ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS.
Risks Related to Our Distribution Structure
Our failure to continue to attract new recruits, retain independent sales representatives or license or maintain the licensing of independent sales representatives would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
New independent sales representatives provide us with access to new clients, enable us to increase sales and provide the next generation of successful independent sales representatives. As is typical with distribution businesses, we experience a high rate of turnover among part-time independent sales representatives, which requires us to attract, retain and motivate a large number of independent sales representatives. Recruiting is performed by current independent sales representatives, and the effectiveness of recruiting is generally dependent upon our reputation as a provider of a rewarding and potentially lucrative income opportunity, as well as the general competitive and economic environment. Whether recruits are motivated to complete their training and licensing requirements and commit to selling our products depends in part on the effectiveness of our compensation and promotional programs, as well as the competitiveness of such programs compared with other companies, including other part-time business opportunities and the recruits’ desire to help middle-income families in their communities.
If our new business opportunity and the products we distribute do not generate sufficient interest to attract new recruits, motivate them to become licensed independent sales representatives and maintain their licenses, and incentivize them to sell our products and recruit other new independent sales representatives, our business would be materially adversely affected.
Certain Regional Vice Presidents (“RVPs”) have large sales organizations. These RVPs are responsible for attracting, motivating, supporting and assisting the independent sales representatives in their sales organizations. The loss of key RVPs together with substantial numbers of independent sales representatives from their related sales organizations for any reason could adversely affect our business and could impact our recruitment of new independent sales representatives.
Like many other companies with large independent sales organizations, we have written agreements with independent sales representatives that define the contractual terms of the relationships both during and after their affiliations with the Company. From time to time, current and former independent sales representatives violate these agreements, and the Company takes steps to enforce them. If former or current independent sales representatives are successful in legally challenging our written agreements, then our business could be adversely impacted.
Furthermore, if we or any other businesses with a similar distribution structure engage in practices resulting in increased negative public attention for our business model, the resulting reputational challenges could adversely affect our ability to attract new recruits. Companies such as ours that distribute through independent agents to sell directly to customers have been and may continue to be the subject of negative commentary on website postings, social media and other media. This negative commentary can spread inaccurate or incomplete information about distribution companies in general or the Company in particular, which can make our recruiting more difficult.
From time to time, various jurisdictions make changes to the state or provincial licensing examination process that may make it more difficult for independent sales representatives to obtain or retain their life insurance and/or securities licenses. For example, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) changed the continuing education (“CE”) regulatory requirement from a three-year period to an annual requirement for securities-licensed representatives. In addition, the North American Securities Administrators Association approved a model rule for participating states that imposes a CE requirement for investment adviser representatives. Such changes place an increased burden on independent sales representatives to maintain their securities licenses, which could negatively impact the size of the active securities sales force in the event that representatives do not complete the applicable CE requirements on a timely basis.
A number of laws and regulations could apply to our independent contractor distribution model, which could require us to modify our distribution structure.
We have not been, and are not currently, subject to business opportunity laws because the amounts paid by the new independent sales representatives to us: (i) are less than the minimum thresholds set by many state statutes and (ii) are not fees paid for the right to participate in a business, but rather are for bona fide expenses such as state-required insurance examinations and pre-licensing training. We have not been, and are not currently, subject to franchise laws for similar reasons. However, there is a risk that a governmental agency or court could disagree with our assessment or that these laws and regulations could change. In addition, we do not believe that the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) current Business Opportunity Rule applies to the Company. On January 13, 2025, the FTC announced proposed amendments to the Business Opportunity Rule that would expand the rule but also would exempt
models like ours from its scope. Nonetheless, the rule ultimately could be amended or interpreted in a manner inconsistent with our current interpretation. Becoming subject to business opportunity or franchise laws or regulations could require us to provide additional disclosures and regulate the manner in which we recruit independent sales representatives that may increase the expense of, or adversely impact our recruitment of, new independent sales representatives.
There are various laws and regulations, including laws of general application such as the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), which prohibit fraudulent or deceptive practices, including but not limited to, pyramid schemes and misrepresentations regarding distributors’ earnings potential. The FTC has exercised its Penalty Offense Authority found in Section 5(m)1(B) of the FTC Act by issuing Notices of Penalty Offenses as a reminder of the law on earnings claims and as a deterrence against violations. The application of these laws and regulations to a given set of business practices is inherently fact-based and, therefore, is subject to interpretation by applicable enforcement authorities. Although we believe that our business practices comply with applicable laws and regulations, there is a risk that a governmental agency or court could disagree with our assessment, or that these laws and regulations could change in actuality or in application, which could require us to restructure our operations or result in regulatory fines, penalties or other costs, or reputational harm, or could otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, if an earnings claims rule like that proposed by the FTC were to become final, it could have an adverse impact on our recruitment and sales.
Various unfair and deceptive trade practices laws and regulations could potentially be invoked to challenge aspects of our recruiting of independent sales representatives. In particular, we and the independent sales representatives use promotional materials in recruiting that describe the potential business opportunity of becoming an independent sales representative and information with respect to earnings and lifestyle statements. These materials and statements made by us or the independent sales representatives may be deemed to be unfair, deceptive, or misleading under the FTC Act or other federal, state and provincial laws or regulations and could result in regulatory fines, penalties or other costs, or reputational harm. Being out of compliance with the aforementioned laws and regulations could require changes to the recruiting of independent sales representatives, which could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
There may be adverse tax, legal or financial consequences if the classification of the independent contractor sales representatives is changed.
Sales representatives are independent contractors who operate their own businesses. Although we believe that we have properly classified these sales representatives as independent contractors, there is a risk that the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), the Department of Labor (“DOL”), the Canada Revenue Agency, a court or other authority will take a different view. Furthermore, the tests governing the determination of whether an individual is considered to be an independent contractor or an employee are fact-sensitive and vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Laws and regulations that govern the status and classification of independent sales representatives are subject to change or interpretation.
The classification of workers as independent contractors continues to be the subject of increasing federal, state and provincial legislative, regulatory and judicial interest. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been introduced by federal and state authorities, and judicial decisions have been made, that call for or result in greater scrutiny of independent contractor classifications. It is difficult to predict what the outcome of worker classification activity may be. Changes to worker classifications could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations because sales representatives are independent contractors.
If there is an adverse determination with respect to the classification of some or all of the independent contractors by a court or governmental agency, we could incur significant costs complying with such laws and regulations, including tax withholding, social security payments, retirement plan contributions and recordkeeping, employee benefits, payment of wages or modification of our business model, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, there is the risk that we may be subject to significant monetary liabilities arising from fines or judgments as a result of any such actual or alleged non-compliance with federal, state, or provincial laws.
The Company’s or the independent sales representatives’ violation of, or non-compliance with, laws and regulations and related claims and proceedings could expose us to material liabilities.
Extensive federal, state, provincial and territorial laws regulate our product offerings, imposing certain requirements that independent sales representatives must follow in dealing with clients. Instances of non-compliance or violations on the part of the independent sales representatives could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition to imposing requirements on independent sales representatives when dealing with clients, federal, state, provincial and territorial laws and regulations generally require us to maintain a system of controls and supervision reasonably designed to ensure that independent sales representatives comply with the requirements to which they are subject. We have policies, procedures and controls to comply with these laws and regulations. Further, at any given time, we may have pending state, federal or provincial examinations or inquiries of our investment and savings products, insurance, mortgage, and other businesses. However, despite these
compliance and supervisory efforts, the breadth of our operations and the broad regulatory requirements could result in oversight failures and instances of non-compliance or violations on the part of the Company or independent sales representatives.
From time to time, we are subject to private litigation as a result of alleged misconduct by independent sales representatives. Non-compliance with or violations of laws or regulations could result in adverse findings in either examinations or litigation and could subject us to sanctions, monetary liabilities, restrictions on or the loss of the operation of our business, or reputational harm, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Insurance Business and Reinsurance
Our life insurance business may face significant losses or volatility if our actual experience differs from our expectations regarding mortality, reinsurance, persistency, or disability.
We set prices for life insurance policies based upon expected claim payment patterns derived from assumptions we make about the mortality rates, or likelihood of death, of our policyholders in any given year. The long-term profitability of these products depends upon how our actual mortality rates compare to our pricing assumptions. For example, if mortality rates are higher than those assumed in our pricing assumptions, we could be required to make more death benefit payments under our life insurance policies or to make such payments sooner than we had projected, which may decrease the profitability of our term life insurance products.
We reinsure 90% of our mortality risk on new business. Interest in reinsuring our mortality risk could diminish if there is increased volatility in the reinsurance market and/or a change in the perceived value of reinsuring Primerica’s business. As a result, in the future we may not be able to access reinsurance on new business and we could be forced to reinsure a smaller percentage of our mortality risk, or to reinsure the same percentage but at costs greater than we have historically paid.
The prices and expected future profitability of our life insurance products are also based, in part, upon assumptions related to persistency. Actual persistency that is lower than our persistency assumptions could have an adverse effect on profitability, especially in the early years of a policy, primarily because we may not collect sufficient revenue to cover our acquisition costs. Actual persistency that is higher than our persistency assumptions could have an adverse effect on profitability in the later years of a block of policies because the anticipated claims experience is higher in these later years. We are precluded from adjusting premiums on our in-force business during the initial term of the policies, and our ability to adjust premiums on in-force business after the initial policy term is limited to the maximum premium rates in the policy.
