subjects Us to Potential Liquidity and Other Risks” and “Risk Factors — The Determination of the Amount of Allowances and Impairments Taken on Our Investments is Subjective and Could Materially Impact Our Results of Operations or Financial Position” included in the 2011 Annual Report. We cannot predict whether or when these adverse consequences may occur, what other unforeseen consequences may result, or the extent, severity and duration of the impact of such consequences on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

107

Our Insurance and Brokerage Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth

Insurance Regulation.Our insurance operations are subject to a wide variety of insurance and other laws and regulations. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation” included in the 2011 Annual Report. State insurance laws regulate most aspects of our U.S. insurance businesses, and our U.S insurance companies are regulated by the insurance regulators of the states in which they are domiciled and the states in which they are licensed.

State laws in the U.S. grant insurance regulatory and other state authorities broad administrative powers with respect to, among other things:

• licensing companies and agents to transact business;

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

• mandating certain insurance benefits;

• regulating certain premium rates;

• reviewing and approving policy forms;

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

• regulating advertising;

• protecting privacy;

• establishing statutory capital and reserve requirements and solvency standards;

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

• approving changes in control of insurance companies;

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

• regulating the types, amounts and valuation of investments.

State insurance guaranty associations have the right to assess insurance companies doing business in their state for funds to help pay the obligations of insolvent insurance companies to policyholders and claimants. Because the amount and timing of an assessment is beyond our control, the liabilities that we have currently established for these potential liabilities may not be adequate. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Guaranty Associations and Similar Arrangements” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

State insurance regulators and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners regularly re-examine existing laws and regulations applicable to insurance companies and their products. Changes in these laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, that are made for the benefit of the consumer sometimes lead to additional expense for the insurer and, thus, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In July 2012, our New York domestic insurer affiliates received, as part of an industry-wide inquiry, a request from the New York Department of Financial Services to provide information regarding their

108

use of affiliated captives or off-shore entities to reinsure insurance risks. Like many life insurance companies, we, and certain of our subsidiaries and affiliates utilize captive reinsurers in order to comply with certain reserve requirements related to universal life and term life insurance policies. The financing arrangements with the captives support non-economic reserves, representing reserves required by regulation but above estimates of needed reserves. It is possible that other state insurance departments could make similar inquiries. If Connecticut, Delaware or other state insurance regulators determine to restrict the use of such captives for purposes of funding reserve requirements related to universal life and term life insurance policies, it could impair our ability to write such products or require us to increases prices on such products unless alternate reserve funding solutions are found.

U.S. Federal Regulation Affecting Insurance. Currently, the U.S. federal government does not directly regulate the business of insurance. However, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) allows federal regulators to compel state insurance regulators to liquidate an insolvent insurer under some circumstances if the state regulators have not acted within a specific period. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve Board”) has also proposed that it be given authority to compel insurance companies to take prompt corrective action in certain circumstances if they are part of a large bank holding company or of a company that has been designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) as a non-bank systemically important financial institution (“non-bank SIFI”). It also establishes the Federal Insurance Office within the Department of the Treasury, which has the authority to participate in the negotiations of international insurance agreements with foreign regulators for the U.S., as well as to collect information about the insurance industry and recommend prudential standards. While not having a general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance, the director of this office will perform various functions with respect to insurance, including serving as a non-voting member of the FSOC and making recommendations to the FSOC regarding insurers to be designated for more stringent regulation. The director is also required to submit a report to Congress regarding how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the United States, including by increasing national uniformity through either a federal charter or effective action by the states.

