UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
|
|
|
X
|
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
For the
quarterly period ended September 30,
2011
|
|
OR
|
|
|
|
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
For the transition period from
to
|
Commission file number:
1-7182
MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC.
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
13-2740599
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
|
incorporation or organization)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank of America Corporate Center
100 N. Tryon Street
Charlotte, North Carolina
|
|
28255
|
|
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
|
(704) 386-5681
|
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
|
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
X YES NO
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such files).
X YES NO
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in Rule
12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated filer
|
Accelerated filer
|
Non-accelerated
filer X
|
Smaller reporting company
|
(Do not check if a smaller
reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).
YES X NO
As of the close of business on November 3, 2011, there were
1,000 shares of Common Stock outstanding, all of which were
held by Bank of America Corporation.
The registrant is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of
America Corporation and meets the conditions set forth in
General Instructions H(1)(a) and (b) of
Form 10-Q
and is therefore filing this Form with the reduced disclosure
format as permitted by Instruction H(2).
QUARTERLY
REPORT ON
FORM 10-Q
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
PART I
Financial Information
|
|
Item 1.
|
Financial
Statements (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal transactions
|
|
$
|
2,781
|
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
1,441
|
|
|
|
1,351
|
|
Managed account and other fee-based revenues
|
|
|
1,354
|
|
|
|
1,114
|
|
Investment banking
|
|
|
1,016
|
|
|
|
1,326
|
|
Earnings from equity method investments
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
Other revenues
|
|
|
(899
|
)
|
|
|
478
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment losses on
available-for-sale
debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
other-than-temporary
impairment losses
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
Less: Portion of
other-than-temporary
impairment losses recognized in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
5,758
|
|
|
|
5,751
|
|
Interest and dividend revenues
|
|
|
2,314
|
|
|
|
2,245
|
|
Less interest expense
|
|
|
2,202
|
|
|
|
2,260
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (expense)
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues, net of interest expense
|
|
|
5,870
|
|
|
|
5,736
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation and benefits
|
|
|
3,638
|
|
|
|
3,507
|
|
Communications and technology
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
493
|
|
Occupancy and related depreciation
|
|
|
385
|
|
|
|
351
|
|
Brokerage, clearing, and exchange fees
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
Advertising and market development
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
265
|
|
Office supplies and postage
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
Provision for representations and warranties
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1,090
|
|
|
|
973
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest expenses
|
|
|
6,260
|
|
|
|
6,002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax loss
|
|
|
(390
|
)
|
|
|
(266
|
)
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(523
|
)
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss)
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss) applicable to common stockholder
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
(418
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
3
Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings
(Loss) (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal transactions
|
|
$
|
6,125
|
|
|
$
|
7,381
|
|
Commissions
|
|
|
4,478
|
|
|
|
4,317
|
|
Managed account and other fee-based revenues
|
|
|
3,976
|
|
|
|
3,328
|
|
Investment banking
|
|
|
4,162
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
Earnings from equity method investments
|
|
|
328
|
|
|
|
658
|
|
Other revenues
|
|
|
2,337
|
|
|
|
2,758
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment losses on
available-for-sale
debt securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
other-than-temporary
impairment losses
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
|
|
(168
|
)
|
Less: Portion of
other-than-temporary
impairment losses recognized in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
21,357
|
|
|
|
22,077
|
|
Interest and dividend revenues
|
|
|
6,220
|
|
|
|
6,985
|
|
Less interest expense
|
|
|
6,945
|
|
|
|
7,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest expense
|
|
|
(725
|
)
|
|
|
(250
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues, net of interest expense
|
|
|
20,632
|
|
|
|
21,827
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation and benefits
|
|
|
12,146
|
|
|
|
11,593
|
|
Communications and technology
|
|
|
1,338
|
|
|
|
1,465
|
|
Occupancy and related depreciation
|
|
|
1,056
|
|
|
|
1,053
|
|
Brokerage, clearing, and exchange fees
|
|
|
882
|
|
|
|
781
|
|
Advertising and market development
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
718
|
|
|
|
660
|
|
Office supplies and postage
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
Provision for representations and warranties
|
|
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
3,535
|
|
|
|
2,177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest expenses
|
|
|
22,864
|
|
|
|
18,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax (loss) earnings
|
|
|
(2,232
|
)
|
|
|
3,812
|
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
(1,329
|
)
|
|
|
1,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) earnings
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,526
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) earnings applicable to common stockholder
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,412
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
13,301
|
|
|
$
|
17,220
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory purposes or
deposited with clearing organizations
|
|
|
13,172
|
|
|
|
12,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities financing transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale agreements (includes $89,119 in 2011
and $74,255 in 2010 measured at fair value in accordance with
the fair value option election)
|
|
|
175,640
|
|
|
|
138,219
|
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions (includes
$1,543 in 2011 and $1,672 in 2010 measured at fair value in
accordance with the fair value option election)
|
|
|
61,362
|
|
|
|
60,458
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
237,002
|
|
|
|
198,677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, at fair value (includes securities pledged as
collateral that can be sold or repledged of $42,251 in 2011 and
$33,933 in 2010):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
39,233
|
|
|
|
39,371
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures
|
|
|
25,066
|
|
|
|
34,204
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
28,345
|
|
|
|
22,248
|
|
Corporate debt and preferred stock
|
|
|
20,272
|
|
|
|
27,703
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed, and asset-backed
|
|
|
7,240
|
|
|
|
10,994
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
43,566
|
|
|
|
41,378
|
|
Municipals, money markets, physical commodities and other
|
|
|
15,089
|
|
|
|
14,759
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178,811
|
|
|
|
190,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities (includes $201 in 2011 and $310 in 2010
measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value option
election)
|
|
|
8,031
|
|
|
|
17,769
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities received as collateral, at fair value
|
|
|
12,558
|
|
|
|
20,363
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables from Bank of America
|
|
|
55,658
|
|
|
|
60,655
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other receivables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customers (net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $15 in 2011
and $8 in 2010)
|
|
|
23,253
|
|
|
|
22,080
|
|
Brokers and dealers
|
|
|
10,378
|
|
|
|
16,483
|
|
Interest and other
|
|
|
12,504
|
|
|
|
10,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,135
|
|
|
|
49,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes, and mortgages (net of allowances for loan losses
of $90 in 2011 and $170 in 2010) (includes $2,399 in 2011 and
$3,190 in 2010 measured at fair value in accordance with the
fair value option election)
|
|
|
21,916
|
|
|
|
25,803
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment and facilities, net
|
|
|
1,471
|
|
|
|
1,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill and intangible assets
|
|
|
9,482
|
|
|
|
9,714
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
17,745
|
|
|
|
17,436
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
615,282
|
|
|
$
|
621,626
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets of Consolidated VIEs Included in Total Assets Above
(pledged as collateral)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
8,766
|
|
|
$
|
10,838
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
|
309
|
|
Loans, notes, and mortgages (net)
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
1,511
|
|
|
|
1,597
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets of Consolidated VIEs
|
|
$
|
10,649
|
|
|
$
|
13,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
LIABILITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities financing transactions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements (includes $36,943 in 2011
and $37,394 in 2010 measured at fair value in accordance with
the fair value option election)
|
|
$
|
203,220
|
|
|
$
|
183,758
|
|
Payables under securities loaned transactions
|
|
|
14,795
|
|
|
|
15,251
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
218,015
|
|
|
|
199,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings (includes $5,527 in 2011 and $6,472 in
2010 measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value
option election)
|
|
|
7,104
|
|
|
|
15,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
12,277
|
|
|
|
12,826
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, at fair value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
29,538
|
|
|
|
32,197
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures
|
|
|
16,602
|
|
|
|
14,026
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
16,702
|
|
|
|
15,705
|
|
Corporate debt and preferred stock
|
|
|
9,655
|
|
|
|
9,500
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
16,677
|
|
|
|
24,747
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89,647
|
|
|
|
96,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligation to return securities received as collateral, at fair
value
|
|
|
12,558
|
|
|
|
20,363
|
|
Payables to Bank of America
|
|
|
33,587
|
|
|
|
23,021
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customers
|
|
|
42,430
|
|
|
|
39,045
|
|
Brokers and dealers
|
|
|
11,211
|
|
|
|
12,895
|
|
Interest and other (includes $189 in 2011 and $165 in 2010
measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value option
election)
|
|
|
19,888
|
|
|
|
19,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,529
|
|
|
|
71,840
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings (includes $31,021 in 2011 and $39,214 in
2010 measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value
option election)
|
|
|
114,917
|
|
|
|
128,851
|
|
Junior subordinated notes (related to trust preferred securities)
|
|
|
3,594
|
|
|
|
3,576
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
|
565,228
|
|
|
|
571,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock (par value
$1.331/3
per share; authorized: 3,000,000,000 shares; issued:
1,000 shares)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Paid-in capital
|
|
|
41,257
|
|
|
|
40,416
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (net of tax)
|
|
|
(284
|
)
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
9,984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stockholders Equity
|
|
|
50,054
|
|
|
|
50,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity
|
|
$
|
615,282
|
|
|
$
|
621,626
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities of Consolidated VIEs Included in Total
Liabilities Above
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
5,314
|
|
|
$
|
4,642
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Payables to Bank of America
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Other payables
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
5,617
|
|
|
|
6,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities of Consolidated VIEs
|
|
$
|
11,128
|
|
|
$
|
11,372
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) earnings
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,526
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to cash provided by
operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for representations and warranties
|
|
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
562
|
|
|
|
692
|
|
Share-based compensation expense
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
1,039
|
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
(204
|
)
|
|
|
673
|
|
Earnings from equity method investments
|
|
|
(328
|
)
|
|
|
(306
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
2,435
|
|
|
|
1,744
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
|
11,846
|
|
|
|
(17,876
|
)
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory purposes or
deposited with clearing organizations
|
|
|
(748
|
)
|
|
|
2,184
|
|
Receivables from Bank of America
|
|
|
4,997
|
|
|
|
(2,674
|
)
|
Receivables under resale agreements
|
|
|
(37,421
|
)
|
|
|
(75,377
|
)
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions
|
|
|
(904
|
)
|
|
|
5,632
|
|
Customer receivables
|
|
|
(1,180
|
)
|
|
|
12,191
|
|
Brokers and dealers receivables
|
|
|
6,106
|
|
|
|
4,999
|
|
Proceeds from loans, notes, and mortgages held for sale
|
|
|
3,928
|
|
|
|
4,989
|
|
Other changes in loans, notes, and mortgages held for sale
|
|
|
(2,428
|
)
|
|
|
(2,559
|
)
|
Trading liabilities
|
|
|
(7,129
|
)
|
|
|
31,664
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
|
19,462
|
|
|
|
43,268
|
|
Payables under securities loaned transactions
|
|
|
(456
|
)
|
|
|
(8,216
|
)
|
Payables to Bank of America
|
|
|
10,566
|
|
|
|
(2,209
|
)
|
Customer payables
|
|
|
3,385
|
|
|
|
385
|
|
Brokers and dealers payables
|
|
|
(1,684
|
)
|
|
|
(4,451
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(8,159
|
)
|
|
|
9,933
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
6,057
|
|
|
|
8,106
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from (payments for):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturities of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
1,442
|
|
|
|
1,201
|
|
Sales of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
3,876
|
|
|
|
14,966
|
|
Purchases of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
(1,430
|
)
|
|
|
(771
|
)
|
Maturities of
held-to-maturity
securities
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Equipment and facilities, net
|
|
|
(89
|
)
|
|
|
(294
|
)
|
Loans, notes, and mortgages held for investment
|
|
|
2,111
|
|
|
|
2,656
|
|
Other investments
|
|
|
5,480
|
|
|
|
2,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by investing activities
|
|
|
11,640
|
|
|
|
20,217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from (payments for):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial paper and short-term borrowings
|
|
|
(8,144
|
)
|
|
|
(5,031
|
)
|
Issuance and resale of long-term borrowings
|
|
|
7,657
|
|
|
|
6,440
|
|
Settlement and repurchases of long-term borrowings
|
|
|
(20,610
|
)
|
|
|
(29,452
|
)
|
Deposits
|
|
|
(549
|
)
|
|
|
(1,295
|
)
|
Derivative financing transactions
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Dividends
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash used for financing activities
|
|
|
(21,616
|
)
|
|
|
(29,453
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(3,919
|
)
|
|
|
(1,130
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
17,220
|
|
|
|
15,142
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
13,301
|
|
|
$
|
14,012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
$
|
147
|
|
|
$
|
2,460
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
|
5,716
|
|
|
|
5,471
|
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities:
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, Merrill
Lynch received a non-cash capital contribution of approximately
$1 billion from Bank of America associated with certain
employee stock awards. In addition, as of January 1, 2010,
Merrill Lynch assumed assets and liabilities in connection with
the consolidation of certain variable interest entities.
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
7
Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. and Subsidiaries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
Net earnings (loss)
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
$
|
(380
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,526
|
|
Other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
Net unrealized (loss) gain on investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
Net deferred gain (loss) on cash flow hedges
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Defined benefit pension and postretirement plans
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive (loss) income, net of tax
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
92
|
|
|
$
|
(933
|
)
|
|
$
|
(272
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
8
September 30, 2011
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc. (ML &
Co.) and together with its subsidiaries (Merrill
Lynch), provides investment, financing and other related
services to individuals and institutions on a global basis
through its broker, dealer, banking and other financial services
subsidiaries. On January 1, 2009, ML & Co. was
acquired by Bank of America Corporation (Bank of
America) in exchange for common and preferred stock with a
value of $29.1 billion. ML & Co. is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America.
Merger
with Banc of America Securities Holdings Corporation
(BASH)
On November 1, 2010, ML & Co. merged with BASH, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, with ML &
Co. as the surviving corporation in the merger. In addition, as
a result of the BASH merger, Banc of America Securities LLC
(BAS), a wholly-owned broker-dealer subsidiary of
BASH, became a wholly-owned broker-dealer subsidiary of
ML & Co. Subsequently, on November 1, 2010, BAS
was merged into Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated (MLPF&S), a wholly-owned
broker-dealer subsidiary of ML & Co., with MLPF&S
as the surviving corporation in the merger. In accordance with
Accounting Standards Codification (ASC)
805-10,
Business Combinations (Business Combinations
Accounting), Merrill Lynchs Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for the three and nine month periods ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 include the
historical results of BASH and subsidiaries as if the BASH
merger had occurred as of January 1, 2009, the date at
which both entities were first under the common control of Bank
of America. Merrill Lynch has recorded the assets and
liabilities acquired in connection with the BASH merger at their
historical carrying values.
Basis of
Presentation
The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the
accounts of Merrill Lynch. The Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements are presented in accordance with U.S. Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles (U.S. GAAP).
Intercompany transactions and balances within Merrill Lynch have
been eliminated. Transactions and balances with Bank of America
have not been eliminated. The interim Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements are unaudited; however, all adjustments for
a fair presentation of the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements have been included.
These unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated
Financial Statements included in Merrill Lynchs Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010 (the 2010 Annual
Report). The nature of Merrill Lynchs business is
such that the results of any interim period are not necessarily
indicative of results for a full year. Certain prior-period
amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current period
presentation.
Consolidation
Accounting
Merrill Lynch determines whether it is required to consolidate
an entity by first evaluating whether the entity qualifies as a
voting rights entity (VRE) or as a variable interest
entity (VIE).
The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the
accounts of Merrill Lynch, whose subsidiaries are generally
controlled through a majority voting interest or a controlling
financial interest. On January 1, 2010, Merrill Lynch
adopted accounting guidance on consolidation of VIEs,
9
which has been deferred for certain investment funds managed on
behalf of third parties if Merrill Lynch does not have an
obligation to fund losses that could potentially be significant
to these funds. Any funds meeting the deferral requirements will
continue to be evaluated for consolidation in accordance with
the prior guidance.
VREs VREs are defined to include entities that have
both equity at risk that is sufficient to fund future operations
and have equity investors that have a controlling financial
interest in the entity through their equity investments. In
accordance with ASC 810, Consolidation,
(Consolidation Accounting), Merrill Lynch
generally consolidates those VREs where it has the majority of
the voting rights. For investments in limited partnerships and
certain limited liability corporations that Merrill Lynch does
not control, Merrill Lynch applies ASC 323,
Investments Equity Method and Joint Ventures
(Equity Method Accounting), which requires use
of the equity method of accounting for investors that have more
than a minor influence, which is typically defined as an
investment of greater than 3% to 5% of the outstanding equity in
the entity. For more traditional corporate structures, in
accordance with Equity Method Accounting, Merrill Lynch applies
the equity method of accounting where it has the ability to
exercise significant influence over operating and financing
decisions of the investee. Significant influence can be
evidenced by a significant ownership interest (which is
generally defined as a voting interest of 20% to 50%),
significant board of director representation, or other contracts
and arrangements.
VIEs Those entities that do not meet the VRE
criteria are generally analyzed for consolidation as VIEs. A VIE
is an entity that lacks equity investors or whose equity
investors do not have a controlling financial interest in the
entity through their equity investments. Merrill Lynch
consolidates those VIEs for which it is the primary beneficiary.