Our profitability is also affected by the extent actual disability rates underlying our waiver benefits, including recovery rates for individuals currently disabled, differ from actuarial assumptions. The waiver benefit is secondary to the death benefit coverage provided. However, the waiver benefit is not reinsured and material changes in assumptions compared to expectations can have a disproportionate impact on our financial results.
Our life insurance business is highly regulated, and statutory and regulatory changes may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Life insurance statutes and regulations are generally designed to protect the interests of the public and policyholders. Those interests may conflict with the interests of our stockholders. Currently, in the United States, the power to regulate insurance resides almost exclusively with the states, which grant state insurance regulators broad powers to regulate almost all aspects of our insurance business. Much of this state regulation follows model statutes or regulations developed or amended by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”), which is composed of the insurance commissioners of each U.S. jurisdiction. The NAIC re-examines and amends existing model laws and regulations (including holding company regulations), in addition to determining whether new ones are needed.
The Federal Insurance Office is authorized to, among other things, study methods to modernize and improve insurance regulation. We cannot predict with certainty whether, or in what form, reforms will be enacted and, if so, whether the enacted reforms will materially affect our business. Changes in federal statutes, financial services regulation and federal taxation, in addition to changes to state statutes and regulations, may be more restrictive than current requirements or may result in higher costs, and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
All U.S. states have adopted rules requiring insurance producers to act in the “best interest” of consumers when recommending an annuity. The New York Department of Financial Services’ “best interest” rules apply to both life insurance and annuities. These rules impose a higher standard of care than previously required, as well as enhanced disclosures and other obligations with respect to recommendations, which may increase our regulatory or litigation risk.
Federal and provincial insurance laws regulate all aspects of our Canadian insurance business. Changes to federal or provincial statutes and regulations may be more restrictive than current requirements or may result in higher costs, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. If the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (“OSFI”) determines that our corporate actions do not comply with applicable Canadian law, Primerica Life Insurance Company of Canada (“Primerica Life Canada”) could face sanctions or fines and be subject to increased capital requirements or other requirements.
The Minister of Finance (Canada) approved our indirect acquisition of Primerica Life Canada in 2010 with the expectation that we will provide ongoing financial, managerial or operational support to this subsidiary as necessary. If OSFI determines Primerica Life Canada is not receiving adequate support from the Parent Company under applicable Canadian law, Primerica Life Canada may be subject to increased capital requirements or other requirements deemed appropriate by OSFI.
If there are extraordinary changes to U.S. or Canadian statutory or regulatory requirements, we may be unable to fully comply with or maintain all required insurance licenses and approvals. As a result, the regulatory authorities could preclude or temporarily suspend us from conducting some or all of our insurance activities or impose fines or penalties on us, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We cannot predict with certainty the effect any proposed or future legislation or regulatory initiatives may have on the conduct of our business.
A decline in the regulatory capital ratios of our insurance subsidiaries could result in increased scrutiny by insurance regulators and ratings agencies and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Each of our U.S. insurance subsidiaries is subject to risk-based capital (“RBC”) standards (imposed under the laws of its respective jurisdiction of domicile). The RBC formula for U.S. life insurance companies generally establishes capital requirements relating to asset, insurance, interest rate and business risks. Our U.S. insurance subsidiaries are required to report RBC calculations annually to the applicable state department of insurance and the NAIC. Our Canadian life insurance subsidiary is subject to the Life Insurance Capital Adequacy Test Guideline (“LICAT”) and is required to provide its capital ratio calculations to the Canadian regulators. The capitalization of our insurance subsidiaries is maintained at levels in excess of the effective minimum requirements of the NAIC in the United States and OSFI in Canada. In any particular year, statutory capital and surplus amounts and RBC and LICAT ratios may increase or decrease depending on a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control.
Our financial strength and credit ratings are significantly influenced by the statutory surplus amounts and RBC and LICAT ratios of our insurance company subsidiaries. Ratings agencies may change their internal models, effectively increasing or decreasing the amount of statutory capital our insurance subsidiaries must hold to maintain their current ratings. Ratings agencies also may downgrade the ratings of securities held in our insurance subsidiaries’ portfolios, which could result in a reduction of our insurance subsidiaries’ statutory capital and surplus and RBC. Our insurance subsidiaries may need additional capital and, if needed, we may not be able to provide it to maintain the targeted RBC and LICAT levels to support their business operations, either of which may impact our financial strength and credit ratings.
The failure of any of our insurance subsidiaries to meet its applicable RBC and LICAT requirements or minimum capital and surplus requirements could subject it to further examination or corrective action imposed by insurance regulators, including limitations on its ability to write additional business, supervision by regulators or seizure or liquidation. Any corrective action imposed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. A decline in RBC or LICAT also limits the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends or make distributions and could be a factor in causing ratings agencies to downgrade the financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries. Such downgrades would have an adverse effect on our ability to write new insurance policies and, therefore, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
A significant ratings downgrade by a ratings organization could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Each of our non-captive life insurance subsidiaries has been assigned a financial strength rating by A.M. Best. Primerica Life currently also has an insurer financial strength rating from each of Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) and Moody’s.
The financial strength ratings of our rated insurance subsidiaries are subject to periodic review using, among other things, the ratings agencies’ proprietary capital adequacy models and are subject to revision or withdrawal at any time. Insurance financial strength ratings are directed toward the concerns of policyholders and are not intended for the protection of stockholders or as a recommendation to buy, hold or sell securities. Our financial strength ratings will affect our competitive position relative to other insurance companies. If the financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries fall below certain levels, some of our policyholders may move their business to our competitors. In addition, the models used by ratings agencies to determine financial strength are different from the capital requirements set by insurance regulators.
Ratings organizations review the financial performance and financial conditions of insurance companies and provide opinions regarding financial strength, operating performance and ability to meet obligations to policyholders. A significant downgrade in the financial strength ratings of any of our insurance subsidiaries, or the announced potential for a downgrade, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If the rating agencies or regulators change their approach to financial strength ratings and statutory capital requirements, we may need to take action to maintain current ratings and capital adequacy ratios, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Parent Company currently has investment grade credit ratings from S&P, Moody’s, and A.M. Best. These ratings are indicators of a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations and are important factors in its ability to access liquidity in the debt markets. A rating downgrade by a rating agency can occur at any time if the rating agency perceives an adverse change in our financial condition, results of operations or ability to service debt. If such a downgrade occurs, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways, including adversely limiting our access to capital in the unsecured debt market and potentially increasing the cost of such debt.
The failure by any of our reinsurers or reserve financing counterparties to perform its obligations to us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We rely on reinsurance in the United States and Canada to diversify our risk and to manage our loss exposure to mortality risk. Reinsurance does not relieve us of our direct liability to our policyholders, even when the reinsurer is liable to us. We, as the insurer, are required to pay the full amount of death benefits even in circumstances where we are entitled to receive payments from the reinsurer. Our reinsurers may be unable to pay the amounts they owe us on a timely basis or at all. Further, reinsurers might refuse or fail to pay losses that we cede to them or might delay payment. Since death benefit claims may be paid long after a policy is issued, we bear credit risk with respect to our reinsurers. The creditworthiness of our reinsurers may change before we can recover amounts to which we are entitled. Any such failure to pay by our reinsurers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We also have in place coinsurance agreements that we originally entered into at the time of our initial public offering (the “IPO”) in 2010, pursuant to which we ceded between 80% and 90% of the risks and rewards of our term life insurance policies that were in force at year-end 2009. Under this arrangement, our existing reinsurance agreements remain in place. Each coinsurer entered into trust agreements with our respective insurance subsidiaries and a trustee pursuant to which the coinsurer placed assets (primarily fixed-income securities and U.S. Treasury securities) in trust for such subsidiary’s benefit to secure the coinsurer’s obligations to such subsidiary. Each such coinsurance agreement requires the relevant coinsurer to maintain assets in trust, the amount of which will not be less than the amount of the statutory reserves for the coinsured liabilities. In Canada, the IPO coinsurer must hold pledged assets in an amount sufficient for us to take credit for reinsurance in a Canadian financial institution, not affiliated with the IPO coinsurer. Our Canadian insurance company has an enforceable security interest that has priority over any other security interest for the pledged assets. Furthermore, our insurance subsidiaries have the right to recapture the business upon the occurrence of an event of default under their respective coinsurance agreement subject to any applicable cure periods. While any such recapture would be at no cost to us, such recapture would result in a substantial increase in our insurance exposure and require us to be fully responsible for the management of the assets set aside to support statutory reserves. The type of assets we might obtain as a result of a recapture may not be as liquid as our current invested asset portfolio and could result in an unfavorable impact on our risk profile.
There is no assurance that the relevant coinsurer will pay the coinsurance obligations owed to us now or in the future or that it will pay these obligations on a timely basis. If any of the coinsurers becomes insolvent and the trust account to support the obligations of such coinsurer is insufficient to pay such coinsurer’s obligations to us and we fail to enforce our right to recapture the business, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We finance redundant statutory reserves of certain issue years of our term life insurance business. Under this transaction, we pay a fee to a financial counterparty for its commitment to support redundant reserves and provide corresponding statutory reinsurance credit, allowing us to more efficiently manage our capital. If the financial strength of this counterparty was significantly impaired to the extent that its support of our redundant reserves could no longer be relied upon, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Investment and Savings Products Business
Our Investment and Savings Products segment is heavily dependent on a limited platform of mutual fund and annuity products offered by a relatively small number of companies and managers. If these products fail to remain competitive with other investment options, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
We offer mutual funds and annuities through our U.S. retail broker-dealer, but not exchange traded funds, individual stocks and bonds, or alternative investments. Our advisory program in the U.S. offers a wider menu of investment types; however, fewer of the independent sales representatives are eligible to offer the program. Our current investment products in Canada consist of two families of mutual funds that include a diversified offering of equity, fixed-income and money market funds. Because of these limitations, our business could be materially adversely impacted if consumer demand were to shift toward products we do not offer. In addition, if any of our investment and savings products fail to achieve satisfactory investment performance, our clients may seek higher yielding or lower cost investment options, and we could experience higher redemption rates.