Federal legislation and administrative policies in several areas can significantly and adversely affect insurance companies. These areas include financial services regulation, securities regulation, derivatives regulation, mortgage regulation, pension regulation, health care regulation, privacy, tort reform legislation and taxation. In addition, various forms of direct and indirect federal regulation of insurance have been proposed from time to time, including proposals for the establishment of an optional federal charter for insurance companies. Other aspects of our insurance operations could also be affected by Dodd-Frank. For example, effective July 21, 2012, Dodd-Frank imposes prohibitions on Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”)-insured depository institutions (such as MetLife Bank, National Association (“MetLife Bank”)) and their affiliates from engaging in proprietary trading or sponsoring or investing in hedge funds or private equity funds (commonly known as the Volcker Rule). In December 2011, MetLife Bank and MetLife entered into a definitive agreement to sell most of the depository business of MetLife Bank. Once MetLife Bank has completely exited its depository business, MetLife plans to terminate MetLife Bank’s FDIC insurance, putting MetLife in a position to be able to deregister as a bank holding company. If and when MetLife Bank’s FDIC insurance is terminated, MetLife and its affiliates will not be subject to the bans on proprietary trading and fund activities under the Volcker Rule. However, because the Volcker Rule nevertheless imposes additional capital requirements and quantitative limits on such trading and activities by a non-bank SIFI, MetLife and its affiliates could be subject to such requirements and limits were they to be designated non-bank SIFIs. Regulations defining and governing such requirements and limits on non-bank SIFIs have not been proposed. Commencing from the date of designation, a non-bank SIFI will have a two-year period, subject to further extension by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the Federal Reserve Board (collectively, the “Federal Reserve”), to conform to any such requirements and limits. Subject to safety and soundness determinations as part of rulemaking that could require additional capital requirements and quantitative limits, Dodd-Frank provides that the exemptions under the Volcker Rule also are available to exempt any additional capital requirements and quantitative limits on non-bank SIFIS. See “Business — Regulation — Dodd-Frank and Other Legislative and Regulatory Developments — Volcker Rule” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

109

Regulation of Brokers and Dealers. Dodd-Frank also authorizes the SEC to establish a standard of conduct applicable to brokers and dealers when providing personalized investment advice to retail and other customers. This standard of conduct would be to act in the best interest of the customer without regard to the financial or other interest of the broker or dealer providing the advice. See “Business — Regulation — Securities, Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser Regulation” and “Risk Factors — Changes in U.S. Federal and State Securities Laws and Regulations, and State Insurance Regulations Regarding Suitability of Annuity Product Sales, May Affect Our Operations and Our Profitability” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

International Regulation. Our international insurance operations are principally regulated by insurance regulatory authorities in the jurisdictions in which they are located or operate. The authority of our international operations to conduct business is subject to licensing requirements, permits and approvals, and these authorizations are subject to modification and revocation. See “Risk Factors — Our International Operations Face Political, Legal, Operational and Other Risks, Including Exposure to Local and Regional Economic Conditions, That Could Negatively Affect Those Operations or Our Profitability” and “Business — Regulation” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

Summary.From time to time, regulators raise issues during examinations or audits of us and our regulated subsidiaries that could, if determined adversely, have a material impact on us. We cannot predict whether or when regulatory actions may be taken that could adversely affect our operations. In addition, the interpretations of regulations by regulators may change and statutes may be enacted with retroactive impact, particularly in areas such as accounting or statutory reserve requirements. We are also subject to other regulations and may in the future become subject to additional regulations. See “Business — Regulation” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

Compliance with applicable laws and regulations is time consuming and personnel-intensive, and changes in these laws and regulations may materially increase our direct and indirect compliance and other expenses of doing business, thus having a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

As a Bank Holding Company and Financial Holding Company, MetLife is Subject to Regulation by the Federal Reserve, Including Risk-Based and Leverage Capital Guidelines, Which May Adversely Affect Our Competitive Position

