Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Legal And Regulatory Proceedings
Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	18. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS During April 2006, the Bancorp was added as a defendant in a consolidated antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa®, MasterCard® and several other major financial institutions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs, merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations, claimed that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks were unreasonable and sought injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In addition to being a named defendant, the Bancorp is also subject to a possible indemnification obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 17 and has also entered into judgment and loss sharing agreements with Visa, MasterCard and certain other named defendants. In October 2012, the parties to the litigation entered into a settlement agreement. The court entered a Class Settlement Preliminary Approval Order in November 2012. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, the Bancorp paid $46 million into a class settlement escrow account. Previously, the Bancorp paid an additional $4 million in another settlement escrow in connection with the settlement of claims from plaintiffs not included in the class action. More than 7,900 merchants have requested exclusion from the class settlement. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, 25% of the funds paid into the class settlement escrow account have been returned to the control of the defendants through Class Exclusion Takedown Payments. Approximately 460 of the merchants who requested exclusion from the class have filed separate federal lawsuits against Visa, MasterCard and certain other defendants alleging similar antitrust violations. These “opt-out” federal lawsuits have been transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Bancorp was not named as a defendant in any of the opt-out federal lawsuits, but may have obligations pursuant to indemnification arrangements and/or the judgment or loss sharing agreements noted above. In addition, one merchant filed a separate state court lawsuit against Visa, MasterCard and certain other defendants, including the Bancorp, alleging similar antitrust violations. On January 14, 2014, the court entered a final order approving the class settlement. A number of merchants have filed appeals from that approval. On July 18, 2014, the court in which all but one of the opt-out federal lawsuits has been consolidated denied defendants' motion to dismiss the complaints. Several of the opt-out federal lawsuits have been resolved. Refer to Note 17 for further information. In 2008, two cases were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and certain officers styled Dudenhoeffer v Fifth Third Bancorp et al. Case No. 1:08-cv-538. The complaints alleged violations of ERISA based on allegations similar to those set forth in the previously reported securities class action cases. The ERISA actions were dismissed by the trial court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court decision. The Bancorp petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review and reverse the Sixth Circuit decision and sought a stay of proceedings in the trial court pending appeal. On December 13, 2013, the Supreme Court granted certiorari and agreed to hear the appeal. Oral arguments were held on April 2, 2014 and on June 25, 2014 the Supreme Court unanimously vacated the Sixth Circuit decision and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the standards articulated in its decision. The Supreme Court issued its mandate remanding the case back to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals but no further proceedings have occurred. In November 2014, a shareholder of the Bancorp filed a shareholder derivative suit in the Court of Common Pleas for Hamilton County, Ohio, against current and former members of the Bancorp's Board of Directors, the Bancorp's former Chief Financial Officer and current Executive Vice President, Daniel T. Poston, the Bancorp's Chief Executive Officer, Kevin T. Kabat, and, nominally, the Bancorp. The suit alleges breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment in connection with the Bancorp's alleged violations of federal and state securities laws, among other charges, in relation to its administrative settlement with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission announced on December 4, 2013 to resolve the previously reported investigation of the Bancorp's historical accounting and reporting with respect to certain commercial loans that were sold or reclassified as held for sale by the Bancorp in the fourth quarter of 2008. The suit seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, disgorgement of profits, certain corporate governance and personnel actions and compliance and disclosure changes. On January 16, 2015 a motion to dismiss the complaint was filed on behalf of all defendants. The impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time. The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal course of business. While it is impossible to ascertain the ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other actions would not have a material effect upon the Bancorp's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Bancorp and/or its affiliates are involved in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by various governmental regulatory agencies and law enforcement authorities, as well as self-regulatory bodies regarding their respective businesses. Additional matters will likely arise from time to time. Any of these matters may result in material adverse consequences to the Bancorp, its affiliates and/or their respective directors, officers and other personnel, including adverse judgments, findings, settlements, fines, penalties, orders, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of the Bancorp's SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures. Investigations by regulatory authorities may from time to time result in civil or criminal referrals to law enforcement authorities such as the Department of Justice or a United States Attorney. Among other matters, the Bancorp has been cooperating with the Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Housing Finance Authority in civil investigations regarding compliance with requirements relating to certain Federal Housing Agency-insured loans and certain loans sold to government sponsored entities originated by affiliates of the Bancorp. The investigations could lead to liability under the Federal False Claims Act and/or the Federal Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, which allow up to treble and other special damages substantially in excess of actual losses. Additionally, the Bancorp is also cooperating with an investigation by the Department of Justice to determine whether the Bank engaged in any discriminatory practices in connection with the Bank's indirect automobile loan portfolio. Any claim resulting from this investigation could include direct and indirect damages and civil money penalties. The Bancorp is party to numerous claims and lawsuits as well as threatened or potential actions or claims concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of claims or litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict. The following factors, among others, contribute to this lack of predictability: plaintiff claims often include significant legal uncertainties, damages alleged by plaintiffs are often unspecified or overstated, discovery may not have started or may not be complete and material facts may be disputed or unsubstantiated. As a result of these factors, the Bancorp is not always able to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes for each claim. A reserve for a potential litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such reserve is adjusted from time to time thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Bancorp also determines, when possible (due to the uncertainties described above), estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses, in excess of amounts reserved. Under U.S. GAAP, an event is “reasonably possible” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely” and an event is “remote” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.” Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the Bancorp is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which the Bancorp believes the risk of loss is more than slight. For matters where the Bancorp is able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, the Bancorp currently estimates that it is reasonably possible that it could incur losses related to legal and regulatory proceedings including the matters discussed above in an aggregate amount up to approximately $105 million in excess of amounts reserved, with it also being reasonably possible that no losses will be incurred in these matters. The estimates included in this amount are based on the Bancorp's analysis of currently available information, and as new information is obtained the Bancorp may change its estimates. For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established reserve that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Bancorp believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against the Bancorp and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Bancorp's consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to the Bancorp's results of operations for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the size of the loss or liability imposed and the operating results for the applicable period.