In accordance with Consolidation Accounting guidance, Merrill
Lynch is considered the primary beneficiary when it has a
controlling financial interest in a VIE. Merrill Lynch has a
controlling financial interest when it has both the power to
direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact
the VIEs economic performance and an obligation to absorb
losses or the right to receive benefits that could potentially
be significant to the VIE. Merrill Lynch reassesses whether it
is the primary beneficiary of a VIE on a quarterly basis. The
quarterly reassessment process considers whether Merrill Lynch
has acquired or divested the power to direct the activities of
the VIE through changes in governing documents or other
circumstances. The reassessment also considers whether Merrill
Lynch has acquired or disposed of a financial interest that
could be significant to the VIE, or whether an interest in the
VIE has become significant or is no longer significant. The
consolidation status of the VIEs with which Merrill Lynch is
involved may change as a result of such reassessments.
Securitization
Activities
In the normal course of business, Merrill Lynch has securitized
commercial and residential mortgage loans; municipal,
government, and corporate bonds; and other types of financial
assets. Merrill Lynch may retain interests in the securitized
financial assets by holding notes or other debt instruments
issued by the securitization vehicle. In accordance with
ASC 860, Transfers and Servicing (Financial
Transfers and Servicing Accounting), Merrill Lynch
recognizes transfers of financial assets where it relinquishes
control as sales to the extent of cash and any other proceeds
received.
Revenue
Recognition
Principal transactions revenue includes both realized and
unrealized gains and losses on trading assets and trading
liabilities, investment securities classified as trading
investments and fair value changes associated with certain
structured debt. These instruments are recorded at fair value.
Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset
or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction
between market participants. Gains and losses on sales are
recognized on a trade date basis.
10
Commissions revenues include commissions, mutual fund
distribution fees and contingent deferred sales charge revenue,
which are all accrued as earned. Commissions revenues also
include mutual fund redemption fees, which are recognized at the
time of redemption. Commissions revenues earned from certain
customer equity transactions are recorded net of related
brokerage, clearing and exchange fees.
Managed account and other fee-based revenues primarily consist
of asset-priced portfolio service fees earned from the
administration of separately managed accounts and other
investment accounts for retail investors, annual account fees,
and certain other account-related fees.
Investment banking revenues include underwriting revenues and
fees for merger and acquisition and other advisory services,
which are accrued when services for the transactions are
substantially completed. Underwriting revenues are presented net
of transaction-related expenses.
Earnings from equity method investments include Merrill
Lynchs pro rata share of income and losses associated with
investments accounted for under the equity method of accounting.
Other revenues include gains (losses) on investment securities,
including sales and
other-than-temporary-impairment
(OTTI) losses associated with certain
available-for-sale
securities, gains (losses) on private equity investments and
other principal investments and gains (losses) on loans and
other miscellaneous items.
Contractual interest received and paid, and dividends received
on trading assets and trading liabilities, excluding
derivatives, are recognized on an accrual basis as a component
of interest and dividend revenues and interest expense. Interest
and dividends on investment securities are recognized on an
accrual basis as a component of interest and dividend revenues.
Interest related to loans, notes, and mortgages, securities
financing activities and certain short- and long-term borrowings
are recorded on an accrual basis as interest revenue or interest
expense, as applicable.
Use of
Estimates
In presenting the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements,
management makes estimates including the following:
|
|
|
Valuations of assets and liabilities requiring fair value
estimates;
|
|
|
The allowance for credit losses;
|
|
|
Determination of
other-than-temporary
impairments for
available-for-sale
investment securities;
|
|
|
The outcome of litigation;
|
|
|
Determination of the liability for representations and
warranties made in connection with the sales of residential
mortgage and home equity loans;
|
|
|
Determination of whether VIEs should be consolidated;
|
|
|
The ability to realize deferred taxes and the recognition and
measurement of uncertain tax positions;
|
|
|
The carrying amount of goodwill and intangible assets;
|
|
|
The amortization period of intangible assets with definite lives;
|
|
|
Incentive-based compensation accruals and valuation of
share-based payment compensation arrangements; and
|
11
|
|
|
Other matters that affect the reported amounts and disclosure of
contingencies in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
Estimates, by their nature, are based on judgment and available
information. Therefore, actual results could differ from those
estimates and could have a material impact on the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, and it is possible that such
changes could occur in the near term. A discussion of certain
areas in which estimates are a significant component of the
amounts reported in the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements follows:
Fair
Value Measurement
Merrill Lynch accounts for a significant portion of its
financial instruments at fair value or considers fair value in
their measurement. Merrill Lynch accounts for certain financial
assets and liabilities at fair value under various accounting
literature, including ASC 320, Investments
Debt and Equity Securities (Investment
Accounting), ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging
(Derivatives Accounting), and the fair value
option election in accordance with
ASC 825-10-25,
Financial Instruments Recognition (the
fair value option election). Merrill Lynch also
accounts for certain assets at fair value under applicable
industry guidance, namely ASC 940, Financial
Services Broker and Dealers (Broker-Dealer
Guide) and ASC 946, Financial Services
Investment Companies (Investment Company Guide).
ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures
(Fair Value Accounting) defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value, establishes a
fair value hierarchy based on the quality of inputs used to
measure fair value and enhances disclosure requirements for fair
value measurements.
Fair values for
over-the-counter
(OTC) derivative financial instruments, principally
forwards, options, and swaps, represent the present value of
amounts estimated to be received from or paid to a marketplace
participant in settlement of these instruments (i.e., the amount
Merrill Lynch would expect to receive in a derivative asset
assignment or would expect to pay to have a derivative liability
assumed). These derivatives are valued using pricing models
based on the net present value of estimated future cash flows
and directly observed prices from exchange-traded derivatives,
other OTC trades, or external pricing services, while taking
into account the counterpartys creditworthiness, or
Merrill Lynchs own creditworthiness, as appropriate.
Determining the fair value for OTC derivative contracts can
require a significant level of estimation and management
judgment.
New and/or
complex instruments may have immature or limited markets. As a
result, the pricing models used for valuation often incorporate
significant estimates and assumptions that market participants
would use in pricing the instrument, which may impact the
results of operations reported in the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements. For instance, on long-dated and illiquid
contracts extrapolation methods are applied to observed market
data in order to estimate inputs and assumptions that are not
directly observable. This enables Merrill Lynch to mark to fair
value all positions consistently when only a subset of prices
are directly observable. Values for OTC derivatives are verified
using observed information about the costs of hedging the risk
and other trades in the market. As the markets for these
products develop, Merrill Lynch continually refines its pricing
models to correlate more closely to the market price of these
instruments. The recognition of significant inception gains and
losses that incorporate unobservable inputs is reviewed by
management to ensure such gains and losses are derived from
observable inputs
and/or
incorporate reasonable assumptions about the unobservable
component, such as implied bid-offer adjustments.
Certain financial instruments recorded at fair value are
initially measured using mid-market prices which results in
gross long and short positions valued at the same pricing level
prior to the application of position netting. The resulting net
positions are then adjusted to fair value representing the exit
price as defined in Fair Value Accounting. The significant
adjustments include liquidity and counterparty credit risk.
12
Liquidity
Merrill Lynch makes adjustments to bring a position from a
mid-market to a bid or offer price, depending upon the net open
position. Merrill Lynch values net long positions at bid prices
and net short positions at offer prices. These adjustments are
based upon either observable or implied bid-offer prices.
Counterparty
Credit Risk
In determining fair value, Merrill Lynch considers both the
credit risk of its counterparties, as well as its own
creditworthiness. Merrill Lynch attempts to mitigate credit risk
to third parties by entering into netting and collateral
arrangements. Net counterparty exposure (counterparty positions
netted by offsetting transactions and both cash and securities
collateral) is then valued for counterparty creditworthiness and
this resultant value is incorporated into the fair value of the
respective instruments. Merrill Lynch generally calculates the
credit risk adjustment for derivatives based on observable
market credit spreads.
Fair Value Accounting also requires that Merrill Lynch consider
its own creditworthiness when determining the fair value of
certain instruments, including OTC derivative instruments and
certain structured notes carried at fair value under the fair
value option election (i.e., debit valuation adjustment or
DVA). Merrill Lynchs DVA is measured in the
same manner as third party counterparty credit risk. The impact
of Merrill Lynchs DVA is incorporated into the fair value
of instruments such as OTC derivative contracts even when credit
risk is not readily observable in the instrument. OTC derivative
liabilities are valued based on the net counterparty exposure as
described above.
Legal and
Representation and Warranty Reserves
Merrill Lynch is a party in various actions, some of which
involve claims for substantial amounts. Amounts are accrued for
the financial resolution of claims that have either been
asserted or are deemed probable of assertion if, in the opinion
of management, it is both probable that a liability has been
incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.
In many cases, it is not possible to determine whether a
liability has been incurred or to estimate the ultimate or
minimum amount of that liability until the case is close to
resolution, in which case no accrual is made until that time.
Accruals are subject to significant estimation by management,
with input from any outside counsel handling the matter.
In addition, Merrill Lynch and certain of its subsidiaries made
various representations and warranties in connection with the
sale of residential mortgage and home equity loans. Breaches of
these representations and warranties may result in the
requirement to repurchase mortgage loans or to otherwise make
whole or provide other remedies. Refer to Note 14 for
further information.
Income
Taxes
Merrill Lynch provides for income taxes on all transactions that
have been recognized in the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements in accordance with ASC 740, Income Taxes
(Income Tax Accounting). Accordingly, deferred
taxes are adjusted to reflect the tax rates at which future
taxable amounts will likely be settled or realized. The effects
of tax rate changes on deferred tax liabilities and deferred tax
assets, as well as other changes in income tax laws, are
recognized in net earnings in the period during which such
changes are enacted. Valuation allowances are established when
necessary to reduce deferred tax assets to the amounts that are
more-likely-than-not to be realized. Pursuant to Income Tax
Accounting, Merrill Lynch may consider various sources of
evidence in assessing the necessity of valuation allowances to
reduce deferred tax assets to amounts more-likely-than-not to be
realized, including the following: 1) past and projected
earnings, including losses, of
13
Merrill Lynch and Bank of America, as certain tax attributes
such as U.S. net operating losses (NOLs),
U.S. capital loss carryforwards and foreign tax credit
carryforwards can be utilized by Bank of America in certain
income tax returns, 2) tax carryforward periods, and
3) tax planning strategies and other factors of the legal
entities, such as the intercompany tax-allocation policy.
Included within Merrill Lynchs net deferred tax assets are
carryforward amounts generated in the U.S. and the U.K.
that are deductible in the future as NOLs. Merrill Lynch has
concluded that these deferred tax assets are
more-likely-than-not to be fully utilized prior to expiration,
based on the projected level of future taxable income of Merrill
Lynch and Bank of America, which is relevant due to the
intercompany tax-allocation policy. For this purpose, future
taxable income was projected based on forecasts, historical
earnings after adjusting for the past market disruptions and the
anticipated impact of the differences between pre-tax earnings
and taxable income.
Merrill Lynch recognizes and measures its unrecognized tax
benefits in accordance with Income Tax Accounting. Merrill Lynch
estimates the likelihood, based on their technical merits, that
tax positions will be sustained upon examination considering the
facts and circumstances and information available at the end of
each period. Merrill Lynch adjusts the level of unrecognized tax
benefits when there is more information available, or when an
event occurs requiring a change. In accordance with Bank of
Americas policy, any new or subsequent change in an
unrecognized tax benefit related to a Bank of America state
consolidated, combined or unitary return in which Merrill Lynch
is a member will generally not be reflected in Merrill
Lynchs balance sheet. However, upon Bank of Americas
resolution of the item, any material impact determined to be
attributable to Merrill Lynch will be reflected in Merrill
Lynchs balance sheet. Merrill Lynch accrues
income-tax-related interest and penalties, if applicable, within
income tax expense.
Merrill Lynchs results of operations are included in the
U.S. federal income tax return and certain state income tax
returns of Bank of America. The method of allocating income tax
expense is determined under the intercompany tax allocation
policy of Bank of America. This policy specifies that income tax
expense will be computed for all Bank of America subsidiaries
generally on a separate pro forma return basis, taking into
account the tax position of the consolidated group and the pro
forma Merrill Lynch group. Under this policy, tax benefits
associated with NOLs (or other tax attributes) of Merrill Lynch
are payable to Merrill Lynch upon the earlier of the utilization
in Bank of Americas tax returns or the utilization in
Merrill Lynchs pro forma tax returns.
Securities
Financing Transactions
Merrill Lynch enters into repurchase and resale agreements and
securities borrowed and loaned transactions to accommodate
customers and earn interest rate spreads (also referred to as
matched book transactions), obtain securities for
settlement and finance inventory positions. Resale and
repurchase agreements are generally accounted for as
collateralized financing transactions and may be recorded at
their contractual amounts plus accrued interest or at fair value
under the fair value option election. In resale and repurchase
agreements, typically the termination date of the agreements is
before the maturity date of the underlying security. However, in
certain situations, Merrill Lynch may enter into agreements
where the termination date of the transaction is the same as the
maturity date of the underlying security. These transactions are
referred to as
repo-to-maturity
transactions. Merrill Lynch enters into
repo-to-maturity
sales only for high quality, very liquid securities such as
U.S. Treasury securities or securities issued by the
government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). Merrill
Lynch accounts for
repo-to-maturity
transactions as sales and purchases in accordance with
applicable accounting guidance, and accordingly, removes or
recognizes the securities from the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheet and recognizes a gain or loss, as appropriate, in
the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Earnings.
Repo-to-maturity
transactions were not material for the periods presented.
Resale and repurchase agreements recorded at fair value are
generally valued based on pricing models that use inputs with
observable levels of price transparency. Where the fair value
option election has
14
been made, changes in the fair value of resale and repurchase
agreements are reflected in principal transactions revenues and
the contractual interest coupon is recorded as interest revenue
or interest expense, respectively. For further information refer
to Note 4.
Resale and repurchase agreements recorded at their contractual
amounts plus accrued interest approximate fair value, as the
fair value of these items is not materially sensitive to shifts
in market interest rates because of the short-term nature of
these instruments
and/or
variable interest rates or to credit risk because the resale and
repurchase agreements are substantially collateralized.
Merrill Lynch may use securities received as collateral for
resale agreements to satisfy regulatory requirements such as
Rule 15c3-3
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Securities borrowed and loaned transactions may be recorded at
the amount of cash collateral advanced or received plus accrued
interest or at fair value under the fair value option election.
Securities borrowed transactions require Merrill Lynch to
provide the counterparty with collateral in the form of cash,
letters of credit, or other securities. Merrill Lynch receives
collateral in the form of cash or other securities for
securities loaned transactions. For these transactions, the fees
received or paid by Merrill Lynch are recorded as interest
revenue or expense. The carrying value of securities borrowed
and loaned transactions, recorded at the amount of cash
collateral advanced or received, approximates fair value as
these items are not materially sensitive to shifts in market
interest rates because of their short-term nature
and/or
variable interest rates or to credit risk because securities
borrowed and loaned transactions are substantially
collateralized.
For securities financing transactions, Merrill Lynchs
policy is to obtain possession of collateral with a market value
equal to or in excess of the principal amount loaned under the
agreements. To ensure that the market value of the underlying
collateral remains sufficient, collateral is generally valued
daily and Merrill Lynch may require counterparties to deposit
additional collateral or may return collateral pledged when
appropriate. Securities financing agreements give rise to
negligible credit risk as a result of these collateral
provisions, and no allowance for loan losses is considered
necessary. These instruments therefore are managed based on
market risk rather than credit risk.
Substantially all securities financing activities are transacted
under master agreements that give Merrill Lynch the right, in
the event of default, to liquidate collateral held and to offset
receivables and payables with the same counterparty. Merrill
Lynch offsets certain repurchase and resale transactions with
the same counterparty on the Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets where it has such a master agreement, that agreement is
legally enforceable and the transactions have the same maturity
date.
All Merrill Lynch-owned securities pledged to counterparties
where the counterparty has the right, by contract or custom, to
sell or repledge the securities are disclosed parenthetically in
trading assets or in investment securities on the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets.
In transactions where Merrill Lynch acts as the lender in a
securities lending agreement and receives securities that can be
pledged or sold as collateral, it recognizes an asset on the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets carried at fair value,
representing the securities received (securities received as
collateral), and a liability for the same amount, representing
the obligation to return those securities (obligation to return
securities received as collateral). The amounts on the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets result from such non-cash
transactions.
At the end of certain quarterly periods during the year ended
December 31, 2009, BAS, which was merged into MLPF&S
(see Merger with Banc of America Securities Holdings
Corporation in this Note for a description of the merger),
had recorded as sales certain transfers of agency
mortgage-backed securities (MBS) which, based on an
internal review and interpretation, should have been recorded as
secured financings. As a result of the merger with BASH, Merrill
Lynch has included the
15
effect of these transactions in its consolidated financial
statements. Merrill Lynch has recently completed a detailed
review to determine whether there are additional sales of agency
MBS that should have been recorded as secured financings and has
identified additional transactions. These transactions did not
have a material impact on Merrill Lynchs Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for any of the affected
periods.
Trading
Assets and Liabilities
Merrill Lynchs trading activities consist primarily of
securities brokerage and trading; derivatives dealing and
brokerage; commodities trading and futures brokerage; and
securities financing transactions. Trading assets and trading
liabilities consist of cash instruments (e.g., securities and
loans) and derivative instruments. Trading assets also include
commodities inventory. See Note 6 for additional
information on derivative instruments.
