Brighthouse Financial Inc

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

Our operations are subject to a wide variety of insurance and other laws and regulations. Our insurance subsidiaries and BRCD are subject to regulation by their primary Delaware, Massachusetts and New York state regulators, as applicable, as well as other regulation in states in which they operate. Changes in these laws and regulations could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Business — Regulation,” as supplemented by discussions of regulatory developments in our subsequently filed Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Industry Trends and Uncertainties — Regulatory Developments.”

In addition, we cannot predict what proposals may be made, what legislation or regulations may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any future legislation or regulations could have on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including the cost of any such compliance. Furthermore, regulatory uncertainty could create confusion among our distribution partners and customers, which could negatively impact product sales. See “Business — Regulation — Standard of Conduct Regulation” for a more detailed discussion of particular regulatory efforts by various regulators.

Changes to the laws and regulations that govern the standards of conduct that apply to the sale of our products, as well as the firms that distribute our products, could adversely affect our operations and profitability. Such changes could increase our regulatory and compliance burden, resulting in increased costs, or limit the type, amount or structure of compensation arrangements into which we may enter with certain of our employees, which could negatively impact our ability to compete with other companies, including with respect to recruiting and retaining key personnel. Additionally, our ability to react to rapidly changing economic conditions and the dynamic, competitive market for our products will depend on the continued efficacy of provisions we have incorporated into our product design allowing frequent and contemporaneous revisions of key pricing elements, as well as our ability to work collaboratively with regulators. Changes in regulatory approval processes, rules and other dynamics in the regulatory process could adversely impact our ability to react to such changing conditions.

We cannot predict the impact that “best interest” or fiduciary standards adopted or proposed by various regulators may have on our business, financial condition or results of operations. Compliance with new or changed rules or legislation in this area may increase our regulatory burden and that of our distribution partners, require changes to our compensation practices and product offerings, and increase litigation risk, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, we are subject to federal, state and other securities and state insurance laws and regulations which, among other things, require that we distribute certain of our products through a registered broker-dealer. The failure to comply with these laws or changes to these laws could have a material adverse effect on our operations and our profitability. Furthermore, changes in laws and regulations that affect our customers and distribution partners or their operations also may affect our business relationships with them and their ability to purchase or distribute our products. Such actions may negatively affect our business and results of operations.

If our associates fail to adhere to regulatory requirements or our policies and procedures, we may be subject to penalties, restrictions or other sanctions by applicable regulators, and we may suffer reputational harm. See “Business — Regulation.”

A decrease in the RBC ratio of our insurance subsidiaries (as a result of a reduction in statutory capital and surplus or an increase in the required RBC capital charges), or a change in the rating agency proprietary capital models for our insurance subsidiaries, could result in increased scrutiny by insurance regulators and rating agencies and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations

The NAIC has established model regulations that provide minimum capitalization requirements based on RBC formulas for insurance companies. Each of our insurance subsidiaries is subject to RBC standards or other minimum statutory capital and surplus requirements imposed under the laws of its respective jurisdiction of domicile. See “Business — Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Statutory Accounting, Reserves and Risk-Based Capital.” A failure to meet these requirements could subject our insurance subsidiaries to further examination or corrective action imposed by insurance regulators, including limitations on their ability to write additional business, increased regulatory supervision, or seizure or liquidation. Any corrective action imposed could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. A decline in RBC ratio, whether or not it results in a failure to meet applicable RBC requirements, could limit the ability of an insurance subsidiary to make dividends or distributions to us, could result in a loss of customers or new business, or could influence ratings agencies to downgrade our financial strength ratings, each of which could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

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

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

Changes in tax laws or interpretations of such laws could have a material adverse effect on our profitability and financial condition and could result in our incurring materially higher statutory taxes. Higher tax rates or differences in interpretation of tax laws may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. Conversely, declines in tax rates could make our products less attractive to consumers. See “Business — Regulation — Federal Tax Reform” for a discussion of the potential impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act and the related corporate alternative minimum tax.

Legal disputes and regulatory investigations are common in our businesses and may result in significant financial losses or harm to our reputation

We face a significant risk of legal disputes and regulatory investigations in the ordinary course of operating our businesses, including the risk of class action lawsuits. Our pending legal actions and regulatory investigations include proceedings specific to us, as well as other proceedings that raise issues that are generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which we operate.

In connection with our insurance operations, plaintiffs’ lawyers may bring or are bringing class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to sales or underwriting practices, claims payments and procedures, escheatment, product design, disclosure, administration, investments, denial or delay of benefits, lapse or termination of policies, cost of insurance and breaches of fiduciary or other duties to customers. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against us may seek very large or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages. Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may be difficult to ascertain. Material pending litigation and other legal disputes, as well as regulatory matters affecting us and risks to our business presented by these proceedings, if any, are discussed in Note 18 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

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

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