If our relationship with one or more of the manufacturers of the funds and annuities we distribute or investment managers we make available is significantly altered or terminated or there is a shift in the business mix, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
We receive revenue and other marketing and support fees from the manufacturers of the investment and savings products we distribute and the investment managers we make available. We earn a significant portion of our earnings through our relationships with a small group of mutual fund and annuity companies. A decision by one or more of these companies to alter or discontinue their current arrangements or product offerings with us, or a change in law or regulation that compels us to alter or discontinue such arrangements, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, we derive a growing portion of our earnings through our asset-based advisory platform. A shift in the business mix of new investments across our products and platforms could materially impact cash flows to our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition to sales commissions and asset-based compensation, a portion of our earnings from investment and savings products comes from recordkeeping services that we provide to mutual fund companies and from fees earned for custodial services that we provide to clients with retirement plan accounts in the funds of these mutual fund companies.
A decision by one or more of our fund companies, annuities companies, or managers to alter or discontinue their current arrangements with us, or a change in law or regulation that compels us to alter or discontinue such arrangements, would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Company’s or the securities-licensed independent sales representatives’ violations of, or non-compliance with, laws and regulations of the securities business could expose us to material liabilities.
Our subsidiary broker-dealers, Primerica Brokerage Services, Inc. and PFS Investments Inc. (“PFS Investments”), and the independent sales representatives, are subject to federal and state regulation of the securities business. PFS Investments is additionally a registered investment adviser and its investment adviser representatives likewise are held to a high standard of conduct. Our subsidiary, Primerica Shareholder Services, Inc. (“PSS”), is a registered transfer agent engaged in the recordkeeping business and is subject to regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Violations of, or non-compliance with, laws or regulations applicable to the activities of PFS Investments or PSS, or violations by a third party with which PFS Investments or PSS contracts, could subject us to regulatory actions and/or litigation. Such events could result in the imposition of cease and desist orders, fines or censures, restitution to clients, suspension or revocation of SEC registration, suspension or expulsion from FINRA, reputational damage and legal expense, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our Canadian broker-dealer subsidiary, PFSL Investments Canada Ltd. (“PFSL Investments Canada”) and the independent sales representatives are subject to the securities laws of the provinces and territories of Canada in which we sell our mutual fund products and to the rules of the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (“CIRO”), the self-regulatory organization governing mutual fund dealers (except in the province of Quebec, the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (“AMF”)). PFSL Investments Canada is subject to periodic review by both the CIRO and the provincial and territorial securities commissions to assess its compliance with, among other things, applicable capital requirements and sales practices and procedures. These regulators have broad administrative powers and may impose sanctions that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If heightened standards of conduct are imposed on us or the independent sales representatives by federal, state or provincial authorities, or selling compensation is reduced as a result of new legislation or regulations, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The U.S. independent sales representatives are subject to federal and state regulation as well as state licensing requirements. PFS Investments, which is regulated as a broker-dealer and registered investment adviser, and U.S. independent sales representatives are currently subject to general anti-fraud limitations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Investment Advisers Act”) and SEC rules and regulations, as well as other conduct standards prescribed by the FINRA. These standards generally require that broker-dealers, investment advisers, and their sales representatives disclose and
mitigate conflicts of interest that might affect the advice or recommendations they provide and require them to make investment recommendations in the best interest of customers. In 2019, the SEC adopted rules addressing the standards of conduct applicable to broker-dealers and their associated persons (collectively, “Reg BI”). Among other things, Reg BI created a “best interest” standard of conduct similar to the fiduciary standard applicable to investment advisers. In addition, the DOL has issued, and may continue to issue, proposals that regulate fiduciary status and related fiduciary requirements. Reg BI and DOL regulations impose higher standards of care and enhanced obligations that increase regulatory and litigation risk to our business.
In addition to federal regulators, certain states have proposed or passed laws or proposed or issued regulations requiring investment advisers, broker-dealers, and/or insurance agents to meet fiduciary standards or standards of care that their advice be in the customer’s best interest, and to mitigate and disclose conflicts of interest to consumers of investment and insurance products. The severity of the impact that such state laws or regulations could have on our business vary from state to state depending on the content of the legislation or regulation and how it would be applied by state regulators and interpreted by the courts. Therefore, such laws or regulations could disrupt our brokerage business in the relevant state. We cannot quantify the financial impact, if any, of any changes to our business that may be necessary in order to comply with such laws or regulations at this time.
In 2022, in response to the regulatory ban on the compensation model we primarily used in Canada, we began to offer through the independent sales representatives, a unique and exclusive range of funds under Principal Distributor agreements with two third-party mutual fund companies (the “Principal Distributor model”).
While we received regulatory approval for the Principal Distributor model in 2022, we were advised at the time of approval that the Canadian Securities Administrators intends to closely re-examine the Principal Distributor provisions of National Instrument 81-105, through a public Request for Comment that was released on November 28, 2024. The Request for Comment proposes banning multiple fund manager relationships with one principal distributor, an arrangement we have in our Canadian mutual fund business. If this proposal is adopted and we are not granted an exemption, then we could be required to restructure our Principal Distributor model for the sale of mutual funds, or discontinue use, which could have a material adverse effect on our investment advisory business in Canada.
The Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators mandated a cessation of deferred sales charges on segregated fund contracts entered into after May 31, 2023. Deferred sales charges will continue to be allowed on subsequent deposits of existing segregated funds contracts for a period of time; however, insurance regulators will be further evaluating whether to allow its continued use. As we anticipated, we experienced a decline in segregated funds product sales beginning in June 2023.
We began distributing segregated funds on behalf of a third party on a limited basis in January 2025 with a full rollout in December 2025. On November 19, 2025, the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators and Canadian Insurance Services Regulatory Organizations issued new Segregated Funds Guidance, which continues to allow existing compensation models but with additional requirements around their usage. We are assessing the impact of these requirements.
Heightened standards of conduct or restrictions on compensation as a result of any of the above items or other similar proposed rules or regulations could also increase the compliance and regulatory burdens on the independent sales representatives and could lead to increased litigation and regulatory risks, changes to our business model, a decrease in the number of licensed independent sales representatives and a reduction in the products we offer to our clients, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If our suitability policies and procedures, or our policies and procedures for compliance with federal, state or provincial regulations governing standards of care, were deemed inadequate, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We review the account applications that we receive for our investment and savings products for suitability, for compliance with Reg BI, the Investment Advisers Act, the DOL regulations, in Canada the Fair Treatment of Customers and the Client Focused Reforms, and for compliance with other federal, state or provincial regulations governing standards of care, as applicable. We believe that the policies and procedures we implement to help independent sales representatives assist clients in making investment choices are reasonably designed to achieve compliance with applicable securities laws and regulations and to satisfy other applicable federal, state, and provincial standards of care. Nonetheless, it is possible that the SEC, FINRA, the DOL, the IRS, state securities and insurance regulators, CIRO or AMF may not agree. Further, we could be subject to regulatory actions or private litigation, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The support tools we make available to the independent sales force are designed to educate potential and existing clients, help identify their financial needs, generally introduce the potential benefits of our product offerings, and identify suitable investment products. The tools themselves or the assumptions and methods of analyses embedded in them could be challenged and subject us to regulatory
action by the SEC, the DOL, FINRA or other regulators, or private litigation, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Non-compliance with applicable regulations could lead to revocation of our subsidiary’s status as a non-bank custodian, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
PFS Investments is a non-bank custodian of retirement accounts, as permitted under Treasury Regulation 1.408-2. A non-bank custodian is an entity that is not a bank and that is permitted by the IRS to act as a custodian for retirement plan account assets of our clients. The IRS retains authority to revoke or suspend that status if it finds that PFS Investments is unwilling or unable to administer retirement accounts in a manner consistent with the requirements of the applicable regulations. Revocation of PFS Investments’ non-bank custodian status would affect its ability to earn revenue for providing such services and, consequently, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Mortgage Brokerage Business
Licensing requirements will impact the size of the mortgage loan independent sales force, which could adversely affect our mortgage brokerage business.
To offer mortgage loan products, independent sales representatives must be individually licensed as mortgage loan originators by the states in which they do business and, in some states, they must also be individually licensed as mortgage brokers. These licensing requirements include enrollment in the Nationwide Multistate Licensing System, application to state regulators for individual licenses, a minimum of 20 hours of pre-licensing education, an annual minimum of eight hours of CE, and the successful completion of both national and state tests or a national test with uniform state content. Compliance with these licensing regimes (including passing the applicable exam, background checks and credit checks) often is a barrier for independent sales representatives. Primerica Mortgage, LLC (“Primerica Mortgage”) must also be licensed at the company level as a mortgage broker (or equivalent) and, in almost all states, representatives’ offices must be licensed as branch offices. To offer mortgage loans in a state, independent sales representatives, offices, and Primerica Mortgage must be licensed as required by state law. These licenses must be renewed on an annual basis. Failure, or the inability due to state restrictions, of independent sales representatives to obtain the required licenses and comply with ongoing licensing requirements would adversely affect the size of the mortgage loan sales force, which could adversely affect our mortgage brokerage business.