Currently, as the owner of MetLife Bank, MetLife is regulated as a bank holding company and financial holding company by the Federal Reserve. In December 2011, MetLife Bank and MetLife entered into a definitive agreement to sell most of the depository business of MetLife Bank to GE Capital Bank. The transaction is subject to the receipt of regulatory approvals from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) and to the satisfaction of other customary closing conditions. The Utah Department of Financial Institutions has approved the transaction and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) has granted approval of a change in the composition of all or substantially all of MetLife Bank’s assets in connection with the transaction. GE Capital Bank has filed an application with the FDIC seeking approval of the assumption of the deposits to be transferred to it, and MetLife Bank has filed an application with the FDIC to terminate MetLife Bank’s FDIC deposit insurance contingent upon certification that MetLife Bank has no remaining deposits (which is dependent on the assumption by GE Capital Bank of the deposits to be transferred to it). The parties have each responded to questions on their applications from the staff of the FDIC, and GE Capital Bank is in the process of responding to recent additional requests from the FDIC. The parties are awaiting action by the FDIC on their applications. Once MetLife Bank has completely exited its depository business, MetLife plans to terminate MetLife Bank’s FDIC insurance, putting MetLife in a position to be able to deregister as a bank holding company. Upon completion of the foregoing, MetLife will no longer be regulated as a bank holding company or subject to enhanced supervision and prudential standards as a bank holding company with assets of $50 billion or more.

However, if, in the future, the FSOC designates MetLife as a non-bank SIFI (as discussed below), it would once again be subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve and enhanced supervision and prudential standards, such as Regulation YY and the requirements relating to resolution planning and (when adopted) credit exposure reporting. For information regarding Regulation YY, see “Risk Factors — Various Aspects of Dodd-Frank Could Impact Our Business Operations, Capital Requirements and Profitability and Limit Our Growth” included in the

110

2011 Annual Report. Regulation of MetLife as a bank holding company or possibly as a non-bank SIFI could affect our business. For example, enhanced capital requirements applicable to MetLife may adversely affect our ability to compete with other insurers that are not subject to those requirements, and counterparty exposure limits may affect our ability to engage in hedging activities. In addition, it could give the Federal Reserve Board the right to require that any of our insurance companies, or insurance company affiliates, take prompt action to correct any financial weaknesses.

In April 2012, the FSOC adopted final rules setting forth the process it will follow and the criteria it will use to assess whether a non-bank financial company should be subject to enhanced supervision by the Federal Reserve as a non-bank SIFI. The FSOC will follow a three-stage process. In Stage 1, a set of uniform quantitative metrics will be applied to a broad group of non-bank financial companies in order to identify non-bank financial companies for further evaluation. If MetLife meets the total consolidated assets threshold and at least one of the other five quantitative thresholds used in the first stage, the FSOC will continue with two stages of further analysis using additional sources of data and qualitative and quantitative factors. MetLife is currently a bank holding company and, as a result, it is not subject to designation as a non-bank SIFI. However, if MetLife succeeds in deregistering as a bank holding company, it could be considered for designation as a non-bank SIFI. See “Business — Regulation — Regulation of MetLife as a Bank Holding Company” included in the 2011 Annual Report.

Capital. MetLife is subject to risk-based and leverage capital guidelines issued by the federal banking regulatory agencies for banks and bank and financial holding companies which may adversely affect our ability to compete with other insurers that are not subject to those requirements. The federal banking regulatory agencies are required by law to take specific prompt corrective actions with respect to institutions that do not meet minimum capital standards. As a bank holding company with more than $50 billion in assets, MetLife is subject to capital planning requirements administered by the Federal Reserve, including the Federal Reserve’s capital plan rule which requires MetLife to submit annual capital plans which include projections of MetLife’s capital levels under baseline and stress scenarios over a nine-quarter period. The Federal Reserve will approve or object to a company’s proposed capital actions, such as dividends and stock repurchases, based on the results of those capital plans and the Federal Reserve’s assessment of the robustness of the company’s capital planning processes. In addition, in recent years, the Federal Reserve has conducted its own assessment of bank holding companies’ internal capital planning processes, capital adequacy and proposed capital distributions. MetLife participated in the assessment conducted by the Federal Reserve in 2012, the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review. Based on its assessment, the Federal Reserve objected to the incremental capital actions described in MetLife’s capital distribution plan, which included a proposed stock repurchase and dividend increase. In June 2012, the Federal Reserve Board granted MetLife an extension of time until September 30, 2012 to resubmit its capital plan under the capital plans rule. If MetLife remains a bank holding company, or if it is designated a non-bank SIFI and is required to submit capital plans to the Federal Reserve in the future, there can be no assurance that the Federal Reserve will approve its future capital plans. Capital planning requirements could have the effect, in practice, of increasing the amounts of capital held by companies subject to the requirements, including MetLife, which could affect their competitive position.

