Item 1A. Risk Factors

An investment in our common shares involves various risks, including those mentioned below and those that are discussed from time to time in our other periodic filings with the SEC. Investors should carefully consider these risks, along with the other information filed in this report, before making an investment decision regarding our common shares. There may be additional risks of which we are currently unaware or consider immaterial. All of these risks could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and/or value of our common shares.

Enterprise Risk Management and Governance Frameworks

Purpose

The objective of our Enterprise Risk Management and Governance Frameworks are to ensure that:

Our frameworks for managing enterprise risks are intended to meet standards that are not only consistent with the applicable laws and regulations, but which are commercially reasonable, aligned to international best practices and prudent taking into consideration the interests of our shareholders, policyholders and other counterparties.

Conducting our insurance and reinsurance business operations and related services in a prudent manner requires us to establish sound governance mechanisms, including a sound risk management and internal controls framework. This framework takes into consideration international best practice on enterprise risk management and internal controls and is overseen by our Board of Directors (the “Board”).

The focus of our risk management framework is on “reasonably foreseeable material risks,” meaning those exposures (financial and non-financial, on and off-balance sheet, current and contingent exposures, etc.) that we can identify in advance as having the potential, should they occur, to change the way relevant stakeholders would assess our solvency and/or liquidity position or risk profile in general. Relevant stakeholders include the Board, senior management, policyholders, investors and the various governmental and non-governmental authorities that monitor and regulate our business activities and securities.

Risk Strategy

Our “Risk Strategy” encompasses our Risk Appetite Framework and strategy for addressing and managing material business risks. The Risk Strategy is outlined and implemented through the respective policies, targets, guidelines, requirements and budgets approved by our Board on a periodic basis.

The Risk Appetite Framework brings together the overall approach for articulating and managing risk appetite, risk preferences, risk tolerances and risk limits. It describes how this is organized and what processes and procedures underpin its implementation in practice. The aim to provide clarity over the amount of risk that can be taken ensures accountability for decision-making.

Because we are subject to an increasingly complex environment for regulatory and financial oversight, we consider Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) and Compliance as key functions from an operational standpoint. However, maintaining a suitable and effective Risk Strategy is also viewed as a strategic imperative since it allows us to remain competitive through a better understanding of our own risks and overall solvency needs, on both a per risk and an aggregated, enterprise wide basis.

16

Framework

Our risk management and internal controls framework is designed to enable us to achieve an accurate and timely understanding of (1) the nature, caliber and sensitivity of the material foreseeable risks to which we are exposed, (2) our ability to mitigate or avoid such risks and (3) to the extent that an identified risk falls outside of our Risk Appetite, what course of action is necessary to address such risk consistent with our business plans and risk tolerances.

Key elements of our risk management framework are summarized below:

Our Board has Corporate Governance Guidelines and Terms of Reference that reflect local and international developments with regard to Risk and Capital Management. The Risk & Capital Committee of the Board is regularly briefed on emerging issues relevant to our international expansion as well as evolving regulatory developments, especially in Bermuda, the United States and the European Union. The risk management function has responsibility across all of Argo Group for the implementation of the risk management framework.  

Throughout the year, risk related aspects to our business are reviewed and evaluated at all levels. Based on these assessments, appropriate risk management actions have been taken to address and mitigate risks where necessary and to ensure that underwriting and investment activities remain consistent with management’s strategic and business plans, as approved by the Board.

These risk management activities are subsequently monitored, reviewed and, if required, adjusted during the course of regularly scheduled operational meetings, reserve review meetings and other management meetings during the year to assure proper alignment with approved risk appetite and tolerance levels.

We employ various  data sources and risk models and continue to evaluate and fortify our processes and protocols to assure the integrity of such tools.  

The risk management techniques, especially with regard to our internal economic capital model, are subject to ongoing review and challenge through independent model validation reviews led by the risk management function. This enables us to quantify and qualify risks to improve over time.

Our Risk Appetite Framework defines our ability to take risk through a series of qualitative risk appetite statements that are communicated across the organization, supported by risk tolerances and limits at the Argo Group level as well as on operational segment level. The risk appetite is based on the available capital and liquidity and is reflected in the Board approved business plans. Risk tolerances define boundaries in terms of volatility and provide a term of reference for our operational segments.

17

Our risk appetite is reflected in our strategic and business planning. In the event of capacity shortages or conflicts with the stipulated limits profile and internal guidelines, fixed escalation and decision-making processes are designed to ensure that business interests and risk management aspects are being surfaced, vetted and r econciled. If necessary, risks are ceded or hedged by means of reinsurance, derivatives or other forms of risk relief.

Risk tolerances and limits encompassed in our Risk Appetite Framework include:

Our Corporate Governance, Compliance, Risk Management and Internal Controls Policies are reviewed on at least an annual basis. Recommendations are made to the Board, its Committees and Senior Management for updates and upgrades as required on a timely basis.

We believe that the foregoing risk management framework and oversight activities are structured in a way that enables us to take an active approach to risk management in an ever changing legal, regulatory and business environment. Through the efforts of management, our internal risk management function and the Board, we seek to manage our risk exposures within agreed tolerances, while recognizing that taking appropriate risks enables us to exploit opportunities beneficial to the organization and to our shareholders.

Significant Risks

Our risk management framework covers the following categories of material foreseeable risks consistent with the guidance provided for each:

Insurance Underwriting Risks

Insurance Underwriting risks are defined as the risk of loss, or adverse change in the value of insurance liabilities, due to inadequate pricing and/or reserving practices. These risks may be caused by the fluctuations in timing, frequency and severity of insured events and claim settlements in comparison to the expectations at the time of underwriting.

The insurance and reinsurance business is historically cyclical, and we may experience periods with excess underwriting capacity and unfavorable premium rates; conversely, we may have a shortage of underwriting capacity when premium rates are strong both of which could adversely impact our results.

Historically, insurers and reinsurers have experienced significant fluctuations in operating results due to competition, frequency and severity of catastrophic events, levels of capacity, adverse trends in litigation, regulatory constraints, general economic conditions and other factors. The supply of insurance and reinsurance is related to prevailing prices, the level of insured losses and the level of capital available to the industry that, in turn, may fluctuate in response to changes in rates of return on investments being earned in the insurance and reinsurance industry. As a result, the insurance and reinsurance business historically has been a cyclical industry characterized by periods of intense price competition due to excessive underwriting capacity as well as periods when shortages of capacity increased premium levels. Demand for reinsurance depends on numerous factors, including the frequency and severity of catastrophic events, levels of capacity, introduction of new capital providers, general economic conditions and underwriting results of primary insurers. The supply of reinsurance is related to prevailing prices, recent loss experience and capital levels. All of these factors fluctuate and may contribute to price declines generally in the reinsurance industry.

We cannot predict with certainty whether market conditions will improve, remain constant or deteriorate. Negative market conditions may impair our ability to underwrite insurance and reinsurance at rates that we consider appropriate and commensurate relative to the risk assumed. If we cannot underwrite insurance or reinsurance at appropriate rates, our ability to transact business would be materially and adversely affected. Any of these factors could lead to an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

18

We operate in a highly competitive environment and no assurance can be given that we will continue to be able to compete effectively in this environment.

We compete with numerous companies that provide property, casualty and specialty lines of insurance and reinsurance and related services. Some of those companies have a larger capital base and are more highly rated than we are. No assurance can be given that we will be able to continue to compete successfully in the insurance and/or reinsurance market. Increased competition in these markets could result in a change in the supply and/or demand for insurance or reinsurance, affect our ability to price our products at risk-adequate rates and retain existing business or underwrite new business on favorable terms. If this increased competition limits our ability to transact business, our operating results could be adversely affected.

Our insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries have exposure to unpredictable and unexpected changes in the claims environment or catastrophes and terrorist acts that can materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

Emerging Claims

Changes in industry practices and legal, judicial, social and other environmental conditions may have an unforeseeable adverse impact on claims and coverage issues. These issues may adversely affect our business, such as by extending coverage beyond the intended scope at the time of underwriting business or increasing the number or size of expected claims. In some instances, these changes may not become apparent until sometime after insurance or reinsurance contracts that are affected were issued and hence cannot be appropriately factored into the underwriting decision. As a result, the full extent of liability under such insurance or reinsurance contracts may not be known for many years after these contracts have been issued, and our financial position and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected in such future periods. The effects of these and other unforeseen evolving or emerging claims and coverage issues are inherently difficult to predict.

Catastrophic Losses

We are subject to claims arising out of catastrophes that may have a significant effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition. Catastrophes can be caused by various events, including tornadoes, hurricanes, windstorms, tsunamis, earthquakes, hailstorms, explosions, power outages, severe winter weather, wildfires and man-made events. The incidence and severity of such randomly occurring catastrophic events are inherently unpredictable. The extent of losses from a catastrophe is a function of both the total amount of insured values in the area affected by the event and severity of the event. Insurance companies are generally not permitted to reserve for probable catastrophic events until they occur. Therefore, although we will actively manage our risk exposure to catastrophes through underwriting limits and processes and further mitigate it through the purchase of reinsurance protection and other hedging instruments, an especially severe catastrophe or series of catastrophes could exceed our reinsurance or hedging protection and may have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition. Also, it is possible that a series of catastrophic events could occur with unusual frequency in a given period which, although individually not severe enough to trigger the reinsurance protection or other hedging instrument, in the aggregate could have a material adverse impact on us.

