W. R. Berkley Corporation (WRB) Risk Analysis

We are subject to extensive governmental regulation and supervision in both the United States and foreign jurisdictions. Most insurance regulations are designed to protect the interests of policyholders rather than stockholders and other investors. This system of regulation, generally administered in the United States by a department of insurance in each state in which we do business, relates to, among other things: - standards of solvency, including risk-based capital measurements;- restrictions on the nature, quality and concentration of investments;- limitations on the amount of dividends, tax distributions, intercompany loans and other payments that can be made without prior regulatory approval;- requirements pertaining to certain methods of accounting;- evaluating enterprise risk to an insurer;- privacy, data protection, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence;- rate and form regulation pertaining to certain of our insurance businesses;- potential assessments for the provision of funds necessary for the settlement of covered claims under certain policies provided by impaired, insolvent or failed insurance companies; and - involvement in the payment or adjudication of catastrophe or other claims beyond the terms of the policies. State insurance departments conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to the financial condition of insurance companies, holding company issues and other matters. Our Insurance business internationally is also generally subject to a similar regulatory scheme in each of the jurisdictions where we conduct operations outside the United States. Federal financial services modernization legislation and legislative and regulatory initiatives taken or which may be taken in response to conditions in the financial markets, global insurance supervision and other factors may lead to additional federal regulation of the insurance industry in the coming years. The Dodd-Frank Act effected sweeping changes to financial services regulation in the United States. The Dodd-Frank Act established the FSOC, which is authorized to recommend that certain systemically significant non-bank financial companies, including insurance companies, be regulated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The Dodd-Frank Act also established a FIO which is authorized to study, monitor and report to Congress on the U.S. insurance industry and the significance of global reinsurance to the U.S. insurance market. The FIO also can recommend that the FSOC designate an insurer as an entity posing risks to the United States financial stability in the event of the insurer's material financial distress or failure. Our business could be affected by changes, whether as a result of potential changes to the Dodd-Frank Act, to the U.S. system of insurance regulation or our designation or the designation of insurers or reinsurers with which we do business as systemically significant non-bank financial companies. The topic of climate risk has come under increased scrutiny by the NAIC and insurance regulators. For instance, in New York, the NYDFS's circular letter, which applies to our insurance subsidiaries licensed in New York, states that regulated insurers are expected to integrate financial risks related to climate change into their governance frameworks, risk management processes, business strategies and scenario analysis, and develop their approach to climate-related financial disclosure. The NYDFS also amended the regulation governing enterprise risk management, which applies to our insurance subsidiaries licensed in New York, that requires an insurance group's enterprise risk management function to address certain additional risks, including climate change risk. In addition, the FIO is assessing how the insurance sector may help mitigate climate- related risks and achieve national climate-related goals, and it released a report in June 2023 urging insurance regulators to adopt climate-related risk monitoring guidance. These measures may subject us to increased oversight at the state and federal level. State regulation is the primary form of regulation of insurance and reinsurance in the United States, although Congress has considered various proposals regarding federal regulation of insurance, in addition to the changes brought about by the Dodd-Frank Act, such as proposals for the creation of an optional federal charter for insurance companies. We may be subject to potentially increased federal oversight as a financial institution. In addition, the new U.S. administration and the volatile political environment increases the chance of other federal legislative and regulatory changes that could affect us in ways we cannot predict. With respect to international measures, Solvency II, the EU regime concerning the capital adequacy, risk management and regulatory reporting for insurers and reinsurers may affect our insurance businesses. As described in "International Regulation" above, the EU has recently amended certain provisions in Solvency II, which EU member states will implement in their domestic regulation over the next two years. In addition, despite the waiver of the Solvency II group capital requirements we received, any changes in the application of Solvency II (or any further amendments to Solvency II itself) may have the effect of increasing the capital requirements of our EU domiciled insurers. Additionally, our capital requirements and compliance requirements may be adversely affected if the European Commission does not deem the insurance regulatory regimes of the jurisdictions outside the EU in which we have insurance or reinsurance companies domiciled to be "equivalent" to Solvency II. Similar considerations apply to our U.K. subsidiaries, which are now subject to a separate U.K. prudential regime that derives from Solvency II. However, the two regimes, and their respective requirements, have begun to diverge due to both the EU's recent amendments to Solvency II described above and the reforms to the U.K.'s domestic prudential regime (please see "International Regulation" above for more information). We therefore may be required to utilize additional resources to ensure compliance with the different rules in each regime. If our compliance with Solvency II, the U.K.'s prudential regime or any other regulatory regime is challenged, we may be subject to monetary or other penalties. In addition, in order to ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements or as a result of any investigation, including remediation efforts, we could be required to incur significant expenses and undertake additional work, which in turn may divert resources from our business. We may be unable to maintain all required licenses and approvals and our business may not fully comply with the wide variety of applicable laws and regulations or the relevant authority's interpretation of the laws and regulations. Also, some regulatory authorities have relatively broad discretion to grant, renew or revoke licenses and approvals. If we do not have the requisite licenses and approvals or do not comply with applicable regulatory requirements, the insurance regulatory authorities could preclude or temporarily suspend us from carrying on some or all of our activities or monetarily penalize us. Also, changes in the level of regulation of the insurance industry, whether federal, state or foreign, or changes in laws or regulations themselves or interpretations thereof by regulatory authorities, may further restrict the conduct of our business.

