ITEM 1A.  RISK FACTORS.

CNO and its businesses are subject to a number of risks including general business and financial risk. Any or all of such risks could have a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition or results of operations of CNO. In addition, please refer to the "Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" included in "Item 7 - Management's Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of Operations".

Potential continuation of a low interest rate environment for an extended period of time may negatively impact our results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

In recent periods, interest rates have been at or near historically low levels. Some of our products, principally traditional whole life, universal life, fixed rate and fixed index annuity contracts, expose us to the risk that low or declining interest rates will reduce our spread (the difference between the amounts that we are required to pay under the contracts and the investment income we are able to earn on the investments supporting our obligations under the contracts). Our spread is a key component of our net income. Investment income is also an important component of the profitability of our health products, especially long-term care and supplemental health policies. In addition, interest rates impact the liability for the benefits we provide under our agent deferred compensation plan (as it is our policy to immediately recognize changes in assumptions used to determine this liability).

If interest rates were to decrease further or remain at low levels for an extended period of time, we may have to invest new cash flows or reinvest proceeds from investments that have matured or have been prepaid or sold at yields that have the effect of reducing our net investment income as well as the spread between interest earned on investments and interest credited to some of our products below present or planned levels. To the extent prepayment rates on fixed maturity investments or mortgage loans in our investment portfolio exceed our assumptions, this could increase the impact of this risk. We can lower crediting rates on certain products to offset the decrease in investment yield. However, our ability to lower these rates may be limited by: (i) contractually guaranteed minimum rates; or (ii) competition. In addition, a decrease in crediting rates may not match the timing or magnitude of changes in investment yields. Currently, the vast majority of our products with contractually guaranteed minimum rates have crediting rates set at the minimum rate. As a result, further decreases in investment yields would decrease the spread we earn and such spread could potentially become a loss.

The following table summarizes the distribution of annuity and universal life account values, net of amounts ceded, by guaranteed interest crediting rates as of December 31, 2017 (dollars in millions):

In addition, during periods of declining or low interest rates, life and annuity products may be relatively more attractive to consumers, resulting in increased premium payments on products with flexible premium features, repayment of policy loans and increased persistency (a higher percentage of insurance policies remaining in force from year-to-year).

Our expectation of future investment income is an important consideration in determining the amortization of insurance acquisition costs and analyzing the recovery of these assets as well as determining the adequacy of our liabilities for insurance products. Expectations of lower future investment earnings may cause us to accelerate amortization, write down the balance of insurance acquisition costs or establish additional liabilities for insurance products, thereby reducing net income in the future periods.

In the fourth quarter of 2017, we completed a comprehensive review of interest rate assumptions on all of our products. The new money rate is the rate of return we receive on cash flows invested at a current date. If new money rates are lower than the overall weighted average return we earn from our investment portfolio, and the lower rates persist, our overall earned rates will decrease. Specifically, our current projections assume new money rates ranging from 4.65 percent to 5.42 percent for one year (previously ranged from 4.90 percent to 5.67 percent) and then grade over 5 years from these levels to an ultimate new money rate ranging from 5.73 percent to 6.50 percent (unchanged from the prior year), depending on the specific product. While subject to many uncertainties, we believe our assumptions for future new money rates are reasonable.

The remaining profit margins for the life contingent payout annuities in the Colonial Penn and Washington National segments and for the long-term care block in run-off are extremely low. Accordingly, future unfavorable changes to our assumptions are more likely to reduce earnings in the period such changes occur.

The following hypothetical scenarios illustrate the sensitivity of changes in interest rates to our products:

While we expect the long-term care business in our Bankers Life segment to generate future net profits, the margins are relatively small and are vulnerable to a variety of factors including lower interest rates, higher morbidity and higher persistency. In addition, our projections of estimated future profits (losses) indicates that profits will be recognized in earlier periods, followed by losses in later periods, which has required us to establish a future loss reserve for this business. Our 2017 comprehensive actuarial review of this long-term care business indicated margins slightly decreased by $5 million in 2017 to approximately $315 million, or approximately 7 percent of related insurance liabilities net of insurance intangibles. Given the concentration of exposure to interest rates in this block of business, we modeled the following additional hypothetical scenarios to illustrate the sensitivity of additional changes in interest rates on long-term care products in the Bankers Life segment:

Although the hypothetical revisions described in the scenarios summarized above are not currently required or anticipated, we believe similar changes could occur based on past variances in experience and our expectations of the ranges of future experience that could reasonably occur. We have assumed that revisions to assumptions resulting in such adjustments would occur equally among policy types, ages and durations within each product classification. Any actual adjustment would be dependent on the specific policies affected and, therefore, may differ from such estimates. In addition, the impact of actual adjustments would reflect the net effect of all changes in assumptions during the period.

Sustained periods of low or declining interest rates may adversely affect our results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

A long-term care reinsurance transaction could adversely impact our financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows.

We have previously disclosed that our strategic priorities include a reduction of our relative long-term care exposure. To achieve this goal, it is likely that we will need to transfer the risks of a portion of this business through one or more reinsurance transactions. The comprehensive, nursing home and home health care long-term care business written before 2003 has negative margins. In order to meaningfully reduce the risk associated with our long-term care block, a substantial ceding commission would be paid by the Company to transfer long-term care risk through reinsurance. Such a reduction of our long-term care exposure would result in the recognition of a loss. Due to our current tax position, it is likely that a portion of the tax benefit recognized on the loss would not be realized and we may be required to increase our valuation allowance for deferred tax assets. Although we believe reducing our exposure to the risk of long-term care business would benefit the Company in the long term, such reduction could initially adversely impact certain aspects of our financial position, results of operations and/or cash flow.

There are risks to our business associated with broad economic conditions.

From 2008 to 2010, the U.S. economy experienced unusually severe credit and liquidity contraction and underwent a recession. Following several years of rapid credit expansion, a contraction in mortgage lending coupled with substantial declines in home prices and rising mortgage defaults resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities and major commercial and investment banks. These write-downs, initially of mortgage-backed securities but spreading to many sectors of the related credit markets, and to related credit default swaps and other derivative securities, caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital, to merge with larger and stronger institutions, to be subsidized by the U.S. government or, in some cases, to fail. These factors, combined with declining business and consumer confidence and increased unemployment, precipitated an economic slowdown.

General factors such as the availability of credit, consumer spending, business investment, capital market conditions and inflation affect our business. For example, in an economic downturn, higher unemployment, lower family income, lower corporate earnings, lower business investment and lower consumer spending may depress the demand for life insurance, annuities and other insurance products. In addition, this type of economic environment may result in higher lapses or surrenders of policies.

Our business is exposed to the performance of the debt and equity markets. Adverse market conditions can affect the liquidity and value of our investments. The manner in which debt and equity market performance and changes in interest rates have affected, and will continue to affect, our business, financial condition, growth and profitability include, but are not limited to, the following:

our investment portfolio and amounts to be credited to policyholders and contractholders, which could adversely affect our profitability.

Claims experience on our long-term care products could negatively impact our operations if actual experience diverges from historical patterns and our expectations.

In setting premium rates, we consider historical claims information and other factors, but we cannot predict future claims with certainty. This is particularly applicable to our long-term care insurance products, for which historical claims experience may not be indicative of future experience. Long-term care products tend to have fewer claims than other health products such as Medicare supplement products, but when claims are incurred, they tend to be much higher in dollar amount and longer in duration. Also, long-term care claims are incurred much later in the life of the policy than most other supplemental health products. As a result of these traits, it is difficult to appropriately price this product. For our long-term care insurance, actual persistency in later policy durations that is higher than our persistency assumptions could have a negative impact on profitability. If these policies remain inforce longer than we assumed, then we could be required to make greater benefit payments than anticipated when the products were priced. Mortality is a critical factor influencing the length of time a claimant receives long-term care benefits. Mortality continues to improve for the general population. Improvements in actual mortality compared to our pricing assumptions have adversely affected the profitability of long-term care products and if such trends continue, further losses may be realized.