Further, as a provider of property catastrophe reinsurance coverage in the worldwide marketplace, Argo Re’s operating results in any given period will depend to some extent on the number and magnitude of such natural and man-made catastrophes. While Argo Re may, depending on market conditions, purchase catastrophe retrocessional coverage for its own protection, the occurrence of one or more major catastrophes in any given period could nevertheless have a material adverse impact on Argo Re’s operating results and/or financial condition. This could, in turn, result in a material adverse impact on Argo Group’s business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

Terrorism

We also carry the risk of losses resulting from acts of terrorism. Even if reinsurers are able to exclude coverage for terrorist acts or price that coverage at rates that we consider attractive, direct insurers, like our primary insurance company subsidiaries, might not be able to likewise exclude coverage of terrorist acts because of regulatory constraints. If this occurs, we, in our capacity as a primary insurer, would have a significant gap in our own reinsurance protection and would be exposed to potential losses as a result of any terrorist act. It is impossible to predict the occurrence of such events with statistical certainty and difficult to estimate the amount of loss per occurrence they will generate. If there is a future terrorist attack, the possibility exists that losses resulting from such event could prove to be material to our financial condition and results of operations. Terrorist acts may also cause multiple claims, and there is no assurance that our attempts to limit our liability through contractual policy provisions will be effective.

We deem terrorism peril to include the damage resulting from various terrorist attacks through either conventional weapons or weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear or radioactive explosive devices as well as chemical and biological contaminants. We continue to review our underwriting data in assessing aggregate exposure to this peril. We underwrite against the risk of terrorism with a philosophy of avoidance wherever possible to the extent permitted by applicable law. For both property and casualty exposures, this

19

is accomplished through the use of portfolio tracking tools that identify high risk areas, as well as areas of potential concentration. We estimate the probable maximum loss from each risk as well as for the portfolio in total and factor this analysis into the underwriting and reinsurance buying process. The probable maximum loss is model generated, and s ubject to assumptions that may not be reflective of ultimate losses incurred for a terrorist act.

Additionally, we have identified certain high risk locations and hazardous operations where there is a potential for an explosion or a rapid spread of fire due to a terrorist act. Through modeling, we continue to refine our estimates of the probable maximum loss from such an event and factor this analysis into the underwriting evaluation process and also seek to mitigate this exposure through various policy terms and conditions (where allowed by statute) and through the use of reinsurance, to the extent possible. Our current reinsurance arrangements either exclude terrorism coverage or significantly limit the level of coverage that is provided.

Terrorism exclusions are not permitted in the United States for workers compensation policies under United States federal law or under the laws of any state or jurisdiction in which we operate. When underwriting existing and new workers compensation business, we consider the added potential risk of loss due to terrorist activity, including foreign and domestic, and this may lead us to decline to underwrite or to renew certain business. However, even in lines where terrorism exclusions are permitted, our clients may object to a terrorism exclusion in connection with business that we may still desire to underwrite without an exclusion, some or many of our insurance policies may not include terrorism exclusion. Given the retention limits imposed under the U.S. federal act and that some or many of our policies may not include a terrorism exclusion, future foreign or domestic terrorist attacks may result in losses that have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

On November 26, 2002, the President of the United States signed into law the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (“TRIA”).  On January 12, 2015, the President of the United States signed into law the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2014 (“TRIPRA”), which extends TRIA through December 31, 2020. Under TRIA commercial insurers are required to offer insurance coverage against terrorist incidents and are reimbursed by the federal government for paid claims subject to deductible and retention amounts. TRIA, and its related rules, contain certain definitions, requirements and procedures for insurers filing claims with the Treasury for payment of the Federal share of compensation for insured losses under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program (“TRIP”).  TRIP is a temporary federal program that has been extended by TRIA to provide for a transparent system of shared public and private compensation for insured losses resulting from acts of terrorism.  The Treasury implements the program. On June 29, 2004, the Treasury issued a final Claims Procedures Rule, effective July 31, 2004, as part of its implementation of Title I of TRIA.  TRIA also contains specific provisions designed to manage litigation arising out of, or resulting from, a certified act of terrorism, and on July 28, 2004, the Treasury issued a final Litigation Management Rule for TRIA. The Claims Procedures Rule specifically addresses requirements for Federal payment, submission of an initial notice of insured loss, loss certifications, timing and process for payment, associated recordkeeping requirements, as well as the Treasury’s audit and investigation authority.  These procedures will apply to all insurers that wish to receive their payment of the Federal share of compensation for insured losses under TRIA.  

Additional materials addressing TRIA and TRIP, including Treasury issued interpretive letters, are contained on the Treasury’s website.

Global climate change may have an adverse effect on our financial results.

Although uncertainty remains as to the nature and effect of future efforts to curb greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions and thereby the mitigation of long-term GHG effects on climate, a broad spectrum of scientific evidence could suggest that man-made production of GHG has had an adverse effect on the global climate. Many sectors, to which we provide insurance coverage, might be affected by climate change. Some examples are coastal management, infrastructure, buildings, water, food and energy supply, land-planning, health and rescue preparedness. Assessing the risk of loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change and the range of approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, including impacts related to extreme weather events and slow onset events, remains a challenge and might adversely impact our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.   We also recognize the increasing focus of investors and other stakeholders into the efforts made by the insurance industry to contribute to global resilience against the impact of storm and flood damage impacting population centers. We continue to contribute to industry-wide initiatives in this regard.

20

Because our business is dependent upon insurance and r einsurance agents and brokers, we are exposed to certain risks arising out of distribution channels that could cause our results to be adversely affected.

We market and distribute some of our insurance products and services through a select group of wholesale agents who have limited quoting and binding authority and who, in turn, sell our insurance products to insureds through retail insurance brokers. These agencies can bind certain risks that meet our pre-established guidelines. If these agents failed to comply with our underwriting guidelines and the terms of their appointment, we could be bound on a particular risk or number of risks that were not anticipated when we developed the insurance products. Such actions could adversely affect our results of operations. Additionally, in any given period, we may derive a significant portion of our business from a limited number of agents and brokers and the loss of any of these relationships could have a significant impact on our ability to market our products and services.

In accordance with industry practice, we may pay amounts owed on claims under our insurance and reinsurance contracts to brokers and/or third-party administrators who in turn remit these amounts to our insureds or reinsureds. Although the law is unsettled and depends upon the facts and circumstances of each particular case, in some jurisdictions in which we conduct business, if an agent or broker fails to remit funds delivered for the payment of claims, we may remain liable to our insured or reinsured ceding insurer for the deficiency. Likewise, in certain jurisdictions, when the insured or reinsured pays the remitting funds to our agent or broker in full, our premiums are considered to have been paid in full, notwithstanding that we may or may not have actually received the premiums from the agent or broker. Consequently, we assume a degree of credit risk associated with certain agents and brokers with whom we transact business.

We may incur income statement charges (or benefits) if the reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses are insufficient (or redundant). Such income statement charges (or benefits) could be material, individually or in the aggregate, to our financial condition and operating results in future periods.

General Loss Reserves

We maintain reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses to cover estimated ultimate unpaid liabilities with respect to reported and unreported claims incurred as of the end of each balance sheet date. Reserves do not represent an exact calculation of liability, but instead represent management’s best estimates, which take into account various statistical and actuarial projection techniques as well as other influencing factors. These reserve estimates represent management’s expectations of what the ultimate settlement and administration of claims will cost based on an assessment of known facts and circumstances, review of historical settlement patterns, estimates of trends in claims severity and frequency, changing legal theories of liability and other factors. Variables in the reserve estimation process can be affected by both internal and external events, such as changes in claims handling procedures, economic inflation, legal precedent and legislative changes. Many of these items are not directly quantifiable, particularly on a prospective basis. Additionally, there may be significant reporting lags between the occurrence of an insured event and the time it is actually reported to the insurer. Reserve estimates are continually reevaluated in a regular ongoing process as historical loss experience develops and additional claims are reported and settled, and consequently, management’s estimates may change from time to time. Because the calculation and setting of the reserves for losses and loss adjustment expenses is an inherently uncertain process dependent on estimates, our existing reserves may be insufficient or redundant and estimates of ultimate losses and loss adjustment expenses may increase or decrease over time.

Asbestos and Environmental Liability Loss Reserves

We have received asbestos and environmental liability claims arising out of liability coverage primarily written in the 1960s, 1970s and into the mid-1980s. Beginning in 1986, nearly all standard liability policies contained an express exclusion for asbestos and environmental related claims. All standard policies currently being issued by our insurance subsidiaries contain this exclusion. Certain of our specialty units offer coverage for environmental damages on a restrictive, contained basis with fixed limit caps within. In addition to the previously described general uncertainties encountered in estimating reserves, there are significant additional uncertainties in estimating the amount of our potential losses from asbestos and environmental claims. Reserves for asbestos and environmental claims cannot be estimated with traditional loss reserving techniques that rely on historical accident year development factors due to the uncertainties surrounding these types of claims.

Among the uncertainties impacting the estimation of such losses are:

21

Management believes these factors continue to render traditional actuarial methods less effective at estimating reserves for asbestos and environmental losses than reserves on other types of losses. We establish reserves to the extent that, in the judgment of our management, the facts and prevailing law reflect an exposure for us not dissimilar to those results the industry has experienced with regard to asbestos and environmental related claims. We have annually reviewed our loss and loss adjustment expense reserves for our run-off lines of business, including asbestos and environmental claims. The review entails a detailed analysis of our direct and assumed exposure. We will continue to monitor industry trends and our own experience in order to determine the adequacy of our environmental and asbestos reserves. There is no assurance that future adverse development will not occur, and such development may have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

Black Lung Disease Loss Reserves

Through workers compensation coverage provided to coal mining operations by our subsidiary Rockwood, we have exposure to claims for black lung disease. Those diagnosed with black lung disease are eligible to receive workers compensation benefits from various U.S. federal and state programs. These programs are continually being reviewed by the governing bodies and may be revised without notice in such a way as to increase our level of exposure.

Because of all of the above, estimates of ultimate losses and loss adjustment expenses may increase in the future. Income statement charges that would result from such increases, if any, cannot now be reasonably estimated. Such charges could be material, individually or in the aggregate, to our future operating results and financial condition. We can provide no assurances such capital will be available. Adjustments to reserves are reflected in the results in the periods in which management’s best estimates are changed.