Trading assets and liabilities are generally recorded on a trade
date basis at fair value. Included in trading liabilities are
securities that Merrill Lynch has sold but did not own and will
therefore be obligated to purchase at a future date (short
sales). Commodities inventory is recorded at the lower of
cost or fair value. Changes in fair value of trading assets and
liabilities (i.e., unrealized gains and losses) are recognized
as principal transactions revenues in the current period.
Realized gains and losses and any related interest amounts are
included in principal transactions revenues and interest
revenues and expenses, depending on the nature of the instrument.
Derivatives
A derivative is an instrument whose value is derived from an
underlying instrument or index, such as interest rates, equity
security prices, currencies, commodity prices or credit spreads.
Derivatives include futures, forwards, swaps, option contracts
and other financial instruments with similar characteristics.
Derivative contracts often involve future commitments to
exchange interest payment streams or currencies based on a
notional or contractual amount (e.g., interest rate swaps or
currency forwards) or to purchase or sell other financial
instruments at specified terms on a specified date (e.g.,
options to buy or sell securities or currencies). Refer to
Note 6 for further information.
Investment
Securities
Investment securities consist of marketable investment
securities and non-qualifying investments. Refer to Note 8.
Marketable
Investment Securities
ML & Co. and certain of its non-broker-dealer
subsidiaries follow the guidance within Investment Accounting
for investments in debt and publicly traded equity securities.
Merrill Lynch classifies those debt securities that it does not
intend to sell as
held-to-maturity
securities.
Held-to-maturity
securities are carried at amortized cost unless a decline in
value is deemed
other-than-temporary,
in which case the carrying value is reduced. For Merrill Lynch,
the trading classification under Investment Accounting generally
includes those securities that are bought and held principally
for the purpose of selling them in the near term, securities
that are economically hedged, or securities that may contain a
bifurcatable embedded derivative as defined in Derivatives
Accounting. Securities classified as trading assets are marked
to fair value through earnings. All other qualifying securities
are classified as
available-for-sale
(AFS) and are held at fair value with unrealized
gains and losses reported in accumulated other comprehensive
income (loss) (OCI).
16
Realized gains and losses on investment securities are included
in current period earnings. For purposes of computing realized
gains and losses, the cost basis of each investment sold is
based on the specific identification method.
Merrill Lynch regularly (at least quarterly) evaluates each
held-to-maturity
and
available-for-sale
security whose fair value has declined below amortized cost to
assess whether the decline in fair value is
other-than-temporary.
A decline in a debt securitys fair value is considered to
be
other-than-temporary
if it is probable that all amounts contractually due will not be
collected or Merrill Lynch either plans to sell the security or
it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the
security before recovery of its amortized cost. For unrealized
losses on debt securities that are deemed
other-than-temporary,
the credit component of an
other-than-temporary
impairment is recognized in earnings and the non-credit
component is recognized in OCI when Merrill Lynch does not
intend to sell the security and it is more likely than not that
Merrill Lynch will not be required to sell the security prior to
recovery.
Non-Qualifying
Investments
Non-qualifying investments are those investments that are not
within the scope of Investment Accounting and primarily include
private equity investments accounted for at fair value and other
equity securities carried at cost or under the equity method of
accounting.
Private equity investments that are held for capital
appreciation
and/or
current income are accounted for under the Investment Company
Guide and carried at fair value. Additionally, certain private
equity investments that are not accounted for under the
Investment Company Guide may be carried at fair value under the
fair value option election. The fair value of private equity
investments reflects expected exit values based upon market
prices or other valuation methodologies, including market
comparables of similar companies and discounted expected cash
flows.
Merrill Lynch has non-controlling investments in the common
shares of corporations and in partnerships that do not fall
within the scope of Investment Accounting or the Investment
Company Guide. Merrill Lynch accounts for these investments
using either the cost or the equity method of accounting based
on managements ability to influence the investees or
Merrill Lynch may elect the fair value option. See the
Consolidation Accounting section of this Note for more
information.
For investments accounted for using the equity method, income is
recognized based on Merrill Lynchs share of the earnings
or losses of the investee. Dividend distributions are generally
recorded as reductions in the investment balance. Impairment
testing is based on the guidance provided in Equity Method
Accounting, and the investment is reduced when an impairment is
deemed
other-than-temporary.
For investments accounted for at cost, income is recognized when
dividends are received, or the investment is sold. Instruments
are periodically tested for impairment based on the guidance
provided in Investment Accounting, and the cost basis is reduced
when impairment is deemed
other-than-temporary.
Loans,
Notes and Mortgages, Net
Merrill Lynchs lending and related activities include loan
originations, syndications and securitizations. Loan
originations include corporate and institutional loans,
residential and commercial mortgages, asset-backed loans, and
other loans to individuals and businesses. Merrill Lynch also
engages in secondary market loan trading (see the Trading Assets
and Liabilities section of this Note) and margin lending. Loans
included in loans, notes and mortgages are classified for
accounting purposes as loans held for investment and loans held
for sale. Upon completion of the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by
Bank of
17
America, certain loans carried by Merrill Lynch were subject to
the requirements of
ASC 310-30,
Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit
Quality (Acquired Impaired Loan Accounting).
Loans held for investment are generally carried at amortized
cost, less an allowance for loan losses, which represents
Merrill Lynchs estimate of probable losses inherent in its
lending activities. The fair value option election has been made
for certain
held-for-investment
loans, notes and mortgages. Merrill Lynch performs periodic and
systematic detailed reviews of its lending portfolios to
identify credit risks and to assess overall collectability.
These reviews, which are updated on a quarterly basis, consider
a variety of factors including, but not limited to, historical
loss experience, estimated defaults, delinquencies, economic
conditions, credit scores and the fair value of any underlying
collateral. Provisions for loan losses are included in interest
and dividend revenue in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Earnings (Loss).
Merrill Lynchs estimate of loan losses includes judgment
about collectability based on available information at the
balance sheet date, and the uncertainties inherent in those
underlying assumptions. While management has based its estimates
on the best information available, future adjustments to the
allowance for loan losses may be necessary as a result of
changes in the economic environment or variances between actual
results and the original assumptions.
In general, loans that are past due 90 days or more as to
principal or interest, or where reasonable doubt exists as to
timely collection, including loans that are individually
identified as being impaired, are classified as non-performing
unless well-secured and in the process of collection. Loans,
primarily commercial, whose contractual terms have been
restructured in a manner which grants a concession to a borrower
experiencing financial difficulties are considered troubled debt
restructurings (TDRs) and are classified as
non-performing until the loans have performed for an adequate
period of time under the restructured agreement. Interest
accrued but not collected is reversed when a commercial loan is
considered non-performing. Interest collections on commercial
loans for which the ultimate collectability of principal is
uncertain are applied as principal reductions; otherwise, such
collections are credited to income when received. Commercial
loans may be restored to performing status when all principal
and interest is current and full repayment of the remaining
contractual principal and interest is expected, or when the loan
otherwise becomes well-secured and is in the process of
collection.
Loans held for sale are carried at lower of cost or fair value.
The fair value option election has been made for certain
held-for-sale
loans, notes and mortgages. Estimation is required in
determining these fair values. The fair value of loans made in
connection with commercial lending activity, consisting mainly
of senior debt, is primarily estimated using the market value of
publicly issued debt instruments when available or discounted
cash flows.
Nonrefundable loan origination fees, loan commitment fees, and
draw down fees received in conjunction with held for
investment loans are generally deferred and recognized over the
contractual life of the loan as an adjustment to the yield. If,
at the outset, or any time during the term of the loan, it
becomes probable that the repayment period will be extended, the
amortization is recalculated using the expected remaining life
of the loan. When the loan contract does not provide for a
specific maturity date, managements best estimate of the
repayment period is used. At repayment of the loan, any
unrecognized deferred fee is immediately recognized in earnings.
If the loan is accounted for as held for sale, the fees received
are deferred and recognized as part of the gain or loss on sale
in other revenues. If the loan is accounted for under the fair
value option election, the fees are included in the
determination of the fair value and included in other revenues.
New
Accounting Pronouncements
In April 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued new accounting guidance on TDRs,
including criteria to determine whether a loan modification
represents a concession and whether the debtor is experiencing
financial difficulties. This new accounting guidance was
effective for Merrill
18
Lynchs interim period ended September 30, 2011 with
retrospective application back to January 1, 2011. The new
accounting guidance was not material to Merrill Lynch.
In April 2011, the FASB issued new accounting guidance that
addresses effective control in repurchase agreements and
eliminates the requirement for entities to consider whether the
transferor has the ability to repurchase the financial assets in
a repurchase agreement. This new accounting guidance will be
effective, on a prospective basis, for new transactions or
modifications to existing transactions, on January 1, 2012.
The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material
impact on Merrill Lynchs consolidated financial position
or results of operations.
In May 2011, the FASB issued amendments to Fair Value
Accounting. The amendments clarify the application of the
highest and best use and valuation premise concepts, preclude
the application of blockage factors in the valuation of all
financial instruments and include criteria for applying the fair
value measurement principles to portfolios of financial
instruments. The amendments additionally prescribe enhanced
financial statement disclosures for Level 3 fair value
measurements. The new amendments will be effective for the three
months ended March 31, 2012. Merrill Lynch is currently
assessing the impact of this guidance on its consolidated
financial position and results of operations.
In June 2011, the FASB issued new accounting guidance on the
presentation of comprehensive income in financial statements.
The new guidance requires entities to report components of
comprehensive income in either a continuous statement of
comprehensive income or two separate but consecutive statements.
This new accounting guidance will be effective for Merrill Lynch
for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The adoption of
this guidance, which involves disclosures only, will not impact
Merrill Lynchs consolidated financial position or results
of operations.
In September 2011, the FASB issued new accounting guidance that
simplifies goodwill impairment testing. The new guidance permits
entities to make a qualitative assessment of whether it is
more-likely-than-not that the fair value of a reporting unit is
less than its carrying value before applying the two-step
impairment test. If it is not more-likely-than-not that the fair
value of a reporting unit is less than the carrying amount, an
entity would not be required to perform the two-step impairment
test. The guidance includes factors for entities to consider
when making the qualitative assessment, including macroeconomic
and company-specific factors as well as factors relating to a
specific reporting unit. Merrill Lynch early adopted the new
accounting guidance for the annual goodwill impairment test
completed during the three months ended September 30, 2011
and the adoption did not have a material impact on the results
of the goodwill impairment test.
Note 2. Transactions with Bank of America
Merrill Lynch has entered into various transactions with Bank of
America, primarily to integrate certain activities within either
Bank of America or Merrill Lynch. Transactions with Bank of
America also include various asset and liability transfers and
transactions associated with intercompany sales and trading and
financing activities.
Merger
with BASH
See Note 1 Merger with Banc of America
Securities Holdings Corporation (BASH) for
further information on this transaction.
Other
Related Party Transactions
Merrill Lynch has entered into various other transactions with
Bank of America, primarily in connection with certain sales and
trading and financing activities. Details on amounts receivable
from
19
and payable to Bank of America as of September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010 are presented below:
Receivables from Bank of America are comprised of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
6,707
|
|
|
$
|
14,471
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory purposes
|
|
|
7,405
|
|
|
|
5,508
|
|
Receivables under resale agreements
|
|
|
29,106
|
|
|
|
31,053
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
|
1,475
|
|
|
|
643
|
|
Net intercompany funding receivable
|
|
|
9,264
|
|
|
|
7,305
|
|
Other receivables
|
|
|
1,701
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
55,658
|
|
|
$
|
60,655
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables to Bank of America are comprised of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
$
|
20,210
|
|
|
$
|
12,890
|
|
Payables under securities loaned transactions
|
|
|
2,359
|
|
|
|
2,352
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
2,395
|
|
|
|
1,901
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Trading liabilities
|
|
|
2,334
|
|
|
|
520
|
|
Other payables
|
|
|
3,620
|
|
|
|
2,746
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(1)
|
|
|
2,579
|
|
|
|
2,579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
33,587
|
|
|
$
|
23,021
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are subordinated
borrowings from Bank of America (see Note 12). |
Total net revenues and non-interest expenses related to
transactions with Bank of America for the three months ended
September 30, 2011 were $288 million and
$537 million, respectively. Such revenues and expenses for
the nine months ended September 30, 2011 were
$822 million and $1,766 million, respectively. Total
net revenues and non-interest expenses related to transactions
with Bank of America for the three months ended
September 30, 2010 were net losses of $111 million and
expenses of $365 million, respectively. Such revenues and
expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 were
net losses of $100 million and expenses of
$816 million, respectively. Non-interest expenses for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 reflect
increased intercompany service fees resulting from the
integration of Bank of Americas and Merrill Lynchs
methodologies for allocating expenses associated with shared
services to their subsidiaries. The results for the nine months
ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010
included gains of $5 million and $282 million,
respectively, from the sale of approximately $3.7 billion
and $11.2 billion, respectively, of
available-for-sale
securities to Bank of America. These transfers were made to
enable Bank of America or its non-Merrill Lynch subsidiaries to
more efficiently manage the existing portfolio of similar
available-for-sale
securities.
Bank of America and Merrill Lynch have entered into certain
intercompany lending and borrowing arrangements to facilitate
centralized liquidity management. Included in these arrangements
is a $50 billion one-year revolving line of credit that
allows Bank of America to borrow funds from Merrill Lynch at a
spread to LIBOR that is reset periodically and is consistent
with other intercompany agreements. The line of credit matures
on January 1, 2012 and will automatically be extended by
one year to the succeeding January 1st unless Merrill
Lynch provides written notice not to extend at least
45 days prior to the maturity date. Approximately
$7.1 billion and $6.1 billion were outstanding under
this line of credit as of September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively. In addition, in October
2011, Merrill Lynch
20
entered into a short-term revolving credit facility that will
allow Bank of America to borrow up to an additional
$25 billion. For information on Merrill Lynchs other
borrowing arrangements with Bank of America, including Bank of
Americas guarantees of certain debt securities, warrants
and/or other
certificates and obligations of certain subsidiaries of
ML & Co., refer to Note 12. Bank of America has
also guaranteed the performance of Merrill Lynch on certain
derivative transactions (see Note 6).
Note 3. Segment and Geographic Information
Segment
Information
Pursuant to ASC 280, Segment Reporting, operating
segments represent components of an enterprise for which
separate financial information is available that is regularly
evaluated by the chief operating decision maker in determining
how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The
business activities of Merrill Lynch are included within certain
of the operating segments of Bank of America. Detailed financial
information related to the operations of Merrill Lynch, however,
is not provided to Merrill Lynchs chief operating decision
maker. As a result, Merrill Lynch does not contain any
identifiable operating segments under Segment Reporting, and
therefore the financial information of Merrill Lynch is
presented as a single segment.
Geographic
Information
Merrill Lynch conducts its business activities through offices
in the following five regions:
|
|
|
United States;
|
|
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA);
|
|
|
Pacific Rim;
|
|
|
Latin America; and
|
|
|
Canada.
|
The principal methodologies used in preparing the geographic
information below are as follows:
|
|
|
Revenues are generally recorded based on the location of the
employee generating the revenue; and
|
|
|
Intercompany transfers are based primarily on service agreements.
|
21
The information that follows, in managements judgment,
provides a reasonable representation of each regions
contribution to the consolidated net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
Revenues, net of interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe, Middle East, and Africa
|
|
$
|
568
|
|
|
$
|
3,217
|
|
|
$
|
1,079
|
|
|
$
|
3,811
|
|
Pacific Rim
|
|
|
692
|
|
|
|
2,028
|
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
|
1,521
|
|
Latin America
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
1,039
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
783
|
|
Canada
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
1,646
|
|
|
|
6,511
|
|
|
|
1,752
|
|
|
|
6,292
|
|
United
States(1)(2)
|
|
|
4,224
|
|
|
|
14,121
|
|
|
|
3,984
|
|
|
|
15,535
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues, net of interest
expense(3)
|
|
$
|
5,870
|
|
|
$
|
20,632
|
|
|
$
|
5,736
|
|
|
$
|
21,827
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
U.S. results for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2011 included gains of
$2.9 billion and
$2.7 billion,
respectively, due to the impact of changes in Merrill
Lynchs credit spreads on the carrying values of certain
long-term borrowings, primarily structured notes. U.S. results
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010
included losses of $0.3 billion and gains of
$1.1 billion, respectively, due to the impact of changes in
Merrill Lynchs credit spreads on the carrying values of
certain long-term borrowings, primarily structured notes.
|
(2) |
|
Corporate net revenues and
adjustments are reflected in the U.S. region. |
(3) |
|
Results for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011 included gains of
$0.7 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively,
associated with the valuation of derivative liabilities due to
changes in Merrill Lynchs credit spreads. Results for the
three months ended September 30, 2010 included losses of
$0.1 billion associated with the valuation of derivative
liabilities due to changes in Merrill Lynchs credit
spreads; the impact on the results for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 was not material. |
Note 4. Fair Value Disclosures
Fair
Value Accounting
Fair
Value Hierarchy
In accordance with Fair Value Accounting, Merrill Lynch has
categorized its financial instruments, based on the priority of
the inputs to the valuation technique, into a three-level fair
value hierarchy.
The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities
(Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable
inputs (Level 3).
Financial assets and liabilities recorded on the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets are categorized based on the inputs
to the valuation techniques as follows:
|
|
Level 1.
|
Financial assets and liabilities whose values are based on
unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in
an active market that Merrill Lynch has the ability to access
(examples include active exchange-traded equity securities,
exchange-traded derivatives, U.S. Government securities,
and certain other sovereign government obligations).
|
|
Level 2.
|
Financial assets and liabilities whose values are based on
quoted prices in markets that are not active or model inputs
that are observable either directly or indirectly for
substantially the full term of the asset or liability.
