Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Text Block [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 20: Commitments and Contingencies MBIA has received subpoenas or informal inquiries from a variety of regulators, regarding a variety of subjects. MBIA has cooperated fully with each of these regulators and has or is in the process of satisfying all such requests. MBIA may receive additional inquiries from these or other regulators and expects to provide additional information to such regulators regarding their inquiries in the future. Litigation MBIA Insurance Corp. v. Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, et al.; Index No. 603751/2009 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. County) On December 14, 2009, MBIA Corp. commenced an action in New York State Supreme Court, New York County, against Credit Suisse. The complaint seeks damages for claims in connection with the procurement of financial guarantee insurance on the Home Equity Mortgage Trust Series 2007-2 securitization. On January 30, 2013, MBIA Corp. filed an amended complaint. MBIA’s claims currently include that Credit Suisse falsely represented: (i) the attributes of the securitized loans; (ii) that the loans complied with the governing underwriting guidelines; and (iii) that Credit Suisse had conducted extensive due diligence on and quality control reviews of the securitized loans to ensure compliance with the underwriting guidelines and breached its contractual obligations to cure or repurchase loans found to be in breach of the representations and warranties applicable thereto. In May of 2018, Justice Kornreich, who had presided over the above-captioned case since its inception, retired from the bench. On May 25, 2018, Justice Schecter was assigned to be the new presiding justice. At a pretrial conference on February 7, 2019, the Court scheduled a two-week trial to begin on July 22, 2019. Lynn Tilton and Patriarch Partners XV, LLC v. MBIA Inc. and MBIA Insurance Corp. v.; Index No.68880/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., County of Westchester) On November 2, 2015, Lynn Tilton and Patriarch Partners XV, LLC filed a complaint in New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County, against MBIA Inc. and MBIA Corp., alleging fraudulent inducement and related claims arising from purported promises made in connection with insurance policies issued by MBIA Corp. on certain collateralized loan obligations managed by Ms. Tilton and affiliated Patriarch entities, and seeking damages. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on January 15, 2016. On March 11, 2018, Ms. Tilton commenced the Zohar Funds Bankruptcy Cases. On May 21, 2018, the court approved the Zohar Bankruptcy Settlement. Subsequently, the parties to the above-captioned litigation jointly filed a request to stay the case for, at minimum, fifteen months, which was granted by Justice Walsh on June 11, 2018. Assured Guaranty Corp. et al. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico et al., Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS (D.P.R. June 3, 2017) (Swain, J.) On May 21, 2017, the Oversight Board filed a petition under Title III of PROMESA to adjust the debts for the Puerto Rico Highways & Transportation Authority (“PRHTA”). On June 3, 2017, National, together with Assured Guaranty Corp. and Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. and Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, filed an adversary complaint PRHTA Title III case, alleging that the Commonwealth and PRHTA are unlawfully diverting pledged special revenues from the payment of certain PRHTA bonds to the Commonwealth’s General Fund. Motions to dismiss were filed on June 28, 2017, and oral arguments were heard on November 21, 2017. On January 30, 2018, the court granted the Commonwealth defendants’ motion to dismiss the PRHTA-related adversary complaint. On February 9, 2018, National, together with Assured, Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. and Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, filed their notice of appeal of the motions to dismiss to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Appellants filed their opening brief on May 9, 2018, and Appellees filed their opposition brief on July 9, 2018. Appellants’ reply brief was filed on August 8, 2018. Oral argument was held on November 5, 2018. The Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, as representative of The Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, et al., Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS (D.P.R. July 19, 2017) (Swain, J.) On July 18, 2017, National, together with other PREPA bondholders, asked the court overseeing PREPA’s Title III bankruptcy proceeding to lift the automatic bankruptcy stay, and permit bondholders to seek appointment of a receiver to oversee PREPA. On September 14, 2017, the court held that PROMESA barred relief from the stay because the appointment of a receiver would (i) interfere with PREPA’s property and governmental powers, and (ii) violate the court’s exclusive jurisdiction over PREPA’s property. The court also held that a comparison of the harms facing both parties pointed towards denying relief from the stay. The bondholders appealed the decision to the First Circuit. As of April 23, 2018, the appeal was fully briefed. The First Circuit heard oral argument on June 5, 2018. On August 8, 2018, the United State Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an order reversing Judge Swain’s decision on jurisdictional grounds and remanding the motion. On October 3, 2018, National, together with Assured Guaranty Corp., Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., and Syncora Guarantee Inc. (collectively, “Movants”) filed an updated motion for relief from the automatic stay to allow Movants to exercise their statutory right to have a receiver appointed at PREPA. Discovery in connection with Movants’ motion is ongoing. The Court is scheduled to hold a hearing on the stay motion on May 8, 2019, and will continue the hearing to May 9, 2019, if necessary. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as agent of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Bettina Whyte, as agent of the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation, Adv. Proc. No. 17-257-LTS in Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS (D.P.R. Sept. 8, 2017) On August 10, 2017, the Court approved and entered a Stipulation and Order Approving Procedure to Resolve Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute in the PROMESA Title III proceeding relating to whether sales and use taxes purportedly pledged by COFINA to secure debt are property of the Commonwealth or COFINA under applicable law. On November 16, 2017, National intervened as a Defendant in the adversary proceeding and filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims. On December 21, 2017, the Court issued an order, which, inter alia, dismissed without prejudice, certain claims of the intervenors that exceeded the scope of the Commonwealth-COFINA dispute including certain of National's counterclaims. On June 5, 2018, the Commonwealth and COFINA Agents submitted a Joint Urgent Motion, which disclosed their agreement in principle to settle the Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute and related issues under the Agents’ mediation authority. Under the proposed settlement terms, COFINA and the Commonwealth would agree to share the statutory Pledged Sales Tax Base Amount. COFINA would receive (a) 53.65% of the yearly scheduled Pledged Sales Tax Base Amount (beginning with payments made on July 1, 2018), and (b) 100% of the funds on deposit prior to July 1, 2018 in the debt service accounts held by the Bank of New York Mellon. COFINA’s Title III plan of adjustment would provide that, to the extent permitted under applicable law, all restructured securities issued by reorganized COFINA (or a new entity established pursuant to COFINA’s Title III plan of adjustment) would be tax-exempt. The Title III Court held a hearing to approve the settlement agreement, as amended by the parties, and confirm a plan of adjustment in the COFINA case incorporating the settlement on January 16 and 17, 2019 (the “Confirmation Hearing”). The Court took confirmation of the plan of adjustment and approval of the Commonwealth/COFINA settlement under advisement and directed the parties to submit supplementation by January 21, 2019 in support of the relief sought at the Confirmation Hearing and supplemental briefing by January 24, 2019 supporting the authority of the court to determine the substantive validity of the new COFINA bond legislation and resolve constitutional challenges to the COFINA structure, among other things. On February 4, 2019, the District Court for the District of Puerto Rico entered the order confirming the Third Amended Title III Plan of Adjustment for COFINA. The plan effective date was February 12, 2019. For those aforementioned actions in which it is a defendant, the Company is defending against those actions and expects ultimately to prevail on the merits. There is no assurance, however, that the Company will prevail in these actions. Adverse rulings in these actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to implement its strategy and on its business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. At this stage of the litigation, there has not been a determination as to the amount, if any, of damages. Accordingly, the Company is not able to estimate any amount of loss or range of loss. The Company similarly can provide no assurance that it will be successful in those actions in which it is a plaintiff. There are no other material lawsuits pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened, to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party. Lease Commitments The Company has a lease agreement for its headquarters in Purchase, New York as well as other immaterial leases for offices in New York, New York and San Francisco, California. The Purchase, New York initial lease term expires in 2030 with the option to terminate the lease in 2025 upon the payment of a termination amount. This lease agreement included an incentive amount to fund certain leasehold improvements, renewal options, escalation clauses and a free rent period. This lease agreement has been classified as an operating lease, and operating rent expense has been recognized on a straight-line basis since the second quarter of 2014. As of December 31, 2018, total future minimum lease payments remaining on this lease were $34 million.