Additional information relating to our reserves for losses and loss adjustment expense is included under Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 5, “Reserves for Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses” in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Operational Risk

Operational risk refers to the risk of loss arising from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, systems or the operational impact of external events. This risk encompasses all exposures faced by functions and services rendered in the course of conducting business including, but not limited to, accounting and financial reporting, business continuity, claims management, information technology and data processing, legal and regulatory compliance, outsourcing and reinsurance purchasing.

We may be unable to attract and retain qualified employees and key executives.

We depend on our ability to attract and retain experienced underwriting talent and other skilled employees and seasoned key executives who are knowledgeable about our business. The pool of highly skilled employees available to fill our key positions may fluctuate based on market dynamics specific to our industry and independent of overall economic conditions. As such, higher demand for employees having desired talents within a particular geographic region or business segment in which we operate could lead to increased compensation expectations for existing and prospective personnel, making it difficult for us to recruit and retain key employees and/or maintain labor costs at desired levels. If we are unable to attract and retain such talented management, we may be unable to maintain our current competitive position in the specialized markets in which we operate and be unable to expand our operations into new markets, which could adversely affect our results.

Argo Group and its subsidiary, Argo Re have operations that require highly skilled personnel to work in Bermuda. Given that the pool of Bermudian citizens available to fill certain key positions is limited, we are often required to recruit and retain qualified non-Bermudians to work in Bermuda. Our ability to do so is constrained by Bermuda law, which provides that non-Bermudians are not permitted to engage in any occupation in Bermuda without an approved work permit from the Bermuda Department of Immigration. The Bermuda Department of Immigration will issue a work permit after proper public advertisements and no Bermudian, spouse of a Bermudian or holder of a permanent resident certificate is available who meets the required education, skills and experience for the advertised position. In January 2013, the Bermuda Department of Immigration amended the term of these Standard Work Permits and this potentially impacts Argo’s ability to renew such permits for key staff members. A significant number of our Bermuda based employees are employed pursuant to these work permits granted by The Bermuda Department of Immigration. These individuals are

22

considered key employees. If the Bermuda Department of Immigration changes its policies with regard to work permits, and these key employees had to leave the island as a re sult, our operations could be disrupted and our financial performance could be adversely affected.

Offices in foreign jurisdictions, such as Dubai, Malta, Singapore and Brazil, may have residence and other mandatory requirements that affect the composition of its local boards of directors, executive teams and choice of third-party service providers. Due to the competition for available talent in such jurisdictions, we may not be able to attract and retain personnel as required by our business plans, which could disrupt operations and adversely affect our financial performance.

Our internal controls may fail and have an adverse effect on our business.

We use a number of strategies and processes to mitigate our insurance risk exposure including:

However, there are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of these strategies and processes. No assurance can be given that a failure to maintain or follow such processes or controls, an unanticipated event or series of such events will not result in loss levels that could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

We continually enhance our operating procedures and internal controls to effectively support our business and comply with our regulatory and financial reporting requirements. As a result of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no system of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control objectives have been or will be met, and that instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons or by collusion of two or more persons. The design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or the degree of compliance with policies or procedures may deteriorate. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. As a result of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatement due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. Accordingly, our disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the disclosure controls and procedures are met. Our management does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal controls will prevent all errors or fraud.

We have a risk of dependency upon the stability and security of our information technology systems.

Our business is highly dependent upon the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our computer and data processing systems. The failure of these systems could interrupt our operations, which could result in a material adverse effect on our business results. We rely on these systems to perform accounting, policy administration, actuarial and other modeling functions necessary for underwriting business, as well as to process and make claims and other payments. We retain highly trained staff committed to the development and maintenance of these systems. We maintain and regularly test recovery plans to enable us to restore critical systems with minimal disruption.

In addition, a security breach of our computer systems could disrupt business operations, result in a loss of confidential information, damage our reputation or result in financial liability. Cyber-security threats extend from individual attempts to gain unauthorized access to our information technology systems to coordinated, elaborate and targeted activity. While we employ security measures to prevent, detect and mitigate such threats (including independent and in-house vulnerability assessments, access controls, data encryption, continuous monitoring of our information technology networks and systems, maintenance of backup and protective systems and cyber insurance coverage to minimize post-event financial impact) the infrastructure may be vulnerable to security incidents which could result in the disruption of business operations and the corruption, unavailability ,misappropriation or destruction of critical data and confidential information (both our own and that of third parties). The potential consequences of a material cyber-security incident include reputational damage, litigation with third parties, and remediation costs, which in turn could have a material impact on our results of operation or financial condition.

23

We may experience issues with outsourcing relationships which might impact our ability to conduct business in a prudent manner and could negatively impact our operations, results and financial condition.

We outsource certain technology and business process functions to third-party providers and may do so increasingly in the future. If we do not effectively develop, implement and monitor our outsourcing relationships, or if third-party providers do not perform as anticipated or if we experience technological or other problems with transition, we may not realize productivity improvements or cost efficiencies and may experience operational difficulties, increased costs and a loss of business that may have an adverse effect upon on our operations or financial condition.

Our outsourcing of certain technology and business process functions to third parties may expose us to enhanced risk related to data security, which could result in adverse monetary, reputational and/or regulatory consequences, which in turn could have an adverse effect on our operations or financial condition.

In addition, our ability to receive services from third-party providers based in different countries might be impacted by political instability, unanticipated regulatory requirements or policies inside or outside of the United States. As a result, our ability to conduct our business might be adversely affected.

Market, Credit, Investment and Liquidity Risk

Market Risk is the risk of loss or adverse change in the financial position due to fluctuations in the level and volatility of market prices of assets, liabilities and financial instruments. This risk may be caused by fluctuations in interest rates, foreign exchange rates or equity, property and securities values.

Credit Risk is the risk of loss or adverse change in the financial position due to fluctuations in the credit standing of issuers of securities, counterparties or any other debtors, including risk of loss arising from an insurer’s inability to collect funds from debtors.

Investment Risk is the uncertainty associated with making an investment that may not yield the expected returns or performance, including the risk that an investment will decline in value, result in a loss or result in liability or other adverse consequences for the investor.

Liquidity Risk is the risk of loss or our inability to realize investments and other assets in order to meet our financial obligations when they fall due or the inability to meet such obligations except at excessive cost.

In an effort to meet business needs and mitigate risks, our investment guidelines provide restrictions on our portfolio’s composition, including issuer limits, sector limits, credit quality limits, portfolio duration, limits on the amount of investments in approved countries and permissible security types. Our investment managers may invest some of the investment portfolio in currencies other than the U.S. dollar based on where our business is underwritten, the currency in which our loss reserves are denominated, regulatory requirements, or our managers’ point of view on a given currency.

The performance of our investment portfolio is subject to a variety of risks, including risks related to general economic conditions, market volatility, interest rate fluctuations, liquidity risk and credit and default risk. Investment guideline restrictions have been established in an effort to minimize the effect of these risks but may not always be effective due to factors beyond our control. A significant change in interest rates could result in losses, realized or unrealized, in the value of our investment portfolio. Additionally, with respect to some of our investments, we are subject to prepayment and possibly reinvestment risk. Certain investments outside our highly rated fixed income portfolio, which includes high yield fixed maturity securities, equities and other alternative investments are subject to restrictions on sale, transfer and redemption, which may limit our ability to withdraw funds or realize gains on such investments for some period of time after our initial investment. The values of, and returns on, such investments may also be more volatile.

A prolonged recession or a period of significant turmoil in the U.S. and international financial markets, could adversely affect our business, liquidity and financial condition and our share price.

U.S. and international financial market disruptions such as the ones experienced in the recent global financial crisis, along with the possibility of a prolonged recession, may potentially affect various aspects of our business, including the demand for and claims made under our products, our counterparty credit risk and the ability of our customers, counterparties and others to establish or maintain their relationships with us, our ability to access and efficiently use internal and external capital resources and our investment performance. Volatility in the U.S. and other securities markets may also adversely affect our share price. Depending on future market conditions, we could incur substantial realized and unrealized losses in future periods, which may have an adverse impact on our results of operations, financial condition, debt and financial strength ratings, insurance subsidiaries’ capital levels and our ability to access capital markets.

24

Our investment portfolio is subject to significant market and credit risks which could result in an adverse impact on our financial position or results.

We hold a diversified portfolio of investments. These investments are managed in accordance with our investment policy by professional investment management firms and internally, under the direction of our Investment Committee, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Investment Officer. Although our investment policies stress diversification of risks, conservation of principal and liquidity, our investments are subject to general economic conditions and market risks as well as risks inherent to particular securities.

During an economic downturn, our investment portfolio could be subject to higher risk. The value of our investment portfolio is subject to the risk that certain investments may default or become impaired due to deterioration in the financial condition of one or more issuers of the securities held or due to deterioration in the financial condition of an insurer that guarantees an issuer’s payments of such investments. Such defaults and impairments could reduce our net investment income and result in realized investment losses.

As of December 31, 2015, we hold $290.0 million of investments in the energy and mining sector, or 6.9% of our total investment portfolio.  Falling oil prices have disrupted the market values for this sector, particularly for oil exploration, production and servicing companies.  Additionally, environmental concerns have had an adverse impact on the mining sector.  A continued downturn in these sectors could have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial position.

Our investment portfolio is also subject to increased valuation uncertainties when investment markets are illiquid. The valuation of investments is more subjective when markets are illiquid, thereby increasing the risk that the portion of the investment portfolio that is carried at fair value as reflected in our consolidated financial statements is not reflective of prices at which actual transactions would occur for certain investments.

Additionally, our portfolio of investments in fixed maturity and short-term securities may be adversely affected by changes in inflation and/or interest rates which, in turn, may adversely affect operating results. The fair value and investment income of these assets fluctuate with general economic and market conditions. Generally the fair value of fixed maturity securities decreases as interest rates increase. Some fixed maturity securities have call or prepayment options, which represent possible reinvestment risk in declining rate environments. Other fixed maturity securities such as mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities carry prepayment risk.

We also invest in marketable equity securities. These securities are carried on our balance sheet at fair value and are subject to potential losses and declines in market value. Our invested assets also include investments in limited partnerships, privately held securities and other alternative investments. Such investments entail substantial risks.

