Commitments and Contingent Liabilities

Litigation Contingencies

As a member of Visa, BOK Financial is obligated for a proportionate share of certain covered litigation losses incurred by Visa under a retrospective responsibility plan. A contingent liability was recognized for the Company’s share of Visa’s covered litigation liabilities. Visa funded an escrow account to cover litigation claims, including covered litigation losses under the retrospective responsibility plan, with proceeds from its initial public offering in 2008 and from available cash.

BOK Financial currently owns 252,233 Visa Class B shares which are convertible into 415,755 shares of Visa Class A shares after the final settlement of all covered litigation. Class B shares may be diluted in the future if the escrow fund is not adequate to cover future covered litigation costs. Therefore, no value has been currently assigned to the Class B shares and no value may be assigned until the Class B shares are converted into a known number of Class A shares.

On March 3, 2015, BOKF, NA and the Company were named as defendants in a class action alleging (1) that the manner in which the Bank posted charges to its consumer deposit accounts was improper from September 1, 2011 through July 8, 2014, the period after which the Bank and BOK Financial had settled a class action respecting a similar claim, and before it made changes to its posting order and (2) that the manner in which the Bank posted charges to its small business deposit accounts was improper from July 9, 2009 through July 8, 2014. Following mediation of the case in August 2016, the Class Representatives and the Bank reached a settlement of the action for $7.8 million. The Settlement was approved by the Court in a final order, the Company funded the settlement, and the settlement has been implemented.

On June 24, 2015, the Bank received a complaint alleging that an employee had colluded with a bond issuer and an individual in misusing revenues pledged to municipal bonds for which the Bank served as trustee under the bond indenture. The Company conducted an investigation and concluded that employees in one of its Corporate Trust offices had, with respect to a single group of affiliated bond issuances, violated Company policies and procedures by waiving financial covenants, granting forbearances and accepting without disclosure to the bondholders, debt service payments from sources other than pledged revenues. The relationship manager was terminated. The Company reported the circumstances to, and cooperated with an investigation by, the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). On December 28, 2015, in an action brought by the SEC, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey entered a judgment against the principals involved in issuing the bonds, precluding the principals from denying the alleged violations of the federal securities laws and requiring the principals to pay all outstanding principal, accrued interest, and other amounts required under the bond documents (estimated to be approximately $73 million, less the value of the facilities securing repayment of the bonds), subject to oversight by a court appointed monitor. On September 7, 2016, the Bank agreed, and the SEC entered, a consent order finding that the Bank had violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and requiring the Bank to disgorge $1,067,721 of fees and pay a civil penalty of $600,000. The Bank has disgorged the fees and paid the penalty. On August 26, 2016, the Bank was sued in the United States District Court for New Jersey by two bondholders in a putative class action on behalf of all holders of the bonds alleging the Bank participated in the fraudulent sale of securities by the principals. On September 14, 2016, the Bank was sued in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma by 19 bondholders alleging the Bank participated in the fraudulent sale of securities by the principals. Management has been advised by counsel that the Bank has valid defenses to the claims. The Bank expects the Court ordered payment plan will result in the payment of the bonds by the principals. Accordingly, no loss is probable at this time and no provision for loss has been made. If the payment plan does not result in payment of the bonds, a loss could become probable. A reasonable estimate cannot be made at this time though the amount could be material to the Company.

On March 14, 2017, the Bank was sued in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma by bondholders in a second putative class action. The bondholders in this second action allege two individuals purchased facilities from the principals who are the subject of the SEC New Jersey proceedings by means of the fraudulent sale of $60 million of municipal securities for which the Bank also served as indenture trustee. The bondholders allege the Bank failed to disclose that the seller of the purchased facilities had engaged in the conduct complained of in the New Jersey action. The Bank properly performed all duties as indenture trustee of this second set of municipal securities, timely commenced proceedings against the issuer of the securities when default occurred, is cooperating with the SEC in actions against the two principals, is not a target of the SEC proceedings, and has been advised by counsel that the Bank has valid defenses to the claims of these bondholders. It is the opinion of management that no loss is probable at this time.

The County of Bernalillo, New Mexico, commenced arbitration pursuant to the Arbitration Rules of FINRA seeking recovery of $5.6 million alleging that various municipal bonds purchased by the elected County Treasurer of Bernalillo County, New Mexico, from BOK Financial Securities, Inc. were unsuitable. The arbitration was conducted in July 2017. Management has been advised by counsel that a loss is not probable.

On March 30, 2017, two deposit customers of the Bank sued the Bank in the District Court of Harris County, Texas. A judgment creditor had served a garnishment summons on the Bank. The deposit customers allege that, because the Bank was unable to produce adequate documentation of ownership of a series of deposit accounts at the Bank owned by them, they were compelled to enter into a settlement agreement with the judgment creditor pursuant to which the Bank paid $4.2 million from the accounts to the judgment creditor. The two deposit customers seek $7 million. Management has been advised by counsel that a loss is not probable and that the amount of the liability, if any, cannot be quantified at this time.

On March 7, 2017, a plaintiff filed a putative class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas alleging an extended overdraft fee charged by BOKF, NA is interest and exceeds permitted rates. BOKF, NA was previously sued in a class action in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma making the same allegations. Pursuant to a motion to dismiss, the Northern District of Oklahoma Court action was dismissed. Other courts considering the question whether extended overdraft fees are interest have likewise determined such fees are not interest. BOKF, NA has moved to dismiss the action. Management is advised by counsel that a loss is not probable and that the loss, if any, cannot be reasonably estimated.