Our Bankers Life segment has offered long-term care insurance since 1985. In recent years, the claims experience and persistency on some of Bankers Life long-term care blocks has generally been higher than our pricing expectations which has resulted in higher benefit ratios and adversely affected our profitability. While we have received regulatory approvals for numerous premium rate increases in recent years pertaining to these blocks, there can be no assurance that future requests will be approved. Even with the rate increases that have been approved, this block experienced benefit ratios of 132.3 percent in 2017 , 135.0 percent in 2016 and 139.2 percent in 2015 .

The results of operations of our insurance business will decline if our premium rates are not adequate or if we are unable to increase rates.

We set the premium rates on our health insurance policies based on facts and circumstances known at the time we issue the policies and on assumptions about numerous variables, including the actuarial probability of a policyholder incurring a claim, the probable size of the claim, maintenance costs to administer the policies and the interest rate earned on our investment of premiums. In setting premium rates, we consider historical claims information, industry statistics, the rates of our competitors and other factors, but we cannot predict with certainty the future actual claims on our products. If our actual claims experience proves to be less favorable than we assumed and we are unable to raise our premium rates to the extent necessary to offset the unfavorable claims experience, our financial results will be adversely affected.

We review the adequacy of our premium rates regularly and file proposed rate increases on our health insurance products when we believe existing premium rates are too low. It is possible that we will not be able to obtain approval for premium rate increases from currently pending or future requests. If we are unable to raise our premium rates because we fail to obtain approval in one or more states, our financial results will be adversely affected. Moreover, in some instances, our ability to exit unprofitable lines of business is limited by the guaranteed renewal feature of most of our insurance policies. Due to this feature, we cannot exit such lines of business without regulatory approval, and accordingly, we may be required to continue to service those products at a loss for an extended period of time.

If we are successful in obtaining regulatory approval to raise premium rates, the increased premium rates may reduce the volume of our new sales and cause existing policyholders to allow their policies to lapse. This could result in a significantly higher ratio of claim costs to premiums if healthier policyholders allow their policies to lapse, while policies of less healthy policyholders continue inforce. This would reduce our premium income and profitability in future periods.

Our Medicare supplement health policies allow us to increase premium rates when warranted by our actual claims experience. These rate increases must be approved by the applicable state insurance departments, and we are required to submit

actuarial claims data to support the need for such rate increases. The re-rate application and approval process on Medicare supplement health products is a normal recurring part of our business operations and reasonable rate increases are typically approved by the state departments as long as they are supported by actual claims experience and are not unusually large in either dollar amount or percentage increase. For policy types on which rate increases are a normal recurring event, our estimates of insurance liabilities assume we will be able to raise rates if experience on the blocks warrants such increases in the future.

As a result of higher persistency and resultant higher claims in our long-term care block in the Bankers Life segment than assumed in the original pricing, our premium rates were too low. Accordingly, we have been seeking approval from regulatory authorities for rate increases on portions of this business. Many of the rate increases have been approved by regulators and implemented, but it has become increasingly difficult to receive regulatory approval for the premium rate increases we have sought. If we are unable to obtain pending or future rate increases, the profitability of these policies and the performance of this block of business will be adversely affected. Most of our long-term care business is guaranteed renewable, and, if necessary rate increases are not approved, we would be required to recognize a loss and establish a premium deficiency reserve.

In some cases, we offer long-term care policyholders the opportunity to reduce their coverage amounts or accept non-forfeiture benefits as alternatives to increasing their premium rates. The financial impact of these alternatives could also result in policyholder anti-selection, meaning that policyholders who are less likely to incur claims may reduce their benefits, while policyholders who are more likely to incur claims may maintain full coverage and accept their rate increase.

Our reserves for future insurance policy benefits and claims may prove to be inadequate, requiring us to increase liabilities which results in reduced net income and shareholders' equity.

Liabilities for insurance products are calculated using management's best judgments, based on our past experience and standard actuarial tables of mortality, morbidity, lapse rates, investment experience and expense levels. For our health insurance business, we establish an active life reserve; a liability for due and unpaid claims, claims in the course of settlement and incurred but not reported claims; and a reserve for the present value of amounts on incurred claims not yet due. We establish reserves based on assumptions and estimates of factors either established at the Effective Date for business inforce or considered when we set premium rates for business written after that date.

Many factors can affect these reserves and liabilities, such as economic and social conditions, inflation, hospital and pharmaceutical costs, changes in life expectancy, regulatory actions, changes in doctrines of legal liability and extra-contractual damage awards. Therefore, the reserves and liabilities we establish are necessarily based on estimates, assumptions, industry data and prior years' statistics. It is possible that actual claims will materially exceed our reserves and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. We have incurred significant losses beyond our estimates as a result of actual claim costs and persistency of our long-term care business included in our Bankers Life segment. The insurance policy benefits incurred for our long-term care products in our Bankers Life segment were $599.3 million , $636.1 million and $669.0 million in 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. The benefit ratios for our long-term care products in our Bankers Life segment were 132.3 percent , 135.0 percent and 139.2 percent in 2017 , 2016 and 2015 , respectively. Our financial performance depends significantly upon the extent to which our actual claims experience and future expenses are consistent with the assumptions we used in setting our reserves. If our future claims are higher than our assumptions, and our reserves prove to be insufficient to cover our actual losses and expenses, we would be required to increase our liabilities, and our financial results could be adversely affected.

We may be required to accelerate the amortization of deferred acquisition costs or the present value of future profits or establish premium deficiency reserves.

Deferred acquisition costs represent incremental direct costs related to the successful acquisition of new or renewal insurance contracts. The present value of future profits represents the value assigned to the right to receive future cash flows from contracts existing at the Effective Date. The balances of these accounts are amortized over the expected lives of the underlying insurance contracts. On an ongoing basis, we test these accounts recorded on our balance sheet to determine if these amounts are recoverable under current assumptions. In addition, we regularly review the estimates and assumptions underlying these accounts for those products for which we amortize deferred acquisition costs or the present value of future profits in proportion to gross profits or gross margins. If facts and circumstances change, these tests and reviews could lead to reduction in the balance of those accounts, and the establishment of a premium deficiency reserve. Such results could have an adverse effect on the results of our operations and our financial condition. See "Item 7 Management's Discussion and Analysis of

Consolidated Finance Condition and Results of Operations, Critical Accounting Policies, Present Value of Future Profits and Deferred Acquisition Costs."

Our operating results may suffer if policyholder surrender levels differ significantly from our assumptions.

Surrenders of our annuities and life insurance products can result in losses and decreased revenues if surrender levels differ significantly from assumed levels. At December 31, 2017 , approximately 23 percent of our total insurance liabilities, or approximately $5.4 billion , could be surrendered by the policyholder without penalty. The surrender charges that are imposed on our fixed rate annuities typically decline during a penalty period, which ranges from five to twelve years after the date the policy is issued. Surrender charges are eliminated after the penalty period. Surrenders and redemptions could require us to dispose of assets earlier than we had planned, possibly at a loss. Moreover, surrenders and redemptions require faster amortization of either the acquisition costs or the commissions associated with the original sale of a product, thus reducing our net income. We believe policyholders are generally more likely to surrender their policies if they believe the issuer is having financial difficulties, or if they are able to reinvest the policy's value at a higher rate of return in an alternative insurance or investment product.

Changing interest rates may adversely affect our results of operations.

Our profitability is affected by fluctuating interest rates. While we monitor the interest rate environment and employ asset/liability and hedging strategies to mitigate such impact, our financial results could be adversely affected by changes in interest rates. Our spread-based insurance and annuity business is subject to several inherent risks arising from movements in interest rates. First, interest rate changes can cause compression of our net spread between interest earned on investments and interest credited to customer deposits. Our ability to adjust for such a compression is limited by the guaranteed minimum rates that we must credit to policyholders on certain products, as well as the terms on most of our other products that limit reductions in the crediting rates to pre-established intervals. As of December 31, 2017 , the vast majority of our products with contractual guaranteed minimum rates had crediting rates set at the minimum. In addition, approximately 21 percent of our insurance liabilities were subject to interest rates that may be reset annually; 50 percent had a fixed explicit interest rate for the duration of the contract; 26 percent had credited rates that approximate the income we earn; and the remainder had no explicit interest rates. Second, if interest rate changes produce an unanticipated increase in surrenders of our spread-based products, we may be forced to sell invested assets at a loss in order to fund such surrenders. Third, the profits from many non-spread-based insurance products, such as long-term care policies, can be adversely affected when interest rates decline because we may be unable to reinvest the cash from premiums received at the interest rates anticipated when we sold the policies. Finally, changes in interest rates can have significant effects on the fair value and performance of our investments in general such as the timing of cash flows on many structured securities due to changes in the prepayment rate of the loans underlying such securities.