Risks for all types of securities are managed through application of the investment policy, which establishes investment parameters that include, but are not limited to, maximum percentages of investment in certain types of securities, minimum levels of credit quality and option-adjusted duration guidelines. There is, however, no guarantee of policy effectiveness.

There can be no assurance that our investment objectives will be achieved, and results may vary substantially over time. In addition, although we seek to employ investment strategies that are not correlated with our insurance and reinsurance exposures, losses in our investment portfolio may occur at the same time as underwriting losses and, therefore, exacerbate such losses’ adverse effect on us.

We may be adversely affected by foreign currency fluctuations.

Although our foreign subsidiaries ’ functional currency is the U.S. Dollar, with the exception of our Brazilian subsidiary whose functional currency is the Brazilian Real and our Malta subsidiary whose functional currency is the Euro, certain premium receivables and loss reserves include business denominated in currencies other than U.S. Dollars. We are exposed to the possibility of significant claims in currencies other than U.S. Dollars. We may, from time to time, experience losses in the form of increased claims costs or devaluation of assets available for paying claims resulting from fluctuations in these non-U.S. currencies, which could materially and adversely affect our operating results.

We may be adversely affected by changes in economic and political conditions, including inflation and changes in interest rates.

The effects of inflation could cause the cost of claims to rise in the future. Our reserve for losses and LAE includes assumptions about future payments for settlement of claims and claims handling expenses, such as medical treatments and litigation costs. To the extent inflation causes these costs to increase above reserves established for these claims, we will be required to increase our loss reserves with a corresponding reduction in our net income in the period in which the deficiency is identified.  Furthermore, if we experience deflation or a lack of inflation going forward and interest rates remain very low or continue to decline, we could experience low portfolio returns because we hold fixed income investments of fairly short duration.

25

Additionally, our operating results are affected, in part, by the performance of our investment portfolio. Our investment portfolio may be adversely affected by inflation or changes in interest rates. Such adverse effects include the potential for realized and unrealized losses in a rising interest rate environment or the loss of income in an environment of prolonged low interest rates.  Suc h effects may be further impacted by decisions made regarding such things as portfolio composition and duration given the prevailing market environment. Interest rates are affected by many factors, including the fiscal and monetary policies of the U.S. and other major economies, inflation, economic and political conditions and other factors beyond our control. Although we attempt to take measures to manage the risks of investing in changing interest rate environments, we may not be able to mitigate interest rate sensitivity effectively. Despite our mitigation efforts, which include duration targets for asset portfolios, compliance monitoring of these targets and means to reasonably and effectively match asset duration to the duration of our liabilities, fluc tuation in interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

We face a risk of non-availability/non-collectability of reinsurance, which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

As is common practice within the insurance industry, we transfer a portion of the risks insured under our policies to other companies through the purchase of reinsurance or other, similar risk mitigating hedging instruments. This reinsurance is maintained to protect the insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries against the severity of losses on individual claims, unusually serious occurrences in which a number of claims produce an aggregate extraordinary loss and catastrophic events. Although reinsurance does not discharge our subsidiaries from their primary obligation to pay for losses insured under the policies they issue, reinsurance does make the assuming reinsurer liable to the insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries for the reinsured portion of the risk. A credit exposure exists with respect to ceded losses to the extent that any reinsurer is unable or unwilling to meet the obligations assumed under the reinsurance contracts. The collectability of reinsurance is subject to the solvency of the reinsurers, interpretation and application of contract language and other factors. We are selective in regard to our reinsurers, placing reinsurance with those reinsurers with strong financial strength ratings from A.M. Best, S&P or a combination thereof. Despite strong ratings, the financial condition of a reinsurer may change based on market conditions. In certain instances we also require assets in trust, letters of credit or other acceptable collateral to support balances due, however, there is no certainty that we can collect on these collateral agreements in the event of a reinsurers default. It is not always standard business practice to require security for balances due; therefore, certain balances are not collateralized. A reinsurer’s insolvency or inability to make payments under the terms of a reinsurance contract could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

Concentration Risk

Concentration Risk is the risk of exposure to losses associated with inadequate diversification of portfolios of assets or obligations. Concentration risk can arise in both the asset and liability side of the balance sheet as well as in off-balance sheet items and can originate from a series of sources such as natural or man-made catastrophes or unprecedented economic events, individual risk exposure, or a combination of risk exposures such as credit, investment, underwriting and liquidity.

We offer a variety of insurance products across different operational segments and geographic regions. As such, diversification is a key component to our business model. Risk diversification helps us manage our capital allocation by limiting the impact of any single event to our economic, financial and regulatory condition. The degree to which the diversification effect can be realized depends not only on the correlation between risks but also on the level of relative concentration of those risks. Based on these assumptions, our goal is to maintain an appropriately balanced risk profile by avoiding any disproportionately large risks. At the Argo Group level, we identify, measure, manage and monitor pre-defined concentration risk scenarios across the operational segments, including our own outward reinsurance placements. With respect to investments, top-down indicators such as strategic asset allocation thresholds are defined and closely monitored to ensure balanced investment portfolios. Disproportionately large risks that might accumulate and have the potential to produce substantial losses, such as, major natural catastrophic or credit events, are modeled, budgeted and monitored on a standalone basis.

Despite the introduction of identification, modeling and monitoring protocols and in light of the inherent limitations to the tools and applications used, it is possible that an unknown, undetected or underestimated accumulation event could occur and result in a material financial loss.

For more details, see also above Insurance and Market/Credit Risk sections.

Strategic Risk

Strategic Risk means the risk of our inability to implement appropriate business plans and strategies, make decisions, allocate resources or adapt to changes in the business environment. Strategic Risk includes the risk of the current or prospective adverse impact on earnings or capital arising from business decisions, improper execution of decisions or lack of responsiveness to industry changes.

26

Deterioration of the macroeconomic environment in the U.S., Eurozone and world wide

Economic imbalances and financial market turmoil could result in a widening of credit spreads and volatility in share prices. Certain financial and economic data may deteriorate. These circumstances could lead to a decline in asset value and potentially reduce the demand for insurance due to limited economic growth prospects. The ultimate impact of such conditions on the insurance industry in general, and on our operations in particular, cannot be fully or accurately quantified at this time.

Adverse developments in the broader economy could create significant challenges to the insurance industry. If policy responses in Europe, the U.S. and internationally are not effective in mitigating these conditions, the insurance sector could be adversely affected by the resulting financial and economic environment. The sovereign debt crisis in certain Eurozone countries could also negatively impact insurers’ balance sheets, resulting in associated solvency issues. Further, insurance regulators worldwide have responded to the sovereign credit risk, equity risk and current economic cycle by imposing or contemplating new or stricter regulatory measures and increased solvency requirements, all of which could have an adverse effect on us.

The financial crisis has created substantial financial performance challenges associated with the prolonged low interest rate environment. In response, we have adjusted the duration and composition of our asset portfolio. Should these challenges continue for an extended period of time, the risk of achieving adequate returns will be greater and could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and competiveness of our products in the market.

Our insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries are subject to risk-based capital and solvency requirements in their respective regulatory domiciles.

A risk-based capital system is designed to measure whether the amount of available capital is adequate to support the inherent specific risks of each insurer. Risk-based regulatory capital is calculated at least annually. Authorities use the risk-based capital formula to identify insurance companies that may be undercapitalized and thus may require further regulatory attention. The formulas prescribe a series of risk measurements to determine a minimum capital amount for an insurance company, based on the profile of the individual company. The ratio of a company’s actual policyholder surplus to its minimum capital requirements will determine whether any regulatory action is required based on the respective local thresholds.

Whereas the majority of our operations operate on the basis of ‘standard formula’ risk-based capital systems, Syndicate 1200 within Lloyd’s has secured approval for the use of an Economic Capital Model, known as an Internal Model.  This model is used to calculate regulatory capital requirements based on our unique risk profile.  The Internal Model has been subject to extensive internal and external scrutiny including independent validation activities. The use of any complex mathematical model however exposures the organization to the risk that these models are not built correctly, contain coding or formulaic errors or rely on unreliable or inadequate data. A clear understanding of the limitations of any such model is required by management to ensure it is used for intended purposes.

As a result of these and other requirements, we may require additional capital in the future that might not be available to us on commercially favorable terms. Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including our ability to underwrite new business, risk propensity and ability to establish premium rates and accurately set reserves at levels adequate to cover expected losses. To the extent that the funds generated by insurance premiums received and sale proceeds and income from our investment portfolio are insufficient to fund future operating requirements and cover incurred losses and loss expenses, we may need to raise additional funds through financings or curtail our growth and reduce in size. The prolonged effects of the financial market crisis have created uncertainty in the equity and fixed maturity securities markets and have affected our ability, and the ability of others within our industry, to raise additional capital in the public or private markets. Any future financing, if available at all, may be on terms that are not favorable to us and our shareholders. In the case of equity financing, dilution to current shareholdings could result, and the securities issued may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior or otherwise superior to those of our common shares.

United States

Argo Group’s U.S. subsidiaries are subject to the risk-based capital system outlined in the Risk-Based Capital for Insurers Model Act. This Act provides four levels of regulatory activity if the risk-based capital ratio yielded by the calculation falls below specified minimums. At each of four successively lower risk-based capital ratios specified by statute, broader regulatory remedies become available. The four levels are: (i) Company Action Level Event, (ii) Regulatory Action Level Event, (iii) Authorized Control Level Event and (iv) Mandatory Control Level Event. If we fall below the minimum acceptable risk-based capital level, we would be subject to additional regulatory actions.

European Union

S II the enhanced EU regulatory regime providing for a risk-based system for the supervision of European insurance and reinsurance undertakings, was enacted in November 2009.  S II imposes new solvency and governance requirements across all 27 European Union

27

Member States to be implemented through the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Agency (“EIOPA”).  The application date of the S II regime is January 1, 2016.  Due to ongoing development and implementation efforts relating to S II, the specific future impact of S II on our business, results of operations or financial condition cannot be determined at this time.