In the ordinary course of business, BOK Financial and its subsidiaries are subject to legal actions and complaints. Management believes, based upon the opinion of counsel, that the actions and liability or loss, if any, resulting from the final outcomes of the proceedings, will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Alternative Investment Commitments

The Company sponsors two private equity funds and invests in several tax credit entities and other funds as permitted by banking regulations. Consolidation of these investments is based on the variable interest model determined by the nature of the entity. Variable interest entities are generally defined as entities that either do not have sufficient equity to finance their activities without support from other parties or whose equity investors lack a controlling financial interest. Variable interest entities are consolidated based on the determination that the Company is the primary beneficiary including the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the variable interest's economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses of the variable interest or the right to receive benefits of the variable interest that could be significant to the variable interest.

BOKF Equity, LLC, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary, is the general partner of two consolidated private equity funds (“the Funds”). The Funds provide alternative investment opportunities to certain customers, some of which are related parties, through unaffiliated limited partnerships. These unaffiliated limited partnerships generally invest in distressed assets, asset buy-outs or venture capital companies. As general partner, BOKF Equity, LLC has the power to direct activities that most significantly affect the Funds' performance and contingent obligations to make additional investments totaling $4.0 million at June 30, 2017. Substantially all of the obligations are offset by limited partner commitments. The Company does not accrue its contingent liability to fund investments. The Volcker Rule in Title VI of the Dodd-Frank Act will limit both the amount and structure of these types of investments.

Consolidated tax credit investment entities represent the Company's interest in entities earning federal new market tax credits related to qualifying loans. The Company has the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the variable interest's economic performance of the entity including being the primary beneficiary of or the obligation to absorb losses of the variable interest that could be significant to the variable interest.

Other consolidated alternative investments include entities held under merchant banking authority. While the Company owns a majority of the voting interest in these entities, its ability to manage daily operations is limited by applicable banking regulations. Consolidated other assets includes total tangible assets, identifiable intangible assets and goodwill held by these entities.

The Company also has interests in various unrelated alternative investments generally consisting of unconsolidated limited partnership interests in or loans to entities for which investment return is primarily in the form of tax credits or that invest in distressed real estate loans and properties, energy development, venture capital and other activities. The Company is prohibited by banking regulations from controlling or actively managing the activities of these investments and the Company's maximum exposure to loss is restricted to its investment balance. The Company's obligation to fund alternative investments is included in Other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

A summary of consolidated and unconsolidated alternative investments as of June 30, 2017, December 31, 2016 and June 30, 2016 is as follows (in thousands):



	June 30, 2017
	Loans		Other assets		Other liabilities		Other borrowings		Non-controlling interests
Consolidated:
Private equity funds	$	—	$	16,905	$	—	$	—	$	14,199
Tax credit entities	10,000		11,274		—		10,964		10,000
Other	—		15,894		1,621		878		2,877
Total consolidated	$	10,000	$	44,073	$	1,621	$	11,842	$	27,076

Unconsolidated:
Tax credit entities	$	59,744	$	148,525	$	63,822	$	—	$	—
Other	—		33,155		13,680		—		—
Total unconsolidated	$	59,744	$	181,680	$	77,502	$	—	$	—



	Dec. 31, 2016
	Loans		Other assets		Other liabilities		Other borrowings		Non-controlling interests
Consolidated:
Private equity funds	$	—	$	17,357	$	—	$	—	$	13,237
Tax credit entities	10,000		11,585		—		10,964		10,000
Other	—		29,783		3,189		1,092		8,266
Total consolidated	$	10,000	$	58,725	$	3,189	$	12,056	$	31,503

Unconsolidated:
Tax credit entities	$	44,488	$	143,715	$	63,329	$	—	$	—
Other	—		31,675		15,028		—		—
Total unconsolidated	$	44,488	$	175,390	$	78,357	$	—	$	—



	June 30, 2016
	Loans		Other assets		Other liabilities		Other borrowings		Non-controlling interests
Consolidated:
Private equity funds	$	—	$	20,469	$	—	$	—	$	16,316
Tax credit entities	10,000		11,895		—		10,964		10,000
Other	—		35,387		2,004		2,272		7,589
Total consolidated	$	10,000	$	67,751	$	2,004	$	13,236	$	33,905

Unconsolidated:
Tax credit entities	$	32,679	$	102,138	$	30,953	$	—	$	—
Other	—		23,439		13,767		—		—
Total unconsolidated	$	32,679	$	125,577	$	44,720	$	—	$	—

Other Commitments and Contingencies

At June 30, 2017, Cavanal Hill Funds’ assets included U.S. Treasury, cash management and tax-free money market funds. Assets of these funds consist of highly-rated, short-term obligations of the U.S. Treasury, corporate issuers and U.S. states and municipalities. The net asset value of units in these funds was $1.00 at June 30, 2017. An investment in these funds is not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or guaranteed by BOK Financial or any of its subsidiaries. BOK Financial may, but is not obligated to purchase assets from these funds to maintain the net asset value at $1.00. No assets were purchased from the funds in 2017 or 2016.