We employ asset/liability strategies that are designed to mitigate the effects of interest rate changes on our profitability but do not currently extensively employ derivative instruments for this purpose. We may not be successful in implementing these strategies and sustaining adequate investment spreads.

We simulate our cash flows expected from existing business under various interest rate scenarios. With such estimates, we actively manage the relationship between the duration of our assets and the expected duration of our liabilities. When the estimated durations of assets and liabilities are similar, the effect of changes in market interest rates shall have largely offsetting effects on the value of the related assets and liabilities. At December 31, 2017 , the estimated durations of our fixed income securities (as modified to reflect estimated prepayments and call premiums) and insurance liabilities were approximately 8.6 years and 8.4 years , respectively. We estimate that our fixed maturity securities and short-term investments, net of corresponding changes in insurance acquisition costs, would decline in fair value by approximately $445 million if interest rates were to increase by 10 percent from rates as of December 31, 2017 . Our simulations incorporate numerous assumptions, require significant estimates and assume an immediate change in interest rates without any management reaction to such change. Consequently, potential changes in the values of our financial instruments indicated by the simulations will likely be different from the actual changes experienced under given interest rate scenarios, and the differences may be material. Because we actively manage our investments and liabilities, our net exposure to interest rates can vary over time.

General market conditions affect investments and investment income.

The performance of our investment portfolio depends in part upon the level of and changes in interest rates, risk spreads, real estate values, market volatility, the performance of the economy in general, the performance of the specific obligors included in our portfolio and other factors that are beyond our control. Changes in these factors can affect our net investment income in any period, and such changes can be substantial.

Financial market conditions can also affect our realized and unrealized investment gains (losses). During periods of rising interest rates, the fair values of our investments will typically decline. Conversely, during periods of falling interest rates, the fair values of our investments will typically rise.

We use derivatives in an effort to hedge higher potential returns to our fixed index annuity policyholders based on the increase in the value of a particular index. For derivative positions we hold that are in-the-money, we are exposed to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty.

In addition, our investment borrowings from the Federal Home Loan Bank ("FHLB") are secured by collateral, the fair value of which can be significantly impacted by general market conditions. If the fair value of pledged collateral falls below specific levels, we would be required to pledge additional eligible collateral or repay all or a portion of the investment borrowings.

We face risk with respect to our reinsurance agreements.

We transfer exposure to certain risks to others through reinsurance arrangements. Under these arrangements, other insurers assume a portion of our losses and expenses associated with reported and unreported claims in exchange for a portion of policy premiums. The availability, amount and cost of reinsurance depend on general market conditions and may vary significantly. As of December 31, 2017 , our reinsurance receivables and ceded life insurance inforce totaled $2.2 billion and $3.5 billion , respectively. Our six largest reinsurers accounted for 93 percent of our ceded life insurance inforce. We face credit risk with respect to reinsurance. When we obtain reinsurance, we are still liable for those transferred risks even if the reinsurer defaults on its obligations. The failure, insolvency, inability or unwillingness of one or more of the Company's reinsurers to perform in accordance with the terms of its reinsurance agreement could negatively impact our earnings or financial position.

In December 2013, two of our insurance subsidiaries with long-term care business (Washington National and BCLIC) entered into 100% coinsurance agreements ceding $495 million of long-term care reserves to BRe, a reinsurer domiciled in the Cayman Islands. BRe was formed in 2012 and was focused on specialized insurance including long-term care. BRe is a reinsurer that is not licensed or accredited by the states of domicile (Indiana and New York, respectively) of the insurance subsidiaries ceding the long-term care business and BRe is not rated by A.M. Best. As a result of its non-accredited status, BRe was required to provide collateral which met the regulatory requirements of the states of domicile in order for our insurance subsidiaries to obtain full credit in their statutory financial statements for the reinsurance receivables due from BRe. Such collateral was held in market value trusts subject to 7% over collateralization, investment guidelines and periodic true-up provisions. In September 2016, we terminated the reinsurance agreements with BRe and recaptured the ceded business as further described in "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Consolidated Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Consolidated Financial Condition - Termination of Long-Term Care Reinsurance Agreements and Recapture of Related Long-Term Care Business in Run-off".

Our investment portfolio is subject to several risks that may diminish the value of our invested assets and negatively impact our profitability, our financial condition and our liquidity.

The value of our investment portfolio is subject to numerous factors, which may be difficult to predict, and are often beyond our control. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

obligations (collectively referred to as "structured securities") prepay faster than expected, investment income may be adversely affected due to the acceleration of the amortization of purchase premiums or the inability to reinvest at comparable yields in lower interest rate environments.

We have recorded writedowns of fixed maturity investments, equity securities and other invested assets as a result of conditions which caused us to conclude a decline in the fair value of the investment was other than temporary as follows: $22.8 million in 2017 ; $32.3 million in 2016 ( $35.9 million , prior to the $3.6 million of impairment losses recognized through accumulated other comprehensive income); and $39.9 million in 2015 ( $42.9 million , prior to the $3.0 million of impairment losses recognized through accumulated other comprehensive income). Our investment portfolio is subject to the risks of further declines in realizable value. However, we attempt to mitigate this risk through the diversification and active management of our portfolio.

In the event of substantial product surrenders or policy claims, we may be required to sell assets at a loss, thereby eroding the performance of our portfolio.

Because a substantial portion of our operating results are derived from returns on our investment portfolio, significant losses in the portfolio may have a direct and materially adverse impact on our results of operations. In addition, losses on our investment portfolio could reduce the investment returns that we are able to credit to our customers of certain products, thereby impacting our sales and eroding our financial performance. Investment losses may also reduce the capital of our insurance subsidiaries, which may cause us to make additional capital contributions to those subsidiaries or may limit the ability of the insurance subsidiaries to make dividend payments to CNO.

Deteriorating financial performance of securities collateralized by mortgage loans and commercial mortgage loans may lead to writedowns, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Changes in mortgage delinquency or recovery rates, declining real estate prices, challenges to the validity of foreclosures and the quality of service provided by service providers on securities in our portfolios could impact the value of our investments and such changes, if material, could lead us to determine that writedowns are appropriate.

The determination of the amount of realized investment losses recorded as impairments of our investments is highly subjective and could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

The determination of realized investment losses recorded as impairments is based upon our ongoing evaluation and assessment of known risks. We consider a wide range of factors about the investment and use our best judgment in evaluating the cause of a decline in estimated fair value and in assessing prospects for recovery. Inherent in our evaluation are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available. We update our evaluations regularly and reflect losses from impairments in operating results as such evaluations are revised. Our assessment of whether unrealized losses are other-than-temporary impairments requires significant judgment and future events may occur, or additional information may become available, which may necessitate changes in our ongoing assessments which may impact the level of future impairments of securities in our portfolio. Historical trends may not be indicative of future other-than-temporary impairments.

The determination of fair value of our fixed maturity securities results in unrealized investment gains and losses and is, in some cases, highly subjective and could materially impact our operating results and financial condition.

In determining fair value, we generally utilize market transaction data for the same or similar instruments. The degree of management judgment involved in determining fair values is inversely related to the availability of market observable information. Since significant observable market inputs are not available for certain securities, it may be difficult to value them. The fair value of financial assets and financial liabilities may differ from the amount actually received to sell an asset or the amount paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Moreover, the use of different valuation assumptions may have a material effect on the fair values of the financial assets and financial liabilities. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016 , our total unrealized net investment gains before adjustments for insurance intangibles and deferred income taxes were $2.2 billion and $1.3 billion , respectively.

Concentration of our investment portfolio in any particular sector of the economy or type of asset may have an adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

The concentration of our investment portfolio in any particular industry, group of related industries, asset classes (such as residential mortgage-backed securities and other asset-backed securities), or geographic area could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial position. While we seek to mitigate this risk by having a broadly diversified portfolio, events or developments that have a negative impact on any particular industry, group of related industries or geographic area may have an adverse effect on the investment portfolio.