United Kingdom

Syndicate 1200 is subject to the risk-based capital requirements administered by the Prudential Regulation Authority (“PRA”), and will be subject to S II risk-based capital requirements when implemented as discussed above. Lloyd’s has introduced its own implementation plan and requirements for S II with which Syndicate 1200 has to date complied and in the future will be expected to comply. The specific future impact of S II based Lloyd’s standards and requirements on Syndicate 1200’s business, results of operations or financial condition cannot be determined at this time.

Bermuda

Argo Group and Argo Re

As discussed in the summary of regulatory provisions above relating to Argo Group and Argo Re in Bermuda, Argo Re is subject to the Bermuda Solvency Capital Requirement (“BSCR”), a risk-based capital system mandated by the Bermuda Insurance (Prudential Standards) (Class 4 and Class 3B Solvency Requirement) Rules, as amended from time to time. Similarly, Argo Group is subject to the Insurance (Prudential Standards) (Insurance Group Solvency Requirement) Rules 2011 as amended from time to time. The application and methods of calculating the BSCR required by the Bermuda Monetary Authority (“BMA”) are subject to change, and the ultimate impact on our solvency position from any future material changes cannot be determined at this time.

Minimum Solvency Margin

Argo Re must ensure that the value of its general business assets exceeds the amount of its general business liabilities by an amount greater than the prescribed minimum solvency margin (“MSM”) pertaining to its general business. As a Class 4 insurer, Argo Re is required, with respect to its general business, to maintain a minimum solvency margin equal to the greatest of (A) $100 million, (B) 50% of net premiums written (being gross premiums written less any premiums ceded by Argo Re, but Argo Re may not deduct more than 25% of gross premiums when computing net premiums written) and (C) 15% of net discounted aggregate losses and loss expense provisions and other insurance reserves. Argo Group is supervised by the BMA as an Insurance Group, and must ensure that the value of the Insurance Group’s assets exceeds the Insurance Group’s liabilities by the aggregate MSM of each qualifying member of the Insurance Group.

Enhanced Capital Requirement

Argo Group, as a BMA supervised Insurance Group, and Argo Re, as a Class 4 insurer, are required to maintain available statutory capital and surplus pertaining to its general business at a level equal to or in excess of its enhanced capital requirement (“ECR”). The ECR is established by reference to either the BSCR model or an approved internal capital model, but must be equal to or exceed the MSM for the insurer. The BSCR is a risk-based capital model which provides a method for determining an insurer’s capital requirements (statutory capital and surplus) by taking into account the risk characteristics of different aspects of the insurer’s business. The BMA may, subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of the Act, make such adjustments to an insurer’s ECR and available statutory capital and surplus requirements as it considers appropriate.

Target Capital Level

Although not a metric specifically defined in the Insurance Act, the BMA has the authority to establish a target capital level (“TCL”) for each Class 4 insurer. The TCL is equal to 120% of an insurer’s ECR. The purpose of the TCL is to serve as an early warning tool for the BMA. Failure to maintain statutory capital at or above the TCL will likely result in increased regulatory oversight.

Eligible Capital

Effective December 31, 2011, Argo Re was required to disclose the makeup of its capital in accordance with the recently introduced “3-tiered capital system”. Corresponding requirements did not exist for Argo Group for the fiscal year ended 2012, but become effective on January 1, 2013.

Under the respective systems applied to Argo Re as a re(insurer) and Argo Group as an Insurance Group supervised by the BMA, all capital instruments at Argo Group and Argo Re will be classified as either basic or ancillary capital, which in turn will be classified into one of three tiers based on their “loss absorbency” characteristics. Highest quality capital will be classified Tier 1 Capital, lesser quality capital will be classified as either Tier 2 Capital or Tier 3 Capital. Under this regime, not less than 80% of Tier 1 Capital and

28

up to 20% of Tier 2 Capital may be used to support the company’s minimum solvency margin for the filing entity’s general business. Thereafter, a minimum of 60% of Tier 1 Capital and a maximum of 15% of Tier 3 Capital may be used to satisfy the filing entity’s EC R. Any combination of Tier 1, 2 or 3 Capital may be used to meet the TCL. As respect to Argo Group, the Insurance (Prudential Standards) (Insurance Group Solvency Requirement) Amendment Rules 2012 provide for a phase-in over a period of six years, starting at 50% of the amount determined and increasing in 10% increments. Where the BMA has previously approved the use of certain instruments for capital purposes, the BMA’s consent must be obtained if such instruments are to remain eligible for use in satisfyin g the minimum margin of solvency pertaining to the filing entity general business and it’s ECR.

Minimum Liquidity Ratio

Argo Re is required to maintain a minimum liquidity ratio for general business equal to the value of its relevant assets at not less than 75% of the amount of its relevant liabilities. Relevant assets include cash and time deposits, quoted investments, unquoted bonds and debentures, first liens on real estate, investment income due and accrued, accounts and premiums receivable and reinsurance balances receivable. The relevant liabilities are total general business insurance reserves and total other liabilities less deferred income tax and sundry liabilities (by interpretation, those not specifically defined).

Restrictions on Dividends and Distributions

Argo Re is prohibited from declaring or paying any dividends during any financial year if it is in breach of its ECR, general business solvency margin or minimum liquidity ratio or if the declaration or payment of such dividends would cause such a breach. If it has failed to meet its minimum margin of solvency or minimum liquidity ratio on the last day of any financial year, Argo Re will be prohibited, without the approval of the BMA, from declaring or paying any dividends during the next financial year. In addition, Argo Re is prohibited from declaring or paying in any financial year dividends of more than 25% of its total statutory capital and surplus (as shown on its previous financial year’s statutory balance sheet) unless it files (at least 7 days before payment of such dividends) with the BMA an affidavit stating that it will continue to meet the required margins.

Argo Group

As discussed in the regulatory section above, Argo Group and its various subsidiaries are considered to be an affiliated group for purposes of the BMA’s Group Supervision regime. This Group Supervision regime stipulates solvency margins, capital requirements and eligible capital requirements at the consolidated Argo Group level that may affect the calculation of similar solvency and capital requirements at the Argo Re level. The methodology for applying these solvency and capital requirements, particularly in regard to the eligibility, and classification of certain capital instruments within an affiliated group, is subject to ongoing refinement and interpretation by the BMA. The applicable rules and regulations for this regime, and the manner in which they will be applied to Argo Group, are subject to change, and it is not possible to predict the ultimate impact of future changes on Argo Group’s operations and financial condition.

We may incur significant additional indebtedness.

We may seek to incur additional indebtedness either through the issuance of public or private debt or through bank or other financing. The funds raised by the incurrence of such additional indebtedness may be used to repay existing indebtedness, including amounts borrowed under our credit facility, outstanding subordinated debt and floating rate loan stock or for our general corporate purposes, including additions to working capital, capital expenditures, investments in subsidiaries or acquisitions.

This additional indebtedness, particularly if not used to repay existing indebtedness, could limit our financial and operating flexibility, including as a result of the need to dedicate a greater portion of our cash flows from operations to interest and principal payments. It may also be more difficult for us to obtain additional financing on favorable terms, if at all, limiting our ability to capitalize on significant business opportunities and making us more vulnerable to economic downturns.

Argo Group is a holding company and if its subsidiaries do not make dividend payments to Argo Group, Argo Group may not be able to pay dividends or other obligations.

Argo Group is a holding company with no significant operations or significant assets other than the share capital of its subsidiaries. Argo group relies primarily on cash dividends from its subsidiaries to pay operating expenses and obligations. It is expected that future distributions from these subsidiaries will be the principal source of funds to meet financial obligations and pay shareholder dividends. The payment of dividends by the insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries is limited under the laws and regulations of the respective domicile. These regulations stipulate the maximum amount of annual dividends or other distributions available to shareholders without prior approval of the relevant regulatory authorities. Thus, cash resources located in subsidiaries may not be readily available to Argo Group in whole or in part to address its liquidity needs.

29

There c an be no assurance that we and our subsidiaries will not experience a ratings downgrade, which may result in an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.

Ratings with respect to claims paying ability and financial strength are important factors in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies and will also impact the cost and availability of capital to an insurance company. Ratings by A.M. Best and S&P represent an important consideration in maintaining customer confidence in us and in our ability to market insurance products. Rating organizations regularly analyze the financial performance and condition of insurers.

All of our insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries, except for Argo Seguros, have a Financial Strength Rating of “A” (Excellent) (3rd highest rating out of 16 rating classifications) with a stable outlook from A.M Best. In 2015, S&P affirmed our Financial Strength Rating of “A-” (Strong) of our U.S. insurance subsidiaries (other than ARIS Title Insurance Corporation) and our outlook of stable. Argo Group US, Inc. has an Issuer Credit Rating of “BBB-” (Good) with a stable outlook from S&P. Syndicate 1200, our Lloyd’s syndicate, receives the Lloyd’s market FSR rating of “A” (Excellent) with a positive outlook by A.M. Best and “A+” (Strong) with a stable outlook by S&P.

Our ratings are subject to periodic review by these agencies and the maintenance of those ratings cannot be assured. A significant downgrade in these ratings could adversely affect our competitive position in the insurance industry, make it more difficult for us to market our products, result in a material loss of business as policyholders move to other companies with higher claims-paying and financial strength ratings and may require us to raise additional capital.

Our merger and acquisition strategy may not succeed.

Our strategy for growth may include mergers and acquisitions. This strategy presents risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial performance, including: (i) the diversion of management’s attention, (ii) our ability to execute a transaction effectively, including the integration of operations and the retention of employees and (iii) the contingent and latent risks associated with the past operations of and other unanticipated problems arising from a transaction partner. We cannot predict whether we will be able to identify and complete a future transaction on terms favorable to us. We cannot know if we will realize the anticipated benefits of a completed transaction or if there will be substantial unanticipated costs associated with such a transaction.