Level 2 inputs include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
a)
|
Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active
markets (examples include restricted stock and U.S. agency
securities);
|
22
|
|
|
|
b)
|
Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in
non-active markets (examples include corporate and municipal
bonds, which can trade infrequently);
|
|
|
|
|
c)
|
Pricing models whose inputs are observable for substantially the
full term of the asset or liability (examples include most
over-the-counter
derivatives, including interest rate and currency
swaps); and
|
|
|
|
|
d)
|
Pricing models whose inputs are derived principally from or
corroborated by observable market data through correlation or
other means for substantially the full term of the asset or
liability (examples include certain residential and commercial
mortgage-related assets, including loans, securities and
derivatives).
|
|
|
Level 3. |
Financial assets and liabilities whose values are based on
prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both
unobservable and significant to the overall fair value
measurement. These inputs reflect managements view about
the assumptions a market participant would use in pricing the
asset or liability (examples include certain private equity
investments, certain residential and commercial mortgage-related
assets and long-dated or complex derivatives).
|
As required by Fair Value Accounting, when the inputs used to
measure fair value fall within different levels of the
hierarchy, the level within which the fair value measurement is
categorized is based on the lowest level input that is
significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. For
example, a Level 3 fair value measurement may include
inputs that are observable (Level 1 and 2) and
unobservable (Level 3). Therefore gains and losses for such
assets and liabilities categorized within the Level 3
reconciliation below may include changes in fair value that are
attributable to both observable inputs (Levels 1 and
2) and unobservable inputs (Level 3). Further, the
following reconciliations do not take into consideration the
offsetting effect of Level 1 and 2 financial instruments
entered into by Merrill Lynch that economically hedge certain
exposures to the Level 3 positions.
A review of fair value hierarchy classifications is conducted on
a quarterly basis. Changes in the observability of valuation
inputs may result in a reclassification for certain financial
assets or liabilities. Level 3 gains and losses represent
amounts incurred during the period in which the instrument was
classified as Level 3. Reclassifications impacting
Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are reported as
transfers in or transfers out of the Level 3 category as of
the beginning of the quarter in which the reclassifications
occur. Refer to the recurring and non-recurring sections within
this Note for further information on transfers in and out of
Level 3.
Valuation
Techniques
The following outlines the valuation methodologies for Merrill
Lynchs material categories of assets and liabilities:
U.S.
Government and agencies
U.S. Treasury securities U.S. Treasury
securities are valued using quoted market prices and are
generally classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy.
U.S. agency securities U.S. agency securities
are comprised of two main categories consisting of agency issued
debt and mortgage pass-throughs. The fair value of agency issued
debt securities is derived using market prices and recent trade
activity gathered from independent dealer pricing services or
brokers. Mortgage pass-throughs include To-be-announced
(TBA) securities and mortgage pass-through
certificates. TBA securities are generally valued using quoted
market prices. Generally, the fair value of mortgage
pass-through certificates is based on market prices of
comparable securities. Agency
23
issued debt securities and mortgage pass-throughs are generally
classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
Sovereign government obligations Sovereign government
obligations are valued using quoted prices in active markets
when available. To the extent quoted prices are not available,
fair value is determined based on reference to recent trading
activity and quoted prices of similar securities. These
securities are generally classified in Level 1 or
Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy, primarily based on the
issuing country.
Municipal
debt
Municipal bonds The fair value of municipal bonds is
calculated using recent trade activity, market price quotations
and new issuance levels. In the absence of this information,
fair value is calculated using comparable bond credit spreads.
Current interest rates, credit events, and individual bond
characteristics such as coupon, call features, maturity, and
revenue purpose are considered in the valuation process. The
majority of these bonds are classified as Level 2 in the
fair value hierarchy.
Auction Rate Securities (ARS) Merrill Lynch
holds investments in certain ARS, including student loan and
municipal ARS. Student loan ARS are comprised of various pools
of student loans. Municipal ARS are issued by states and
municipalities for a wide variety of purposes, including but not
limited to healthcare, industrial development, education and
transportation infrastructure. The fair value of the student
loan ARS is calculated using a pricing model that relies upon a
number of assumptions including weighted average life, coupon,
discount margin and liquidity discounts. The fair value of the
municipal ARS is calculated based upon projected refinancing and
spread assumptions. In both cases, recent trades and issuer
tenders are considered in the valuations. Student loan ARS and
municipal ARS are classified as Level 3 in the fair value
hierarchy.
Corporate
and other debt
Corporate bonds Corporate bonds are valued based on
either the most recent observable trade
and/or
external quotes, depending on availability. The most recent
observable trade price is given highest priority as the
valuation benchmark based on an evaluation of transaction date,
size, frequency, and bid-offer. This price may be adjusted by
bond or credit default swap spread movement. When credit default
swap spreads are referenced,
cash-to-synthetic
basis magnitude and movement as well as maturity matching are
incorporated into the value. When neither external quotes nor a
recent trade is available, the bonds are valued using a
discounted cash flow approach based on risk parameters of
comparable securities. In such cases, the potential pricing
difference in spread
and/or price
terms with the traded comparable is considered. Corporate bonds
are generally classified as Level 2 or Level 3 in the
fair value hierarchy.
Corporate loans and commitments The fair values of
corporate loans and loan commitments are based on market prices
and most recent transactions when available. When not available,
a discounted cash flow valuation approach is applied using
market-based credit spreads of comparable debt instruments,
recent new issuance activity or relevant credit derivatives with
appropriate
cash-to-synthetic
basis adjustments. Corporate loans and commitments are generally
classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. Certain
corporate loans, particularly those related to emerging market,
leveraged and distressed companies have limited price
transparency. These loans are generally classified as
Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
24
Mortgages,
mortgage-backed and asset-backed
Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities (RMBS),
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (CMBS), and
other Asset-Backed Securities (ABS) RMBS, CMBS
and other ABS are valued based on observable price or credit
spreads for the particular security, or when price or credit
spreads are not observable, the valuation is based on prices of
comparable bonds or the present value of expected future cash
flows. Valuation levels of RMBS and CMBS indices are used as an
additional data point for benchmarking purposes or to price
outright index positions.
When estimating the fair value based upon the present value of
expected future cash flows, Merrill Lynch uses its best estimate
of the key assumptions, including forecasted credit losses,
prepayment rates, forward yield curves and discount rates
commensurate with the risks involved, while also taking into
account performance of the underlying collateral.
RMBS, CMBS and other ABS are classified as Level 3 in the
fair value hierarchy if external prices or credit spreads are
unobservable or if comparable trades/assets involve significant
subjectivity related to property type differences, cash flows,
performance and other inputs; otherwise, they are classified as
Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Equities
Exchange-Traded Equity Securities Exchange-traded equity
securities are generally valued based on quoted prices from the
exchange. To the extent these securities are actively traded,
they are classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy,
otherwise they are classified as Level 2.
Derivative
contracts
Listed Derivative Contracts Listed derivatives that are
actively traded are generally valued based on quoted prices from
the exchange and are classified as Level 1 in the fair
value hierarchy. Listed derivatives that are not actively traded
are valued using the same approaches as those applied to OTC
derivatives; they are generally classified as Level 2 in
the fair value hierarchy.
OTC Derivative Contracts OTC derivative contracts include
forwards, swaps and options related to interest rate, foreign
currency, credit, equity or commodity underlyings.
The fair value of OTC derivatives is derived using market prices
and other market based pricing parameters such as interest
rates, currency rates and volatilities that are observed
directly in the market or gathered from independent sources such
as dealer consensus pricing services or brokers. Where models
are used, they are used consistently and reflect the contractual
terms of and specific risks inherent in the contracts.
Generally, the models do not require a high level of
subjectivity since the valuation techniques used in the models
do not require significant judgment and inputs to the models are
readily observable in active markets. When appropriate,
valuations are adjusted for various factors such as liquidity
and credit considerations based on available market evidence. In
addition, for most collateralized interest rate and currency
derivatives the requirement to pay interest on the collateral
may be considered in the valuation. The majority of OTC
derivative contracts are classified as Level 2 in the fair
value hierarchy.
OTC derivative contracts that do not have readily observable
market based pricing parameters are classified as Level 3
in the fair value hierarchy. Examples of derivative contracts
classified within Level 3 include contractual obligations
that have tenures that extend beyond periods in which inputs to
the model would be observable, exotic derivatives with
significant inputs into a valuation model that are less
transparent in the market and certain credit default swaps
(CDS) referenced to mortgage-backed securities. For
example, derivative instruments, such as certain CDS referenced
to RMBS,
25
CMBS, ABS and collateralized debt obligations
(CDOs), may be valued based on the underlying
mortgage risk where these instruments are not actively quoted.
Inputs to the valuation will include available information on
similar underlying loans or securities in the cash market. The
prepayments and loss assumptions on the underlying loans or
securities are estimated using a combination of historical data,
prices on recent market transactions, relevant observable market
indices such as the Asset Backed Securities Index
(ABX) or Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities Index
(CMBX) and prepayment and default scenarios and
analyses.
CDOs The fair value of CDOs is derived from a referenced
basket of CDS, the CDOs capital structure, and the default
correlation, which is an input to a proprietary CDO valuation
model. The underlying CDO portfolios typically contain
investment grade as well as non-investment grade obligors. After
adjusting for differences in risk profile, the correlation
parameter for an actual transaction is estimated by benchmarking
against observable standardized index tranches and other
comparable transactions. CDOs are classified as either
Level 2 or Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Investment
securities non-qualifying
Investments in Private Equity, Real Estate and Hedge
Funds Merrill Lynch has investments in numerous asset
classes, including: direct private equity, private equity funds,
hedge funds and real estate funds. Valuing these investments
requires significant management judgment due to the nature of
the assets and the lack of quoted market prices and liquidity in
these assets. Initially, the transaction price of the investment
is generally considered to be the best indicator of fair value.
Thereafter, valuation of direct investments is based on an
assessment of each individual investment using various
methodologies, which include publicly traded comparables derived
by multiplying a key performance metric (e.g., earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) of the portfolio
company by the relevant valuation multiple observed for
comparable companies, acquisition comparables, entry level
multiples and discounted cash flows. These valuations are
subject to appropriate discounts for lack of liquidity or
marketability. Certain factors which may influence changes to
fair value include but are not limited to, recapitalizations,
subsequent rounds of financing, and offerings in the equity or
debt capital markets. For fund investments, Merrill Lynch
generally records the fair value of its proportionate interest
in the funds capital as reported by the funds
respective managers.
Investment securities non-qualifying include equity securities
that have recently gone through initial public offerings or
secondary sales of public positions. These investments are
primarily classified as either Level 1 or Level 2 in
the fair value hierarchy. Level 2 classifications generally
include those publicly traded equity investments that have a
legal or contractual transfer restriction. All other investments
in private equity, real estate and hedge funds are classified as
Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy due to infrequent
trading
and/or
unobservable market prices.
Resale
and repurchase agreements
Merrill Lynch elected the fair value option for certain resale
and repurchase agreements. For such agreements, the fair value
is estimated using a discounted cash flow model which
incorporates inputs such as interest rate yield curves and
option volatility. Resale and repurchase agreements for which
the fair value option has been elected are generally classified
as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.
Long-term
and short-term borrowings
Merrill Lynch and its consolidated VIEs issue structured notes
that have coupons or repayment terms linked to the performance
of debt or equity securities, indices, currencies or
commodities. The fair value of structured notes is estimated
using valuation models for the combined derivative and debt
portions of the notes when the fair value option has been
elected. These models incorporate observable, and in some
instances unobservable, inputs including security prices,
interest rate yield
26
curves, option volatility, currency, commodity or equity rates
and correlations between these inputs. The impact of Merrill
Lynchs own credit spreads is also included based on
Merrill Lynchs observed secondary bond market spreads.
Structured notes are classified as either Level 2 or
Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Recurring
Fair Value
The following tables present Merrill Lynchs fair value
hierarchy for those assets and liabilities measured at fair
value on a recurring basis as of September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis
|
|
|
as of September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netting
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Adj(1)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities segregated for regulatory purposes or deposited with
clearing organizations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
319
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
319
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,777
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,777
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
982
|
|
|
|
765
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,747
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities segregated for regulatory purposes or deposited
with clearing organizations
|
|
|
982
|
|
|
|
2,861
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,843
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale agreements
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
89,119
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
89,119
|
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,543
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,543
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
|
13,339
|
|
|
|
7,078
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
20,581
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,331
|
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,485
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
26,144
|
|
|
|
1,826
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
28,345
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
15,661
|
|
|
|
4,314
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
19,975
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,020
|
|
|
|
3,220
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7,240
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
23,656
|
|
|
|
19,910
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
43,566
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
1,345
|
|
|
|
11,031
|
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14,642
|
|
Physical commodities and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
64,484
|
|
|
|
64,304
|
|
|
|
10,790
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
139,578
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
contracts(2)
|
|
|
4,524
|
|
|
|
803,294
|
|
|
|
10,895
|
|
|
|
(779,480
|
)
|
|
|
39,233
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. treasury securities and agency debentures
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
393
|
|
Securities, mortgage-backed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and asset-backed Agency CMOs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
Non-agency MBSs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
490
|
|
Corporate ABS
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
383
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
2,497
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
1,288
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
2,890
|
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
1,671
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities received as collateral
|
|
|
11,874
|
|
|
|
684
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,558
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
560
|
|
|
|
1,839
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,399
|
|
Other Assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis
|
|
|
as of September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netting
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Adj(1)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,943
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,943
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,527
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,527
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts: Equities
|
|
|
14,228
|
|
|
|
2,239
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16,467
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
16,092
|
|
|
|
610
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16,702
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,588
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,641
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
14,216
|
|
|
|
2,461
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16,677
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
44,896
|
|
|
|
15,143
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
60,109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
contracts(2)
|
|
|
4,044
|
|
|
|
800,649
|
|
|
|
6,442
|
|
|
|
(781,597
|
)
|
|
|
29,538
|
|
Obligation to return securities received as collateral
|
|
|
11,874
|
|
|
|
684
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,558
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
28,877
|
|
|
|
2,144
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
31,021
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents counterparty and
cash collateral netting. |
(2) |
|
Refer to Note 6 for
product level detail. |
Transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 assets and
liabilities were not significant for the three or nine month
periods ended September 30, 2011.
Level 3 derivative contracts (assets) relate to derivative
positions on U.S. ABS CDOs and other mortgage products of
$2.6 billion, $3.5 billion of other credit derivatives
that incorporate unobservable model valuation inputs, and
$4.7 billion of equity, currency, interest rate and
commodity derivatives that are long-dated
and/or have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
Level 3 non-qualifying investment securities primarily
relate to certain private equity positions.
Level 3 loans, notes and mortgages primarily relate to
residential mortgage and corporate loans.
Level 3 other assets represent net monoline exposure to a
single counterparty. This exposure was reclassified from
derivative contracts (assets) during the third quarter of 2011
because of the inherent default risk and given that these
contracts no longer provide a hedge benefit (see Note 6).
Level 3 derivative contracts (liabilities) relate to
derivative positions on U.S. ABS CDOs and other mortgage
products of $1.7 billion, $1.0 billion of other credit
derivatives that incorporate unobservable model valuation
inputs, and $3.7 billion of equity, currency, interest rate
and commodity derivatives that are long-dated
and/or have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
Level 3 long-term borrowings primarily relate to
equity-linked structured notes of $1.7 billion, which have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis
|
|
|
as of December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netting
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Adj(1)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities segregated for regulatory purposes or deposited with
clearing organizations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
306
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
306
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
1,652
|
|
|
|
1,402
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,054
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
1,419
|
|
|
|
1,413
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,832
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities segregated for regulatory purposes or deposited
with clearing organizations
|
|
|
3,071
|
|
|
|
3,121
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale
agreements(2)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
74,255
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
74,255
|
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
|
20,458
|
|
|
|
7,673
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
28,301
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,903
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,903
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
18,393
|
|
|
|
3,612
|
|
|
|
243
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22,248
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22,300
|
|
|
|
4,605
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
26,905
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
511
|
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
798
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,247
|
|
|
|
5,747
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,994
|
|
U.S. Government and
agencies(3)
|
|
|
17,742
|
|
|
|
23,636
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
41,378
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
732
|
|
|
|
11,102
|
|
|
|
2,327
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14,161
|
|
Physical commodities and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
598
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
598
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
57,325
|
|
|
|
80,582
|
|
|
|
13,379
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
151,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
contracts(4)
|
|
|
1,622
|
|
|
|
590,020
|
|
|
|
14,359
|
|
|
|
(566,630
|
)
|
|
|
39,371
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities and agency debentures
|
|
|
430
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
430
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities residential MBS
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,869
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,869
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities agency CMOs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities non-agency MBS
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
518
|
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
731
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
430
|
|
|
|
4,448
|
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
2,792
|
|
|
|
690
|
|
|
|
3,394
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,876
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
3,222
|
|
|
|
5,138
|
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
11,967
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities received as collateral
|
|
|
19,471
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
20,363
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,423
|
|
|
|
1,891
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,314
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
37,394
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
37,394
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,472
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,472
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
|
11,706
|
|
|
|
914
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12,620
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,406
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,406
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
14,748
|
|
|
|
957
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
15,705
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,500
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9,500
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
19,860
|
|
|
|
4,887
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24,747
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
224
|
|
|
|
347
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
46,538
|
|
|
|
18,011
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
64,549
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives
contracts(4)
|
|
|
1,142
|
|
|
|
590,138
|
|
|
|
7,991
|
|
|
|
(567,074
|
)
|
|
|
32,197
|
|
Obligation to return securities received as collateral
|
|
|
19,471
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
20,363
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
165
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
36,818
|
|
|
|
2,396
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
39,214
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents counterparty and
cash collateral netting. |
29
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Receivables under resale
agreements have been revised from approximately $51 billion
(as previously reported) to approximately $74 billion. A
similar revision has been made on the balance sheet to the
parenthetical disclosure of receivables under resale agreements
measured at fair value in accordance with the fair value option
election. |
(3) |
|
U.S. Government and agencies
trading asset amounts shown in Level 1 and Level 2
have been revised from approximately $7 billion and
$34 billion, respectively (as previously reported) to
approximately $18 billion and $24 billion,
respectively. |
(4) |
|
Refer to Note 6 for
product level detail. |
Level 3 derivative contracts (assets) relate to derivative
positions on U.S. ABS CDOs and other mortgage products of
$5.7 billion, $4.1 billion of other credit derivatives
that incorporate unobservable model valuation inputs, and
$4.5 billion of equity, currency, interest rate and
commodity derivatives that are long-dated
and/or have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
Level 3 non-qualifying investment securities primarily
relate to certain private equity positions.