If it remains a bank holding company, MetLife may become required to comply with further requirements relating to the calculation of capital, commonly referred to as “Basel II,” as well as increased capital and liquidity requirements (commonly referred to as “Basel III”) for bank holding companies. In June 2012, the OCC, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC published three notices of proposed rulemaking (the “Bank Capital NPRs”) that would revise and replace the agencies’ current capital rules with rules consistent with (i) the final rules for increased capital and liquidity requirements for bank holding companies, such as MetLife, of Basel III, as well as the applicable sections of Dodd-Frank, (ii) a series of revisions adopted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to the market risk capital requirements for exposures in a banking organization’s trading book (Basel II.5), and (iii) the market risk capital requirements of Basel II. It is possible that even more stringent capital and liquidity requirements could be imposed if, in the future, MetLife is designated by the FSOC as a non-bank SIFI. Certain of our international operations could also be affected by Solvency II, a new capital adequacy regime for the European insurance industry.

111

Changes in Market Interest Rates May Significantly Affect Our Profitability

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

As interest rates decrease or remain at low levels, we may be forced to reinvest proceeds from investments that have matured or have been prepaid or sold at lower yields, reducing our investment margin. Moreover, borrowers may prepay or redeem the fixed income securities, commercial or agricultural mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities in our investment portfolio with greater frequency in order to borrow at lower market rates, which exacerbates this risk. Lowering interest crediting rates can help offset decreases in investment margins on some products. However, our ability to lower these rates could be limited by competition or contractually guaranteed minimum rates and may not match the timing or magnitude of changes in asset yields. As a result, our spread could decrease or potentially become negative. Our expectation for future spreads is an important component in the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”) and value of business acquired (“VOBA”), and significantly lower spreads may cause us to accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period. In addition, during periods of declining interest rates, life insurance and annuity products may be relatively more attractive investments to consumers, resulting in increased premium payments on products with flexible premium features, repayment of policy loans and increased persistency, or a higher percentage of insurance policies remaining in force from year to year, during a period when our new investments carry lower returns. A decline in market interest rates could also reduce our return on investments that do not support particular policy obligations. During periods of sustained lower interest rates, policy liabilities may not be sufficient to meet future policy obligations and may need to be strengthened. Accordingly, declining and sustained lower interest rates may materially affect our results of operations, financial position and cash flows and significantly reduce our profitability. In June 2012, the Federal Reserve Board reiterated its plans to keep interest rates low until at least through late 2014, in order to revive the slow recovery from stressed economic conditions. It also extended to the end of 2012 “Operation Twist.” Central banks around the world, including the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Australia, the Central Bank of Brazil and the Central Bank of China, followed the recent actions of the Federal Reserve Board to lower interest rates. The collective effort globally to lower interest rates was in response to concerns about Europe’s sovereign debt crisis and slowing global economic growth.

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

112

Litigation and Regulatory Investigations Are Increasingly Common in Our Businesses and May Result in Significant Financial Losses and/or Harm to Our Reputation

We face a significant risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating our businesses, including the risk of class action lawsuits. Our pending legal and regulatory actions include proceedings specific to us and others generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which we operate. In connection with our insurance operations, plaintiffs’ lawyers may bring or are bringing class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to sales or underwriting practices, claims payments and procedures, product design, disclosure, administration, denial or delay of benefits and breaches of fiduciary or other duties to customers. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against us may seek very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages. Modern pleading practice in the U.S. and other countries permits considerable variation in the assertion of money damages or other relief. This variability in pleadings, together with our actual experience in litigating or resolving through settlement numerous claims over an extended period of time, demonstrates to management that the monetary relief which may be specified in a lawsuit or claim bears little relevance to its merits or disposition value. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may normally be difficult to ascertain. Uncertainties can include how fact finders will evaluate documentary evidence and the credibility and effectiveness of witness testimony, and how trial and appellate courts will apply the law in the context of the pleadings or evidence presented, whether by motion practice, or at trial or on appeal. Disposition valuations are also subject to the uncertainty of how opposing parties and their counsel will themselves view the relevant evidence and applicable law.