A future merger or acquisition may result in tax consequences at either or both the shareholder and Argo Group level, potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, the incurrence of additional debt and the recognition of potential impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets. Each of these factors could adversely affect our financial position.

Argo Re’s inability to provide the necessary collateral could affect Argo Re’s ability to offer reinsurance in certain markets.

Argo Re, the Bermuda Class 4 risk bearing entity, is not licensed or admitted as an insurer in any jurisdiction other than Bermuda. Because many jurisdictions do not permit insurance companies to take credit for reinsurance obtained from unlicensed or non-admitted insurers in statutory financial statements unless appropriate security is in place, Argo Re anticipates that its reinsurance clients will typically require it to post a letter of credit or other collateral for incurred losses. If Argo Re is unable to arrange for security on commercially reasonable terms, Argo Re could be limited in its ability to underwrite business for certain of its clients.

Reputational Risk

Reputational Risk is the risk of potential loss through a deterioration of our reputation or standing due to a negative perception of our image among customers, counterparties, shareholders or supervisory authorities, and includes risk of adverse publicity regarding our business practices and associations.

We may be adversely affected by misconduct of our personnel or failure to identify transactions that are in violation of local and international trade sanctions.

We maintain strong oversight and control over our internal Group-wide Corporate Governance Guidelines and Code of Conduct and Business Ethics, and we maintain a continuous education and training program and monitor compliance on an ongoing basis. However, there can be no ultimate assurance that these measures will be sufficient in all instances to prevent an undetected violation of internal or external rules of conduct, which might lead to a financial loss and/or reputational damage.

Legal, Regulatory and Litigation Risks

Legal and Regulatory Risk means the risk arising from our (a) failure to comply with statutory or regulatory obligations; (b) failure to comply with our bye-laws; or (c) failure to comply with any contractual agreement.

30

Litigation Risk means the risk that acts or omissions or other business activity of Argo Group and our key functionaries and employees could result in legal proceedings to which we are a party, the uncertainty surrounding the outcome of such legal proceedi ngs and the risk of an adverse impact on us resulting from such legal proceedings.

Litigation and legal proceedings against us could have an adverse effect on our financial condition.

Our subsidiaries are parties to legal actions incidental to their business. Adverse outcomes could materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Regulatory constraints may restrict our ability to operate our business.

General Regulatory Constraints

Restrictions on Ownership

Argo Group’s ownership of U.S. subsidiaries can, under applicable state insurance company laws and regulations, delay or impede a change of control of Argo Group. Under applicable insurance regulations, any proposed purchase of 10% or more of Argo Group’s voting securities would require the prior approval of the relevant insurance regulatory authorities.

Except as provided below, shareholders have one vote for each common share held by them and are entitled to vote at all meetings of shareholders. However, for so long as the shares of a shareholder are treated as “controlled shares” (as determined under section 958 of the Internal Revenue Code) of any U.S. Person (that owns shares directly or indirectly through non-U.S. entities) and such controlled shares constitute 9.5% or more of the votes conferred by our issued shares, the voting rights with respect to the controlled shares of such U.S. Person, which we refer to as a 9.5% U.S. Shareholder, will be limited, in the aggregate, to a voting power of less than 9.5% under a formula specified in our bye-laws. The formula is applied repeatedly until the voting power of all 9.5% U.S. Shareholders has been reduced to less than 9.5%. In addition, our Board may limit a shareholder’s voting rights where it deems it appropriate to do so to (i) avoid the existence of any 9.5% U.S. Shareholder and (ii) avoid certain material adverse tax, legal or regulatory consequences to Argo Group, any of its subsidiaries or any direct or indirect shareholder or its affiliates. “Controlled shares” include, among other things, all shares of Argo Group that such U.S. Person is deemed to own directly, indirectly or constructively (within the meaning of section 958 of the Internal Revenue Code).

Under these provisions, certain shareholders may have their voting rights limited, while other shareholders may have voting rights in excess of one vote per share. Moreover, these provisions could have the effect of reducing the votes of certain shareholders who would not otherwise be subject to the 9.5% limitation by virtue of their direct share ownership.

Regulation of Subsidiaries

General

Our insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries and insurance-related services subsidiaries may not be able to obtain or maintain necessary licenses, permits or authorizations, or may be able to do so only at significant cost. In addition, we may not be able to comply with, or obtain appropriate exemptions from the wide variety of laws and regulations applicable to insurance or reinsurance companies or insurance-related services companies or holding companies. Failure to comply with or to obtain appropriate authorizations and/or exemptions under any applicable laws could result in restrictions on our ability to do business or certain activities that are regulated in one or more of the jurisdictions and could subject us to fines and other sanctions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Argo Group International Holdings, Ltd

Argo Group is supervised by the BMA as an Insurance Group, and as such, is subject to specific laws, rules and regulations promulgated by the Bermudian authorities according to the Insurance Act. Changes in Bermuda’s statutes, regulations and policies could result in restrictions on our ability to pursue our business plans, strategic objectives, execute our investment strategy and fulfill other shareholders’ obligations.

Argo Group’s U.S. Subsidiaries

Our U.S. insurance subsidiaries are subject to extensive regulation, which may reduce our profitability or inhibit our growth. If we fail to comply with these regulations, we may be subject to penalties, including fines and suspensions, which may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Finally, changes in the level of regulation of the insurance industry or changes in laws or regulations themselves or interpretations by regulatory authorities could adversely affect our ability to pursue our business plan and operate our U.S. insurance subsidiaries.

31

Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to the supervision and regulation of ea ch of the states in which they are domiciled and do business. Such supervision and regulation is designed to protect our policyholders rather than our shareholders. These regulations are generally administered by a department of insurance in each state and relate to various aspects of our business. State insurance departments also conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance and reinsurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to financial condition, holding com pany issues and other matters. These regulatory requirements may adversely affect or inhibit our ability to achieve some or all of our business objectives.

In addition, regulatory authorities have relatively broad discretion to deny, suspend or revoke licenses for various reasons, including the violation of regulations. If we do not have the requisite licenses and approvals or do not comply with applicable regulatory requirements, insurance regulatory authorities could preclude or temporarily suspend us from carrying on some or all of our activities or otherwise penalize us. This could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

From time to time, various laws and regulations are proposed for application to the U.S. insurance industry, some of which could adversely affect the results of reinsurers and insurers. Among the proposals that have been considered are those that would establish a federal system of regulation in addition to or in lieu of a state-based system of regulation and repeal the McCarran-Ferguson Act and/or measures under the Dodd-Frank Act that have established the Federal Insurance Office. Additionally, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) has undertaken the Solvency Modernization Initiative (“SMI”), the primary focus of which is the review of insurer solvency regulations throughout the U.S. and the development of long-term solvency modernization objectives. Included within NAIC’s scope of review for SMI purposes, is the U.S. insurer solvency framework, group solvency issues, capital requirements, international accounting and regulatory standards, reinsurance and corporate governance. We are unable to predict the potential effect, if any, such legislative or regulatory developments may have on our future operations or financial condition.

Argo Group’s Bermuda Subsidiary

Argo Re is registered as a Class 4 Bermuda insurance company and is subject to regulation and supervision in Bermuda by the BMA. Changes in Bermuda insurance statutes, regulations and policies could result in restrictions on Argo Re’s ability to pursue its business plans, issue reinsurance policies, distribute funds and execute its investment strategy.

U.K. Financial Services Authority, Prudential Regulation Authority and Financial Conduct Authority Regulations

Since 2014 regulatory supervision over Syndicate 1200 has been conducted by the PRA and FCA.  The operations of Syndicate 1200 continued to be supervised by Lloyd’s.  The PRA, FCA and Lloyd’s have common objectives in ensuring that the Lloyd’s market is appropriately regulated.  To minimize duplication, there are arrangements with Lloyd’s for co-operation on supervision and enforcement.  Both the PRA and FCA have substantial powers of intervention in relation to the Lloyd’s Managing Agents (such as Argo Managing Agency Limited) that they regulate, including the power to remove their authorization to manage Lloyd’s Syndicates.  In addition, each year the PRA requires Lloyd’s to satisfy an annual solvency test that measures whether Lloyd’s has sufficient assets in the aggregate to meet all outstanding liabilities of its members, both current and run-off.  If Lloyd’s fails this test, the PRA may require Lloyd’s to cease trading and/or its members to cease or reduce underwriting.  Future regulatory changes or rulings by the PRA and/or FCA could interfere with the business strategy or financial assumptions of Syndicate 1200, possibly resulting in an adverse effect on the financial condition and operating results of Syndicate 1200.

Lloyd’s Regulations and Requirements

The operations of Syndicate 1200 are supervised by Lloyd’s. The Lloyd’s Franchise Board requires annual approval of the Syndicate 1200 business plan, including maximum underwriting capacity, and may require changes to any business plan presented to it or additional capital to be provided to support underwriting.  Lloyd’s also imposes various charges and assessments on its member companies.  If Lloyd’s were to require material changes in the Syndicate 1200 business plans, or if charges and assessments payable by Syndicate 1200 to Lloyd’s were to increase significantly, these events could have an adverse effect on the operations and financial results of Syndicate 1200. In addition, no assurances can be given as to how much business Lloyd’s will permit Syndicate 1200 to underwrite in 2016 and subsequent years nor the viability and cost of the capital structure we may use as a substitute for the external capital and reinsurance used by Syndicate 1200 in 2015 and prior underwriting years.

The financial security of the Lloyd’s market is regularly assessed by three independent rating agencies (A.M. Best, S&P and Fitch Ratings).  A satisfactory credit rating issued by an accredited rating agency is necessary for Lloyd’s Syndicates to be able to trade in certain classes of business or certain jurisdictions at current levels.  Syndicate 1200 would be adversely affected if Lloyd’s current ratings were downgraded.

32

Other Applicable Laws

Lloyd’s worldwide insurance and reinsurance business is subject to various regulations, laws, treaties and other applicable policies of the EU, as well as each nation, state and locality in which it operates. Material changes in governmental requirements and laws could have an adverse effect on Lloyd’s and its member companies, including Syndicate 1200.