In recent years, changing weather patterns and climatic conditions, such as global warming, appear to have contributed to the unpredictability, frequency and severity of natural disasters and created additional uncertainty as to future trends and exposures. There is a scientific consensus that global warming and other climate change are altering the frequency, severity and peril characteristics of catastrophic weather events, such as hurricanes, windstorms, floods, wildfires and other natural disasters. Such changes make it more difficult for us to predict and model catastrophic events, reducing our ability to accurately price our exposure to such events and mitigate our risks. Any increase in the frequency or severity of natural disasters may adversely affect our financial condition and results.

As industry practices and economic, legal, judicial, social, technological and other environmental conditions change, unexpected and unintended issues related to claim and coverage frequently emerge. These issues may adversely affect our business by either extending coverage beyond our underwriting intent or by increasing the number or size of claims. Examples of emerging claims and coverage issues include, but are not limited to: - judicial expansion of policy coverage and a greater propensity to grant claimants more favorable amounts and the impact of new theories of liability;- plaintiffs targeting property and casualty insurers, including us, in purported class action litigation relating to claims-handling and other practices;- social inflation trends, including higher and more frequent claims, more favorable judgments and legislated increases;- medical developments that link health issues to particular causes, resulting in liability claims;- claims relating to unanticipated consequences of current or new technologies, including cyber security related risks;- claims relating to potentially changing climate conditions; and - increased claims due to third party funding of litigation. In some instances, these emerging issues may not become apparent for some time after we have issued the affected insurance policies. As a result, the full extent of liability under our insurance policies may not be known until many years after the policies are issued. In addition, the potential passage of new legislation designed to expand the right to sue, to remove limitations on recovery, to extend the statutes of limitations or otherwise to repeal or weaken tort reforms could have an adverse impact on our business. The effects of these and other unforeseen emerging claim and coverage issues are difficult to predict and could harm our business and materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

Our business is highly dependent upon our employees' ability to perform necessary business functions in an efficient and uninterrupted fashion. A shutdown of, or inability to access, one or more of our facilities, a power outage or a failure of one or more of our information technology, telecommunications or other computer systems could significantly impair our employees' ability to perform such functions on a timely basis. In the event of a disaster such as a natural catastrophe, terrorist attack or industrial accident, physical or electronic security breaches, such as breaches by computer hackers, the infection of our systems by a malicious computer virus, denial of service attack, or other cybersecurity incident, our systems could be inaccessible for an extended period of time. In addition, because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems and infrastructure beyond our control, we could experience service denials or failures of controls if demand for our service exceeds capacity or a third-party system or infrastructure fails or experiences an interruption. If our business continuity plans or system security does not sufficiently address such a business interruption, system failure or service denial, our ability to write and process new and renewal business, provide customer service, pay claims in a timely manner or perform other necessary business functions could be significantly impaired and our business could be harmed.