Our business is subject to extensive regulation, which limits our operating flexibility and could result in our insurance subsidiaries being placed under regulatory control or otherwise negatively impact our financial results.

Our insurance business is subject to extensive regulation and supervision in the jurisdictions in which we operate. See "Business of CNO - Governmental Regulation." Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to state insurance laws that establish supervisory agencies. The regulations issued by state insurance agencies can be complex and subject to differing interpretations. If a state insurance regulatory agency determines that one of our insurance company subsidiaries is not in compliance with applicable regulations, the subsidiary is subject to various potential administrative remedies including, without limitation, monetary penalties, restrictions on the subsidiary's ability to do business in that state and a return of a portion of policyholder premiums. In addition, regulatory action or investigations could cause us to suffer significant reputational harm, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our insurance subsidiaries are required to comply with statutory accounting principles ("SAP"). SAP (including principles that impact the calculation of RBC and our insurance liabilities) are subject to continued review by the NAIC in an effort to address emerging issues and improve financial reporting. Various proposals are currently being considered by the NAIC, some of which, if enacted, would negatively impact our insurance subsidiaries.

Our insurance subsidiaries are also subject to RBC requirements. These requirements were designed to evaluate the adequacy of statutory capital and surplus in relation to investment and insurance risks associated with asset quality, mortality and morbidity, asset and liability matching and other business factors. The requirements are used by states as an early warning tool to discover companies that may be weakly-capitalized for the purpose of initiating regulatory action. Generally, if an insurer's RBC ratio falls below specified levels, the insurer is subject to different degrees of regulatory action depending upon the magnitude of the deficiency. The 2017 statutory annual statements of each of our insurance subsidiaries reflect RBC ratios in excess of the levels subjecting the insurance subsidiaries to any regulatory action.

In addition to the RBC requirements, certain states have established minimum capital requirements for insurance companies licensed to do business in their state. These regulators have the discretionary authority, in connection with the continual licensing of the Company's insurance subsidiaries, to limit or prohibit writing new business within its jurisdiction when, in the state's judgment, the insurance subsidiary is not maintaining adequate statutory surplus or capital or that the insurance subsidiary's further transaction of business would be hazardous to policyholders. The state insurance department rules provide several standards for the regulators to use in identifying companies which may be deemed to be in hazardous financial condition. One of the standards defines hazardous conditions as existing if an insurer's operating loss in the last twelve months or any shorter period of time, (including, but not limited to: (A) net capital gain or loss; (B) change in nonadmitted assets; and (C) cash dividends paid to shareholders), is greater than fifty percent of the insurer's remaining surplus. All of our insurance subsidiaries currently exceed these standards, if applicable.

Our broker-dealer and investment advisor subsidiaries are subject to regulation and supervision by the SEC, FINRA and certain state regulatory bodies. The SEC, FINRA and other governmental agencies, as well as state securities commissions, may examine or investigate the activities of broker-dealers and investment advisors. These examinations or investigations often focus on the activities of the registered representatives and registered investment advisors doing business through such entities and the entities' supervision of those persons. It is possible that any examination or investigation could lead to enforcement action by the regulator and/or may result in payments of fines and penalties, payments to customers, or both, as well as changes in systems or procedures of such entities, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition or results of operations.

Furthermore, the SEC is reviewing the standard of conduct applicable to brokers, dealers and investment advisors when those entities provide personalized investment advice about securities to retail customers. FINRA has also issued a report addressing how its member firms might identify and address conflicts of interest including conflicts related to the introduction of new products and services and the compensation of the member firms' associated persons. These regulatory initiatives could

have an impact on Company operations and the manner in which broker-dealers and investment advisors distribute the Company's products.

Volatility in the securities markets, and other economic factors, may adversely affect our business, particularly our sales of certain life insurance products and annuities.

Fluctuations in the securities markets and other economic factors may adversely affect sales and/or policy surrenders of our annuities and life insurance policies. For example, volatility in the equity markets may deter potential purchasers from investing in fixed index annuities and may cause current policyholders to surrender their policies for the cash value or to reduce their investments. In addition, significant or unusual volatility in the general level of interest rates could negatively impact sales and/or lapse rates on certain types of insurance products.

Litigation and regulatory investigations are inherent in our business, may harm our financial condition and reputation, and may negatively impact our financial results.

Insurance companies historically have been subject to substantial litigation. In addition to the traditional policy claims associated with their businesses, insurance companies like ours face class action suits and derivative suits from policyholders and/or shareholders. We also face significant risks related to regulatory investigations and proceedings. The litigation and regulatory matters we are, have been, or may become, subject to include matters related to the classification of our career agents as independent contractors, sales, marketing and underwriting practices, payment of contingent or other sales commissions, claim payments and procedures, product design, product disclosure, administration, additional premium charges for premiums paid on a periodic basis, calculation of cost of insurance charges, changes to certain non-guaranteed policy features, denial or delay of benefits, charging excessive or impermissible fees on products, procedures related to canceling policies and recommending unsuitable products to customers. Certain of our insurance policies allow or require us to make changes based on experience to certain non-guaranteed elements ("NGEs") such as cost of insurance charges, expense loads, credited interest rates and policyholder bonuses. We intend to make changes to certain NGEs in the future. In some instances in the past, such action has resulted in litigation and similar litigation may arise in the future. Our exposure (including the potential adverse financial consequences of delays or decisions not to pursue changes to certain NGEs), if any, arising from any such action cannot presently be determined. Our pending legal and regulatory proceedings include matters that are specific to us, as well as matters faced by other insurance companies. State insurance departments have focused and continue to focus on sales, marketing and claims payment practices and product issues in their market conduct examinations. Negotiated settlements of class action and other lawsuits have had a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition and results of operations of CNO and our insurance subsidiaries.

We are, in the ordinary course of our business, a plaintiff or defendant in actions arising out of our insurance business, including class actions and reinsurance disputes, and, from time to time, we are also involved in various governmental and administrative proceedings and investigations and inquiries such as information requests, subpoenas and books and record examinations, from state, federal and other authorities. Recently, we and other insurance companies have been the subject of regulatory examinations regarding compliance with state unclaimed property laws. Such examinations have included inquiries related to the use of data available on the U.S. Social Security Administration's Death Master File to identify instances where benefits under life insurance policies, annuities and retained asset accounts are payable. It is possible that such examination or other regulatory inquiries may result in payments to beneficiaries, escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws and changes to procedures for the identification and escheatment of abandoned property. See the note to the consolidated financial statements entitled "Litigation and Other Legal Proceedings." The ultimate outcome of these lawsuits, regulatory proceedings and investigations cannot be predicted with certainty. In the event of an unfavorable outcome in one or more of these matters, the ultimate liability may be in excess of liabilities we have established and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We could also suffer significant reputational harm as a result of such litigation, regulatory proceedings or investigations, including harm flowing from actual or threatened revocation of licenses to do business, regulator actions to assert supervision or control over our business, and other sanctions which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Managing operational risks may not be effective in mitigating risk and loss to us.

We are subject to operational risks including, among other things, fraud, errors, failure to document transactions properly or to obtain proper internal authorization, failure to comply with regulatory requirements or obligations under our agreements, information technology failures including cyber security attacks and failure of our service providers (such as investment custodians and information technology and policyholder service providers) to comply with our services agreements. The associates and agents who conduct our business, including executive officers and other members of management, sales

managers, investment professionals, product managers, sales agents and other associates, do so in part by making decisions and choices that involve exposing us to risk. These include decisions involving numerous business activities such as setting underwriting guidelines, product design and pricing, investment purchases and sales, reserve setting, claim processing, policy administration and servicing, financial and tax reporting and other activities, many of which are very complex.