Level 3 loans, notes and mortgages primarily relate to
residential mortgage and corporate loans.
Level 3 derivative contracts (liabilities) relate to
derivative positions on U.S. ABS CDOs and other mortgage
products of $2.2 billion, $2.0 billion of other credit
derivatives that incorporate unobservable model valuation
inputs, and $3.8 billion of equity, currency, interest rate
and commodity derivatives that are long-dated
and/or have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
Level 3 long-term borrowings primarily relate to
equity-linked structured notes of $1.9 billion that are
long-dated
and/or have
unobservable model valuation inputs (e.g., unobservable
correlation).
30
The following tables provide a summary of changes in Merrill
Lynchs Level 3 financial assets and liabilities for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Level 3 Financial Assets and Liabilities
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Realized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Realized and Unrealized Gains or (Losses)
|
|
and Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
included in Income
|
|
Gains or (Losses)
|
|
Gains or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
included in
|
|
(Losses) to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Ending
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Income
|
|
OCI
|
|
Sales
|
|
Purchases
|
|
Issuances
|
|
Settlements
|
|
In
|
|
Out
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
163
|
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(73
|
)
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
164
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
152
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
154
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
391
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
375
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
3,846
|
|
|
|
(199
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(199
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(433
|
)
|
|
|
925
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(238
|
)
|
|
|
516
|
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
4,314
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
4,848
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,281
|
)
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(281
|
)
|
|
|
3,220
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
2,486
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(189
|
)
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
12,193
|
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,978
|
)
|
|
|
1,175
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(503
|
)
|
|
|
600
|
|
|
|
(397
|
)
|
|
|
10,790
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
5,101
|
|
|
|
988
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
988
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,912
|
)
|
|
|
285
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
4,453
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities agency CMOs
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities non-agency MBSs
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
Corporate ABS
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
383
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
1,571
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(286
|
)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(109
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,288
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(287
|
)
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(109
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
1,940
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
(53
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(154
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
450
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(326
|
)
|
|
|
1,839
|
|
Other Assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
2,532
|
|
|
|
344
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
362
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
(173
|
)
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
|
(240
|
)
|
|
|
2,144
|
|
|
|
Net gains in principal transactions related to derivative
contracts, net were primarily due to credit spreads widening on
short CDS baskets.
Sales of mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities
primarily relates to the sale of CDO and collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) positions.
Purchases of corporate debt primarily relates to purchases of
non-investment grade and distressed corporate loans and bonds.
The purchases for other assets and settlements for derivative
contracts, net reflect the reclassification of approximately
$1.6 billion of net monoline exposure from derivative
contracts (assets) to other assets because of the inherent
default risk and given that these contracts no longer provide a
hedge benefit.
31
Transfers in for corporate debt are primarily due to decreased
observability (i.e., decreased market liquidity) for certain
corporate loans and bonds. Transfers out for mortgages,
mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities primarily relates to
increased observability (i.e., trading activity) for certain
CMBS positions. Transfers in for derivative contracts, net are
primarily due to certain equity derivative positions with
unobservable correlation. Transfers out for loans, notes and
mortgages and other payables interest and other
primarily relates to increased observability (i.e., liquid
comparables) for certain corporate loans and unfunded loan
commitments. Transfers in and out related to long-term
borrowings are primarily due to changes in the impact of
unobservable inputs on the value of certain equity-linked
structured notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Level 3 Financial Assets and Liabilities
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
Total Realized and Unrealized
|
|
Total Realized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains or (Losses)
|
|
and Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
included in Income
|
|
Gains or (Losses)
|
|
Gains or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
included in
|
|
(Losses) to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Ending
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Income
|
|
OCI
|
|
Sales
|
|
Purchases
|
|
Issuances
|
|
Settlements
|
|
In
|
|
Out
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
170
|
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(159
|
)
|
|
$
|
181
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(64
|
)
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
164
|
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
238
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
154
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
243
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
|
|
375
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
4,605
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,529
|
)
|
|
|
2,043
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(346
|
)
|
|
|
763
|
|
|
|
(350
|
)
|
|
|
4,314
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(123
|
)
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
297
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
5,747
|
|
|
|
286
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
286
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(3,689
|
)
|
|
|
1,596
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(90
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(631
|
)
|
|
|
3,220
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
2,327
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,810
|
)
|
|
|
1,936
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(361
|
)
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
13,379
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
597
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(8,425
|
)
|
|
|
6,179
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(940
|
)
|
|
|
1,043
|
|
|
|
(1,043
|
)
|
|
|
10,790
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
6,368
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(796
|
)
|
|
|
742
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2,774
|
)
|
|
|
584
|
|
|
|
(686
|
)
|
|
|
4,453
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities agency CMOs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities non-agency MBSs
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
Corporate ABS
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
315
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
383
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
3,394
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
451
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
451
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,138
|
)
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(298
|
)
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
(1,548
|
)
|
|
|
1,288
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(1,221
|
)
|
|
|
367
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
375
|
|
|
|
(1,548
|
)
|
|
|
1,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
1,891
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(650
|
)
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
665
|
|
|
|
(175
|
)
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
(366
|
)
|
|
|
1,839
|
|
Other Assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
2,396
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
412
|
|
|
|
(499
|
)
|
|
|
855
|
|
|
|
(615
|
)
|
|
|
2,144
|
|
|
|
Net gains in principal transactions related to derivative
contracts, net were primarily due to credit spreads widening on
short CDS baskets in the third quarter of 2011.
32
Sales of corporate debt primarily relates to sales of corporate
ARS and distressed loans during the first quarter of 2011. Sales
of mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities
primarily relates to the sale of CDO positions in conjunction
with the liquidation of a VIE and sales of CLO positions due to
the unwind of Merrill Lynchs proprietary trading business.
Purchases of corporate debt primarily relates to purchases of
non-investment grade and distressed corporate loans and bonds.
Purchases of mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
securities primarily relates to purchases of CDO and CLO
positions. Sales and purchases of municipal securities is
primarily due to dealer activity in student loan ARS. Sales of
investment securities non-qualifying primarily relates to the
sale of a private equity investment during the first quarter of
2011.
The purchases for other assets and settlements for derivative
contracts, net reflect the reclassification of approximately
$1.6 billion of net monoline exposure from derivative
contracts (assets) to other assets because of the inherent
default risk and given that these contracts no longer provide a
hedge benefit.
Transfers in for corporate debt are primarily due to decreased
observability (i.e., decreased market liquidity) for certain
corporate loans and bonds. Transfers out for corporate debt
primarily relates to increased price observability (e.g.,
trading comparables) for certain corporate bond positions.
Transfers out for mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
securities primarily relates to increased price observability
for certain RMBS, CMBS and consumer ABS portfolios. Transfers in
for derivative contracts, net primarily relates to changes in
the valuation methodology for certain CDO positions, in addition
to certain equity derivative positions with unobservable
correlation. Transfers out for derivative contracts, net
primarily relates to increased price observability for certain
equity and credit derivative positions. Transfers in for
investment securities non-qualifying are due to a change in the
valuation methodology for a private equity fund. Transfers out
related to investment securities non-qualifying are due to a
private equity investment that underwent an initial public
offering during the first quarter of 2011. Transfers out for
loans, notes and mortgages and other payables
interest and other primarily relates to increased observability
(i.e., liquid comparables) for certain corporate loans and
unfunded loan commitments. Transfers in and out related to
long-term borrowings are primarily due to changes in the impact
of unobservable inputs on the value of certain equity-linked
structured notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Level 3 Financial Assets and Liabilities
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Realized and Unrealized Gains or (Losses)
|
|
Total Realized and
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Sales,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in Income
|
|
Unrealized Gains
|
|
Gains or
|
|
Issuances
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
or (Losses)
|
|
(Losses) to
|
|
and
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Ending
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
included in Income
|
|
OCI
|
|
Settlements
|
|
In
|
|
out
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
345
|
|
|
$
|
(20
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(20
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
328
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
940
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(653
|
)
|
|
|
268
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
5,580
|
|
|
|
202
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
202
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(442
|
)
|
|
|
260
|
|
|
|
(555
|
)
|
|
|
5,045
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
205
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
6,874
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(226
|
)
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6,779
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
3,116
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(221
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
17,043
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(921
|
)
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
(1,212
|
)
|
|
|
15,548
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
6,591
|
|
|
|
(246
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(246
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
818
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
(551
|
)
|
|
|
6,794
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities residential non-agency
MBSs
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
352
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
4,128
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(104
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
4,480
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(276
|
)
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
3,152
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(196
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
3,222
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities interest and other
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
4,006
|
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(222
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
|
|
390
|
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
|
|
3,923
|
|
|
|
33
Transfers out for
non-U.S. governments
and agencies primarily relates to increased price testing
coverage for certain positions.
Increase in purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related
to derivatives contracts, net primarily relates to the
termination of certain total return swaps in a liability
position.
Transfers out for derivatives contracts, net primarily relates
to $1.3 billion of derivatives assets and $700 million
of derivative liabilities transferred to Level 2 as a
result of increase price observability and price testing
coverage for certain positions.
Transfers in and transfers out related to long-term borrowings
are primarily due to changes in the impact of unobservable
inputs on the value of certain equity-linked structured notes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Level 3 Financial Assets and Liabilities
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Total Realized and Unrealized Gains or (Losses)
|
|
Total Realized and
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Purchases,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in Income
|
|
Unrealized Gains
|
|
Gains or
|
|
Sales,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
or (Losses)
|
|
(Losses) to
|
|
Issuances and
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Transfers
|
|
Ending
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Included in Income
|
|
OCI
|
|
Settlements
|
|
In
|
|
Out
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
351
|
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
74
|
|
|
$
|
(76
|
)
|
|
$
|
328
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
1,142
|
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(131
|
)
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
(712
|
)
|
|
|
268
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
6,790
|
|
|
|
453
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
453
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,958
|
)
|
|
|
912
|
|
|
|
(1,152
|
)
|
|
|
5,045
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
562
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(333
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
205
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
7,294
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(661
|
)
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
(445
|
)
|
|
|
6,779
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
2,148
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(390
|
)
|
|
|
1,234
|
|
|
|
(113
|
)
|
|
|
2,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
18,287
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(3,463
|
)
|
|
|
2,726
|
|
|
|
(2,499
|
)
|
|
|
15,548
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
6,866
|
|
|
|
(882
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(882
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
665
|
|
|
|
692
|
|
|
|
(547
|
)
|
|
|
6,794
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities residential non-agency
MBSs
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
3,696
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
962
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
962
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(748
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
3,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
4,169
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
868
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
(850
|
)
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
(147
|
)
|
|
|
4,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
4,115
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
271
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1,109
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
3,222
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities interest and other
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
4,683
|
|
|
|
475
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
565
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
1,206
|
|
|
|
(1,350
|
)
|
|
|
3,923
|
|
|
|
Other revenue related to investment securities non-qualifying
primarily represents net gains on certain private equity
investments.
Decreases in purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related
to corporate debt primarily relates to the sale of certain
positions (e.g., ARS) during the first and second quarter of
2010. Decreases in purchases, sales, issuances and settlements
related to loans, notes and mortgages primarily relates to sales
and repayments of sizable positions and portfolios during the
first and second quarter of 2010.
34
Transfers in for municipals and money markets relates to reduced
price transparency (e.g., lower trading activity) for municipal
ARS. Transfers out for corporate debt primarily relates to
increased price testing coverage for certain positions.
Transfers in and transfers out related to long-term borrowings
are primarily due to changes in the impact of unobservable
inputs on the value of certain equity-linked structured notes.
The following tables provide the portion of gains or losses
included in income for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 attributable
to unrealized gains or losses relating to those Level 3
assets and liabilities held at September 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Unrealized Gains or (Losses) for Level 3 Assets and
Liabilities Still Held
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Total
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(55
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(55
|
)
|
Convertible debentures
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(206
|
)
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
(116
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(116
|
)
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
(325
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(325
|
)
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
875
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
875
|
|
|
|
1,144
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,144
|
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities non-agency MBSs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
Corporate/Agency bonds
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Municipals, money markets and other
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
349
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
220
|
|
|
|
35
Net unrealized gains in principal transactions related to
derivative contracts, net were primarily due to credit spreads
widening on short CDS baskets in the third quarter of 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Unrealized Gains or (Losses) for Level 3 Assets and
Liabilities Still Held
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Total
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Interest
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
Corporate debt
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed and asset-backed
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading assets, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts, net
|
|
|
(189
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(189
|
)
|
|
|
(779
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(779
|
)
|
Investment securities
available-for-sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities - non-agency MBSs
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available-for-sale
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(249
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(269
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(269
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
191
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading liabilities, excluding derivative contracts
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
(113
|
)
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
381
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
469
|
|
|
|
Non-recurring
Fair Value
Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a
non-recurring basis and are not included in the tables above.
These assets and liabilities primarily include loans and loan
commitments held for sale that are reported at lower of cost or
fair value and loans held for investment that were initially
measured at cost and have been written down to fair value as a
result of an impairment. The following tables show the fair
value hierarchy for those assets and liabilities measured at
fair value on a non-recurring basis as of September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains/(Losses)
|
|
Gains/(Losses)
|
|
Gains/(Losses)
|
|
Gains/(Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
Three Months
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
Non-Recurring Basis
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
as of September 30, 2011
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Total
|
|
2011
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(5
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(13
|
)
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
565
|
|
|
|
322
|
|
|
|
887
|
|
|
|
(43
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
(79
|
)
|
Other assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Non-Recurring Basis
|
|
|
as of December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Total
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities non-qualifying
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
85
|
|
|
$
|
85
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
1,280
|
|
|
|
1,305
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages includes held for sale loans that are
carried at the lower of cost or fair value and for which the
fair value was below the cost basis at September 30, 2011
and December 31, 2010. It also includes certain impaired
held for investment loans where an allowance for loan losses has
been calculated based upon the fair value of the loans or
collateral. Level 3 assets as of September 30, 2011
and December 31, 2010 primarily relate to commercial real
estate loans that are classified as held for sale where there
continues to be significant illiquidity in the loan trading and
securitization markets.
Other payables interest and other includes amounts
recorded for loan commitments at lower of cost or fair value
where the funded loan will be held for sale.
Fair
Value Option Election
The fair value option election allows companies to irrevocably
elect fair value as the initial and subsequent measurement
attribute for certain financial assets and liabilities. Changes
in fair value for assets and liabilities for which the election
is made will be recognized in earnings as they occur. The fair
value option election is permitted on an
instrument-by-instrument
basis at initial recognition of an asset or liability or upon an
event that gives rise to a new basis of accounting for that
instrument. As discussed above, certain of Merrill Lynchs
financial instruments are required to be accounted for at fair
value under Investment Accounting and Derivatives Accounting, as
well as industry level guidance. For certain financial
instruments that are not accounted for at fair value under other
applicable accounting guidance, the fair value option election
has been made.
The following tables provide information about the line items in
the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings where changes
in fair values of assets and liabilities, for which the fair
value
37
option election has been made, are included for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2011 and September 30,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value For the
|
|
Changes in Fair Value For the
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011,
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011,
|
|
|
for Items Measured
|
|
for Items Measured
|
|
|
at Fair Value Pursuant
|
|
at Fair Value Pursuant
|
|
|
to the Fair Value Option Election
|
|
to the Fair Value Option Election
|
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Total
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
Changes
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
Changes
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
in Fair
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
in Fair
|
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenues
|
|
Value
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenues
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale agreements
|
|
$
|
169
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
169
|
|
|
$
|
197
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
197
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Loans(1)
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
307
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
4,568
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
4,702
|
|
|
|
4,062
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
4,196
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Effective July 1, 2011,
includes certain loans accounted for under the fair value option
that were reclassified from loans held for sale to trading
assets because they are risk managed on that basis. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value For the
|
|
Changes in Fair Value For the
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
for Items Measured
|
|
for Items Measured
|
|
|
at Fair Value Pursuant
|
|
at Fair Value Pursuant
|
|
|
to the Fair Value Option Election
|
|
to the Fair Value Option Election
|
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Total
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Gains/
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
Changes
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
Changes
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
in Fair
|
|
Principal
|
|
Other
|
|
in Fair
|
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenues
|
|
Value
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Revenues
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale
agreements(1)
|
|
$
|
54
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
54
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
396
|
|
|
|
396
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payables under repurchase agreements
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
Other payables interest and other
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(2)
|
|
|
(1,243
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(1,325
|
)
|
|
|
1,238
|
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
1,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Changes in fair value for the
three months ended September 30, 2010 were revised from
approximately $49 million (as previously reported) to
approximately $54 million. Changes in fair value for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 were revised from
approximately $50 million (as previously reported) to
approximately $73 million. |
38
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Other revenues primarily
represent fair value changes on non-recourse long-term
borrowings issued by consolidated VIEs. |
The following describes the rationale for electing to account
for certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value, as
well as the impact of instrument-specific credit risk on the
fair value.