Note 20: Commitments and Contingencies

MBIA has received subpoenas or informal inquiries from a variety of regulators, regarding a variety of subjects. MBIA has cooperated fully with each of these regulators and has or is in the process of satisfying all such requests. MBIA may receive additional inquiries from these or other regulators and expects to provide additional information to such regulators regarding their inquiries in the future.

Litigation

MBIA Insurance Corp. v. Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, et al.; Index No. 603751/2009 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., N.Y. County)

On December 14, 2009, MBIA Corp. commenced an action in New York State Supreme Court, New York County, against Credit Suisse. The complaint seeks damages for claims in connection with the procurement of financial guarantee insurance on the Home Equity Mortgage Trust Series 2007-2 securitization. On January 30, 2013, MBIA Corp. filed an amended complaint. MBIA’s claims currently include that Credit Suisse falsely represented: (i) the attributes of the securitized loans; (ii) that the loans complied with the governing underwriting guidelines; and (iii) that Credit Suisse had conducted extensive due diligence on and quality control reviews of the securitized loans to ensure compliance with the underwriting guidelines and breached its contractual obligations to cure or repurchase loans found to be in breach of the representations and warranties applicable thereto. In May of 2018, Justice Kornreich, who had presided over the above-captioned case since its inception, retired from the bench. On May 25, 2018, Justice Schecter was assigned to be the new presiding justice. At a pretrial conference on February 7, 2019, the Court scheduled a two-week trial to begin on July 22, 2019.

Lynn Tilton and Patriarch Partners XV, LLC v. MBIA Inc. and MBIA Insurance Corp. v.; Index No.68880/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., County of Westchester)

On November 2, 2015, Lynn Tilton and Patriarch Partners XV, LLC filed a complaint in New York State Supreme Court, Westchester County, against MBIA Inc. and MBIA Corp., alleging fraudulent inducement and related claims arising from purported promises made in connection with insurance policies issued by MBIA Corp. on certain collateralized loan obligations managed by Ms. Tilton and affiliated Patriarch entities, and seeking damages. The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on January 15, 2016. On March 11, 2018, Ms. Tilton commenced the Zohar Funds Bankruptcy Cases. On May 21, 2018, the court approved the Zohar Bankruptcy Settlement. Subsequently, the parties to the above-captioned litigation jointly filed a request to stay the case for, at minimum, fifteen months, which was granted by Justice Walsh on June 11, 2018.

Assured Guaranty Corp. et al. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico et al., Case No. 17 BK 3567-LTS (D.P.R. June 3, 2017) (Swain, J.)

On May 21, 2017, the Oversight Board filed a petition under Title III of PROMESA to adjust the debts for the Puerto Rico Highways & Transportation Authority (“PRHTA”). On June 3, 2017, National, together with Assured Guaranty Corp. and Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. and Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, filed an adversary complaint PRHTA Title III case, alleging that the Commonwealth and PRHTA are unlawfully diverting pledged special revenues from the payment of certain PRHTA bonds to the Commonwealth’s General Fund. Motions to dismiss were filed on June 28, 2017, and oral arguments were heard on November 21, 2017. On January 30, 2018, the court granted the Commonwealth defendants’ motion to dismiss the PRHTA-related adversary complaint. On February 9, 2018, National, together with Assured, Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. and Financial Guaranty Insurance Company, filed their notice of appeal of the motions to dismiss to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Appellants filed their opening brief on May 9, 2018, and Appellees filed their opposition brief on July 9, 2018. Appellants’ reply brief was filed on August 8, 2018. Oral argument was held on November 5, 2018.

The Financial Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, as representative of The Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, et al., Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS (D.P.R. July 19, 2017) (Swain, J.)

On July 18, 2017, National, together with other PREPA bondholders, asked the court overseeing PREPA’s Title III bankruptcy proceeding to lift the automatic bankruptcy stay, and permit bondholders to seek appointment of a receiver to oversee PREPA. On September 14, 2017, the court held that PROMESA barred relief from the stay because the appointment of a receiver would (i) interfere with PREPA’s property and governmental powers, and (ii) violate the court’s exclusive jurisdiction over PREPA’s property. The court also held that a comparison of the harms facing both parties pointed towards denying relief from the stay. The bondholders appealed the decision to the First Circuit. As of April 23, 2018, the appeal was fully briefed. The First Circuit heard oral argument on June 5, 2018. On August 8, 2018, the United State Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued an order reversing Judge Swain’s decision on jurisdictional grounds and remanding the motion. On October 3, 2018, National, together with Assured Guaranty Corp., Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., and Syncora Guarantee Inc. (collectively, “Movants”) filed an updated motion for relief from the automatic stay to allow Movants to exercise their statutory right to have a receiver appointed at PREPA. Discovery in connection with Movants’ motion is ongoing. The Court is scheduled to hold a hearing on the stay motion on May 8, 2019, and will continue the hearing to May 9, 2019, if necessary.