Our U.S. mortgage brokerage and Canadian mortgage referral business is highly regulated and subject to various federal, state and provincial laws and regulations in the U.S. and Canada. Changes in, non-compliance with, or violations of, such laws and regulations could affect the cost or our ability to distribute our products and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our U.S. mortgage brokerage business is subject to a wide array of laws at the federal, state, and local levels and regulators, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, state mortgage and licensing regulators, state attorneys general, state and local consumer protection offices, the FTC, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Department of Justice. Each of these authorities may examine, supervise, investigate, and enforce applicable laws, regulations and policies. Federal law and regulations impose prohibitions and restrictions on the manner and amount of compensation paid and incentives offered in connection with a mortgage loan transaction and establish a federal ability to repay standard for all mortgage loans. Other laws could have the effect of limiting the availability of certain loan products in the market and adversely impact the range of products offered and the volume of loan business.
Additionally, we must comply with various state and local laws and policies concerning the lender, compensation and incentives, fair lending, supervision, the provision of consumer disclosures, net branching, predatory lending and high cost loans and recordkeeping. Differing interpretations of, changes in, or violations of, any of these laws or regulations could subject us to damages, fines, or sanctions and could affect the cost or our ability to distribute our products, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Remediation for noncompliance with federal, state or local laws could be costly and significant fines may be incurred. Failure to comply with applicable laws could result in potential litigation liability. Further, the lender must comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations, and any noncompliance by such lender may adversely impact our U.S. mortgage brokerage business.
In Canada, independent sales representatives offer mortgage loans on a referral basis only. Various provincial mortgage brokerage laws strictly prescribe the requirements applicable to a mortgage referral program in order for individuals who make the referrals to be exempt from the requirement to be licensed as mortgage brokers. Differing interpretations of, changes in, or violations of, any of the applicable exemptions under mortgage brokerage laws could subject us to damages, fines or sanctions and could have a material adverse effect on our ability to offer mortgage loan referrals in Canada. In addition, independent sales representatives selling mutual funds must comply with the disclosure requirements of CIRO and applicable securities laws governing mortgage referral
arrangements. Failure to comply with such disclosure requirements could result in regulatory sanctions, which could have an adverse effect on our ability to offer mortgage loan referrals in Canada.
In the United States, we broker mortgage loans based on contractual agreements with a very limited number of mortgage lenders. A significant change to or disruption in the mortgage lenders’ mortgage businesses or an inability of the mortgage lenders to satisfy their contractual obligations to us could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Through a contractual agreement with Rocket Mortgage, LLC, Primerica Mortgage offers mortgage loans through the independent sales representatives who are licensed as mortgage loan originators. Primerica Mortgage also offers, through its mortgage loan originators, second mortgages and home equity lines of credit based on a contractual agreement with Spring EQ, LLC. A significant change to or disruption in the lenders’ businesses or their inability to satisfy their contractual obligations to Primerica Mortgage could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our U.S. mortgage brokerage business is impacted by U.S. mortgage interest rates. Changes in prevailing mortgage interest rates or U.S. monetary policies that affect mortgage interest rates could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The U.S. Federal Reserve, which serves as the primary driver of U.S. monetary policies impacting mortgage interest rates, implemented multiple interest rate increases over recent years to address continued elevated inflation. Although the U.S. Federal Reserve implemented moderate interest rate decreases in 2024 and 2025, mortgage interest rates remain elevated. Elevated mortgage interest rates lowered the demand for refinance mortgages and purchase-money mortgages offered by Primerica Mortgage. Continued elevated mortgage interest rates relative to recent market rates could continue to impact consumer demand for refinance mortgages and purchase-money mortgages, which could have an adverse impact on our mortgage brokerage business in the U.S.
Risks Related to Economic Downcycles, Public Health Crises or Catastrophes, and Disasters
The effects of economic downcycles, issues affecting the national, regional and/or global economy or geopolitical event(s), or any combination thereof, could impact the cost of living for our middle-income clients and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected by economic downturns in the United States and Canada, as well as issues in the national, regional and/or global economy such as elevated inflation resulting in a higher cost of living that may have repercussions on our markets. Economic downturns can result from a multitude of reasons and are often characterized by conditions such as elevated inflation and higher cost of living, declines in capital markets, higher unemployment, lower household income, lower valuation of retirement savings accounts, lower corporate earnings, lower business investment and/or lower consumer spending. These conditions can impact the disposable income of middle-income consumers, which can influence their spending and investment decisions. With respect to our term life insurance business, we may continue to experience an elevated incidence of lapses or surrenders of term life insurance policies, which adversely impacts the amount of insurance premiums we collect. Consumer spending and borrowing levels affect how consumers evaluate their savings and debt management plans. Factors that significantly impact consumer demand for the savings and investment products we distribute include interest rates, equity market returns and our customers’ perception of the strength of the capital markets. Better returns from interest rates relative to the performance of the equity markets and the perceived attractiveness of investing in equity markets versus other investments, such as U.S. Treasury bills and money market funds, could adversely impact consumer demand for the mutual funds, annuities, and managed accounts we distribute. Continued elevated producer prices have caused and may continue to cause higher labor costs and increased vendor and supplier costs. Economic conditions, including continued elevated producer prices have impacted and may continue to impact prospective recruits’ perceptions of the business opportunity that becoming an independent sales representative offers, which can drive or dampen recruiting.
Our investment and savings products business is sensitive to the performance of the equity markets. A protracted long-term downturn in equity market performance brought about by an economic downturn and/or geopolitical event(s) could adversely affect new sales and cause clients to liquidate mutual funds and other investments sold by independent sales representatives. This could cause a decrease in the asset value of client accounts which reduce our trailing commission revenues. Further, volatility or downturns in equity markets could dampen purchases of the investment products that we distribute and could have a material adverse effect on our business, including our ability to recruit and retain independent sales representatives. In addition, disruptions in credit markets caused by an economic downturn could result in a decline in the fair value of our fixed-maturity invested asset portfolio as well as increased credit losses on these invested assets.
Major public health pandemics, epidemics or outbreaks (such as the COVID-19 pandemic) or other catastrophic events, have impacted and could again materially adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our operations are exposed to the risk of major public health pandemics, epidemics or outbreaks (a “major public health crisis”), such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or other catastrophic events (“catastrophic events”), which, among other things, has caused and could again cause a large number of premature deaths of our insureds. Although we have ceded a significant majority of our mortality risk to reinsurers, a major public health crisis or catastrophic event could cause: (i) substantial volatility in our financial results for a period of time; (ii) material harm to the financial condition of our reinsurers; (iii) increases in the probability of default on reinsurance recoverables; (iv) decreases in the availability of reinsurance on new business; or (v) increases in reinsurance costs on new business and/or rates during the post-level term period. In addition, most of the jurisdictions in which our insurance subsidiaries are licensed to transact business require life insurers to participate in guaranty associations, which raise funds to pay contractual benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed issuers. A major public health crisis or catastrophic event could require extraordinary assessments on our insurance companies, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
A major public health crisis or catastrophic event has impacted and could again negatively impact our ability to attract new recruits, train and license the independent sales force, and incentivize the independent sales force to sell our products. If a significant number of independent sales representatives were to be impacted by a major public health crisis or catastrophic event, it could have a material adverse effect on recruiting, licensing, and our ability to write new business. A major public health crisis or catastrophic event could again cause significant volatility in global financial markets and disrupt the economy and the demand for the term life insurance, investment and savings, and other financial products that we distribute. Our investment portfolio and the valuations of invested assets we hold could also be materially adversely affected.
In the event of a disaster, our business continuity plan may not be sufficient, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our infrastructure supports a combination of local and remote recovery solutions for business resumption in the event of a disaster, including a security incident. Our Canadian and U.S. operations utilize a data center located in our main campus in Duluth, Georgia. In the event of either a main campus destruction or the inability to access our data center or main campus in Duluth, Georgia, our business recovery plan provides for our employees to perform their work functions via a dedicated business backup/recovery site located about 20 miles from our main campus or by remote access from an employee’s home. However, in the event of main campus destruction, our business recovery plan may be inadequate, and our employees and the independent sales representatives may be unable to carry out their work immediately, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to Information Technology and Cybersecurity
If one of our, or a third-party partner’s, significant information technology systems fails, if its security is compromised, or if the Internet becomes disabled or unavailable, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.
Our business is highly dependent upon the effective operation of our information technology systems and third-party technology systems, networks and clouds to record, process, transmit and store information, including sensitive customer and proprietary information. We rely on these systems throughout our business for a variety of functions including to conduct many of our business activities and transactions with customers, independent sales representatives, vendors and other third parties, to prepare our financial statements and to communicate with our Board of Directors. Further, our information technology systems and applications run a variety of third-party and proprietary software intended to support the independent sales force. Our business also relies on the use by employees, independent sales representatives and other third parties of electronic mobile devices, such as laptops, tablets and smartphones, which are particularly vulnerable to loss and theft.
Maintaining the integrity of these systems and networks is critical to the success of our business operations, including the retention of independent sales representatives and customers, and to the protection of our proprietary information and our customers’ confidential and personal information. We could experience a failure of one or more of these systems or could fail to complete all necessary data reconciliation or other conversion controls when implementing new software systems. In addition, despite the implementation of security and back-up measures, our information technology systems may be vulnerable to physical or electronic intrusions, viruses or other attacks, programming errors and similar disruptions.