Resale
and repurchase agreements
Merrill Lynch elected the fair value option for certain resale
and repurchase agreements. The fair value option election was
made based on the tenor of the resale and repurchase agreements,
which reflects the magnitude of the interest rate risk. The
majority of resale and repurchase agreements collateralized by
U.S. Government securities were excluded from the fair
value option election as these contracts are generally
short-dated and therefore the interest rate risk is not
considered significant. Amounts loaned under resale agreements
require collateral with a market value equal to or in excess of
the principal amount loaned, resulting in minimal credit risk
for such transactions.
Loans and
loan commitments
Merrill Lynch made the fair value option election for certain
loans that are risk managed on a fair value basis. Upon the
acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, Merrill Lynch
also made the fair value option election for certain mortgage,
corporate, and leveraged loans and loan commitments. The changes
in the fair value of loans and commitments, for which the fair
value option was elected, that were attributable to changes in
borrower-specific credit risk were not material for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010.
As of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the
aggregate fair value of loans for which the fair value option
election has been made that were 90 days or more past due
was $26 million and $32 million, respectively, and the
aggregate fair value of loans that were in non-accrual status
was $26 million and $32 million, respectively. As of
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the unpaid
principal amount due exceeded the aggregate fair value of such
loans that are 90 days or more past due
and/or in
non-accrual status by $129 million and $173 million,
respectively.
Short-term
and long-term borrowings
Merrill Lynch made the fair value option election for certain
short-term and long-term borrowings that are risk managed on a
fair value basis (e.g., structured notes)
and/or for
which hedge accounting under Derivatives Accounting had been
difficult to obtain. The majority of the fair value changes on
long-term borrowings are from structured notes with coupon or
repayment terms that are linked to the performance of debt and
equity securities, indices, currencies or commodities. Excluding
gains (losses) for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 related to
changes in Merrill Lynchs credit spreads, the majority of
the gains (losses) for the respective periods are offset by
gains (losses) on derivatives that economically hedge these
borrowings and that are accounted for at fair value under
Derivatives Accounting. The changes in the fair value of
liabilities for which the fair value option election was made
that were attributable to changes in Merrill Lynchs credit
spreads were gains of approximately $2.9 billion and
$2.7 billion for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011, respectively, and losses of
approximately $0.3 billion and gains of approximately
$1.1 billion for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010, respectively. Changes in Merrill Lynch
specific credit risk are derived by isolating fair value changes
due to changes in Merrill Lynchs credit spreads as
observed in the secondary cash market.
The fair value option election was also made for certain
non-recourse long-term borrowings and secured borrowings issued
by consolidated VIEs. The fair value of these borrowings is not
materially affected by changes in Merrill Lynchs
creditworthiness.
39
The following tables present the difference between fair values
and the aggregate contractual principal amounts of receivables
under resale agreements, receivables under securities borrowed
transactions, loans and long-term borrowings for which the fair
value option election has been made as of September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
Due Upon
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
Maturity
|
|
Difference
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale agreements
|
|
$
|
89,119
|
|
|
$
|
88,644
|
|
|
$
|
475
|
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions
|
|
|
1,543
|
|
|
|
1,735
|
|
|
|
(192
|
)
|
Loans(1)
|
|
|
2,892
|
|
|
|
4,230
|
|
|
|
(1,338
|
)
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(2)
|
|
|
31,021
|
|
|
|
38,554
|
|
|
|
(7,533
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes $493 million of
loans held for sale accounted for under the fair value option
that were reclassified to trading assets because they are risk
managed on that basis. |
|
(2) |
|
The majority of the difference
between the fair value and principal amount due upon maturity at
September 30, 2011 relates to the impact of widening of
Merrill Lynchs credit spreads, as well as the fair value
of the embedded derivative, where applicable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
Due Upon
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2010
|
|
Maturity
|
|
Difference
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables under resale
agreements(1)
|
|
$
|
74,255
|
|
|
$
|
73,941
|
|
|
$
|
314
|
|
Receivables under securities borrowed transactions
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
|
|
1,672
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Loans, notes and mortgages
|
|
|
3,190
|
|
|
|
4,518
|
|
|
|
(1,328
|
)
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(2)
|
|
|
39,214
|
|
|
|
43,014
|
|
|
|
(3,800
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The fair value and principal
amount due upon maturity of receivables under resale agreements
have been revised from approximately $51 billion for each
(as previously reported) to approximately
$74 billion. |
|
(2) |
|
The majority of the difference
relates to the impact of the widening of Merrill Lynchs
credit spreads since issuance and the change in fair value of
non-recourse debt issued by consolidated VIEs. |
Note 5. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The fair values of financial instruments have been derived, in
part, by managements assumptions, the estimated amount and
timing of future cash flows and estimated discount rates.
Different assumptions could significantly affect these estimated
fair values. Accordingly, the net realizable values could be
materially different from the estimates presented below. In
addition, the estimates are only indicative of the value of
individual financial instruments and should not be considered an
indication of the fair value of Merrill Lynch.
The following disclosures represent financial instruments for
which the ending balances at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010 are not carried at fair value in their
entirety on Merrill Lynchs Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets.
40
Short-term
Financial Instruments
The carrying value of short-term financial instruments,
including cash and cash equivalents, cash and securities
segregated for regulatory purposes or deposited with clearing
organizations, certain securities financing transactions,
customer and broker-dealer receivables and payables, and other
short-term borrowings, approximates the fair value of these
instruments. These financial instruments generally expose
Merrill Lynch to limited credit risk and have no stated
maturities or have short-term maturities and carry interest
rates that approximate market interest rates.
Loans,
Notes and Mortgages
Fair values were generally determined by discounting both
principal and interest cash flows expected to be collected using
an observable discount rate for similar instruments with
adjustments that Merrill Lynch believes a market participant
would consider in determining fair value. Merrill Lynch
estimates the cash flows expected to be collected using internal
credit risk, interest rate and prepayment risk models that
incorporate its best estimate of current key assumptions, such
as default rates, loss severity and prepayment speeds for the
life of the loan. Merrill Lynch made the fair value option
election for certain loans and loan commitments. See Note 4
for additional information.
Deposits
The fair value for certain deposits with stated maturities was
calculated by discounting contractual cash flows using current
market rates for instruments with similar maturities. For
deposits with no stated maturities, the carrying amount was
considered to approximate fair value and does not take into
account the significant value of the cost advantage and
stability of Merrill Lynchs long-term relationships with
depositors.
Long-term
Borrowings
Merrill Lynch uses quoted market prices for its long-term
borrowings when available. When quoted market prices are not
available, fair value is estimated based on current market
interest rates and credit spreads for Merrill Lynch debt with
similar maturities. Merrill Lynch made the fair value option
election for certain long-term borrowings, including structured
notes. See Note 4 for additional information.
The book and fair values of certain financial instruments at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Book Value
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Book Value
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Financial assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, notes and
mortgages(1)
|
|
$
|
21,916
|
|
|
$
|
21,150
|
|
|
$
|
25,803
|
|
|
$
|
24,383
|
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
12,277
|
|
|
|
12,277
|
|
|
|
12,826
|
|
|
|
12,826
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(2)
|
|
|
118,511
|
|
|
|
111,781
|
|
|
|
132,427
|
|
|
|
131,694
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Loans are presented net of the
allowance for loan losses. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes junior subordinated
notes (related to trust preferred securities). |
A derivative is an instrument whose value is derived from an
underlying instrument or index, such as interest rates, equity
security prices, currencies, commodity prices or credit spreads.
Derivatives include futures, forwards, swaps, option contracts,
and other financial instruments with similar characteristics.
Derivative contracts often involve future commitments to
exchange interest payment streams or currencies based on a
notional or contractual amount (e.g., interest rate swaps or
currency forwards) or
41
to purchase or sell other financial instruments at specified
terms on a specified date (e.g., options to buy or sell
securities or currencies).
Derivatives Accounting establishes accounting and reporting
standards for derivative instruments, including certain
derivative instruments embedded in other contracts
(embedded derivatives) and for hedging activities.
Derivatives Accounting requires that an entity recognize all
derivatives as either assets or liabilities and measure those
instruments at fair value. The fair value of all derivatives is
recorded on a
net-by-counterparty
basis on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets where Merrill
Lynch believes a legal right of setoff exists under an
enforceable netting agreement. All derivatives, including
bifurcated embedded derivatives within structured notes, are
reported on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as trading
assets and liabilities.
The accounting for changes in fair value of a derivative
instrument depends on its intended use and if it is designated
and qualifies as an accounting hedging instrument under
Derivatives Accounting.
Trading
derivatives
Merrill Lynch enters into derivatives to facilitate client
transactions, for trading and financing purposes, and to manage
risk exposures arising from trading assets and liabilities.
Changes in fair value for these derivatives are reported in
current period earnings as principal transactions revenues.
Derivatives
that contain a significant financing element
In the ordinary course of trading activities, Merrill Lynch
enters into certain transactions that are documented as
derivatives where a significant cash investment is made by one
party. Certain derivative instruments that contain a significant
financing element at inception and where Merrill Lynch is deemed
to be the borrower are included in financing activities in the
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. The cash flows
from all other derivative transactions that do not contain a
significant financing element at inception are included in
operating activities.
Non-trading
derivatives
Merrill Lynch also enters into derivatives in order to manage
risk exposures arising from assets and liabilities not carried
at fair value as follows:
|
|
1. |
Merrill Lynchs debt was issued in a variety of maturities
and currencies to achieve the lowest cost financing possible.
Merrill Lynch enters into derivative transactions to hedge these
liabilities. Derivatives used most frequently include swap
agreements that:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convert fixed-rate interest payments into variable-rate interest
payments;
|
|
|
|
Change the underlying interest rate basis or reset
frequency; and
|
|
|
|
Change the settlement currency of a debt instrument.
|
Changes in the fair value of interest rate and foreign currency
derivatives are reported in interest expense or other revenues
when hedge accounting is applied; otherwise changes in fair
value are reported in other revenue.
|
|
2. |
Merrill Lynch uses foreign-exchange forward contracts,
foreign-exchange options, and currency swaps to hedge its net
investments in foreign operations, as well as other foreign
currency exposures (e.g.,
non-U.S. dollar
denominated debt and expenses). These derivatives are used to
mitigate the impact of changes in exchange rates. Changes in the
fair value of these derivatives are reported in
|
42
|
|
|
OCI, other revenue and interest expense when net investment
hedge accounting is applied; otherwise changes in fair value are
reported in other revenues.
|
|
|
3.
|
Merrill Lynch enters into futures, swaps, options and forward
contracts to manage the price risk of certain commodity
inventory and forecasted commodity purchases and sales. Changes
in fair value of these derivatives are reported in principal
transaction revenues, unless cash flow hedge accounting is
applied.
|
|
4.
|
Merrill Lynch enters into CDS to manage the credit risk on
certain loans that are not part of trading activities. Changes
in the fair value of these derivatives are reported in other
revenue.
|
Derivatives that qualify as accounting hedges under the guidance
in Derivatives Accounting are designated as one of the following:
|
|
1.
|
A hedge of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability
(fair value hedge). Changes in the fair value of
derivatives that are designated and qualify as fair value hedges
of interest rate risk, foreign exchange risk and commodity price
risk, along with the gain or loss on the hedged asset or
liability that is attributable to the hedged risk, are recorded
in current period earnings as interest expense, other revenues,
or principal transactions.
|
|
2.
|
A hedge of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid
related to a recognized asset or liability (cash flow
hedge). Changes in the fair value of derivatives that are
designated and qualify as cash flow hedges are recorded in OCI
until earnings are affected by the variability of cash flows of
the hedged asset or liability or when the forecasted purchase or
sale occurs.
|
|
3.
|
A hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation (net
investment hedge). Changes in the fair value of
derivatives that are designated and qualify as hedges of a net
investment in a foreign operation are recorded in the foreign
currency translation adjustment account within OCI. Changes in
the fair value of the hedging instruments that are associated
with the difference between the spot rate and the contracted
forward rate are recorded in current period earnings in other
revenues and in interest expense.
|
Merrill Lynch formally assesses, both at the inception of the
hedge and on an ongoing basis, whether the hedging derivatives
are highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash
flows of hedged items. Merrill Lynch uses regression analysis at
the hedges inception and for each reporting period
thereafter to assess whether the derivative used in its hedging
transaction is expected to be and has been highly effective in
offsetting changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged
item. When it is determined that a derivative is not highly
effective as a hedge, Merrill Lynch discontinues hedge
accounting.
43
Hedge accounting activity for 2011 and 2010 included the
following:
Fair
value hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
Hedged
|
|
Hedge
|
|
|
|
Hedged
|
|
Hedge
|
|
|
Derivative(1)
|
|
Item(1)(2)
|
|
Ineffectiveness(1)
|
|
Derivative(1)
|
|
Item(1)(2)
|
|
Ineffectiveness(1)
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate risk on USD denominated long-term debt
|
|
$
|
1,555
|
|
|
$
|
(1,744
|
)
|
|
$
|
(189
|
)
|
|
$
|
843
|
|
|
$
|
(986
|
)
|
|
$
|
(143
|
)
|
Interest rate risk on foreign currency denominated long-term debt
|
|
|
(345
|
)
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
1,311
|
|
|
|
(1,297
|
)
|
|
|
14
|
|
Commodity price risk on commodity inventory
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate risk on USD denominated long-term debt
|
|
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
(2,100
|
)
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
2,530
|
|
|
|
(2,913
|
)
|
|
|
(383
|
)
|
Interest rate risk on foreign currency denominated long-term debt
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
(499
|
)
|
|
|
(164
|
)
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
(284
|
)
|
|
|
(225
|
)
|
Commodity price risk on commodity inventory
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
(69
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
Assets
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value of hedging derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
7,069
|
|
|
$
|
609
|
|
|
$
|
4,442
|
|
|
$
|
484
|
|
Commodity inventory
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Notional amount of hedging derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
45,584
|
|
|
|
10,544
|
|
|
|
43,924
|
|
|
|
13,967
|
|
Commodity inventory
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
232
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are recorded in
interest expense and other revenues for long-term debt and
principal transactions for commodity inventory. |
|
(2) |
|
Excludes the impact of purchase
accounting adjustments made to certain long-term borrowings in
connection with the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of
America. |
44
Cash
flow hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
Hedge
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
(losses) in
|
|
Hedge
|
|
Gains
|
|
(losses) in
|
|
Ineffectiveness
|
|
|
(losses)
|
|
Income
|
|
Ineffectiveness
|
|
(losses)
|
|
Income
|
|
and Amounts
|
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
Reclassified
|
|
and Amounts
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
Reclassified
|
|
Excluded
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
from
|
|
Excluded from
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
from
|
|
from
|
|
|
OCI on
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Effectiveness
|
|
OCI on
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Effectiveness
|
|
|
derivatives
|
|
OCI(1)
|
|
Testing(1)
|
|
derivatives
|
|
OCI(1)
|
|
Testing(1)
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity price risk on forecasted purchases and
sales(2)
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity price risk on forecasted purchases and
sales(2)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
Trading
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
Assets
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value of hedging derivatives
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
109
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
Notional amount of hedging derivatives
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
255
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are recorded in
principal transactions. |
(2) |
|
Amount that is expected to be
reclassified into earnings in the next 12 months included
in principal transactions is $1 million and
$22 million at September 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010, respectively. |
Net
investment hedges of foreign operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
Hedge
|
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
Hedge
|
|
|
|
|
(losses) in
|
|
Ineffectiveness
|
|
|
|
(losses) in
|
|
Ineffectiveness
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
Income
|
|
and Amounts
|
|
Gains
|
|
Income
|
|
and Amounts
|
|
|
(losses)
|
|
Reclassified
|
|
Excluded
|
|
(losses)
|
|
Reclassified
|
|
Excluded
|
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
from
|
|
from
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
from
|
|
from
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Effectiveness
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Effectiveness
|
|
|
OCI
|
|
OCI(1)
|
|
Testing(2)
|
|
OCI
|
|
OCI(1)
|
|
Testing(2)
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange risk
|
|
$
|
1,215
|
|
|
$
|
(18
|
)
|
|
$
|
(110
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,356
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
For the nine months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange risk
|
|
|
254
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(267
|
)
|
|
|
(509
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(138
|
)
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value of hedging derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
1,343
|
|
|
$
|
468
|
|
Trading liabilities
|
|
|
577
|
|
|
|
930
|
|
Carrying value of non-derivative hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
536
|
|
Notional amount of hedging derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in an asset position
|
|
|
22,954
|
|
|
|
6,639
|
|
in a liability position
|
|
|
5,985
|
|
|
|
19,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are recorded in other
revenue. |
(2) |
|
Amounts are recorded in other
revenues and interest expense. |
Net
gains (losses) on economic hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
2011(1)
|
|
2010(1)
|
|
|
For the three months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate risk
|
|
$
|
182
|
|
|
$
|
239
|
|
Foreign currency risk
|
|
|
(2,350
|
)
|
|
|
4,507
|
|
Credit risk
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the nine months ended September 30:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate risk
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
708
|
|
Foreign currency risk
|
|
|
796
|
|
|
|
(1,223
|
)
|
Credit risk
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are recorded in other
revenue. |
The amounts in the Net gains (losses) on economic
hedges table above represent net gains (losses) on
derivatives that are not used for trading purposes and are not
used in accounting hedging relationships. Interest rate risk
primarily relates to derivatives used to economically hedge
long-term borrowings. Foreign currency risk primarily relates to
economic hedges of foreign currency denominated transactions
that generate earnings upon remeasurement in accordance with
ASC 830-20,
Foreign Currency Transactions (Foreign Currency
Transactions). As both the remeasurement of the foreign
currency risk on the transaction and the changes in fair value
of the derivative are recorded in earnings, hedge accounting is
not applied. Credit risk relates to credit default swaps used to
economically manage the credit risk on certain loans not
included in trading activities.