We seek to monitor and control our exposure to risks arising out of these activities through a risk control framework encompassing a variety of reporting systems, internal controls, management review processes and other mechanisms. However, these processes and procedures may not effectively control all known risks or effectively identify unforeseen risks. Management of operational risks can fail for a number of reasons including design failure, systems failure, cyber security attacks, human error or unlawful activities. If our controls are not effective or properly implemented, we could suffer financial or other loss, disruption of our business, regulatory sanctions or damage to our reputation. Losses resulting from these failures may have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

The occurrence of natural or man-made disasters or a pandemic could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We are exposed to various risks arising out of natural disasters, including earthquakes, hurricanes, floods and tornadoes, and man-made disasters, including acts of terrorism and military actions and pandemics. For example, a natural or man-made disaster or a pandemic could lead to unexpected changes in persistency rates as policyholders and contractholders who are affected by the disaster may be unable to meet their contractual obligations, such as payment of premiums on our insurance policies and deposits into our investment products. In addition, such a disaster or pandemic could also significantly increase our mortality and morbidity experience above the assumptions we used in pricing our products. The continued threat of terrorism and ongoing military actions may cause significant volatility in global financial markets, and a natural or man-made disaster or a pandemic could trigger an economic downturn in the areas directly or indirectly affected by the disaster or pandemic. These consequences could, among other things, result in a decline in business and increased claims from those areas. Disasters or a pandemic also could disrupt public and private infrastructure, including communications and financial services, which could disrupt our normal business operations.

A natural or man-made disaster or a pandemic could also disrupt the operations of our counterparties or result in increased prices for the products and services they provide to us. For example, a natural or man-made disaster or a pandemic could lead to increased reinsurance prices and potentially cause us to retain more risk than we otherwise would retain if we were able to obtain reinsurance at lower prices. In addition, a disaster or a pandemic could adversely affect the value of the assets in our investment portfolio if it affects companies' ability to pay principal or interest on their securities.

Interruption in telecommunication, information technology and other operational systems, or a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data residing on such systems, could harm our business.

We depend heavily on our telecommunication, information technology and other operational systems and on the integrity and timeliness of data we use to run our businesses and service our customers. These systems may fail to operate properly or become disabled as a result of events or circumstances which may be wholly or partly beyond our control. Further, we face the risk of operational and technology failures by others, including financial intermediaries, vendors and parties that provide services to us. If these parties do not perform as anticipated, we may experience operational difficulties, increased costs and other adverse effects on our business. Despite our implementation of a variety of security measures, our information technology and other systems could be subject to cyber attacks (including the risk of undetected attacks) and unauthorized access, such as physical or electronic break-ins, unauthorized tampering or other security breaches, resulting in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal financial and health information relating to customers. There can be no assurance that any such breach will not occur or, if any does occur, that it can be sufficiently remediated. 

Interruption in telecommunication, information technology and other operational systems, or a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data residing on such systems, whether due to actions by us or others, could delay or disrupt our ability to do business and service our customers, harm our reputation, subject us to litigation, regulatory sanctions and other claims, require us to incur significant expenses, lead to a loss of customers and revenues and otherwise adversely affect our business. Depending on the nature of the information compromised, in the event of a data breach or other unauthorized access to our customer data, we may also have obligations to notify customers about the incident and we may need to provide some form of remedy, such as a subscription to a credit monitoring service, for the individuals affected by the incident. A growing number of legislative and regulatory bodies have adopted consumer notification requirements in the event of unauthorized access to or acquisition of certain types of personal data. Such breach notification laws continue to evolve and

may be inconsistent from one jurisdiction to another. Complying with these obligations could cause us to incur substantial costs (including fines) and could increase negative publicity surrounding any incident that compromises customer data. While we maintain insurance coverage that, subject to policy terms and conditions and a self-insured retention, is designed to address certain aspects of cyber risks, such insurance coverage may be insufficient to cover all losses or all types of claims that may arise in the continually evolving area of cyber risk.

Third parties to whom we outsource certain of our functions are also subject to the risks outlined above, and failures in their systems could adversely affect our business.

Our business could be interrupted or compromised if we experience difficulties arising from outsourcing relationships.

We outsource certain information technology and policy administration operations to third-party service providers. If we fail to maintain an effective outsourcing strategy or if third-party providers do not perform as contracted, we may experience operational difficulties, increased costs and a loss of business that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. In the event that one or more of our third-party service providers becomes unable to continue to provide services, we may suffer financial loss and other negative consequences.

We have substantial indebtedness which may restrict our ability to take advantage of business, strategic or financing opportunities.

As of December 31, 2017 , we had an aggregate principal amount of indebtedness of $925.0 million . CNO's indebtedness will require approximately $45 million in cash to service in 2018 (based on the principal amounts outstanding and applicable interest rates as of December 31, 2017 ). Our substantial indebtedness and the obligations under our debt agreements may restrict our ability to take advantage of business, strategic or financing opportunities.

In conjunction with the refinancing of its existing debt in 2015, the Company entered into a $150.0 million four-year unsecured revolving credit agreement on May 19, 2015, and made an initial drawing of $100.0 million , resulting in $50.0 million available for additional borrowings. On October 13, 2017, the Company entered into an amendment and restatement agreement (the "Amendment Agreement") with respect to its revolving credit agreement (as amended by the Amendment Agreement, the "Revolving Credit Agreement"). The Amendment Agreement, among other things, increased the total commitments available under the revolving credit facility from $150.0 million to $250.0 million , increased the aggregate amount of additional incremental loans the Company may incur from $50.0 million to $100.0 million and extended the maturity date of the revolving credit facility from May 19, 2019 to the earlier of October 13, 2022 and the date that is six months prior to the maturity date of the 2020 Notes, which is November 30, 2019. The amount drawn under the Revolving Credit Agreement continues to be $100.0 million . On May 19, 2015, the Company also issued $325.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.500% Senior Notes due 2020 (the "2020 Notes") and $500.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.250% Senior Notes due 2025 (together with the 2020 Notes, the "Notes"). The Revolving Credit Agreement contains various restrictive covenants and required financial ratios that we are required to meet or maintain and that will limit our operating flexibility. If we default under any of these covenants, the lenders could declare the outstanding principal amount of the loan, accrued and unpaid interest and all other amounts owing or payable thereunder to be immediately due and payable, which would have material adverse consequences to us. In such event, the holders of the Notes could elect to take similar action with respect to those debts. If that were to occur, we would not have sufficient liquidity to repay our indebtedness.

If we fail to pay interest or principal on our other indebtedness, including the Notes, we will be in default under the indenture governing such indebtedness, which could also lead to a default under agreements governing our existing and future indebtedness, including under the Revolving Credit Agreement. If the repayment of the related indebtedness were to be accelerated after any applicable notice or grace periods, we likely would not have sufficient funds to repay our indebtedness. Absent sufficient liquidity to repay our indebtedness, our management or our independent registered public accounting firm may conclude that there is substantial doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

The Revolving Credit Agreement and the Indenture for the Notes contain various restrictive covenants and required financial ratios that limit our operating flexibility. The violation of one or more loan covenant requirements will entitle our lenders to declare all outstanding amounts under the Revolving Credit Agreement and the Notes to be due and payable.

Pursuant to the Revolving Credit Agreement, CNO agreed to a number of covenants and other provisions that restrict the Company's ability to borrow money and pursue some operating activities without the prior consent of the lenders. We also

agreed to meet or maintain various financial ratios and balances. Our ability to meet these financial tests may be affected by events beyond our control. There are several conditions or circumstances that could lead to an event of default under the Revolving Credit Agreement, as described below.

The Revolving Credit Agreement contains certain financial, affirmative and negative covenants. The negative covenants in the Revolving Credit Agreement include restrictions that relate to, among other things and subject to customary baskets, exceptions and limitations for facilities of this type:

The Revolving Credit Agreement requires the Company to maintain (each as calculated in accordance with the Revolving Credit Agreement): (i) a debt to total capitalization ratio of not more than 35.0 percent ( 30.0 percent prior to the Amendment Agreement) (such ratio was 20.3 percent at December 31, 2017 ); (ii) an aggregate ratio of total adjusted capital to company action level risk-based capital for the Company's insurance subsidiaries of not less than 250 percent (such ratio was estimated to be 446 percent at December 31, 2017 ); and (iii) a minimum consolidated net worth of not less than the sum of (x) $2,674 million plus (y) 50.0% of the net equity proceeds received by the Company from the issuance and sale of equity interests in the Company (the Company's consolidated net worth was $3,635.4 million at December 31, 2017 compared to the minimum requirement of $2,684.9 million ). Certain formulas used to calculate risk-based capital have embedded tax rate assumptions that will not change to be consistent with the Tax Reform Act until actions are taken by the NAIC. Although no action was taken by the NAIC for the 2017 calculation of the RBC ratio, it is possible that changes will be made for future periods. We estimate that the full impact of changing these embedded tax rate assumptions to be consistent with the Tax Reform Act is an increase to required capital of approximately $80 million (equivalent to a 65 percentage point decrease to the RBC ratio).