We are subject to international, federal, state, and provincial regulations, and in some cases contractual obligations, that require us to establish and maintain policies and procedures designed to protect sensitive customer, employee, independent sales representative and third-party information. We have implemented and maintain security measures, including industry-standard commercial technology, designed to protect against breaches of security and other interference with our systems and networks resulting from attacks by third parties, including hackers, and from employee or independent sales representative error or malfeasance. We continually assess our ability to monitor, respond to, and recover from such threats. In accordance with these laws and our security practices, we also require third-party vendors, who in the provision of services to us are provided with or process information pertaining to our business or our
customers, to meet certain information security standards. Despite the measures we have taken and may in the future take to address and mitigate cybersecurity and technology risks, we cannot assure that our systems and networks will not be subject to breaches or interference. Any such breaches or interference by third parties or by independent sales representatives or employees that may occur in the future, including the failure of any one of these systems for any reason, could cause significant interruptions to our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Anyone who is able to circumvent our security measures and penetrate our information technology systems could access, view, misappropriate, alter, or delete information in the systems, including personally-identifiable client information, health information, and proprietary business information. In addition, an increasing number of regulators require that regulators and clients be notified if a security breach results in the disclosure of personally-identifiable client information or health information, which could exacerbate the harm to our business, financial condition or results of operations. We cannot be certain that advances in criminal capabilities, discovery of new vulnerabilities, attempts to exploit vulnerabilities in our systems, data thefts, physical system, network or cloud break-ins or inappropriate access, or other developments will not compromise or breach the technology or other security measures protecting the networks and systems used in connection with our business.
Operating system failures, ineffective system implementation, loss of the Internet or the compromise of security with respect to internal, external or third-party operating systems or electronic devices could subject us to significant civil and criminal liability, harm our reputation, interrupt our business operations, deter people from purchasing our products, require us to incur significant technical, legal and other expenses, and adversely affect our internal control over financial reporting, business, financial condition, or results of operations.
Any failure to protect the confidentiality of client information could adversely affect our reputation and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Various government bodies have established rules protecting the privacy and security of personal information, which vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Many independent sales representatives, employees, and third-party service providers have access to, and routinely process, personal information of clients on paper and on personal and Company-owned hardware, the cloud and mobile devices through a variety of media, including the Internet and software applications. We rely on internal processes and controls to protect the confidentiality of client information that is accessible to, or in the possession of, our Company, our employees and the independent sales representatives. If: (i) an independent sales representative, employee, or third-party service provider intentionally or unintentionally discloses or misappropriates confidential client information; (ii) our data is the subject of a cybersecurity attack; (iii) we fail to maintain adequate internal controls; or (iv) independent sales representatives, employees or third-party service providers fail to comply with our policies and procedures, then misappropriation or intentional or unintentional inappropriate disclosure or misuse of client information could occur. Such internal control inadequacies or non-compliance could materially damage our reputation or lead to civil or criminal penalties, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The current legislative and regulatory climate with regard to privacy and cybersecurity could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Various international, federal and state legislative and regulatory bodies are considering or have considered, proposed, or adopted new standards and rules regarding protection of personally-identifiable information. All 50 U.S. states and Canada have breach notification requirements. New York State Department of Financial Services’ Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies (“NYDFS Cybersecurity Requirements”) require covered financial services institutions to implement a cybersecurity program with policies and controls designed to protect information systems and data. The NAIC has adopted the Insurance Data Security Model Law (“Model Law”), which among other things, requires insurers and insurance producers to develop and maintain a written information security program, conduct risk assessments, and assess the data security practices of third-party service providers. The Model Law, which has some similarities as well as differences from the NYDFS Cybersecurity Requirements, has been adopted by a significant number of states. The SEC’s Regulation S-P imposes cybersecurity requirements on covered entities regarding policies and procedures, incident response and notification procedures, and cybersecurity risk management. In addition, various regulators and legislators are proposing, have proposed, and have passed more stringent privacy requirements, including the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, its updates in the California Privacy Rights Act of 2023, and related regulations (“CCPA”). The CCPA is designed to give consumers more control over their personal data and imposes strict liability for security incidents under certain circumstances.
Such laws or regulations could require us to implement new technologies or revise and maintain policies and procedures designed to protect sensitive customer, employee, independent sales representative and third-party information. Being subject to, or out of compliance with, the aforementioned laws and regulations could result in material costs, fines, penalties or litigation, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The development and use of artificial intelligence present risks and challenges that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We, our third-party service providers, or competitors, may develop or incorporate artificial intelligence (“AI”) technology in certain business processes, products or services. AI technologies are complex and rapidly evolving. The regulatory environment related to AI is also uncertain and evolving, which could require changes in our potential use and implementation of AI technologies and could increase compliance costs and the risk of non-compliance. AI technologies used by us or our third-party service providers could result in inaccurate information. More rapid adoption of AI by our competitors resulting in more cost-effective technologies and/or products could result in a change in the competitive environment in which we operate that could negatively affect our ability to maintain or increase our market share or profitability.
Additionally, our or our third-party service providers’ use of AI technologies could increase the risk of loss or inadvertent sharing of consumer or proprietary data, which could increase the risk of related information and security and privacy incidents, regulatory actions and/or consumer litigation. Likewise, malefactors are also increasingly using AI to target individuals to gain access to consumer accounts, such as through “deep fakes” and impersonations. AI may also be used to increase the frequency and severity of cybersecurity attacks against us or our third-party service providers. An increase in any of these wrongdoings may adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We regularly undertake business initiatives to enhance our technology, products, and services. The efficiency and success of these initiatives may vary significantly and may cause unanticipated costs, errors, or disruptions which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We regularly evaluate and undertake business initiatives to improve and support our competitiveness and grow our business. Business initiatives that we are currently developing or executing, for example, include enhancements to information technology, our client relationship manager tool, updates to our client and independent sales representative-facing software tools and applications, implementation of AI technologies to improve efficiencies and streamlining of our communications systems. Our ability to implement these initiatives often may be dependent on our capacity to integrate, develop, or invest in new systems and technologies as well as to evolve existing methods and tools. The execution of these initiatives also may depend on our ability to change vendors, and implementation of certain initiatives may be dependent on third parties. In addition, these initiatives may take longer than anticipated to implement, and our ability to execute these initiatives in a timely manner may impact the outcomes. Likewise, technological and other changes made in connection with initiatives, either by Primerica or changes by our partners, may result in increased or unanticipated costs, inadvertent data disclosures, operating errors, disruptions to our business, or may present other unanticipated technical or operational hurdles. The expansion, or changes of services, or changes of vendors may involve client, regulatory and other third-party data use, storage and security challenges, as well as other regulatory compliance, business continuity and other considerations. As a result, we may not achieve some or all of the anticipated benefits or other intended results associated with these initiatives, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Financial Risks Affecting Our Business
Credit deterioration in, and the effects of interest rate fluctuations on, our invested asset portfolio and other assets that are subject to changes in credit quality and interest rates could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
A large percentage of our invested asset portfolio is invested in fixed-income securities. As a result, credit deterioration and interest rate fluctuations could materially affect the value of and earnings generated by our invested asset portfolio. During periods of declining market interest rates, we must invest the cash we receive as interest, return of principal on our investments and cash from operations in lower-yielding, high-grade instruments or in lower-credit instruments to maintain comparable returns. Issuers of fixed-income securities could also decide to prepay their obligations to borrow at lower market rates, which would increase our reinvestment risk. If interest rates generally increase, the fair value of our fixed rate income portfolio decreases. Additionally, if the fair value of any security in our invested asset portfolio decreases, we may realize losses if we deem the value of the security to be impaired due to a credit loss. To the extent that any fluctuations in fair value or interest rates are significant or we recognize impairments that are material, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Valuation of our investments and the determination of expected credit losses when the fair value of our available-for-sale invested assets is below amortized cost are both based on estimates that may prove to be incorrect, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
Our portfolio of invested assets primarily consists of fixed-maturity securities that are classified as available-for-sale. When the fair value of any of our available-for-sale invested assets declines below amortized cost, an impairment exists and we recognize a loss in either our consolidated statement of income or in other comprehensive income based on our assessment of expected credit losses. The
determination of the fair value of certain invested assets, particularly those that do not trade on a regular basis, requires an assessment of available data and the use of assumptions and estimates. Once it is determined that the fair value of an available-for-sale security is below its carrying value, we first determine if we intend to sell or will more likely than not be required to sell the security before the expected recovery of its amortized cost. If we intend to sell or will more likely than not be required to sell the security, then we recognize the impairment as a credit loss in our consolidated statement of income by writing down the security’s amortized cost to its fair value. If we do not intend to sell or it is not more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before the expected recovery of its amortized cost, we recognize the portion of the impairment that is due to a credit loss, if any, in our consolidated statement of income through an allowance. The portion of the impairment that is due to factors other than a credit loss is recognized in other comprehensive income in the consolidated statement of comprehensive income as an unrealized loss. The determination of whether an impairment is due to credit factors is subjective and involves a variety of assumptions and estimates.
There are various risks and uncertainties associated with determining whether an impairment is due to credit factors when the fair value of available-for-sale securities declines below amortized cost. To the extent that we are incorrect in our determination of the fair value of our investment securities or our determination of whether an impairment is due to credit factors for available-for-sale securities, we may realize losses that never actually materialize and are subsequently reversed, or we may fail to recognize losses within the appropriate reporting period.
Changes in accounting standards can be difficult to predict and could adversely impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations.
Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. United States generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) is a continuously evolving set of financial accounting and reporting standards that governs the preparation of our financial statements. Changes to U.S. GAAP can be difficult to implement and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Future financial reporting standard changes by the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the SEC could adversely impact our ability to maintain effective control over financial reporting given the changes that are needed to adopt such standards.