We establish liabilities for litigation and regulatory loss contingencies when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities have been established for a number of matters noted in Note 9 of the Notes to the Interim Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. It is possible that some of the matters could require us to pay damages or make other expenditures or establish accruals in amounts that could not be estimated at June 30, 2012.

Over the past several years, we have faced numerous claims, including class action lawsuits, alleging improper marketing or sales of individual life insurance policies, annuities, mutual funds or other products.

We are also subject to various regulatory inquiries, such as information requests, subpoenas and books and record examinations, from state and federal regulators and other authorities. A substantial legal liability or a significant regulatory action against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, even if we ultimately prevail in the litigation, regulatory action or investigation, we could suffer significant reputational harm, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including our ability to attract new customers, retain our current customers and recruit and retain employees.

In April 2012, MetLife, for itself and on behalf of entities including MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, reached agreements with representatives of the U.S. jurisdictions that were conducting audits of MetLife and certain of its affiliates for compliance with unclaimed property laws, and with state insurance regulators directly involved in a multistate targeted market conduct examination relating to claim-payment practices and compliance with unclaimed property laws. The effectiveness of each agreement was conditioned upon the approval of a specified number of jurisdictions. In each case, the threshold for effectiveness has been reached. Pursuant to the agreements, MetLife will, among other things, take specified action to identify liabilities under life insurance, annuity, and retained asset contracts, to adopt specified procedures for seeking to contact and pay owners of the identified liabilities, and, to the extent that it is unable to locate such owners, to escheat these amounts with interest at a specified rate to the appropriate states. Additionally, MetLife has agreed to accelerate the final date of certain industrial life policies and to escheat unclaimed benefits of such policies. It is

113

possible that other jurisdictions may pursue similar exams or audits and that such exams or audits may result in additional payments to beneficiaries, additional escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws, administrative penalties, interest, and/or further changes to the Company’s procedures.

We cannot give assurance that current claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and other proceedings against us will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. It is also possible that related or unrelated claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and proceedings may be commenced in the future, and we could become subject to further investigations and have lawsuits filed or enforcement actions initiated against us. Increased regulatory scrutiny and any resulting investigations or proceedings could result in new legal actions and precedents and industry-wide regulations that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Item 6. Exhibits

(Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts:In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, please remember that they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries, or the other parties to the agreements. The agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representationsand warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and (i) should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate; (ii) have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement; (iii) may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to investors; and (iv) were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments. Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries may be found elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.)

Exhibit No.	Description
31.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS	XBRL Instance Document.
101.SCH	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
101.CAL	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.
101.LAB	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.
101.PRE	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.
101.DEF	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.

114

Signatures

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

METLIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT
By:	/s/  Peter M. Carlson
Name:		Peter M. Carlson
Title:		Executive Vice President, Finance
		Operations and Chief Accounting Officer
		(Authorized Signatory and Principal Accounting Officer)

Date: August 10, 2012

115

Exhibit Index

(Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts:In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, please remember that they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries, or the other parties to the agreements. The agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and (i) should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate; (ii) have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement; (iii) may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to investors; and (iv) were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments. Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and its subsidiaries may be found elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut’s other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.)

Exhibit No.	Description
31.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1	Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2	Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS	XBRL Instance Document.
101.SCH	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
101.CAL	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.
101.LAB	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.
101.PRE	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.
101.DEF	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.

E-1