The Revolving Credit Agreement provides for customary events of default (subject in certain cases to customary grace and cure periods), which include, without limitation, the following:

If an event of default under the Revolving Credit Agreement occurs and is continuing, the Agent may accelerate the amounts and terminate all commitments outstanding under the Revolving Credit Agreement.

These covenants place significant restrictions on the manner in which we may operate our business and our ability to meet these financial covenants may be affected by events beyond our control. If we default under any of these covenants, the lenders could declare the outstanding principal amount of the loan, accrued and unpaid interest and all other amounts owing and payable thereunder to be immediately due and payable, which would have material adverse consequences to us. If the lenders under the Revolving Credit Agreement elect to accelerate the amounts due, the holders of the Notes could elect to take similar action with respect to those debts. If that were to occur, we would not have sufficient liquidity to repay our indebtedness.

The Indenture contains covenants that restrict the Company’s ability, with certain exceptions, to:

The Indenture provides for customary events of default (subject in certain cases to customary grace and cure periods), which include nonpayment, breach of covenants in the Indenture, failure to pay at maturity or acceleration of other indebtedness, a failure to pay certain judgments and certain events of bankruptcy and insolvency. Generally, if an event of default occurs, Wilmington Trust, National Association or holders of at least 25% in principal amount of the then outstanding Notes may declare the principal of and accrued but unpaid interest, including any additional interest, on all of the Notes to be due and payable.

Our current credit ratings may adversely affect our ability to access capital and the cost of such capital, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

Our issuer credit and senior unsecured debt rating from each of the major rating agencies is below investment grade. If we were to require additional capital, either to refinance our existing indebtedness or for any other reason, our current senior unsecured debt ratings, as well as conditions in the credit markets generally, could restrict our access to such capital and adversely affect its cost. Disruptions, volatility and uncertainty in the financial markets, and our below investment grade rating could limit our ability to access external capital markets at times and on terms which allow us to meet our capital and liquidity needs. See "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Liquidity of the Holding Companies" for more information.

CNO is a holding company and its liquidity and ability to meet its obligations may be constrained by the ability of CNO's insurance subsidiaries to distribute cash to it.

CNO and CDOC, Inc. ("CDOC") are holding companies with no business operations of their own. CNO and CDOC depend on their operating subsidiaries for cash to make principal and interest payments on debt and to pay administrative expenses and income taxes. CNO and CDOC receive cash from our insurance subsidiaries, consisting of dividends and distributions, principal and interest payments on surplus debentures and tax-sharing payments, as well as cash from their non-insurance subsidiaries consisting of dividends, distributions, loans and advances. Deterioration in the financial condition, earnings or cash flow of these significant subsidiaries for any reason could hinder the ability of such subsidiaries to pay cash dividends or other disbursements to CNO and/or CDOC, which would limit our ability to meet our debt service requirements and satisfy other financial obligations. In addition, CNO may elect to contribute additional capital to certain insurance subsidiaries to strengthen their surplus for covenant compliance or regulatory purposes (including, for example, maintaining adequate RBC level) or to provide the capital necessary for growth, in which case it is less likely that its insurance subsidiaries would pay dividends to the holding company. Accordingly, this could limit CNO's ability to meet debt service requirements and satisfy other holding company financial obligations. See "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Liquidity of the Holding Companies" for more information.

CNO receives dividends and other payments from CDOC and from certain non-insurance subsidiaries. CDOC receives dividends and surplus debenture interest payments from our insurance subsidiaries and payments from certain of our non-insurance subsidiaries. Payments from our non-insurance subsidiaries to CNO or CDOC, and payments from CDOC to CNO, do not require approval by any regulatory authority or other third party. However, the payment of dividends or surplus debenture interest by our insurance subsidiaries to CDOC is subject to state insurance department regulations and may be prohibited by insurance regulators if they determine that such dividends or other payments could be adverse to our policyholders or contract holders. Insurance regulations generally permit dividends to be paid from statutory earned surplus of the insurance company without regulatory approval for any 12-month period in amounts equal to the greater of (or in some states, the lesser of):

However, as each of the immediate insurance subsidiaries of CDOC has negative earned surplus, any dividend payments from the insurance subsidiaries to CNO require the prior approval of the director or commissioner of the applicable state insurance department. In 2017 , our insurance subsidiaries paid dividends of $357.7 million to CDOC. CNO expects to receive regulatory approval for future dividends from our insurance subsidiaries, but there can be no assurance that such payments will

be approved or that the financial condition of our insurance subsidiaries will not deteriorate, making future approvals less likely.

CDOC holds surplus debentures from Conseco Life Insurance Company of Texas ("CLTX") with an aggregate principal amount of $749.6 million.  Interest payments on those surplus debentures do not require additional approval provided the RBC ratio of CLTX exceeds 100 percent (but do require prior written notice to the Texas state insurance department).  The estimated RBC ratio of CLTX was 383 percent at December 31, 2017 .  CDOC also holds a surplus debenture from Colonial Penn with a principal balance of $160.0 million. Interest payments on that surplus debenture require prior approval by the Pennsylvania state insurance department. Dividends and other payments from our non-insurance subsidiaries, including 40|86 Advisors and CNO Services, LLC ("CNO Services"), to CNO or CDOC do not require approval by any regulatory authority or other third party.  However, insurance regulators may prohibit payments by our insurance subsidiaries to parent companies if they determine that such payments could be adverse to our policyholders or contractholders.

In addition, although we are under no obligation to do so, we may elect to contribute additional capital to strengthen the surplus of certain insurance subsidiaries for covenant compliance or regulatory purposes or to provide the capital necessary for growth. Any election regarding the contribution of additional capital to our insurance subsidiaries could affect the ability of our top tier insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends. The ability of our insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends is also impacted by various criteria established by rating agencies to maintain or receive higher financial strength ratings and by the capital levels that we target for our insurance subsidiaries, as well as the RBC compliance requirements under the Revolving Credit Agreement. CNO made no capital contributions to its insurance subsidiaries in 2017 .

In addition, Washington National may not distribute funds to any affiliate or shareholder, except pursuant to agreements with affiliates that have been approved, without prior notice to the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, in accordance with an order from the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.

We previously identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting which has been remediated, and our business may be adversely affected if we fail to maintain effective controls over financial reporting.

We have previously identified material weaknesses in internal controls which were subsequently remediated. We have emphasized the importance of performing and reviewing calculations consistent with the design of our internal control structure in an effort to ensure controls operate effectively.

We face the risk that, notwithstanding our efforts to date to identify and remedy the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, we may discover other material weaknesses in the future and the cost of remediating the material weakness could be high and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our ability to use our existing NOLs may be limited by certain transactions, and an impairment of existing NOLs could result in a significant writedown in the value of our deferred tax assets, which could cause us to breach the debt to total capitalization covenant of the Revolving Credit Agreement.

As of December 31, 2017 , we had approximately $2.3 billion of federal tax NOLs resulting in deferred tax assets of approximately $.5 billion , expiring in years 2023 through 2035. Section 382 of the Code imposes limitations on a corporation's ability to use its NOLs when it undergoes a 50 percent "ownership change" over a three year period. Although we underwent an ownership change in 2003 as the result of our reorganization, the timing and manner in which we will be able to utilize our NOLs is not currently limited by Section 382.

