15.Commitments and Contingencies

Operating leases: The Company has non-cancelable operating leases for office space and equipment. Future annual minimum rental commitments under these leases, net of contractual subleases are as follows:


	Operating
December 31, 2015	Leases		Subleases		Net
2016	$	135	$	34	$	101
2017		122		28		94
2018		82		6		76
2019		53		2		51
2020		43		2		41
Thereafter		139		4		135
Total	$	574	$	76	$	498

Certain leases contain provisions for renewal options, purchase options, and rent escalations based on increases in certain costs incurred by the lessor. Rent expense relating to operating leases was $116 million, $114 million, and $116 million in 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively.

Purchase obligations: The Company has purchase obligations for services such as advertising and marketing, telecommunications, professional services, and hardware- and software-related agreements. The Company has purchase obligations as follows:


December 31, 2015
2016	$	230
2017		114
2018		38
2019		19
2020		17
Thereafter		213
Total	$	631

Guarantees and indemnifications: The Company has clients that sell (i.e., write) listed option contracts that are cleared by the Options Clearing Corporation – a clearing house that establishes margin requirements on these transactions. The Company partially satisfies the margin requirements by arranging unsecured standby LOCs, in favor of the Options Clearing Corporation and others, which are issued by multiple banks. At December 31, 2015, the aggregate face amount of these LOCs totaled $304 million. There were no funds drawn under any of these LOCs at December 31, 2015. In connection with its securities lending activities, the Company is required to provide collateral to certain brokerage clients. The Company satisfies the collateral requirements by providing cash as collateral.

The Company also provides guarantees to securities clearing houses and exchanges under standard membership agreements, which require members to guarantee the performance of other members. Under the agreements, if another member becomes unable to satisfy its obligations to the clearing houses and exchanges, other members would be required to meet shortfalls. The Company’s liability under these arrangements is not quantifiable and may exceed the cash and securities it has posted as collateral. However, the potential requirement for the Company to make payments under these arrangements is remote. Accordingly, no liability has been recognized for these guarantees.

Legal contingencies: The Company is subject to claims and lawsuits in the ordinary course of business, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation, some of which include claims for substantial or unspecified damages. The Company is also the subject of inquiries, investigations, and proceedings by regulatory and other governmental agencies.

The Company believes it has strong defenses in all significant matters currently pending and is contesting liability and any damages claimed. Nevertheless, some of these matters may result in adverse judgments or awards, including penalties, injunctions or other relief, and the Company may also determine to settle a matter because of the uncertainty and risks of litigation. Described below are certain matters in which there is a reasonable possibility that a material loss could be incurred or where the matter may otherwise be of significant interest to stockholders. Unless otherwise noted, the Company is unable to provide a reasonable estimate of any potential liability given the stage of proceedings in the matter.

With respect to all other pending matters, based on current information and consultation with counsel, it does not appear reasonably possible that the outcome of any such matter would be material to the financial condition, operating results or cash flows of the Company. However, predicting the outcome of a litigation or regulatory matter is inherently difficult, requiring significant judgment and evaluation of various factors, including the procedural status of the matter and any recent developments; prior experience and the experience of others in similar cases; available defenses, including potential opportunities to dispose of a case on the merits or procedural grounds before trial (e.g., motions to dismiss or for summary judgment); the progress of fact discovery; the opinions of counsel and experts regarding potential damages; potential opportunities for settlement and the status of any settlement discussions; and potential insurance coverage and indemnification. It may not be possible to reasonably estimate potential liability, if any, or a range of potential liability until the matter is closer to resolution – pending, for example, further proceedings, the outcome of key motions or appeals, or discussions among the parties. Numerous issues may have to be developed, such as discovery of important factual matters and determination of threshold legal issues, which may include novel or unsettled questions of law. Reserves are established or adjusted or further disclosure and estimates of potential loss are provided as the matter progresses and more information becomes available.

Total Bond Market Fund Litigation: On August 28, 2008, a class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of investors in the Schwab Total Bond Market Fund™. The lawsuit, which alleges violations of state law and federal securities law in connection with the fund’s investment policy, named CSIM, Schwab Investments (registrant and issuer of the fund’s shares) and certain current and former fund trustees as defendants. Allegations include that the fund improperly deviated from its stated investment objectives by investing in collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) and investing more than 25% of fund assets in CMOs and mortgage-backed securities without obtaining a shareholder vote. Plaintiff seeks unspecified compensatory and rescission damages, unspecified equitable and injunctive relief, costs and attorneys’ fees. Plaintiff’s federal securities law claim and certain of plaintiff’s state law claims were dismissed. On August 8, 2011, the court dismissed plaintiff’s remaining claims with prejudice. Plaintiff appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which issued a ruling on March 9, 2015 reversing the district court’s dismissal of the case and remanding the case for further proceedings. A petition by defendants for U.S. Supreme Court review was denied on October 6, 2015. In the interim, defendants filed a fourth amended complaint on June 25, 2015. Defendants moved to dismiss and on October 6, 2015, the court dismissed with prejudice plaintiff’s contractual claims, but declined to dismiss certain of the claims for fiduciary breach. On February 23, 2016, the court dismissed plaintiff’s remaining claims with prejudice. Plaintiff has 30 days in which to appeal.

Other Regulatory Matters: On April 16, 2012, optionsXpress, Inc. was charged by the SEC in an administrative proceeding alleging violations of the firm’s close-out obligations under Regulation SHO (short sale delivery rules) in connection with certain client trading activity. Following trial, in a decision issued June 7, 2013, the judge held that the firm had violated Regulation SHO and aided and abetted fraudulent trading activity by its client, and ordered the firm and the client to pay disgorgement and penalties in an amount which would not be material. The Company continues to dispute the allegations and is appealing the decision.