Derivative
balances by primary risk
Derivative instruments contain numerous market risks. In
particular, most derivatives have interest rate risk, as they
contain an element of financing risk that is affected by changes
in interest rates. Additionally, derivatives expose Merrill
Lynch to counterparty credit risk, although this is generally
mitigated by collateral margining and netting arrangements. For
disclosure purposes below, the primary risk of a derivative is
largely determined by the business that is engaging in the
derivative activity. For instance, a derivative that is
initiated by an equities derivative business will generally have
equity price risk as its primary underlying market risk and is
classified as such for the purposes of this disclosure, despite
the fact that there may be other market risks that affect the
value of the instrument.
The following tables identify the primary risk for derivative
instruments, which includes trading, non-trading and bifurcated
embedded derivatives, at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010. The
46
primary risk is provided on a gross basis, prior to the
application of the impact of counterparty and cash collateral
netting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2011
|
|
|
Contract/
|
|
Trading Assets-
|
|
Contract/
|
|
Trading Liabilities-
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
Derivative Contracts
|
|
Notional
|
|
Derivative Contracts
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
$
|
9,552,280
|
|
|
$
|
649,980
|
|
|
$
|
9,247,885
|
|
|
$
|
648,260
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
2,092,306
|
|
|
|
1,795
|
|
|
|
2,200,980
|
|
|
|
1,730
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,501,666
|
|
|
|
63,907
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
1,483,887
|
|
|
|
68,715
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Foreign exchange contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
100,834
|
|
|
|
11,662
|
|
|
|
123,244
|
|
|
|
14,160
|
|
Spot, futures and forwards
|
|
|
109,094
|
|
|
|
6,182
|
|
|
|
101,500
|
|
|
|
5,731
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
312,446
|
|
|
|
10,285
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
294,075
|
|
|
|
10,156
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Equity contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
26,629
|
|
|
|
1,866
|
|
|
|
22,791
|
|
|
|
2,011
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
45,805
|
|
|
|
2,541
|
|
|
|
56,411
|
|
|
|
2,319
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
341,472
|
|
|
|
20,749
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
342,128
|
|
|
|
21,510
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
39,138
|
|
|
|
6,334
|
|
|
|
39,057
|
|
|
|
6,844
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
277,892
|
|
|
|
3,756
|
|
|
|
276,212
|
|
|
|
2,582
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
136,792
|
|
|
|
8,348
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
137,314
|
|
|
|
8,314
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Credit derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased protection:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps
|
|
|
195,074
|
|
|
|
23,137
|
|
|
|
50,789
|
|
|
|
1,176
|
|
Total return swaps
|
|
|
2,602
|
|
|
|
442
|
|
|
|
2,234
|
|
|
|
308
|
|
Other Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
864
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Written protection:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps
|
|
|
45,458
|
|
|
|
2,071
|
|
|
|
202,847
|
|
|
|
22,085
|
|
Total return swaps
|
|
|
2,565
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
2,321
|
|
|
|
632
|
|
Other Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross derivative assets/liabilities
|
|
$
|
14,747,945
|
|
|
$
|
818,713
|
|
|
$
|
14,618,875
|
|
|
$
|
811,135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Legally enforceable master netting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(747,835
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(747,835
|
)
|
Less: Cash collateral applied
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31,645
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33,762
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
39,233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
29,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Contract/
|
|
Trading Assets-
|
|
Contract/
|
|
Trading Liabilities-
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
Derivative Contracts
|
|
Notional
|
|
Derivative Contracts
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
$
|
8,492,025
|
|
|
$
|
452,115
|
|
|
$
|
8,333,391
|
|
|
$
|
452,564
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
1,916,110
|
|
|
|
1,549
|
|
|
|
1,955,861
|
|
|
|
1,608
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,708,493
|
|
|
|
46,064
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
1,836,089
|
|
|
|
48,185
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Foreign exchange contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
93,721
|
|
|
|
10,396
|
|
|
|
98,987
|
|
|
|
11,947
|
|
Spot, futures and forwards
|
|
|
118,363
|
|
|
|
5,637
|
|
|
|
105,671
|
|
|
|
5,702
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
280,290
|
|
|
|
10,673
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
273,375
|
|
|
|
10,501
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Equity contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
17,411
|
|
|
|
1,622
|
|
|
|
20,764
|
|
|
|
1,871
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
35,483
|
|
|
|
2,897
|
|
|
|
43,257
|
|
|
|
2,122
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
221,791
|
|
|
|
15,677
|
|
Purchased options
|
|
|
174,313
|
|
|
|
15,338
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
39,284
|
|
|
|
8,872
|
|
|
|
50,710
|
|
|
|
9,158
|
|
Futures and forwards
|
|
|
215,588
|
|
|
|
4,122
|
|
|
|
198,130
|
|
|
|
2,817
|
|
Written options
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
86,241
|
|
|
|
6,628
|
|
Other Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
84,554
|
|
|
|
6,565
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Credit derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased protection:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps
|
|
|
322,230
|
|
|
|
29,670
|
|
|
|
251,679
|
|
|
|
8,001
|
|
Total return swaps
|
|
|
2,127
|
|
|
|
301
|
|
|
|
3,243
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
Other Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Written protection:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps
|
|
|
248,509
|
|
|
|
7,978
|
|
|
|
326,448
|
|
|
|
23,755
|
|
Total return swaps
|
|
|
3,802
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
1,607
|
|
|
|
475
|
|
Other Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross derivative assets/liabilities
|
|
$
|
13,873,424
|
|
|
$
|
606,001
|
|
|
$
|
13,686,824
|
|
|
$
|
599,271
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Legally enforceable master netting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(538,055
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(538,055
|
)
|
Less: Cash collateral applied
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,575
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29,019
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
39,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
32,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading
revenues
Merrill Lynch enters into trading derivatives and non-derivative
cash instruments to facilitate client transactions, for trading
and financing purposes, and to manage risk exposures arising
from trading assets and liabilities. The resulting risk from
derivatives and non-derivative cash instruments is managed on a
portfolio basis as part of Merrill Lynchs sales and
trading activities and the related revenue is recorded on
different income statement line items, including principal
transactions, commissions, other revenues and net interest
income (expense).
Sales and trading revenue includes changes in fair value and
realized gains and losses on the sales of trading and other
assets, which are included in principal transactions and other
revenues, net interest income, and commissions. Initial trading
related revenue is generated by the difference in the client
price for an instrument and the price at which the trading desk
can execute the trade in the dealer market. That revenue is
included within principal transactions on the Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Earnings (Loss). For equity
securities, commissions related to purchases and sales are
recorded in commissions on the Condensed Consolidated Statement
of Earnings (Loss). Changes in the
48
fair value of these equity securities are included in principal
transactions. These amounts are reflected in equity risk in the
tables below. For debt securities, revenue, with the exception
of interest, is typically included in principal transactions.
Unlike commissions for equity securities, the initial revenue
related to broker/dealer services for debt securities is
included in the pricing of the instrument rather than charged
through separate fee agreements. Therefore, this revenue is
recorded in principal transactions as part of the initial mark
to fair value. In transactions where Merrill Lynch acts as an
agent, fees are earned and recorded in commissions. In the
tables below, most sovereign government debt securities are
reflected in interest rate risk. All other government debt
securities (including, for example, municipal bonds and emerging
markets sovereign debt) and corporate debt securities are
included in credit risk.
For derivatives, revenue is typically included in principal
transactions. Similar to debt securities, the initial revenue
related to dealer services is included in the initial pricing of
the instrument rather than charged through separate fee
agreements. Therefore, this revenue is recorded in principal
transactions as part of the initial mark to fair value. In
transactions where Merrill Lynch acts as agent, which includes
exchange traded futures and options, fees are earned and
recorded in commissions. Derivatives are included in the tables
below based on their predominant risk (e.g., credit default
swaps are included in credit risk.)
Certain instruments, primarily
available-for-sale
securities and loans, are not considered trading assets or
liabilities. Gains/losses on sales and changes in fair value of
these instruments, where applicable (e.g., the fair value option
has been elected), are recorded in other revenues. These
instruments are typically reflected in credit risk.
Interest revenue for debt securities and loans is included in
net interest income (expense).
The following tables identify the amounts in the income
statement line items attributable to trading and non-trading
activities, including both derivatives and non-derivative cash
instruments categorized by primary risk for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010.
Non-trading related amounts include activities in connection
with principal investment, wealth management, and certain
lending activities; economic hedging activity discussed in the
Non-trading derivatives section above; and the impact of
changes in Merrill Lynchs own creditworthiness on
borrowings accounted for at fair value.
Trading
and Non-Trading Related Revenue for Derivatives and
Non-Derivative Cash Instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
For the Three Months
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Net Interest
|
|
|
Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Commissions
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
Income (Expense)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Interest Rate Risk
|
|
$
|
396
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
205
|
|
|
$
|
622
|
|
Foreign Exchange Risk
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
Equity Risk
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
792
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
1,064
|
|
Commodity Risk
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
188
|
|
Credit Risk
|
|
|
(829
|
)
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
634
|
|
|
|
(146
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading related
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
829
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
915
|
|
|
|
1,753
|
|
Non-trading related
|
|
|
2,842
|
|
|
|
612
|
|
|
|
(974
|
)
|
|
|
(803
|
)
|
|
|
1,677
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,781
|
|
|
$
|
1,441
|
|
|
$
|
(904
|
)
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
|
$
|
3,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
Trading
and Non-Trading Related Revenue for Derivatives and
Non-Derivative Cash Instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
For the Nine Months
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Net Interest
|
|
|
Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Commissions
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
Income (Expense)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Interest Rate Risk
|
|
$
|
746
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
585
|
|
|
$
|
1,414
|
|
Foreign Exchange Risk
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
Equity Risk
|
|
|
2,020
|
|
|
|
2,458
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
(715
|
)
|
|
|
3,857
|
|
Commodity Risk
|
|
|
523
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
437
|
|
Credit Risk
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
390
|
|
|
|
2,028
|
|
|
|
2,524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading related
|
|
|
3,423
|
|
|
|
2,566
|
|
|
|
503
|
|
|
|
1,818
|
|
|
|
8,310
|
|
Non-trading related
|
|
|
2,702
|
|
|
|
1,912
|
|
|
|
1,785
|
|
|
|
(2,543
|
)
|
|
|
3,856
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
6,125
|
|
|
$
|
4,478
|
|
|
$
|
2,288
|
|
|
$
|
(725
|
)
|
|
$
|
12,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading
and Non-Trading Related Revenue for Derivatives and
Non-Derivative Cash Instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
For the Three Months
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Net Interest
|
|
|
Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Commissions
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
Income (Expense)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Interest Rate Risk
|
|
$
|
136
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
350
|
|
Foreign Exchange Risk
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
Equity Risk
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
716
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1,144
|
|
Commodity Risk
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
113
|
|
Credit Risk
|
|
|
912
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
815
|
|
|
|
2,022
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading related
|
|
|
1,542
|
|
|
|
747
|
|
|
|
337
|
|
|
|
975
|
|
|
|
3,601
|
|
Non-trading related
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
604
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
(990
|
)
|
|
|
(586
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
$
|
1,351
|
|
|
$
|
436
|
|
|
$
|
(15
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading
and Non-Trading Related Revenue for Derivatives and
Non-Derivative Cash Instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
For the Nine Months
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Net Interest
|
|
|
Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
Transactions
|
|
Commissions
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
Income (Expense)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Interest Rate Risk
|
|
$
|
1,066
|
|
|
$
|
60
|
|
|
$
|
49
|
|
|
$
|
538
|
|
|
$
|
1,713
|
|
Foreign Exchange Risk
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
43
|
|
Equity Risk
|
|
|
1,660
|
|
|
|
2,323
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
(459
|
)
|
|
|
3,734
|
|
Commodity Risk
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
(93
|
)
|
|
|
113
|
|
Credit Risk
|
|
|
3,612
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
2,480
|
|
|
|
6,739
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading related
|
|
|
6,582
|
|
|
|
2,415
|
|
|
|
880
|
|
|
|
2,465
|
|
|
|
12,342
|
|
Non-trading related
|
|
|
799
|
|
|
|
1,902
|
|
|
|
1,713
|
|
|
|
(2,715
|
)
|
|
|
1,699
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
7,381
|
|
|
$
|
4,317
|
|
|
$
|
2,593
|
|
|
$
|
(250
|
)
|
|
$
|
14,041
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes other income and OTTI
losses on
available-for-sale
debt securities. |
Derivatives
as guarantees
Merrill Lynch enters into certain derivative contracts that meet
the definition of a guarantee under ASC 460, Guarantees
(Guarantees Accounting). Guarantees are defined
to include derivative contracts that contingently require a
guarantor to make payment to a guaranteed party based on
50
changes in an underlying (such as changes in the value of
interest rates, security prices, currency rates, commodity
prices, indices, etc.) that relate to an asset, liability or
equity security of a guaranteed party. Derivatives that meet the
accounting definition of a guarantee include certain OTC written
options (e.g., written interest rate and written currency
options). Merrill Lynch does not track, for accounting purposes,
whether its clients enter into these derivative contracts for
speculative or hedging purposes. Accordingly, Merrill Lynch has
disclosed information about all credit derivatives,
credit-related notes and certain types of written options that
can potentially be used by clients to protect against changes in
an underlying, regardless of how the contracts are actually used
by the client.
Merrill Lynchs derivatives that act as guarantees at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are
summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payout/
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
1 year
|
|
1 - 3 years
|
|
3 - 5 years
|
|
Over 5 years
|
|
Value(1)
|
|
|
At September 30, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade(2)
|
|
$
|
82,461
|
|
|
$
|
9,330
|
|
|
$
|
27,980
|
|
|
$
|
24,287
|
|
|
$
|
20,864
|
|
|
$
|
4,601
|
|
Non-investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
170,933
|
|
|
|
20,346
|
|
|
|
47,918
|
|
|
|
50,874
|
|
|
|
51,795
|
|
|
|
18,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total credit derivatives
|
|
|
253,394
|
|
|
|
29,676
|
|
|
|
75,898
|
|
|
|
75,161
|
|
|
|
72,659
|
|
|
|
22,725
|
|
Credit related notes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
2,297
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
1,939
|
|
|
|
2,297
|
|
Non-investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
918
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
753
|
|
|
|
918
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total credit related notes
|
|
|
3,215
|
|
|
|
138
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
2,692
|
|
|
|
3,215
|
|
Other derivatives
|
|
|
1,680,963
|
|
|
|
456,047
|
|
|
|
373,141
|
|
|
|
197,554
|
|
|
|
654,221
|
|
|
|
80,848
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
1,937,572
|
|
|
$
|
485,861
|
|
|
$
|
449,112
|
|
|
$
|
273,027
|
|
|
$
|
729,572
|
|
|
$
|
106,788
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade(2)
|
|
$
|
394,704
|
|
|
$
|
35,231
|
|
|
$
|
138,666
|
|
|
$
|
98,617
|
|
|
$
|
122,190
|
|
|
$
|
13,742
|
|
Non-investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
185,876
|
|
|
|
23,272
|
|
|
|
61,365
|
|
|
|
49,556
|
|
|
|
51,683
|
|
|
|
10,489
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total credit derivatives
|
|
|
580,580
|
|
|
|
58,503
|
|
|
|
200,031
|
|
|
|
148,173
|
|
|
|
173,873
|
|
|
|
24,231
|
|
Credit related notes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
3,580
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,448
|
|
|
|
3,580
|
|
Non-investment
grade(2)
|
|
|
1,358
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
|
1,173
|
|
|
|
1,358
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total credit related
notes(3)
|
|
|
4,938
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
152
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
|
4,621
|
|
|
|
4,938
|
|
Other derivatives
|
|
|
1,379,874
|
|
|
|
421,080
|
|
|
|
296,885
|
|
|
|
190,062
|
|
|
|
471,847
|
|
|
|
50,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
1,965,392
|
|
|
$
|
479,592
|
|
|
$
|
497,068
|
|
|
$
|
338,391
|
|
|
$
|
650,341
|
|
|
$
|
79,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Derivative contracts are shown
on a gross basis prior to cash collateral or counterparty
netting. |
(2) |
|
Refers to the creditworthiness
of the underlying reference obligations. |
(3) |
|
Total credit related note
amounts have been revised from approximately $2.4 billion
(as previously reported) to approximately $4.9 billion to
reflect CDOs and CLOs held by certain consolidated
VIEs. |
Credit
derivatives
Credit derivatives derive value based on an underlying third
party referenced obligation or a portfolio of referenced
obligations. Merrill Lynch is both a seller and a buyer of
credit protection. A seller of credit protection is required to
make payments to a buyer upon the occurrence of a predefined
credit event. Such credit events generally include bankruptcy of
the referenced credit entity and failure to pay under their
credit obligations, as well as acceleration of indebtedness and
payment repudiation or moratorium. Merrill Lynch considers
credit derivatives to be guarantees where it is the seller of
credit protection. For credit derivatives based on a portfolio
of referenced credits or credit indices, Merrill
51
Lynch as a seller of credit protection may not be required to
make payment until a specified amount of loss has occurred
and/or may
only be required to make payment up to a specified amount.