Malta Financial Services Authority (“MFSA”)

ArgoGlobal SE is authorized by the MFSA to carry on the business of insurance under the Business Act (Cap. 403).  In addition, ArgoGlobal SE is subject to regulation by the EU and its branch office in Switzerland is subject to regulation by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority FINMA.  Changes in the applicable laws, regulations and supplementing rules could interfere with ArgoGlobal SE’s business strategy or financial assumptions, possibly resulting in an adverse effect on ArgoGlobal SE’s financial condition and operating results.

Brazil’s Superintend ệ ncia de Seguros Privados, Superintendence of Private Insurance, (“SUSEP”)

Argo Seguros is authorized to operate as a licensed insurer domiciled in Brazil by the Superintend ệ ncia de Seguros Privados, (“SUSEP”) per Ordinance nº 4.316 issued in 2011. Brazil’s insurance regulatory regime contains provisions which restrict the amount of reinsurance a domestic insurer may place with reinsurers outside of Brazil and places limits on the amount of reinsurance that may be placed with affiliates. Such restrictions constrain the size and category of risks that Argo Seguros can entertain and require that Argo Seguros be capitalized at a level that is comparatively higher than in other jurisdictions in which Argo Group has subsidiaries. Failure to manage the impact of such restrictions within its business plan, as well as changes in the applicable laws, rules and supplementing resolutions, could result in restrictions on Argo Seguros’s ability to pursue its mandate.

Argo Re Ltd. Is registered by the SUSEP as an admitted reinsurer under the applicable laws and regulations of Brazil and is authorized to carry on such business through its representative office, Argo Re Escritório de Representação no Brasil Ltda. (“Argo Re Escritório”) in São Paulo, Brazil, per Ordinance nº 5.795.  Changes in the applicable laws and regulations could result in restrictions on Argo Re to conduct business as an admitted reinsurer in Brazil.

Dubai Financial Services Authority (“DFSA”)

Argo Re (DIFC) Ltd. is licensed to operate as an Authorized Firm (Category 4) to carry on financial services in the area of “insurance management” and “insurance intermediation.” Changes in the applicable laws and regulations could result in restrictions on Argo Re (DIFC), Ltd.’s ability to pursue its business strategy.

Special Selected Risk Factors

An impairment in the carrying value of goodwill and intangible assets could negatively impact our consolidated results of operations and shareholders’ equity.

Goodwill and intangible assets are originally recorded at fair value. Goodwill is not amortized while certain intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives or have indefinite useful lives. Goodwill and intangible assets are reviewed for impairment at least annually or more frequently if indicators are present. Management, in evaluating the recoverability of such assets, relies on estimates and assumptions related to margin, growth rates, discount rates and other data. There are inherent uncertainties related to these factors and management’s judgment in applying these factors. Goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges can result from declines in operating results, divestitures or sustained market capitalization declines and other factors. Impairment charges could materially affect our financial results in the period in which they are recognized. As of December 31, 2015, goodwill and intangible assets represented approximately 13.6% of shareholders’ equity. We continue to monitor relevant internal and external factors and their potential impact on the fair value of our reporting segments, and if required, we will update our impairment analysis.

Some aspects of our corporate structure and applicable insurance regulations may discourage or impede the sale of the Company, tender offers or other mechanisms of control.

Restrictions in Bye-Laws on Stock Transfers

Our bye-laws generally permit transfers of our common shares unless the Board determines a transfer may result in a non-de minimus adverse tax, legal or regulatory consequence to us, any of our subsidiaries or any direct or indirect shareholder of Argo Group or its affiliates. We may refuse to register on our share transfer records, any transfer that does not comply with these share transfer restrictions. A transferee will be permitted to promptly dispose of any of our shares purchased that violate the restrictions and as to the transfer of which registration is refused.

33

Restrictions on Voting Rights

In the event that we become aware of a U.S. Person (that owns our shares directly or indirectly through non-U.S. entities) owning more than the permitted 9.5% level of voting power of our outstanding shares after a transfer of shares has been registered, our bye-laws provide that, subject to certain exceptions and waiver procedures, the voting rights with respect to our shares owned by any such shareholder will be limited to the permitted level of voting power, subject only to the further limitation that no other shareholder allocated any such voting rights may exceed the permitted level of voting power as a result of such limitation.

We also have the authority under our bye-laws to request information from any shareholder for the purpose of determining whether a shareholder’s voting rights are to be reallocated under the bye-laws. If a shareholder fails to respond to such a request for information or submits incomplete or inaccurate information in response to such a request, we may, in our sole discretion, eliminate such shareholder’s voting rights.

Election of Board of Directors

Our bye-laws provide for a classified board of directors. The directors of the class elected at each annual general meeting hold office for a term of three years, with the term of each class expiring at successive annual general meetings of shareholders. Under our bye-laws, the vote of two-thirds of the outstanding shares entitled to vote and approval of a majority of the Board are required to amend bye-laws regarding appointment and removal of directors, indemnification of directors and officers, directors’ interests and procedures for amending bye-laws.

Insurance laws and other applicable regulations regarding change of control

Because a person who acquires control of Argo Group would thereby acquire indirect control of the same percentage of the stock in its insurance company subsidiaries, change of control provisions in the laws and other rules applicable to our insurance subsidiaries in various jurisdictions would apply to such a transaction. Such change of control provisions generally apply to transactions involving the acquisition of direct or indirect control over 10% or more of our outstanding shares. No assurance can be given that an applicable regulatory body would approve of any future change of control. These changes of control provisions may discourage potential acquisition proposals and may delay, deter or prevent a change of control of Argo Group, including transactions that some or all of our shareholders might consider to be desirable.

Restrictions on Third-Party Takeovers

The provisions described above may have the effect of making it more difficult or discouraging unsolicited takeover bids from third parties. To the extent that these effects occur, shareholders could be deprived of opportunities to realize takeover premiums for their shares and the market price of their shares could be depressed. In addition, these provisions could also result in the entrenchment of incumbent management and Board members.

We are a Bermuda company and it may be difficult for you to enforce judgments against us and/or our directors and executive officers.

We are organized under the laws of Bermuda and headquartered in Bermuda. The Companies Act 1981 of Bermuda, and its subsequent amendments, which applies to us, differs in certain material respects from laws generally applicable to U.S. corporations and their shareholders. These differences include the manner in which directors must disclose transactions in which they have an interest, rights of shareholders to bring class action and derivative lawsuits, our right to enter into business transactions with shareholders without prior approval from shareholders, committee organization and scope of indemnification available to directors and officers.

In addition, certain of our directors and officers reside outside the U.S. As such, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process within the U.S. on our directors and officers who reside outside the U.S. or to enforce against us or our directors and officers judgments of U.S. courts predicated upon civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws.

We have been advised that there is doubt as to whether:

34

Further, we have been advised that there is no treaty in effect between the U.S. and Bermuda providing for the enforcement of judgments of U.S. courts, and there are grounds upon which Bermuda courts may not enforce judgments of U.S. courts. Because judgments of U.S. courts are not automatically enforceable in Bermuda, it may be difficult for our shareholders to recover against us based on such judgments.

Tax Risks Associated with Argo Group

U.S. Tax Risks

Argo Group and Argo Group’s non-U.S. subsidiaries may be subject to U.S. tax, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Argo Group and Argo Group’s non-U.S. subsidiaries have operated and intend to continue to operate in a manner that should not cause them to be treated as engaged in a trade or business in the U.S. (and, in the case of those non-U.S. companies qualifying for treaty protection, in a manner that should not cause any of such non-U.S. subsidiaries to be doing business through a permanent establishment in the U.S.) and, thus, we believe that we and our non-U.S. subsidiaries should not be subject to U.S. federal income taxes or branch profits tax (other than withholding taxes on certain U.S. source investment income and excise taxes on insurance or reinsurance premiums). However, because there is uncertainty as to the activities that constitute being engaged in a trade or business within the U.S., and as to what constitutes a permanent establishment under the applicable tax treaties, there can be no assurances that the United States Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) will not contend successfully that one or more of the non-U.S. subsidiaries is engaged in a trade or business, or carrying on business through a permanent establishment, in the U.S.

The reinsurance agreements between us and our U.S. subsidiaries may be subject to re-characterization or other adjustment for U.S. federal income tax purposes, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Under Section 845 of the Internal Revenue Code, the IRS may allocate income, deductions, assets, reserves, credits and any other items related to a reinsurance agreement among certain related parties to the reinsurance agreement, re-characterize such items or make any other adjustment in order to reflect the proper source, character or amount of the items for each party. No regulations have been issued under Section 845 of the Internal Revenue Code. Accordingly, the application of such provisions is uncertain and we cannot predict what impact, if any, such provisions may have on us and our subsidiaries.

Changes in U.S. federal income tax law could be retroactive and may subject us or our non-U.S. subsidiaries to U.S. federal income taxation.

Legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress attempting to eliminate certain perceived tax advantages of companies (including insurance companies) that have legal domiciles outside the U.S. but have certain U.S. affiliates. There are currently pending legislative proposals that, if enacted, could have a material adverse effect on us or our shareholders. For example, legislation has been introduced in Congress to limit the deductibility of reinsurance premiums paid by U.S. companies to foreign affiliates that, if enacted, could adversely impact our results. It is possible that broader-based or new legislative proposals could emerge in the future that could have an adverse effect on us or our shareholders.

The tax laws and interpretations thereof are subject to change, possibly on a retroactive basis. We are not able to predict if, when or in what form such changes will be provided and whether such guidance will be applied on a retroactive basis.

Bermuda Tax Risks

Argo Group and Argo Group’s Bermuda subsidiaries may become subject to Bermuda taxes after 2035.