Additionally, the Company’s insurance company subsidiaries prepare statutory financial statements in accordance with accounting principles designated by regulators in the jurisdictions in which they are domiciled. The financial statements of our U.S. insurance subsidiaries are prepared in accordance with statutory accounting principles (“SAP”) prescribed or permitted by state insurance departments and the NAIC. SAP, including actuarial methodologies for estimating reserves, are subject to continuous evaluation by the NAIC and state insurance departments. Similarly, our Canadian life insurance subsidiary is required to prepare statutory financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards, as prescribed by the OSFI in Canada. The statutory financial statements of our insurance company subsidiaries are used to determine dividend capacity and risk-based capital and are monitored closely by regulators. Changes in accounting standards and interpretations of those standards could adversely impact our insurance companies’ ability to pay dividends to the Parent Company and comply with the financial statement requirements stipulated by the applicable insurance regulators.
The inability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends or make distributions or other payments to us in sufficient amounts would impede our ability to meet our obligations and return capital to our stockholders.
Operations of the Company are conducted by its subsidiaries. As such, Primerica, Inc. is a holding company that has no significant operations. Our primary asset is the capital stock of our subsidiaries and our primary liability is our senior unsecured notes (the “Senior Notes”). We rely primarily on dividends and other payments from our subsidiaries to meet our operating costs, other corporate expenses, and Senior Notes obligations, as well as to return capital to our stockholders. The ability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends to us depends on their earnings, covenants contained in existing and future financing or other agreements and on regulatory restrictions. The ability of our insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends will further depend on their statutory income and surplus. If the cash we receive from our subsidiaries is insufficient for us to fund our obligations or if a subsidiary is unable to pay dividends to us, we may be required to raise cash through the incurrence of debt, the issuance of equity or the sale of assets. However, given the risk of volatility in the capital markets, there is no assurance that we would be able to raise cash by these means.
The jurisdictions in which our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled impose certain restrictions on their ability to pay dividends to us. In the United States, these restrictions are based, in part, on the prior year’s statutory income and surplus. In general, dividends up to specified levels are considered ordinary and may be paid without prior approval. Dividends in larger amounts are subject to approval by the insurance commissioner of the state of domicile. In Canada, dividends can be paid, subject to the paying insurance company continuing to meet the regulatory requirements for capital adequacy and liquidity and upon 15 days’ minimum notice to OSFI. More stringent restrictions could be adopted from time to time by jurisdictions in which our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled, and such restrictions could have the effect, under certain circumstances, of significantly reducing dividends or other amounts payable to us by our subsidiaries without prior approval by regulatory authorities. In addition, in the future, we may become subject to debt covenants or other agreements that limit our ability to return capital to our stockholders. The ability of our insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends to us is also limited by our need to maintain the financial strength ratings of our subsidiaries assigned by the ratings agencies.
If any of our subsidiaries were to become insolvent, liquidate, or otherwise reorganize, we, as sole stockholder, will have no right to proceed against the assets of that subsidiary. Furthermore, with respect to our insurance subsidiaries, we, as sole stockholder, will have no right to cause the liquidation, bankruptcy, or winding-up of the subsidiary under the applicable liquidation, bankruptcy or winding-up laws, although, in Canada, we could apply for permission to cause liquidation. The applicable insurance laws of the jurisdictions in which each of our insurance subsidiaries is domiciled would govern any proceedings relating to that subsidiary. The insurance authority of that jurisdiction would act as a liquidator or rehabilitator for the subsidiary. Both creditors of the subsidiary and policyholders (if an insurance subsidiary) would be entitled to payment in full from the subsidiary’s assets before we, as the sole stockholder, would be entitled to receive any distribution from the subsidiary.
If the ability of our insurance or non-insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions or payments to us is materially restricted by regulatory requirements, bankruptcy, or insolvency, or our need to maintain our financial strength ratings, or is limited due to operating results or other factors, it could materially adversely affect our ability to fund our obligations and return capital to our stockholders.
Risks Related to Legislative and Regulatory Changes and Government Policy Uncertainty
We are subject to various federal, state and provincial laws and regulations in the United States and Canada, as well as executive branch actions, orders and policies, judicial rulings and decisions by public officials, any of which may require us to alter our business practices and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our business is subject to many laws, regulations and government policies that could relate to, among other things, consumer protection, fair credit reporting, financial privacy, consumer fraud, anti-money laundering, worker classification standards, worker eligibility, corporate taxation, artificial intelligence or algorithmic underwriting, and transactions with certain countries. These laws and regulations often are subject to the political climate.
Changes in any of these laws, regulations or government policies may require additional compliance procedures, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Uncertainty in the legislative and regulatory climate with regard to financial services may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
The volume and purpose of legislative, regulatory and executive activity related to financial services and the level of enforcement actions and investigations by federal, state and provincial authorities may vary based on the political climate. Legislative, regulatory and enforcement activity at the federal level, whether considerable or not, may contribute to heightened activity at the state and provincial level. In addition, volatility in the objective and permanency of laws and regulations may lead to uncertainty. If we or the independent sales representatives become subject to new requirements or regulations or experience voluminous changes in laws, it could result in increased litigation, regulatory risks, changes to our business model, a decrease in the number of securities-licensed representatives, increased compliance costs, or a reduction in the products we offer to our clients or the profits we earn, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Regulators could also adopt laws or interpret existing laws in a way that would require retroactive changes to our business, accounting practices, or redundant reserve financing structure. Any such retroactive changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The current regulatory climate with regard to climate change may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Activity by federal, state and provincial regulators relating to the possible impacts of climate change on companies and their constituents has resulted in heightened legislative and regulatory activity at the federal, state and provincial levels.
For example, on October 7, 2023, California enacted The Climate Corporate Accountability Act (“SB 253”) and The Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (“SB 261”), which impose extensive new climate-related reporting requirements on any U.S. business entity with annual revenues over $1 billion and $500 million (for SB 253 and SB 261, respectively) doing business in California. SB 253 requires disclosure of Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions beginning in 2026 and Scope 3 GHG emissions beginning in 2027. SB 261 requires covered entities to biennially report on climate-related financial risk and measures adopted to reduce and adapt to such risk; however, the Company is exempt from SB 261 because it already completes the Climate Risk Disclosure Survey, an annual survey administered by the California Department of Insurance. On September 27, 2024, California enacted Senate Bill 219 (“SB 219”), amending SB 253 and SB 261 by, among other things, (i) extending the deadline for the California Air Resources Board (“CARB”) to implement regulations from January 1, 2025 to July 1, 2025; (ii) authorizing reporting entities to consolidate emissions disclosures at the parent company level; and (iii) granting CARB discretion to set Scope 3 GHG emissions disclosure in 2027. Regulations from CARB pursuant to SB 219 are expected to be released in the first quarter of 2026.
In addition, on March 7, 2023, OSFI issued its final Guideline B-15, which sets out expectations for the management and disclosure of climate-related risks for federally regulated financial institutions in Canada, including public disclosure of Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions no later than 180 days after the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025 and Scope 3 GHG emissions no later than 180 days after the fiscal year ending December 31, 2028. Guideline B-15 also includes OSFI’s expectation that applicable entities conduct internal and standardized climate scenario analyses and report the results to OSFI periodically.
Compliance with SB 253, SB 219, Guideline B-15 and any other climate disclosure rules applicable to the Company may require significant assistance from third-party vendor(s). Factors that could adversely impact our ability to comply with any new climate disclosure rules include, but are not limited to, failure to secure the assistance of a third-party vendor(s), inability to gather the requisite data in a timely manner or at all, and/or significant associated financial costs.
General Risk Factors
Litigation and regulatory investigations and actions may result in financial losses and harm our reputation.
We face a risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating our businesses. From time to time, we are subject to private litigation as a result of alleged independent sales representative misconduct or alleged failure of the Company to follow applicable insurance, securities or other laws or regulations. If we become subject to any such litigation, the associated legal expense and any judgment or settlement of the claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are also routinely subject to regulatory inquiries, such as information requests, subpoenas and books and record examinations, from state, provincial and federal regulators and other authorities and from time to time, regulatory investigations as a result of alleged independent sales representative misconduct or alleged failure of the Company to follow applicable laws or regulations. 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 any litigation, regulatory action or investigation, we could suffer significant reputational harm and we could incur significant legal expenses, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, increased regulatory scrutiny and any resulting investigations or proceedings could result in new legal precedents and industry-wide regulations or practices that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
A significant change in the competitive environment in which we operate could negatively affect our ability to maintain or increase our market share and profitability.
We face competition in all of our business lines. Our competitors include financial services companies, banks, investment management firms, broker-dealers, registered investment advisers, insurance companies, insurance brokers, direct sales companies, and technology companies. In many of our product offerings, we face competition from competitors that may have greater market share or breadth of distribution, offer a broader range of products, services or features, assume a greater level of risk, have lower profitability expectations, have lower fee and expense ratios, have higher financial strength ratings, offer more robust digital tools and self-service capabilities than we do or made use of emerging technologies, including AI, more fully or rapidly than us. More recently, significant capital has been invested in direct-to-consumer offerings, including wealth management, retirement and life insurance products. In addition, regulatory changes and competitive factors are leading to innovations in product offerings and compensation structures. To the extent these entrants create a significant change in the competitive environment, our ability to maintain or increase our market share and profitability could be materially adversely affected.
