Guarantees

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2019

NOTE 15 – 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 provision of the Company’s services. The following is a discussion of the guarantees that the Company has issued at June 30, 2019. 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 16, “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; however, commercial letters of credit are considered guarantees of funding and are not subject to the disclosure requirements of guarantee obligations.

At June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the maximum potential exposure to loss related to the Company’s issued letters of credit was $2.6 billion and $2.9 billion, respectively. The Company’s outstanding letters of credit generally have a term of more than one year. 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 Company’s credit risk management for letters of credit leverages the risk rating process to focus greater visibility on higher risk and higher dollar letters of credit. The allowance 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 7, “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 both June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018.

Loan Sales and Servicing

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. The Company also originates and sells certain commercial mortgage loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, originates FHA insured loans, and issues and sells Ginnie Mae commercial MBS secured by FHA insured loans.

When 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, the Company may be obligated to repurchase the loan or to reimburse an investor for losses incurred (make whole requests), if such deficiency or defect cannot be cured by the Company within the specified period following discovery. These representations and warranties may extend through the life of the loan. 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, and (iv) loss mitigation strategies, including loan modifications and foreclosures.

The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s reserve for residential mortgage loan repurchases:



	Three Months Ended June 30						Six Months Ended June 30
(Dollars in millions)	2019			2018			2019			2018
Balance, beginning of period		$24			$39			$26			$39
Repurchase benefit	(1		)	(3		)	(3		)	(3		)
Balance, end of period		$23			$36			$23			$36

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. While the mortgage 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 liability is recorded in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, and the related repurchase (benefit)/provision is recognized in Mortgage-related income in the Consolidated Statements of Income.

The following table summarizes the carrying value of the Company’s outstanding repurchased residential mortgage loans:



(Dollars in millions)	June 30, 2019		December 31, 2018
Outstanding repurchased residential mortgage loans:
Performing LHFI		$140		$183
Nonperforming LHFI	8		16
Total carrying value of outstanding repurchased residential mortgages		$148		$199

Residential mortgage 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 may also indemnify the FHA and VA for losses related to loans not originated in accordance with their guidelines.

Commercial Mortgage Loan Loss Share Guarantee

In connection with the acquisition of Pillar, the Company assumed a loss share obligation associated with the terms of a master loss sharing agreement with Fannie Mae for multi-family commercial mortgage loans that were sold by Pillar to Fannie Mae under Fannie Mae’s delegated underwriting and servicing program. Upon the acquisition of Pillar, the Company entered into a lender contract amendment with Fannie Mae for multi-family commercial mortgage loans that Pillar sold to Fannie Mae prior to acquisition and that the Company sold to Fannie Mae subsequent to acquisition, whereby the Company bears a risk of loss of up to one-third of the incurred losses resulting from borrower defaults. The breach of any representation or warranty related to a loan sold to Fannie Mae could increase the Company’s level of risk-sharing associated with the loan. The outstanding UPB of loans sold subject to the loss share guarantee was $3.7 billion and $3.5 billion at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. The maximum potential exposure to loss was $1.1 billion and $1.0 billion at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. Using probability of default and severity of loss estimates, the Company’s loss share liability was $7 million and $5 million at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, and is recorded in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

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 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. While the district court approved a class action settlement of the Litigation in 2012 that settled the claims of both a damages class and an injunctive relief class, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district court’s approval of the settlement on June 30, 2016. The U.S. Supreme Court denied plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari on March 27, 2017, and the case returned to the district court for further action. Since being remanded to the district court, plaintiffs have pursued two separate class actions—one class action seeking damages that names, among others, the Company as a defendant, and one class action seeking injunctive relief that does not name the Company as a defendant, but for which the Company could bear some responsibility under the judgment and loss sharing agreement described above. An agreement to resolve the claims was reached and the settlement was preliminarily approved by the district court on January 24, 2019.

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. Additionally, the Company will make periodic payments based on the notional of the derivative and a fixed rate until the date on which the Litigation is settled. The fair value of the derivative is estimated based on unobservable inputs consisting of management’s estimate of the probability of certain litigation scenarios and the timing of the resolution of the Litigation. The fair value of the derivative liability was $6 million and $7 million at June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. The fair value of the derivative is estimated based on the Company’s expectations regarding the resolution of the Litigation. The ultimate impact to the Company could be significantly different based on the Litigation outcome.