Legal and Regulatory Proceedings

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2014

18. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS

During April 2006, the Bancorp was added as a defendant in a consolidated antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa®, MasterCard® and several other major financial institutions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The plaintiffs, merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations, claimed that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks were unreasonable and sought injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In addition to being a named defendant, the Bancorp is also subject to a possible indemnification obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 17 and has also entered into judgment and loss sharing agreements with Visa, MasterCard and certain other named defendants. In October 2012, the parties to the litigation entered into a settlement agreement. The court entered a Class Settlement Preliminary Approval Order in November 2012. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, the Bancorp paid $46 million into a class settlement escrow account. Previously, the Bancorp paid an additional $4 million in another settlement escrow in connection with the settlement of claims from plaintiffs not included in the class action. More than 7,900 merchants have requested exclusion from the class settlement. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement, 25% of the funds paid into the class settlement escrow account have been returned to the control of the defendants through Class Exclusion Takedown Payments. Approximately 460 of the merchants who requested exclusion from the class have filed separate federal lawsuits against Visa, MasterCard and certain other defendants alleging similar antitrust violations. These “opt-out” federal lawsuits have been transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Bancorp was not named as a defendant in any of the opt-out federal lawsuits, but may have obligations pursuant to indemnification arrangements and/or the judgment or loss sharing agreements noted above. In addition, one merchant filed a separate state court lawsuit against Visa, MasterCard and certain other defendants, including the Bancorp, alleging similar antitrust violations. On January 14, 2014, the court entered a final order approving the class settlement. A number of merchants have filed appeals from that approval. On July 18, 2014, the court in which all but one of the opt-out federal lawsuits has been consolidated denied defendants' motion to dismiss the complaints. Several of the opt-out federal lawsuits have been resolved. Refer to Note 17 for further information.

In 2008, two cases were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and certain officers styled Dudenhoeffer v Fifth Third Bancorp et al. Case No. 1:08-cv-538. The complaints alleged violations of ERISA based on allegations similar to those set forth in the previously reported securities class action cases. The ERISA actions were dismissed by the trial court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court decision. The Bancorp petitioned the United States Supreme Court to review and reverse the Sixth Circuit decision and sought a stay of proceedings in the trial court pending appeal. On December 13, 2013, the Supreme Court granted certiorari and agreed to hear the appeal. Oral arguments were held on April 2, 2014 and on June 25, 2014 the Supreme Court unanimously vacated the Sixth Circuit decision and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the standards articulated in its decision. The Supreme Court issued its mandate remanding the case back to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals but no further proceedings have occurred.

In November 2014, a shareholder of the Bancorp filed a shareholder derivative suit in the Court of Common Pleas for Hamilton County, Ohio, against current and former members of the Bancorp's Board of Directors, the Bancorp's former Chief Financial Officer and current Executive Vice President, Daniel T. Poston, the Bancorp's Chief Executive Officer, Kevin T. Kabat, and, nominally, the Bancorp. The suit alleges breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment in connection with the Bancorp's alleged violations of federal and state securities laws, among other charges, in relation to its administrative settlement with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission announced on December 4, 2013 to resolve the previously reported investigation of the Bancorp's historical accounting and reporting with respect to certain commercial loans that were sold or reclassified as held for sale by the Bancorp in the fourth quarter of 2008. The suit seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, disgorgement of profits, certain corporate governance and personnel actions and compliance and disclosure changes. On January 16, 2015 a motion to dismiss the complaint was filed on behalf of all defendants. The impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time.

The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal course of business. While it is impossible to ascertain the ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other actions would not have a material effect upon the Bancorp's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The Bancorp and/or its affiliates are involved in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by various governmental regulatory agencies and law enforcement authorities, as well as self-regulatory bodies regarding their respective businesses. Additional matters will likely arise from time to time. Any of these matters may result in material adverse consequences to the Bancorp, its affiliates and/or their respective directors, officers and other personnel, including adverse judgments, findings, settlements, fines, penalties, orders, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of the Bancorp's SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures. Investigations by regulatory authorities may from time to time result in civil or criminal referrals to law enforcement authorities such as the Department of Justice or a United States Attorney. Among other matters, the Bancorp has been cooperating with the Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Housing Finance Authority in civil investigations regarding compliance with requirements relating to certain Federal Housing Agency-insured loans and certain loans sold to government sponsored entities originated by affiliates of the Bancorp. The investigations could lead to liability under the Federal False Claims Act and/or the Federal Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989, which allow up to treble and other special damages substantially in excess of actual losses. Additionally, the Bancorp is also cooperating with an investigation by the Department of Justice to determine whether the Bank engaged in any discriminatory practices in connection with the Bank's indirect automobile loan portfolio. Any claim resulting from this investigation could include direct and indirect damages and civil money penalties.

The Bancorp is party to numerous claims and lawsuits as well as threatened or potential actions or claims concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of claims or litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict. The following factors, among others, contribute to this lack of predictability: plaintiff claims often include significant legal uncertainties, damages alleged by plaintiffs are often unspecified or overstated, discovery may not have started or may not be complete and material facts may be disputed or unsubstantiated. As a result of these factors, the Bancorp is not always able to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes for each claim. A reserve for a potential litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such reserve is adjusted from time to time thereafter as appropriate to reflect changes in circumstances. The Bancorp also determines, when possible (due to the uncertainties described above), estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses, in excess of amounts reserved. Under U.S. GAAP, an event is “reasonably possible” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely” and an event is “remote” if “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight.” Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the Bancorp is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which the Bancorp believes the risk of loss is more than slight. For matters where the Bancorp is able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, the Bancorp currently estimates that it is reasonably possible that it could incur losses related to legal and regulatory proceedings including the matters discussed above in an aggregate amount up to approximately $105 million in excess of amounts reserved, with it also being reasonably possible that no losses will be incurred in these matters. The estimates included in this amount are based on the Bancorp's analysis of currently available information, and as new information is obtained the Bancorp may change its estimates.

For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established reserve that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Bancorp believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against the Bancorp and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Bancorp's consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to the Bancorp's results of operations for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the size of the loss or liability imposed and the operating results for the applicable period.