Bermuda currently imposes no income tax on corporations. In addition, we have obtained an assurance from the Bermuda Minister of Finance, under The Exempted Undertakings Tax Protection Act 1966 of Bermuda, that if any legislation is enacted in Bermuda that would impose tax computed on profits or income, or computed on any capital asset, gain or appreciation or any tax in the nature of estate duty or inheritance tax, then the imposition of any such tax will not be applicable to us or our Bermuda subsidiaries, until March 31, 2035. During 2011, legislation was passed to extend the period of the assurance mentioned above from 2016 to March 31, 2035. We filed for, and received, an extension of the assurance in January of 2012.

35

U.K. Tax Risks

Our non-U.K. companies may be subject to U.K. tax.

We intend to operate in such a manner so that none of our companies other than those companies incorporated in the United Kingdom should be resident in the U.K. for tax purposes or have a permanent establishment in the U.K. Accordingly, we expect that none of our companies other than Argo Global Syndicate 1200 should be subject to U.K. taxation. However, since applicable law and regulations do not conclusively define the activities that constitute conducting business in the U.K. through a permanent establishment, the U.K. Inland Revenue might contend successfully that one or more of our other companies is conducting business in the U.K. through a permanent establishment in the U.K.

Any arrangements between U.K.-resident entities of Argo Group and other members of Argo Group are subject to the U.K. transfer pricing regime. Consequently, if any agreement between a U.K. resident entity of Argo Group and any other Argo Group entity (whether that entity is resident in or outside the U.K.) is found not to be on arm’s length terms and as a result a U.K. tax advantage is being obtained, an adjustment will be required to compute U.K. taxable profits as if such an agreement were on arm’s length terms. Any transfer pricing adjustment could adversely impact the tax charge incurred by the relevant U.K. resident entities of Argo Group.

Irish Tax Risks

Dividends paid by our U.S. subsidiaries to Argo Ireland may not be eligible for benefits under the U.S.-Ireland income tax treaty.

Under U.S. federal income tax law, dividends paid by a U.S. corporation to a non-U.S. shareholder are generally subject to a 30% withholding tax, unless reduced by treaty. The income tax treaty between the Republic of Ireland and the United States (“the Irish Treaty”) reduces the rate of withholding tax on certain dividends to 5%. Were the IRS to contend successfully that Argo Financial Holdings, Ltd (“Argo Ireland”) is not eligible for benefits under the Irish Treaty, any dividends paid by Argo Group’s U.S. subsidiaries to Argo Ireland would be subject to the 30% withholding tax. Such a result could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Tax Risks Associated with Our Shareholders

If you are a U.S. non-corporate shareholder, dividends you receive from us will not be eligible for reduced rates of tax upon enactment of certain legislative proposals.

Legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would, if enacted, deny the applicability of reduced rates to dividends paid by any corporation organized under the laws of a foreign country that does not have a comprehensive income tax system, such as Bermuda. Therefore, depending on whether, when and in what form this legislative proposal is enacted, we cannot assure you that any dividends paid by us in the future would qualify for reduced rates of tax.

If we are classified as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”), your taxes would increase.

In order to avoid significant potential adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences for any U.S. person who owns our common shares, we must not constitute a PFIC in any year in which such U.S. person is a shareholder. Those consequences could include increasing the tax liability of the investor, accelerating the imposition of the tax and causing a loss of the basis step-up on the death of the investor. In general, a non-U.S. corporation is a passive foreign investment company for a taxable year if 75% or more of its income constitutes passive income or 50% or more of its assets produce passive income. Passive income generally includes interest, dividends and other investment income. However, passive income does not include income derived in the active conduct of an insurance business by a company that is predominantly engaged in an insurance business. This exception is intended to ensure that income derived by a bona fide insurance company is not treated as passive income, except to the extent such income is attributable to financial reserves in excess of the reasonable needs of the insurance business. We believe that we should not be, and currently do not expect to become, a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes; however, we cannot assure you that we will not be deemed a PFIC by the IRS. There are currently no regulations regarding the application of the PFIC provisions to an insurance company. New regulations or pronouncements interpreting or clarifying these rules may be forthcoming. We cannot predict what impact, if any, such guidance would have on persons subject to U.S. federal income tax that directly or indirectly own our shares.

  If you acquire 10% or more of our shares and we or one or more of our non-U.S. subsidiaries is classified as a controlled foreign corporation (“CFC”) your taxes could increase.

Each U.S. person who, directly, indirectly or through attribution rules, owns 10% or more of our common shares should consider the possible application of the controlled foreign corporation rules.

Each U.S. 10% shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation on the last day of the controlled foreign corporation’s taxable year generally must include in its gross income for U.S. federal income tax purposes its pro-rata share of the controlled foreign

36

corporation’s subpart F income, even if the subpart F income has not been distributed. In general, a non-U.S. insurance company is treated as a controlled foreign corporation only if such U.S. 10% s hareholders collectively own more than 25% of the total combined voting power or total value of the company’s capital stock for an uninterrupted period of 30 days or more during any year. We believe that, because of the anticipated dispersion of share owne rship among holders and because of the restrictions in our bye-laws on transfer, issuance or repurchase of our common shares, shareholders will not be subject to treatment as U.S. 10% shareholders of a controlled foreign corporation. In addition, because u nder our bye-laws no single shareholder is permitted to exercise 9.5% or more of the total combined voting power, unless such provision is waived by the unanimous consent of the Board, we believe that our shareholders should not be viewed as U.S. 10% share holders of a controlled foreign corporation for purposes of the controlled foreign corporation rules. Notwithstanding the above, it is possible that the CFC rules could be construed by the IRS in the future, or amended, in such a way as to apply to our sha reholders.

We cannot assure you that we or our non-U.S. subsidiaries will not be classified as CFCs. We believe that because of the anticipated dispersion of our common share ownership, provisions in our organizational documents that limit voting power and other factors, no United States person who (i) owns our shares directly or indirectly through one or more non-U.S. entities and (ii) has not received a waiver from our Board of provisions in our organizational documents that limit voting power, should be treated as owning (directly, indirectly through non-U.S. entities or constructively) 10% or more of the total voting power of all classes of the shares of Argo Group or any of our non-U.S. subsidiaries.

Due to the attribution provisions of the Internal Revenue Code regarding determination of beneficial ownership, there is a risk that the IRS could assert that Argo Group or one or more of our non-U.S. subsidiaries are CFCs and that U.S. holders of our shares who own 10% or more of the value of our shares should be treated as owning 10% or more of the total voting power of Argo Group and/or our non-U.S. subsidiaries notwithstanding the reduction of voting power discussed above.

If one or more of our non-U.S. subsidiaries is determined to have related person insurance income (“RPII”), you may be subject to U.S. taxation on your pro rata share of such income.

If the RPII of any of our non-U.S. insurance subsidiaries were to equal or exceed 20% of such company’s gross insurance income in any taxable year and direct or indirect insureds (and persons related to such insureds) own, directly or indirectly through entities, 20% or more of our voting power or value, then a U.S. person who owns our shares (directly or indirectly through non-U.S. entities) on the last day of the taxable year would be required to include in its income for U.S. federal income tax purposes such person’s pro rata share of such non-U.S. insurance subsidiary’s RPII for the entire taxable year, determined as if such RPII were distributed proportionately only to U.S. persons at that date regardless of whether such income is distributed. In addition, any RPII that is includible in the income of a U.S. tax-exempt organization may be treated as unrelated business taxable income. The amount of RPII earned by the non-U.S. insurance subsidiaries (generally, premium and related investment income from the direct or indirect insurance or reinsurance of any direct or indirect U.S. holder of common shares or any person related to such holder) will depend on a number of factors, including the identity of persons directly or indirectly insured or reinsured by the non-U.S. insurance subsidiaries. We believe that the gross RPII of each non-U.S. insurance subsidiary did not in prior years of operation and is not expected in the foreseeable future to equal or exceed 20% of such subsidiary’s gross insurance income. Additionally, we do not expect the direct or indirect insureds of our non-U.S. insurance subsidiaries (and persons related to such insureds) to directly or indirectly own 20% or more of either the voting power or value of our shares. No assurance can be given that this will be the case because some of the factors that determine the existence or extent of RPII may be beyond our knowledge and/or control.

The RPII rules provide that if a U.S. person disposes of shares in a non-U.S. insurance corporation in which U.S. persons own 25% or more of the shares (even if the amount of RPII is less than 20% of the corporation’s gross insurance income and the ownership of its shares by direct or indirect insureds and related persons is less than the 20% threshold), any gain from the disposition will generally be treated as ordinary income to the extent of the U.S. person’s share of the corporation’s undistributed earnings and profits that were accumulated during the period that the U.S. person owned the shares (whether or not such earnings and profits are attributable to RPII). In addition, such U.S. person will be required to comply with certain reporting requirements, regardless of the amount of shares owned by the U.S. person. These RPII rules should not apply to dispositions of our shares because we will not ourselves be directly engaged in the insurance business. The RPII provisions, however, have never been interpreted by the courts or the U.S. Treasury Department in final regulations, and regulations interpreting the RPII provisions of the Internal Revenue Code exist only in proposed form. It is not certain whether these regulations will be adopted in their proposed form or what changes or clarifications might ultimately be made thereto or whether any such changes, as well as any interpretation or application of RPII by the IRS, the courts or otherwise, might have retroactive effect. The U.S. Treasury Department has authority to impose, among other things, additional reporting requirements with respect to RPII. Accordingly, the meaning of the RPII provisions and application of those provisions to us and our non-U.S. subsidiaries are uncertain.

37

U.S. tax-exempt organiz ations that own our shares may recognize unrelated business taxable income.

A U.S. tax-exempt organization may recognize unrelated business taxable income if a portion of our insurance income is allocated to the organization. In general, insurance income will be allocated to a U.S. tax-exempt organization if either we are a CFC and the tax-exempt shareholder is a 10% U.S. Shareholder or there is RPII and certain exceptions do not apply. Although we do not believe that any U.S. persons should be allocated such insurance income, we cannot be certain that this will be the case. U.S. tax-exempt investors should consult their tax advisors as to the U.S. tax consequences of any allocation of our insurance income.