Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Contingencies
Contingencies	12.Contingencies The Company is involved from time to time in various legal proceedings, regulatory investigations and claims incident to the normal conduct of business, which may include proceedings that are specific to us and others generally applicable to business practices within the industries in which we operate. A substantial legal liability or a significant regulatory action against us could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and on the results of operations in a particular quarter or year. The Company establishes reserves for litigation and similar matters when those matters present material loss contingencies that management determines to be both probable and reasonably estimable in accordance with ASC 450, "Contingencies." These amounts are not reduced by amounts that may be recovered under insurance or claims against third parties, but undiscounted receivables from insurers or other third parties may be accrued separately. The Company regularly revises such accruals in light of new information. The Company discloses the nature of the contingency when management believes it is reasonably possible the outcome may be significant to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and, where feasible, an estimate of the possible loss. For purposes of our litigation contingency disclosures, “significant” includes material matters as well as other items that management believes should be disclosed. Management’s judgment is required related to contingent liabilities because the outcomes are difficult to predict. In an action filed on February 18, 2016 in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, Saket Kapor [sic], Peter Brockett and Hieu Phan v. Ivy Investment Management Company, et. al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-02106-JWL-TJJ), the Company's registered investment advisor subsidiaries, the trustees of two of the Company’s affiliated mutual funds, and an officer of a Company subsidiary were sued in a putative derivative action by three mutual fund shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract claims relating to investments held in the affiliated mutual funds. On behalf of the mutual funds, the plaintiffs seek monetary damages and demand a jury trial. On April 18, 2016, the plaintiffs dismissed the complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas and filed a similar complaint against the same defendants, regarding the same substantive allegations and causes of action, in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas (Case No. I6CV02338 Div.4). On April 25, 2016, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the officer of a Company subsidiary as a defendant. On June 30, 2016, all remaining defendants filed separate motions to dismiss the complaint. On August 22, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that removed Saket Kapor [sic] and Peter Brockett as plaintiffs and in their stead added Audrey Ohman as a named plaintiff, but otherwise did not change the substantive allegations raised in the initial complaint. On September 14, 2016, all remaining defendants filed separate motions to dismiss the amended complaint. Oral arguments in the matter are scheduled for November 10, 2016. To date, no discovery has taken place. In the opinion of management, the ultimate resolution and outcome of this matter is uncertain. Given the preliminary nature of the proceedings and the Company's dispute over the merits of the claims, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss, if any, that such matter may represent. While the ultimate resolution of this matter is uncertain, an adverse determination against the Company could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The Company has reviewed all other legal and regulatory matters and as a result of such process provided an aggregate accrual for such matters in the amount of $3.0 million at September 30, 2016.

12.Contingencies

The Company is involved from time to time in various legal proceedings, regulatory investigations and claims incident to the normal conduct of business, which may include proceedings that are specific to us and others generally applicable to business practices within the industries in which we operate. A substantial legal liability or a significant regulatory action against us could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and on the results of operations in a particular quarter or year.

The Company establishes reserves for litigation and similar matters when those matters present material loss contingencies that management determines to be both probable and reasonably estimable in accordance with ASC 450, "Contingencies." These amounts are not reduced by amounts that may be recovered under insurance or claims against third parties, but undiscounted receivables from insurers or other third parties may be accrued separately. The Company regularly revises such accruals in light of new information. The Company discloses the nature of the contingency when management believes it is reasonably possible the outcome may be significant to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and, where feasible, an estimate of the possible loss. For purposes of our litigation contingency disclosures, “significant” includes material matters as well as other items that management believes should be disclosed. Management’s judgment is required related to contingent liabilities because the outcomes are difficult to predict.

In an action filed on February 18, 2016 in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, Saket Kapor [sic], Peter Brockett and Hieu Phan v. Ivy Investment Management Company, et. al. (Case No. 2:16-cv-02106-JWL-TJJ), the Company's registered investment advisor subsidiaries, the trustees of two of the Company’s affiliated mutual funds, and an officer of a Company subsidiary were sued in a putative derivative action by three mutual fund shareholders alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract claims relating to investments held in the affiliated mutual funds. On behalf of the mutual funds, the plaintiffs seek monetary damages and demand a jury trial. On April 18, 2016, the plaintiffs dismissed the complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas and filed a similar complaint against the same defendants, regarding the same substantive allegations and causes of action, in the District Court of Johnson County, Kansas (Case No. I6CV02338 Div.4). On April 25, 2016, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the officer of a Company subsidiary as a defendant. On June 30, 2016, all remaining defendants filed separate motions to dismiss the complaint. On August 22, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that removed Saket Kapor [sic] and Peter Brockett as plaintiffs and in their stead added Audrey Ohman as a named plaintiff, but otherwise did not change the substantive allegations raised in the initial complaint. On September 14, 2016, all remaining defendants filed separate motions to dismiss the amended complaint. Oral arguments in the matter are scheduled for November 10, 2016. To date, no discovery has taken place.

In the opinion of management, the ultimate resolution and outcome of this matter is uncertain. Given the preliminary nature of the proceedings and the Company's dispute over the merits of the claims, the Company is unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss, if any, that such matter may represent. While the ultimate resolution of this matter is uncertain, an adverse determination against the Company could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company has reviewed all other legal and regulatory matters and as a result of such process provided an aggregate accrual for such matters in the amount of $3.0 million at September 30, 2016.