We regularly monitor ownership changes (as calculated for purposes of Section 382) based on available information and, as of December 31, 2017 , our analysis indicated that we were below the 50 percent ownership change threshold that would limit our ability to utilize our NOLs. A future transaction or transactions and the timing of such transaction or transactions could trigger an ownership change under Section 382. Such transactions may include, but are not limited to, additional repurchases or issuances of common stock, acquisitions or sales of shares of CNO's stock by certain holders of its shares, including persons who have held, currently hold or may accumulate in the future 5 percent or more of CNO's outstanding common stock for their own account. In January 2009, CNO's Board of Directors adopted a Section 382 Rights Agreement designed to protect shareholder value by preserving the value of our NOLs. The Section 382 Rights Agreement has been amended and extended by the CNO Board of Directors on three occasions. The Amended Section 382 Rights Agreement provides a strong economic disincentive for any one shareholder knowingly, and without the approval of the Board of Directors, to become an owner of more than 4.99% of the Company's outstanding common stock (or any other interest in CNO

that would be treated as "stock" under applicable Section 382 regulations) and for any owner of more than 4.99% of CNO's outstanding common stock as of the date of the Amended Section 382 Rights Agreement to increase their ownership stake by more than 1 percent of the shares of CNO's common stock then outstanding, and thus limits the uncertainty with regard to the potential for future ownership changes. However, despite the strong economic disincentives of the Amended Section 382 Rights Agreement, shareholders may elect to increase their ownership, including beyond the limits set by the Amended Section 382 Rights Agreement, and thus adversely affect CNO's ownership shift calculations. To further protect against the possibility of triggering an ownership change under Section 382, CNO's shareholders approved in 2010 an amendment to CNO's certificate of incorporation (the "Original Section 382 Charter Amendment") designed to prevent certain transfers of common stock which could otherwise adversely affect our ability to use our NOLs. CNO's shareholders approved amendments and extensions of the Original Section 382 Charter Amendment in 2013 and in 2016 (the "2016 Section 382 Charter Amendment"). The 2016 Section 382 Charter Amendment became effective July 31, 2016 and is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2019.

See the note to the consolidated financial statements entitled "Income Taxes" for further information regarding the Amended Section 382 Rights Agreement, the 2016 Section 382 Charter Amendment and CNO's NOLs.

If an ownership change were to occur for purposes of Section 382, we would be required to calculate an annual limitation on the use of our NOLs to offset future taxable income. The annual restriction would be calculated based upon the value of CNO's equity at the time of such ownership change, multiplied by a federal long-term tax exempt rate ( 1.96 percent at December 31, 2017 ), and the annual restriction could eliminate our ability to use a substantial portion of our NOLs to offset future taxable income. Additionally, the writedown of our deferred tax assets that would occur in the event of an ownership change for purposes of Section 382 could cause us to breach the debt to total capitalization covenant in the Revolving Credit Agreement.

The value of our deferred tax assets may be reduced to the extent our future profits are less than we have projected or the current corporate income tax rate is reduced, and such reductions in value may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our financial condition.

As of December 31, 2017 , we had net deferred tax assets of $376.2 million . Our income tax expense includes deferred income taxes arising from temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, capital loss carryforwards and NOLs. We evaluate the realizability of our deferred tax assets and assess the need for a valuation allowance on an ongoing basis. In evaluating our deferred tax assets, we consider whether it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be realized. The ultimate realization of our deferred tax assets depends upon generating sufficient future taxable income during the periods in which our temporary differences become deductible and before our capital loss carry-forwards and NOLs expire. Our assessment of the realizability of our deferred tax assets requires significant judgment. Failure to achieve our projections may result in an increase in the valuation allowance in a future period. Any future increase in the valuation allowance would result in additional income tax expense which could have a material adverse effect upon our earnings in the future, and reduce shareholders' equity.

The value of our net deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2017 reflects the current Federal corporate income tax rate of 21 percent. A reduction in the corporate income tax rate would cause a writedown of our net deferred tax assets, which may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

From time to time we may become subject to tax audits, tax litigation or similar proceedings, and as a result we may owe additional taxes, interest and penalties, or our NOLs may be reduced, in amounts that may be material.

In determining our provisions for income taxes and our accounting for tax-related matters in general, we are required to exercise judgment. We regularly make estimates where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. The final determination of any tax audit, appeal of the decision of a taxing authority, tax litigation or similar proceedings may be materially different from that reflected in our financial statements. The assessment of additional taxes, interest and penalties could be materially adverse to our current and future results of operations and financial condition. See the note to the consolidated financial statements entitled "Income Taxes" for further information.

Our results of operations may be negatively impacted if our initiatives to restructure our insurance operations or our efforts to become more efficient are unsuccessful.

We have implemented or are in the process of implementing several initiatives to improve operating results, including: (i) focusing sales efforts on higher margin products; (ii) reducing operating expenses by eliminating or reducing marketing costs of certain products; (iii) streamlining administrative procedures and reducing personnel; (iv) using third party service

providers to improve service and reduce expenses; and (v) increasing retention rates on our more profitable blocks of inforce business. Many of our initiatives address issues resulting from the substantial number of acquisitions of our Predecessor. Between 1982 and 1997, our Predecessor completed 19 transactions involving the acquisitions of 44 separate insurance companies. These prior acquisitions have contributed to the complexity and cost of our current administrative operating environment and make it challenging, in some instances, to operate our business within the expense levels assumed in the pricing of our products. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to become more efficient, our future earnings will be adversely affected.

In the event one or more of our third party service providers to whom we outsource certain of our functions becomes unable to continue to provide services or experiences a failure in their systems, our business could be adversely impacted.

Conversions to new systems can result in valuation differences between the prior system and the new system. We have recognized such differences in the past. Our planned conversions could result in future valuation adjustments, and these adjustments may have a material adverse effect on future earnings.

A decline in the current financial strength rating of our insurance subsidiaries could cause us to experience decreased sales, increased agent attrition and increased policyholder lapses and redemptions.

An important competitive factor for our insurance subsidiaries is the ratings they receive from nationally recognized rating organizations. Agents, insurance brokers and marketing companies who market our products and prospective purchasers of our products use the financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries as an important factor in determining whether to market or purchase. Ratings have the most impact on our annuity, interest-sensitive life insurance and long-term care products.

The current financial strength ratings of our primary insurance subsidiaries from Fitch, S&P, A.M. Best and Moody's are "BBB+", "BBB+", "A-" and "Baa1", respectively.  Fitch has nineteen possible ratings. There are seven ratings above our "BBB+" rating and eleven ratings that are below our rating. S&P has twenty-one possible ratings. There are seven ratings above our "BBB+" rating and thirteen ratings that are below our rating. A.M. Best has sixteen possible ratings. There are three ratings above our "A-" rating and twelve ratings that are below our rating. Moody's has twenty-one possible ratings. There are seven ratings above our "Baa1" rating and thirteen ratings that are below our rating.

If our ratings are downgraded, we may experience declining sales of certain of our insurance products, defections of our independent and career sales force, and increased policies being redeemed or allowed to lapse. These events would adversely affect our financial results, which could then lead to ratings downgrades.

Competition from companies that have greater market share, higher ratings, greater financial resources and stronger brand recognition, may impair our ability to retain existing customers and sales representatives, attract new customers and sales representatives and maintain or improve our financial results.

The supplemental health insurance, annuity and individual life insurance markets are highly competitive. Competitors include other life and accident and health insurers, commercial banks, thrifts, mutual funds and broker-dealers.

Our principal competitors vary by product line. Our main competitors for agent-sold long-term care insurance products include Northwestern Mutual, Mutual of Omaha and New York Life. Our main competitors for agent-sold Medicare supplement insurance products include Blue Cross and Blue Shield Plans, United HealthCare and Mutual of Omaha. Our main competitors for life insurance sold through direct marketing channels include Gerber Life, Mutual of Omaha, New York Life, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries of Torchmark Corporation. Our main competitors for supplemental health products sold through our Washington National segment include AFLAC, subsidiaries of Allstate, Colonial Life and Accident Company and subsidiaries of Torchmark Corporation.

In some of our product lines, such as life insurance and fixed annuities, we have a relatively small market share. Even in some of the lines in which we are one of the top writers, our market share is relatively small. For example, while, based on an Individual Long-Term Care Insurance Survey, our Bankers Life segment ranked fifth in annualized new premiums of individual long-term care insurance in the first half of 2017 with a market share of approximately 6 percent, the top four writers of individual long-term care insurance had annualized new premiums with a combined market share of approximately 65 percent during the period. In addition, while, based on a 2016 Medicare Supplement Loss Ratios report, we ranked sixth in direct premiums earned for Medicare supplement insurance in 2016 with a market share of 2.8 percent, the top writer of Medicare supplement insurance had direct premiums with a market share of 35 percent during the period.

