Commitments and Contingencies

The Company has clients that sell (i.e., write) listed option contracts that are cleared by various clearing houses. The clearing houses establish margin requirements on these transactions. The Company partially satisfies the margin requirements by arranging unsecured standby letter of credit agreements (LOCs), in favor of the clearing houses, which are issued by multiple banks. At June 30, 2012, the aggregate face amount of these LOCs totaled $350 million. In connection with its securities lending activities, Schwab is required to provide collateral to certain brokerage clients. Schwab satisfies the collateral requirements by arranging LOCs in favor of these brokerage clients, which are issued by multiple banks. At June 30, 2012, the aggregate face amount of these LOCs totaled $110 million. There were no funds drawn under any of these LOCs at June 30, 2012.

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. In addition, the Company is responding to certain litigation claims brought against former subsidiaries pursuant to indemnities it has provided to purchasers of those entities.

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. With respect to all other pending matters, based on current information and consultation with counsel, it does not appear that the outcome of any such matter could 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. Often, as in the case of the Auction Rate Securities Regulatory Inquiries and Total Bond Market Fund Litigation matters described below, it is not 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.

Auction Rate Securities Regulatory Inquiries: Schwab has been responding to industry wide inquiries from federal and state regulators regarding sales of auction rate securities to clients who were unable to sell their holdings when the normal auction process for those securities froze unexpectedly in February 2008. On August 17, 2009, a civil complaint was filed against Schwab in New York state court by the Attorney General of the State of New York (NYAG) alleging material misrepresentations and omissions by Schwab regarding the risks of auction rate securities, and seeking restitution, disgorgement, penalties and other relief, including repurchase of securities held in client accounts. As reflected in a statement issued August 17, 2009, Schwab has responded that the allegations are without merit, and has been contesting all charges. By order dated October 24, 2011, the court granted Schwab’s motion to dismiss the complaint. On November 30, 2011, the NYAG filed notice of its intention to appeal the ruling.

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™ (Northstar lawsuit). The lawsuit, which alleges violations of state law and federal securities law in connection with the fund’s investment policy, names Schwab Investments (registrant and issuer of the fund’s shares) and CSIM 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. Plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory and rescission damages, unspecified equitable and injunctive relief, and costs and attorneys’ fees. Plaintiffs’ federal securities law claim and certain of plaintiffs’ state law claims were dismissed in proceedings before the court and following a successful petition by defendants to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 8, 2011, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ remaining claims with prejudice. Plaintiffs have appealed to the Ninth Circuit, where the case is currently pending.

optionsXpress Regulatory Matters: optionsXpress entities and individual employees have been responding to certain pending regulatory matters which predate the Company’s acquisition of optionsXpress. On April 16, 2012, optionsXpress, Inc. was charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in an administrative proceeding alleging violations of the firm’s close-out obligations under SEC Regulation SHO (short sale delivery rules) in connection with certain customer trading activity. Separately, on April 19, 2012, the SEC instituted an administrative proceeding alleging violations of the broker-dealer registration requirements by an unregistered optionsXpress entity. The Company disputes the allegations and is contesting the charges in the two matters. The Company recorded a contingent liability associated with these matters, which was not material at June 30, 2012.