Primerica’s continued success requires a high-performing and stable team of employees across all levels, and the loss of key employees could negatively affect our financial condition and impair our ability to implement our business strategy.
In addition to intense competition for talent, workforce dynamics are constantly evolving. A disproportionate loss of staff can negatively impact morale, productivity and service levels. If the Company does not manage these changing workforce dynamics effectively, leading to prolonged employee attrition, or reasonable security measures with respect to senior management when traveling on behalf of the Company fail, it could materially adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, and inhibit our long-term business strategy.
Further, our success substantially depends on our ability to attract and retain members of our senior management team. The efforts, level of engagement, and leadership of our senior managers have been, and will continue to be, critical to our success. The Company anticipates a steady pace of retirements within our senior management team in the years to come. While our senior management talent
and succession plans and processes are reviewed and updated routinely, the loss of service of members of our senior management team for any reason and without adequate succession planning and talent management could reduce our ability to successfully motivate the independent sales representatives or implement our business plan, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Although our executive officers have entered into employment agreements with us, there is no assurance that they will complete the term of their employment agreements or that such agreements will be renewed.
We may not be able to effectively execute our corporate strategy, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our mission to create financially independent families has remained unchanged. In early 2025, we updated our corporate strategy to re-align our mission, strategic vision, guiding principles and growth pillars to help us continue to deliver on our mission. An inability to effectively execute our corporate strategy could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may be materially adversely affected by currency fluctuations in the United States dollar versus the Canadian dollar.
The Canadian dollar is the functional currency for our Canadian subsidiaries and our financial results, reported in U.S. dollars, are affected by changes in the currency exchange rate. The assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses of our Canadian subsidiaries are generally all denominated in Canadian dollars. However, the Canadian dollar financial statements of our Canadian subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars in our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report. Therefore, significant exchange rate fluctuations between the U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. A weaker Canadian dollar relative to the U.S. dollar would result in lower levels of reported revenues, expenses, net income, assets, liabilities and accumulated other comprehensive income as translated in our U.S. dollar reporting currency financial statements. In addition, our net investment in our Canadian subsidiaries is significantly affected by fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar.
The market price of our common stock may fluctuate.
The stock market in general, and the market for companies in the financial services industry in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Also, broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. Our stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in price in response to various factors, many of which are beyond our control.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
Not applicable.
ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY.
Risk Management and Strategy
Primerica has processes in place aimed at assessing, identifying, and managing material risks from cybersecurity threats which are integrated into Primerica’s enterprise risk management system. Primerica’s enterprise risk management and internal audit functions conduct regular assessments and audits of risks from cybersecurity threats and report the results to the Board of Directors at least quarterly. The Board considers cybersecurity risk as part of its business strategy, risk management, and financial oversight.
Primerica institutes a three-lines-of-defense model for information security risk assurance, in which management owns the risk, our enterprise risk management team assesses the risk and oversees compliance with internal guidelines and policies, and our internal audit team reviews the effectiveness of the first two lines of defense. Management works with external assessors, consultants, auditors, and other third parties from time to time in conducting maturity and technical assessments.
Primerica has processes in place to oversee and identify material risks from cybersecurity threats associated with its use of third-party service providers. The Company maintains a policy governing information security, which includes risk assessment policies and procedures relating to third-party vendors, as well as a data loss prevention policy. The Company’s policies address technical requirements needed to protect the environments in which data is processed, as well as how it is maintained, governed, and protected. Primerica also imposes mandatory privacy and information security controls and data security protection requirements on the independent sales force. We train all regular employees in information security and privacy-related risks and we perform regular tests to determine whether our employees can recognize phishing emails. Similarly, our annual compliance training for the independent sales representatives includes training on maintaining data security and privacy.
We have an incident response plan designed to help us monitor the prevention, detection, mitigation, and remediation of information security incidents. The incident response plan documents the roles and responsibilities of Primerica personnel in responding to information security incidents, including the process by which our Chief Information Security Officer, our Chief Information Officer, senior management, and the Board is informed about such incidents.
Our Chief Information Security Officer leads the Company’s Incident Advisory Committee (“IAC”), which is notified in the event of high or medium severity incidents. The IAC includes representatives from information technology, legal, and often the impacted business unit. The Incident Response Team (“IRT”) consists of the IAC and a larger group of managers that is typically notified of more significant incidents. The IRT reports findings to management and the Board as necessary. Each IRT member has specific responsibilities related to his or her function at the Company. On a semi-annual basis, the IRT undertakes facilitator-led trainings and simulations of information security incidents.
The Company is not aware that it has experienced any cybersecurity threats or incidents that have materially adversely affected or are reasonably likely to materially adversely affect the Company and its business strategy, results of operations and/or financial condition. For a discussion of risks to the Company related to cybersecurity threats, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors – Risks Related to Information Technology and Cybersecurity”, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Governance
The Board of Directors has responsibility for oversight of risks from cybersecurity threats. The Board receives a quarterly report from our Chief Information Officer and Chief Information Security Officer on risks from cybersecurity threats and, under the Company’s incident reporting plan, the Board is informed by management of certain cybersecurity incidents as appropriate.
Primerica’s senior executive leadership is actively involved in managing material risks from cybersecurity threats. Primerica’s cybersecurity operations risk steering group is chaired by our Chief Insurance Officer and holds quarterly meetings. It includes key executives from the Company’s technology, security, privacy, and legal teams, coordinates corporate security initiatives and provides high-level guidance on technology-and security-related issues. Our Chief Information Security Officer has responsibility for assessing and managing the Company’s material risks from cybersecurity threats. Our Chief Information Security Officer has served in various roles in information technology and information security for 37 years, including serving as the Company’s Chief Information Security Officer for over 25 years.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.
Our executive offices and business operations are housed primarily at our home office facility located in Duluth, Georgia. Our home office facility consists of approximately 345,000 square feet of general office space where our primary business operations are maintained including our information technology infrastructure and our media production studios. The lease for this building is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2035. This office space is used by all of our operating segments.
We also maintain a regional head office location for our Canadian operations in Mississauga, Ontario. Our Canadian head office location consists of general office space under a lease expiring in October 2030. This office space is used by all of our operating segments.
We lease general office space for our NBLIC subsidiary in Long Island City, New York under a lease expiring in March 2030. This office space is primarily used by the Corporate and Other Distributed Products segment.
We believe that our existing facilities in the U.S. and Canada are adequate for our current requirements and for our operations for the foreseeable future.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS.
We are involved from time to time in legal disputes, regulatory inquiries and arbitration proceedings in the normal course of business. Additional information regarding certain legal proceedings to which we are a party is described under “Contingent Liabilities” in Note 18 (Commitments and Contingent Liabilities) to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report, and such information is incorporated herein by reference. As of the date of this report, we do not believe any pending legal proceeding to which Primerica or any of its subsidiaries is a party is required to be disclosed pursuant to this item.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES.
Not applicable.
ITEM X. INFORMATION ABOUT OUR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CERTAIN SIGNIFICANT EMPLOYEES
The name, age at February 27, 2026, and position of each of our executive officers and certain significant employees are presented below. These officers comprise our senior management team.
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age |
|
Position |
Executive Officers: |
|
|
|
|
Glenn J. Williams |
|
66 |
|
Chief Executive Officer |
Peter W. Schneider |
|
69 |
|
President |
Tracy X. Tan |
|
55 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
Certain Significant Employees: |
John A. Adams |
|
67 |
|
Executive Vice President; Chief Executive Officer of Primerica Life Insurance Company of Canada |
Michael C. Adams |
|
69 |
|
Executive Vice President, Special Strategic Projects |
Lisa A. Brown |
|
56 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief People Officer |
Nicholas E. Craven |
|
41 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Insurance Officer |
Stacey K. Geer |
|
59 |
|
Executive Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, Chief Governance and Risk Officer, and Corporate Secretary |
Kathryn E. Kieser |
|
56 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Reputation Officer |
Rosie Orlando |
|
59 |
|
Executive Vice President; President of Primerica Life Insurance Company of Canada |
Robert H. Peterman, Jr. |
|
60 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
Paul E. Regard |
|
53 |
|
Executive Vice President; Chief Executive Officer of PFS Investments Inc. |
Brett A. Rogers |
|
60 |
|
Executive Vice President and General Counsel |
Julie A. Seman |
|
56 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing and Innovation Officer |
Dale A.M. Tuck |
|
53 |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Information Technology Officer |
Set forth below is biographical information concerning our executive officers, who were elected by our Board of Directors and serve subject to their respective employment agreements.
Glenn J. Williams has served as Chief Executive Officer since April 2015. He served as President from 2005 through March 2015. Previously, he served as Executive Vice President of Field and Product Marketing for international operations from 2000 to 2005, as President and Chief Executive Officer of Primerica Canada from 1996 to 2000, and in roles of increasing responsibility as part of Primerica’s international expansion team in Canada from 1985 to 2000. He began his career with Primerica in 1981 as a member of the Company’s independent sales force and joined the home office team in 1983. Mr. Williams earned his B.S. degree in Education from Baptist University of America. He has served on the board of trustees for the Georgia Baptist Foundation since October 2024 and from 2019 to 2023.
Peter W. Schneider has served as President since April 2015. He served as Executive Vice President, General Counsel, and Chief Administrative Officer from 2000 to April 2015 and as Corporate Secretary from 2000 through January 2014. He began his professional career as an Associate at the law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and worked as a Partner at the law firm of Rogers & Hardin LLP in Atlanta, Georgia from 1988 to 2000. Mr. Schneider earned both his B.S. degree in political science and industrial relations and his J.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He serves on the Advisory Council of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), the board of directors of Camp John W. Hanes (YMCA), the board of visitors of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the National Commission of the Anti-Defamation League.