Most of our major competitors have higher financial strength ratings than we do. Many of our competitors are larger companies that have greater capital, technological and marketing resources and have access to capital at a lower cost. Recent industry consolidation, including business combinations among insurance and other financial services companies, has resulted in larger competitors with even greater financial resources. Furthermore, changes in federal law have narrowed the historical separation between banks and insurance companies, enabling traditional banking institutions to enter the insurance and annuity markets and further increase competition. This increased competition may harm our ability to maintain or improve our profitability.

In addition, because the actual cost of products is unknown when they are sold, we are subject to competitors who may sell a product at a price that does not cover its actual cost. Accordingly, if we do not also lower our prices for similar products, we may lose market share to these competitors. If we lower our prices to maintain market share, our profitability would decline.

The Colonial Penn segment has faced increased competition from other insurance companies who also distribute products through direct marketing. In addition, the demand and cost of television advertising appropriate for Colonial Penn's campaigns fluctuates from period to period and this will impact the average cost to generate a TV lead.

We must attract and retain sales representatives to sell our insurance and annuity products. Strong competition exists among insurance and financial services companies for sales representatives. We compete for sales representatives primarily on the basis of our financial position, financial strength ratings, support services, compensation, products and product features. Our competitiveness for such agents also depends upon the relationships we develop with these agents. Our Predecessor's bankruptcy continues to be an adverse factor in developing relationships with certain agents. If we are unable to attract and retain sufficient numbers of sales representatives to sell our products, our ability to compete and our revenues and profitability would suffer.

If we are unable to attract and retain agents and marketing organizations, sales of our products may be reduced.

Our products are marketed and distributed primarily through a dedicated field force of career agents and sales managers (in our Bankers Life segment) and through PMA and independent marketing organizations (in our Washington National segment). We must attract and retain agents, sales managers and independent marketing organizations to sell our products through those distribution channels. We compete with other insurance companies, financial services companies and other entities for agents and sales managers and for business through marketing organizations. If we are unable to attract and retain these agents, sales managers and marketing organizations, our ability to grow our business and generate revenues from new sales would suffer. In recent periods, our Bankers Life segment has faced challenges in retaining new agents, which has impacted sales of its products.

Federal and state legislation could adversely affect the financial performance of our insurance operations.

During recent years, the health insurance industry has experienced substantial changes, including those caused by healthcare legislation. Recent federal and state legislation and pending legislative proposals concerning healthcare reform contain features that could severely limit, or eliminate, our ability to vary pricing terms or apply medical underwriting standards to individuals, thereby potentially increasing our benefit ratios and adversely impacting our financial results. In particular, Medicare reform could affect our ability to price or sell our products or profitably maintain our blocks inforce. For example, the Medicare Advantage program provides incentives for health plans to offer managed care plans to seniors. The growth of managed care plans under this program could decrease sales of the traditional Medicare supplement products we sell. Some current proposals contain government provided long-term care insurance which could affect the sales of our long-term care products.

Proposals currently pending in Congress and some state legislatures may also affect our financial results. These proposals include the implementation of minimum consumer protection standards in all long-term care policies, including: guaranteed premium rates; protection against inflation; limitations on waiting periods for pre-existing conditions; setting standards for sales practices for long-term care insurance; and guaranteed consumer access to information about insurers, including information regarding lapse and replacement rates for policies and the percentage of claims denied. Enactment of any proposal that would limit the amount we can charge for our products, such as guaranteed premium rates, or that would increase the benefits we must pay, such as limitations on waiting periods, or that would otherwise increase the costs of our business, could adversely affect our financial results.

In April 2016, the DOL issued a final regulation that expands the range of activities considered to be fiduciary investment advice under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Code. The DOL also issued a new "best interest contract" prohibited transaction exemption regarding how such advice can be provided to retirement investors. These regulations focus in large part on conflicts of interest related to investment recommendations made by financial advisors, registered investment advisors, insurance agents and other investment professionals to retirement investors, how financial advisors are able to discuss IRA rollovers, as well as how financial advisors and affiliates can transact with retirement investors. These regulations primarily impact our Bankers Life segment. Most provisions of these regulations became effective in June 2017. However, certain of the regulations including the "best interest contract" exemption were scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2018. In November 2017, the DOL delayed the applicability date of these provisions to July 1, 2019. We continue to monitor the status of the remaining provisions.

The NAIC has developed a principle-based reserving approach for life insurance products which will replace the current formulaic approach to determining policy reserves with an approach that more closely reflects the risks of the products. The principle-based approach became effective on January 1, 2017, and there is a three-year transition period where the approach is optional until it is required to be used for all life insurance products issued on or after January 1, 2020. The new approach will impact the financial statements of our insurance subsidiaries prepared under statutory accounting principles prescribed or permitted by regulatory authorities. The Company is implementing the new approach to its reserves on new life insurance products as they are introduced through the transition period.

On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was enacted and signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Act made extensive changes to the laws regulating financial services firms and requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations. Among other provisions, the Dodd-Frank Act provides for a new framework of regulation of over-the-counter derivatives markets. This requires us to clear certain types of transactions currently traded in the over-the-counter derivative markets and may limit our ability to customize derivative transactions for our needs. In addition, we will likely experience additional collateral requirements and costs associated with derivative transactions.

The Dodd-Frank Act also establishes a Financial Stability Oversight Council, which is authorized to subject nonbank financial companies deemed systemically significant to stricter prudential standards and other requirements and to subject such a company to a special orderly liquidation process outside the federal bankruptcy code, administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (although insurance company subsidiaries would remain subject to liquidation and rehabilitation proceedings under state law). In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act establishes a Federal Insurance Office within the Department of the Treasury. While not having a general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance, the director of this office will perform various functions with respect to insurance, including serving as a non-voting member of the Financial Stability Oversight Council and making recommendations to the Council regarding insurers to be designated for more stringent regulation. The director is also required to conduct a study on how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the United States, including by increased national uniformity through either a federal charter or effective action by the states.

Federal agencies have been given significant discretion in drafting the rules and regulations that will implement the Dodd-Frank Act. Consequently, many of the details and much of the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act may not be known for some time. In addition, this legislation mandated multiple studies and reports for Congress, which could result in additional legislative or regulatory action. In April 2017, the Trump Administration issued a Presidential Memorandum that calls for a comprehensive review of the Dodd-Frank Act. Such review may result in the Dodd-Frank Act being modified, repealed or replaced.

We cannot predict the requirements of the regulations ultimately adopted under the Dodd-Frank Act, the effect such regulations will have on financial markets generally, or on our businesses specifically, the additional costs associated with compliance with such regulations, or any changes to our operations that may be necessary to comply with the Dodd-Frank Act, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.

Reinsurance may not be available, affordable or adequate to protect us against losses.

As part of our overall risk and capital management strategy, we have historically purchased reinsurance from external reinsurers as well as provided internal reinsurance support for certain risks underwritten by our business segments. The availability and cost of reinsurance protection are impacted by our operating and financial performance as well as conditions beyond our control. For example, volatility in the equity markets and the related impacts on asset values required to fund liabilities may reduce the availability of certain types of reinsurance and make it more costly when it is available, as reinsurers are less willing to take on credit risk in a volatile market. Accordingly, we may be forced to incur additional expenses for

reinsurance or may not be able to obtain sufficient new reinsurance on acceptable terms, which could adversely affect our ability to write future business or obtain statutory capital credit for new reinsurance.

Our insurance subsidiaries may be required to pay assessments to fund other companies' policyholder losses or liabilities and this may negatively impact our financial results.

The solvency or guaranty laws of most states in which an insurance company does business may require that company to pay assessments up to certain prescribed limits to fund policyholder losses or liabilities of other insurance companies that become insolvent. Insolvencies of insurance companies increase the possibility that these assessments may be required. These assessments may be deferred or forgiven under most guaranty laws if they would threaten an insurer's financial strength and, in certain instances, may be offset against future premium taxes. We cannot estimate the likelihood and amount of future assessments. Although past assessments have not been material, if there were a number of large insolvencies, future assessments could be material and could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial position.