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as agent of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

v. Bettina Whyte, as agent of the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corporation, Adv. Proc. No. 17-257-LTS in Case No. 17 BK

3283-LTS (D.P.R. Sept. 8, 2017)

On August 10, 2017, the Court approved and entered a Stipulation and Order Approving Procedure to Resolve Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute in the PROMESA Title III proceeding relating to whether sales and use taxes purportedly pledged by COFINA to secure debt are property of the Commonwealth or COFINA under applicable law. On November 16, 2017, National intervened as a Defendant in the adversary proceeding and filed its answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims. On December 21, 2017, the Court issued an order, which, inter alia, dismissed without prejudice, certain claims of the intervenors that exceeded the scope of the Commonwealth-COFINA dispute including certain of National's counterclaims. On June 5, 2018, the Commonwealth and COFINA Agents submitted a Joint Urgent Motion, which disclosed their agreement in principle to settle the Commonwealth-COFINA Dispute and related issues under the Agents’ mediation authority. Under the proposed settlement terms, COFINA and the Commonwealth would agree to share the statutory Pledged Sales Tax Base Amount. COFINA would receive (a) 53.65% of the yearly scheduled Pledged Sales Tax Base Amount (beginning with payments made on July 1, 2018), and (b) 100% of the funds on deposit prior to July 1, 2018 in the debt service accounts held by the Bank of New York Mellon. COFINA’s Title III plan of adjustment would provide that, to the extent permitted under applicable law, all restructured securities issued by reorganized COFINA (or a new entity established pursuant to COFINA’s Title III plan of adjustment) would be tax-exempt. The Title III Court held a hearing to approve the settlement agreement, as amended by the parties, and confirm a plan of adjustment in the COFINA case incorporating the settlement on January 16 and 17, 2019 (the “Confirmation Hearing”). The Court took confirmation of the plan of adjustment and approval of the Commonwealth/COFINA settlement under advisement and directed the parties to submit supplementation by January 21, 2019 in support of the relief sought at the Confirmation Hearing and supplemental briefing by January 24, 2019 supporting the authority of the court to determine the substantive validity of the new COFINA bond legislation and resolve constitutional challenges to the COFINA structure, among other things. On February 4, 2019, the District Court for the District of Puerto Rico entered the order confirming the Third Amended Title III Plan of Adjustment for COFINA. The plan effective date was February 12, 2019.

For those aforementioned actions in which it is a defendant, the Company is defending against those actions and expects ultimately to prevail on the merits. There is no assurance, however, that the Company will prevail in these actions. Adverse rulings in these actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s ability to implement its strategy and on its business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. At this stage of the litigation, there has not been a determination as to the amount, if any, of damages. Accordingly, the Company is not able to estimate any amount of loss or range of loss. The Company similarly can provide no assurance that it will be successful in those actions in which it is a plaintiff.

There are no other material lawsuits pending or, to the knowledge of the Company, threatened, to which the Company or any of its subsidiaries is a party.

Lease Commitments

The Company has a lease agreement for its headquarters in Purchase, New York as well as other immaterial leases for offices in New York, New York and San Francisco, California. The Purchase, New York initial lease term expires in 2030 with the option to terminate the lease in 2025 upon the payment of a termination amount. This lease agreement included an incentive amount to fund certain leasehold improvements, renewal options, escalation clauses and a free rent period. This lease agreement has been classified as an operating lease, and operating rent expense has been recognized on a straight-line basis since the second quarter of 2014. As of December 31, 2018, total future minimum lease payments remaining on this lease were $34 million.