Tracy X. Tan has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since December 2023. She joined Primerica in October 2023 as Executive Vice President, Finance and was designated at that time as the next Chief Financial Officer. In this role, she serves as a key spokesperson with the investor and analyst communities and focuses on the Company’s economic and business strategy, while driving value creation for all stakeholders through innovation and financial management. Ms. Tan oversees all aspects of the Company’s finance function and Enterprise Transformation Office, including planning and analysis, controllership, investor relations, treasury, tax, and capital markets. Prior to joining Primerica, from 2018 to October 2023, Ms. Tan served as Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Strategic Link Consulting, a fintech enterprise. From 2015 to 2018, Ms. Tan was Senior Vice President and CFO for Assurant Global Housing, a subsidiary of Assurant, Inc. From 2013 to 2015, she served as Vice President (VP) of Finance and Divisional CFO for Novelis North America in Novelis Inc. From 2005 to 2013, she was VP and Divisional CFO for the Electrical and Industrial Divisions of Southwire Company. Ms. Tan began her career at General Electric Company in 1996, where she held various roles with increasing responsibilities across four industries, including as VP and CFO for GE Intelligent Platform Embedded Systems from 2003 to 2005. Ms. Tan has an M.B.A. degree from Bowling Green State University. She is also an alumna of GE’s Experienced Financial Leadership Program and Financial Management Program.
Set forth below is biographical information concerning certain significant employees, who were elected as officers by our Board of Directors.
John A. Adams has served as Executive Vice President of Primerica, Inc. since May 2018 and as the Chief Executive Officer of Primerica Life Insurance Company of Canada (PLICC) since 2003. He previously served Primerica Life Canada as Chief Financial Officer and before that as Vice President of Finance. Before joining Primerica, Mr. Adams served as the Director of Finance of a major Canadian university and Treasurer of an insurance group of companies. He began his career in 1980 with KPMG LLP. He graduated from Trinity College at the University of Toronto with a Bachelor of Commerce degree and is a Chartered Accountant and Chartered Professional Accountant. Mr. Adams provides industry leadership as Board Chairman of the Federation of Independent Dealers (FID) since January 2026, having served as a board member of FID since 2022. He previously served as a board member of the Securities and Investment Management Association (SIMA) from 2005 to 2025 and as SIMA’s Board Chairman from 2015 to 2017.
Michael C. Adams has served as Executive Vice President, Special Strategic Projects of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024. He previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Business Technology Officer from May 2021 to October 2024 and was responsible for business technology since 1988. He was Co-Head of Business Technology from 2017 to May 2021 and served in various capacities at the Company since 1980. Mr. Adams earned his B.A. degree in business and economics from Hendrix College in 1978.
Lisa A. Brown has served as Executive Vice President and Chief People Officer of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024. She previously served as Chief Administrative Officer from October 2020 to October 2024. In her current role, Ms. Brown leads the Company’s Human Resources (HR) and Talent Management functions, driving its people strategy, organizational culture, leadership development, and talent continuity strategies. She also provides executive oversight of workplace culture and inclusion initiatives and manages the engagement strategy of the Company’s Strategic Markets business groups that support the Company’s independent sales force leaders. Prior to joining Primerica, Ms. Brown spent over 21 years at Delta Air Lines where she held leadership roles in Human Resources. Her experience includes leading enterprise-wide talent development initiatives, overseeing HR operations for Delta Airlines’ subsidiaries, and serving as the senior HR executive for multiple customer-facing organizations. Ms. Brown holds a B.S. degree in Human Resources Administration from Michigan State University and a M.B.A. from Kennesaw State University. In addition to being an active member of Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., she serves on the Broad College of Business Advisory Board at Michigan State University and serves on the board of Junior Achievement of Georgia.
Nicholas E. Craven has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Insurance Officer of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024. In this role, he oversees the operations of Primerica Life Insurance Company (PLIC) as well as agent life insurance licensing, data analytics and technology company wide. Previously, he served as President of PLIC from April 2021 through December 2024 and as Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer of PLIC from August 2018 to April 2021. Prior to joining Primerica, he advanced through various consulting roles of increasing seniority at Ernst & Young, LLP from 2013 to 2018. Mr. Craven has a Bachelor of Business Administration from Georgia State University.
Stacey K. Geer has served as Executive Vice President, Deputy General Counsel, Chief Governance Officer and Corporate Secretary of Primerica, Inc. since March 2015. She was named the Company’s Chief Risk Officer in May 2024. In these capacities, she has responsibility for all corporate governance matters, including matters relating to the board of directors, SEC disclosure, financings and company equity, mergers and acquisitions and sustainability, and she also supervises certain of the Company’s non-governance related legal functions. Ms. Geer joined Primerica in February 2010. Prior to joining Primerica, Ms. Geer served as Deputy General Counsel of Mueller Water Products, Inc. from 2007 to February 2010, as the Chief Securities Counsel of BellSouth Corporation from 2001 to 2007, and as a Partner at King & Spalding in Atlanta, Georgia from 2000 to 2001. Ms. Geer received a B.S degree in Economics from The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and a J.D. from the UCLA School of Law.
Kathryn E. Kieser has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Reputation Officer of Primerica, Inc. and President and Chair of the Primerica Foundation since January 2019, leading public relations, social media, search and generative engine optimization, enterprise research and philanthropy. Previously, she served as Executive Vice President of Investor Relations from April 2010 to December 2018. Ms. Kieser joined Primerica in October 1995 and has held many positions over her career including Vice President of Sales and Product Marketing, Senior Vice President of Auto and Homeowners Insurance, and Chief Marketing Officer for Primerica Life Insurance Company (PLIC). Ms. Kieser earned her B.S. degree in Business Administration from Auburn University and a Master of Science degree from Georgia State University. She serves on the boards of directors for the Gwinnett Chamber of Commerce and the Community Foundation for Northeast Georgia and on the board of advisors for the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce.
Rosie Orlando has served as Executive Vice President of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024 and as President of Primerica Life Insurance Company of Canada (PLICC) since November 2022. She previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of PLICC from February 2006 to November 2022, Senior Vice President, Training and Development from January 2022 to February 2006 and in various roles since joining the Company in 1992. Ms. Orlando obtained her B.A. from York University in Toronto.
Robert H. Peterman, Jr. has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024. He previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Distribution Officer from March 2023 to October 2024 and as Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer from 2018 to March 2023. He served as President of Primerica Distribution from 2013 to 2018, where he was responsible for recruiting, licensing, licensing education, field compensation, field equity, and decision support. In 2005, he became Executive Vice President and was given responsibility for the Company’s Grow the Sales Force initiative. He also served as Chief Executive Officer of Primerica’s National Benefit Life Insurance Company from 2017 to 2018. Mr. Peterman joined the Company in 1984 and has served in many varying roles throughout the business.
Paul E. Regard has served as Executive Vice President of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024 and as Chief Executive Officer and President of PFS Investments Inc. since October 2023. Since joining Primerica in September 2015, he has held various roles in the Company’s securities business, including building and launching the Company’s managed account platform. Before joining Primerica, Mr. Regard was a Director at The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation (BNY Mellon) from 2008 to 2013 where he helped develop BNY Mellon’s asset management business for Asian financial intermediaries. Mr. Regard has a B.S. in Finance from the University of Notre Dame.
Brett “Ben” A. Rogers has served as Executive Vice President and General Counsel since May 2019. Previously, he was a Partner at Rogers & Hardin LLP in Atlanta, Georgia, where he represented Primerica as outside counsel for more than 20 years. At Rogers & Hardin LLP, his practice focused on complex business matters, including securities litigation, arbitration, and general commercial litigation. Mr. Rogers received a B.A. degree from Dickinson College and his J.D. with honors from Florida State University.
Julie A. Seman has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing and Innovation Officer since March 2023, responsible for the marketing of our Life, Investment and Savings, and Legal Protection products, Digital & Field Distribution and Meetings & Conventions. She previously served as Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer of Field Distribution, Digital Distribution, Primerica Life, Client Solutions, and Strategic Markets from May 2018 to March 2023. Since 2014 she has been responsible for sales force growth and increased product distribution through the training and development of financial services representatives in the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico and Guam. In addition, Ms. Seman previously supported Primerica’s Strategic Markets, which include African American, Asian Pacific Islander, Hispanic, Partnership and Women with a focus on personal financial education and entrepreneurship. Prior thereto, she was Senior Vice President of Client Solutions from 2010 to 2014 where she supervised all front-end products and oversaw field communication tools. Ms. Seman joined the Company in 1998 and has served in many roles with increasing responsibility. Ms. Seman received her B.S. degree in Business Management from Southern Illinois University.
Dale A.M. Tuck has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Information Technology Officer of Primerica, Inc. since October 2024. Since September 2020, he has served as Executive Vice President of Primerica Life Insurance Company (PLIC) and since October 2024 as Chief Information Technology Officer, overseeing information technology initiatives across the Company. He served as Senior Vice President, Technology Strategy and Governance from February 2019 to September 2020. Prior to joining Primerica, Mr. Tuck served as Head of Digital Business at Neudesic, an IBM company, from 2018 to February 2019 and in various roles throughout his nearly 20 year technology-related career. He obtained a Higher Diploma (HD) in Marketing Management from the Institute of Marketing Management in Durban, South Africa and a Masters in Business Administration from the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom.