XML 34 R21.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.4.0.3
Guarantees
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Guarantees [Abstract]  
Guarantees
NOTE 12 – GUARANTEES
The Company has undertaken certain guarantee obligations in the ordinary course of business. The issuance of a guarantee imposes an obligation for the Company to stand ready to perform and make future payments should certain triggering events occur. Payments may be in the form of cash, financial instruments, other assets, shares of stock, or through a provision of the Company’s services. The following is a discussion of the guarantees that the Company has issued at March 31, 2016. The Company has also entered into certain contracts that are similar to guarantees, but that are accounted for as derivative instruments as discussed in Note 13, “Derivative Financial Instruments.”

Letters of Credit
Letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Company, generally to guarantee the performance of a client to a third party in borrowing arrangements, such as CP, bond financing, or similar transactions. The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loan facilities to clients but may be reduced by selling participations to third parties. The Company issues letters of credit that are classified as financial standby, performance standby, or commercial letters of credit.
At March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the maximum potential amount of the Company’s obligation for issued financial and performance standby letters of credit was $3.0 billion and $2.9 billion, respectively. The Company’s outstanding letters of credit generally have a term of less than one year but may extend longer. Some standby letters of credit are designed to be drawn upon in the normal course of business and others are drawn upon only in circumstances of dispute or default in the underlying transaction to which the Company is not a party. In all cases, the Company is entitled to reimbursement from the client. If a letter of credit is drawn upon and reimbursement is not provided by the client, the Company may take possession of the collateral securing the letter of credit, where applicable.
The Company monitors its credit exposure under standby letters of credit in the same manner as it monitors other extensions of credit in accordance with its credit policies. Consistent with the methodologies used for all commercial borrowers, an internal assessment of the PD and loss severity in the event of default is performed. The management of credit risk for letters of credit leverages the risk rating process to focus greater visibility on higher risk and/or higher dollar letters of credit. The allowance for credit losses associated with letters of credit is a component of the unfunded commitments reserve recorded in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and is included in the allowance for credit losses as disclosed in Note 6, “Allowance for Credit Losses.” Additionally, unearned fees relating to letters of credit are recorded in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The net carrying amount of unearned fees was immaterial at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

Loan Sales and Servicing
STM, a consolidated subsidiary of the Company, originates and purchases residential mortgage loans, a portion of which are sold to outside investors in the normal course of business, through a combination of whole loan sales to GSEs, Ginnie Mae, and non-agency investors. Prior to 2008, the Company also sold mortgage loans through a limited number of Company-sponsored securitizations. When mortgage loans are sold, representations and warranties regarding certain attributes of the loans are made to third party purchasers. Subsequent to the sale, if a material underwriting deficiency or documentation defect is discovered, STM may be obligated to repurchase the mortgage loan or to reimburse an investor for losses incurred (make whole requests), if such deficiency or defect cannot be cured by STM within the specified period following discovery. Additionally, breaches of underwriting and servicing representations and warranties can result in loan repurchases, as well as adversely affect the valuation of MSRs, servicing advances, or other mortgage loan-related exposures, such as OREO. These representations and warranties may extend through the life of the mortgage loan. STM’s risk of loss under its representations and warranties is partially driven by borrower payment performance since investors will perform extensive reviews of delinquent loans as a means of mitigating losses.
Non-agency loan sales include whole loan sales and loans sold in private securitization transactions. While representations and warranties have been made related to these sales, they differ from those made in connection with loans sold to the GSEs in that non-agency loans may not be required to meet the same underwriting standards and non-agency investors may be required to demonstrate that an alleged breach is material and caused the investors' loss.
Loans sold to Ginnie Mae are insured by the FHA or are guaranteed by the VA. As servicer, the Company may elect to repurchase delinquent loans in accordance with Ginnie Mae guidelines, however, the loans continue to be insured. The Company indemnifies the FHA and VA for losses related to loans not originated in accordance with their guidelines.
The Company previously reached agreements in principle with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae that relieve the Company of certain existing and future repurchase obligations related to loans sold from 2000-2008 to Freddie Mac and loans sold from 2000-2012 to Fannie Mae. Such requests from GSEs, Ginnie Mae, and non-agency investors, for all vintages, are illustrated in the following table that summarizes demand activity.
 
Three Months Ended March 31
(Dollars in millions)
2016
 
2015
Pending repurchase requests, beginning of period

$17

 

$47

Repurchase requests received
11

 
20

Repurchase requests resolved:
 
 
 
Repurchased
(5
)
 
(5
)
Cured
(9
)
 
(14
)
Total resolved
(14
)
 
(19
)
Pending repurchase requests, end of period 1

$14

 

$48

 
 
 
 
Percent from non-agency investors:
 
 
 
Ending pending repurchase requests
32.6
%
 
5.2
%
Repurchase requests received
%
 
%
1 Comprised of $9 million and $45 million from the GSEs, and $5 million and $3 million from non-agency investors at March 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The repurchase and make whole requests received have been primarily due to alleged material breaches of representations related to compliance with the applicable underwriting standards, including borrower misrepresentation and appraisal issues. STM performs a loan-by-loan review of all requests and contests demands to the extent they are not considered valid. The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s reserve for mortgage loan repurchases:
 
Three Months Ended March 31
(Dollars in millions)
2016
 
2015
Balance, beginning of period

$57

 

$85

Repurchase benefit
(2
)
 
(2
)
Charge-offs, net of recoveries

 
(1
)
Balance, end of period

$55

 

$82



A significant degree of judgment is used to estimate the mortgage repurchase liability as the estimation process is inherently uncertain and subject to imprecision. The Company believes that its reserve appropriately estimates incurred losses based on its current analysis and assumptions, inclusive of the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae settlement agreements, GSE owned loans serviced by third party servicers, loans sold to private investors, and other indemnifications.
Notwithstanding the aforementioned agreements with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae settling certain aspects of the Company's repurchase obligations, those institutions preserve their right to require repurchases arising from certain types of events, and that preservation of rights can impact future losses of the Company. While the repurchase reserve includes the estimated cost of settling claims related to required repurchases, the Company's estimate of losses depends on its assumptions regarding GSE and other counterparty behavior, loan performance, home prices, and other factors. The related liability is recorded in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, and the related repurchase benefit is recognized in mortgage production related income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. See Note 15, "Contingencies," for additional information on current legal matters related to loan sales.
The following table summarizes the carrying value of the Company's outstanding repurchased mortgage loans at:
(Dollars in millions)
March 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
Outstanding repurchased mortgage loans:
 
 
 
Performing LHFI

$253

 

$255

Nonperforming LHFI
17

 
17

Total carrying value of outstanding repurchased mortgage loans

$270

 

$272



In addition to representations and warranties related to loan sales, the Company makes representations and warranties that it will service the loans in accordance with investor servicing guidelines and standards, which may include (i) collection and remittance of principal and interest, (ii) administration of escrow for taxes and insurance, (iii) advancing principal, interest, taxes, insurance, and collection expenses on delinquent accounts, (iv) loss mitigation strategies including loan modifications, and (v) foreclosures.
The Company normally retains servicing rights when loans are transferred, however, servicing rights are occasionally sold to third parties. When MSRs are sold, the Company makes representations and warranties related to servicing standards and obligations, and recognizes a liability for contingent losses recorded in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. This liability, which is separate from the reserve for mortgage loan repurchases, totaled $12 million and $14 million at March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively.

Contingent Consideration
At December 31, 2015, the Company had a contingent consideration obligation of $23 million related to a prior business combination recorded in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Payments were calculated using certain post-acquisition performance criteria and the obligation was measured at the fair value of contingent payments. During the three months ended March 31, 2016, the Company's contingent obligation under the liability was settled and paid in full. See Note 14, "Fair Value Election and Measurement," for additional information.

Visa
The Company executes credit and debit transactions through Visa and MasterCard. The Company is a defendant, along with Visa and MasterCard (the “Card Associations”), as well as several other banks, in one of several antitrust lawsuits challenging the practices of the Card Associations (the “Litigation”). The Company entered into judgment and loss sharing agreements with Visa and certain other banks in order to apportion financial responsibilities arising from any potential adverse judgment or negotiated settlements related to the Litigation. Additionally, in connection with Visa's restructuring in 2007, shares of Visa common stock were issued to its financial institution members and the Company received its proportionate number of shares of Visa Inc. common stock, which were subsequently converted to Class B shares of Visa Inc. upon completion of Visa’s IPO in 2008. A provision of the original Visa By-Laws, which was restated in Visa's certificate of incorporation, contains a general indemnification provision between a Visa member and Visa that explicitly provides that each member's indemnification obligation is limited to losses arising from its own conduct and the specifically defined Litigation.
Agreements associated with Visa's IPO have provisions that Visa will fund a litigation escrow account, established for the purpose of funding judgments in, or settlements of, the Litigation. If the escrow account is insufficient to cover the Litigation losses, then Visa will issue additional Class A shares (“loss shares”). The proceeds from the sale of the loss shares would then be deposited in the escrow account. The issuance of the loss shares will cause a dilution of Visa's Class B shares as a result of an adjustment to lower the conversion factor of the Class B shares to Class A shares. Visa U.S.A.'s members are responsible for any portion of the settlement or loss on the Litigation after the escrow account is depleted and the value of the Class B shares is fully diluted.
In May 2009, the Company sold its 3.2 million Class B shares to the Visa Counterparty and entered into a derivative with the Visa Counterparty. Under the derivative, the Visa Counterparty is compensated by the Company for any decline in the conversion factor as a result of the outcome of the Litigation. Conversely, the Company is compensated by the Visa Counterparty for any increase in the conversion factor. The amount of payments made or received under the derivative is a function of the 3.2 million shares sold to the Visa Counterparty, the change in conversion rate, and Visa’s share price. The Visa Counterparty, as a result of its ownership of the Class B shares, is impacted by dilutive adjustments to the conversion factor of the Class B shares caused by the Litigation losses. The fair value of the derivative liability was immaterial at both March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015; however, the ultimate impact to the Company could be significantly different based on the outcome of the Litigation.