For most credit derivatives, the notional value represents the
maximum amount payable by Merrill Lynch as a seller of credit
protection. However, Merrill Lynch does not exclusively monitor
its exposure to credit derivatives based on notional value.
Instead, a risk framework is used to define risk tolerances and
establish limits to help to ensure that certain credit
risk-related losses occur within acceptable, predefined limits.
Merrill Lynch discloses internal categorizations (i.e.,
investment grade, non-investment grade) consistent with how risk
is managed to evaluate the payment status of its freestanding
credit derivative instruments.
Merrill Lynch economically hedges its exposure to credit
derivatives by entering into a variety of offsetting derivative
contracts and security positions. For example, in certain
instances, Merrill Lynch purchases credit protection with
identical underlying referenced names to offset its exposure. At
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the notional
value and carrying value of credit protection purchased and
credit protection sold by Merrill Lynch with identical
underlying referenced names was:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payout/
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
1 year
|
|
1 - 3 years
|
|
3 - 5 years
|
|
Over 5 years
|
|
Value(1)
|
|
|
At September 30, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit derivatives purchased
|
|
$
|
224,462
|
|
|
$
|
26,632
|
|
|
$
|
65,461
|
|
|
$
|
68,785
|
|
|
$
|
63,584
|
|
|
$
|
19,938
|
|
Credit derivatives sold
|
|
|
227,788
|
|
|
|
28,282
|
|
|
|
63,095
|
|
|
|
71,526
|
|
|
|
64,885
|
|
|
|
19,713
|
|
At December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit derivatives purchased
|
|
$
|
543,233
|
|
|
$
|
53,741
|
|
|
$
|
179,809
|
|
|
$
|
140,764
|
|
|
$
|
168,919
|
|
|
$
|
17,875
|
|
Credit derivatives sold
|
|
|
567,828
|
|
|
|
57,954
|
|
|
|
198,656
|
|
|
|
147,121
|
|
|
|
164,097
|
|
|
|
21,600
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Derivative contracts are shown
on a gross basis prior to cash collateral or counterparty
netting. |
Credit
related notes
Credit related notes in the guarantees table above include
investments in securities issued by CDO, CLO and credit linked
note vehicles. These instruments are classified as trading
securities. Most of the entities that issue these instruments
have either the ability to enter into credit derivatives or have
entered into credit derivatives that meet the definition of a
guarantee (in this case, the sale of credit protection). Since
most of these securities could potentially have embedded credit
derivatives that would meet the definition of a guarantee,
Merrill Lynch includes all of its investments in these
securities above.
The carrying value of these instruments equals Merrill
Lynchs maximum exposure to loss. Merrill Lynch is not
obligated to make any payments to the entities under the terms
of the securities owned. Merrill Lynch discloses internal
categorizations (i.e., investment grade, non-investment grade)
consistent with how risk is managed for these instruments.
Other
derivative contracts
Other derivative contracts in the guarantees table above
primarily include OTC written interest rate options and written
currency options. For such contracts the maximum payout could
theoretically be unlimited, because, for example, the rise in
interest rates or changes in foreign exchange rates could
theoretically be unlimited. Merrill Lynch does not monitor its
exposure to derivatives based on the theoretical maximum payout
because that measure does not take into consideration the
probability of the occurrence. As such, rather than including
the maximum payout, the notional value of these
52
contracts has been included to provide information about the
magnitude of involvement with these types of contracts. However,
it should be noted that the notional value is not a reliable
indicator of Merrill Lynchs exposure to these contracts.
Instead, as previously noted, a risk framework is used to define
risk tolerances and establish limits to help ensure that certain
risk-related losses occur within acceptable, predefined limits.
As the fair value and risk of payment under these derivative
contracts are based upon market factors, such as changes in
interest rates or foreign exchange rates, the carrying values in
the table above reflect the best estimate of Merrill
Lynchs performance risk under these transactions at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010. Merrill
Lynch economically hedges its exposure to these contracts by
entering into a variety of offsetting derivative contracts and
security positions.
Credit
risk management of derivatives
Merrill Lynch defines counterparty credit risk as the potential
for loss that can occur as a result of an individual,
counterparty, or issuer being unable or unwilling to honor its
contractual obligations. Merrill Lynch mitigates its credit risk
to counterparties through a variety of techniques, including,
where appropriate, the right to require initial collateral or
margin, the right to terminate transactions or to obtain
collateral should unfavorable events occur, the right to call
for collateral when certain exposure thresholds are exceeded,
the right to call for third party guarantees, and the purchase
of credit default protection.
Merrill Lynch enters into International Swaps and Derivatives
Association, Inc. (ISDA) master agreements or their
equivalent (master netting agreements) with almost
all derivative counterparties. Master netting agreements provide
protection in bankruptcy in certain circumstances and, where
legally enforceable, enable receivables and payables with the
same counterparty to be offset for accounting and risk
management purposes. Netting agreements are generally negotiated
bilaterally and can require complex terms. While Merrill Lynch
makes reasonable efforts to execute such agreements, it is
possible that a counterparty may be unwilling to sign such an
agreement and, as a result, would subject Merrill Lynch to
additional credit risk.
Where Merrill Lynch has entered into legally enforceable netting
agreements with counterparties, it reports derivative assets and
liabilities, and any related cash collateral, net in the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets in accordance with
ASC 210-20,
Balance Sheet-Offsetting. At September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, cash collateral received of
$31.6 billion and $28.6 billion, respectively, and
cash collateral paid of $33.8 billion and
$29.0 billion, respectively, was netted against derivative
assets and liabilities. The enforceability of master netting
agreements under bankruptcy laws in certain countries or in
certain industries is not free from doubt, and receivables and
payables with counterparties in these countries or industries
are accordingly reported on a gross basis.
Merrill Lynch considers the impact of counterparty credit risk
on the valuation of derivative contracts. Factors used to
determine the credit valuation adjustments on the derivatives
portfolio include current exposure levels (i.e., fair value
prior to credit valuation adjustments) and expected exposure
levels profiled over the maturity of the contracts. CDS market
information, including either quoted single name CDS or index or
other proxy CDS, is also considered. In addition, the credit
valuation adjustments also take into account the netting and
credit provisions of relevant agreements including collateral
margin agreements and master netting agreements. During the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and
September 30, 2010, valuation adjustments (net of hedges)
of approximately $0.4 billion and $1.1 billion of
losses and $0.2 billion and $0.1 billion of gains,
respectively, were recognized in principal transactions for
counterparty credit risk. At September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, the cumulative counterparty credit risk
valuation adjustment that was reflected in derivative assets was
$1.6 billion and $5.9 billion, respectively. In
addition, the fair value of derivative
53
liabilities is adjusted to reflect the impact of Merrill
Lynchs credit quality. During the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2011, valuation adjustments (net of
hedges) of approximately $0.7 billion and $0.6 billion
in gains were recognized in principal transactions for changes
in Merrill Lynchs credit risk. During the three months
ended September 30, 2010, valuation adjustments of
approximately $0.1 billion were recognized as losses in
principal transactions for changes in Merrill Lynchs
credit risk. For the nine months ended September 30, 2010,
valuation adjustments were not material for changes in Merrill
Lynchs credit risk. At September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, the cumulative credit risk valuation
adjustment that was reflected in the derivative liabilities
balance was $1.2 billion and $0.6 billion,
respectively.
Monoline derivative credit exposure at September 30, 2011
had a notional value of $16.8 billion compared with
$32.0 billion at December 31, 2010.
Mark-to-market
monoline derivative credit exposure was $1.8 billion at
September 30, 2011 compared with $8.8 billion at
December 31, 2010. This decrease was driven by terminated
monoline contracts and the reclassification of certain
exposures. During the three months ended September 30,
2011, Merrill Lynch terminated all of its monoline contracts
referencing super senior ABS CDOs. In addition, Merrill Lynch
reclassified approximately $1.6 billion ($4.3 billion
gross receivable less impairment) of net monoline exposure from
trading assets derivative contracts to other assets,
because of the inherent default risk and given that these
contracts no longer provide a hedge benefit, they are no longer
considered derivative trading instruments. This monoline
exposure relates to a single counterparty and is recorded at
fair value based on current net recovery projections. The net
recovery projections take into account the present value of
projected payments expected to be received from the
counterparty. At September 30, 2011, the counterparty
credit valuation adjustment related to monoline derivative
exposure was $442 million compared with $5.0 billion
at December 31, 2010, which reduced Merrill Lynchs
net
mark-to-market
exposure to $1.3 billion at September 30, 2011.
Monoline related
mark-to-market
losses for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2011 were $205 million and $83 million, respectively,
which consist of changes in valuation adjustments as well as
hedge losses due to a breakdown in correlations during the
periods.
Bank of America has guaranteed the performance of Merrill Lynch
on certain derivative transactions. The aggregate amount of such
derivative liabilities was approximately $3.0 billion and
$2.1 billion at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively.
Credit-risk
related contingent features
Most of Merrill Lynchs derivative contracts contain credit
risk related contingent features, primarily in the form of ISDA
master netting agreements and credit support documentation that
enhance the creditworthiness of these instruments compared to
other obligations of the respective counterparty with whom
Merrill Lynch has transacted (e.g., other debt or equity). These
contingent features may be for the benefit of Merrill Lynch as
well as its counterparties with respect to changes in Merrill
Lynchs creditworthiness and the mark-to-market exposure
under the derivative transactions. At September 30, 2011
and December 31, 2010, Merrill Lynch held cash and
securities collateral of $44.9 billion and
$44.0 billion, and posted collateral of $44.9 billion
and $38.2 billion in the normal course of business under
derivative agreements.
At September 30, 2011, the amount of collateral, calculated
based on the terms of the contracts that Merrill Lynch could be
required to post to counterparties but had not yet posted to
counterparties was approximately $3.6 billion. That amount
included $2.9 billion in collateral that could be required
to be posted as a result of the downgrade by Moodys
Investors Service, Inc. (Moodys) on
September 21, 2011.
54
Some counterparties are able to unilaterally terminate certain
contracts, or Merrill Lynch may be required to take other action
such as find a suitable replacement or obtain a guarantee. At
September 30, 2011, the current liability for these
derivative contracts was $3.1 billion, against which
Merrill Lynch had posted $1.6 billion of collateral for
these contracts, resulting in a net uncollateralized liability
of approximately $1.5 billion. The amount of additional
collateral calculated based on the terms of the contracts
Merrill Lynch could be required to post is approximately
$2.3 billion, all of which is included in the
$3.6 billion figure discussed above.
In addition, if at September 30, 2011, the ratings agencies
had downgraded their long-term senior debt ratings for
ML & Co. by one incremental notch, the amount of
additional collateral and termination payments contractually
required by such derivative contracts and other trading
agreements would have been up to approximately
$1.7 billion. If the ratings agencies had downgraded their
long-term senior debt ratings for ML & Co. by a second
incremental notch, approximately $0.5 billion in additional
collateral and termination payments would have been required.
Note 7. Securities Financing Transactions
Merrill Lynch enters into secured borrowing and lending
transactions in order to meet customers needs and earn
residual interest rate spreads, obtain securities for settlement
and finance trading inventory positions.
Under these transactions, Merrill Lynch either receives or
provides collateral, including U.S. Government and agency,
asset-backed, corporate debt, equity, and
non-U.S. government
and agency securities. Merrill Lynch receives collateral in
connection with resale agreements, securities borrowed
transactions, customer margin loans and other loans. Under most
agreements, Merrill Lynch is permitted to sell or repledge the
securities received (e.g., use the securities to secure
repurchase agreements, enter into securities lending
transactions, or deliver to counterparties to cover short
positions). At September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010, the fair value of securities received as collateral where
Merrill Lynch is permitted to sell or repledge the securities
was $467 billion and $439 billion, respectively, and
the fair value of the portion that had been sold or repledged
was $382 billion and $332 billion, respectively.
Merrill Lynch may use securities received as collateral for
resale agreements to satisfy regulatory requirements such as
Rule 15c3-3
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Additionally, Merrill
Lynch receives securities as collateral in connection with
certain securities transactions in which Merrill Lynch is the
lender. In instances where Merrill Lynch is permitted to sell or
repledge securities received, Merrill Lynch reports the fair
value of such securities received as collateral and the related
obligation to return securities received as collateral in the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Merrill Lynch pledges assets to collateralize repurchase
agreements and other secured financings. Pledged securities that
can be sold or repledged by the secured party are
parenthetically disclosed in trading assets on the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets. The carrying value and
classification of
55
securities owned by Merrill Lynch that have been pledged to
counterparties where those counterparties do not have the right
to sell or repledge at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
December 31,
2010
|
|
|
Trading asset category
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures
|
|
$
|
3,780
|
|
|
$
|
8,199
|
|
Corporate debt and preferred stock
|
|
|
9,285
|
|
|
|
14,320
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
21,490
|
|
|
|
26,381
|
|
Non-U.S.
governments and agencies
|
|
|
1,317
|
|
|
|
1,424
|
|
Mortgages, mortgage-backed, and asset-backed securities
|
|
|
1,932
|
|
|
|
3,480
|
|
Municipals and money markets
|
|
|
444
|
|
|
|
1,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
38,248
|
|
|
$
|
55,784
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In certain cases, Merrill Lynch has transferred assets to
consolidated VIEs where those restricted assets serve as
collateral for the interests issued by the VIEs. These assets
are disclosed on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as
Assets of Consolidated VIEs. These transactions are also
described in Note 9.
Generally, when Merrill Lynch transfers financial instruments
that are not recorded as sales (i.e., secured borrowing
transactions), the liability is recorded as either payables
under repurchase agreements or payables under securities loaned
transactions; however, in instances where Merrill Lynch
transfers financial assets to a consolidated VIE, the
liabilities of the consolidated VIE will be reflected in long or
short-term borrowings (see Note 9). In either case, at the
time of transfer, the related liability is equal to the cash
received in the transaction. In most cases the lenders in
secured borrowing transactions have full recourse to Merrill
Lynch (i.e., recourse beyond the assets pledged).
Note 8. Investment Securities
Investment securities on the Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets include:
|
|
|
Investments within the scope of Investment Accounting that are
held by ML & Co. and certain of its non-broker-dealer
subsidiaries consist of debt securities
held-for-investment
and liquidity and collateral management purposes that are
classified as AFS, and debt securities that Merrill Lynch
intends to hold until maturity.
|
|
|
Non-qualifying investments are those that are not within the
scope of Investment Accounting and consist principally of equity
investments, including investments in partnerships and joint
ventures. Included in non-qualifying investments are investments
accounted for under the equity method of accounting, which
consist of investments in (i) partnerships and certain
limited liability corporations where Merrill Lynch has more than
a minor influence (generally defined as three to five percent
interest) and (ii) corporate entities where Merrill Lynch
has the ability to exercise significant influence over the
investee (generally defined as ownership and voting interest of
20% to 50%). Also included in non-qualifying investments are
private equity investments that Merrill Lynch holds for capital
appreciation
and/or
current income and which are accounted for at fair value in
accordance with the Investment Company Guide, as well as private
equity investments accounted for at fair value under the fair
value option election.
|
Investment securities reported on the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets at September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010 are presented below.
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
December 31,
2010
|
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
$
|
5,091
|
|
Held-to-maturity
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
Non-qualifying
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
investments(2)
|
|
|
4,696
|
|
|
|
10,437
|
|
Other investments
|
|
|
2,155
|
|
|
|
1,996
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,031
|
|
|
$
|
17,769
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Investments that are
non-qualifying for Investment Accounting purposes. |
|
(2) |
|
The December 31, 2010
balance included Merrill Lynchs investment in BlackRock,
Inc., which consisted of approximately 13.6 million
preferred shares. The carrying value and fair value of this
investment was $2.2 billion and $2.6 billion,
respectively, at December 31, 2010. During the second
quarter of 2011, Merrill Lynch sold its remaining investment in
BlackRock, Inc., resulting in a pre-tax gain of
$377 million. |
For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011,
OTTI losses related to non-agency mortgage-backed AFS securities
were $12 million and $59 million, respectively. For
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010, OTTI
losses related to non-agency mortgage-backed AFS securities were
$45 million and $168 million, respectively. Net
impairment losses recognized in earnings represent the credit
component of OTTI losses on AFS debt securities and total OTTI
losses for AFS debt securities that Merrill Lynch does not
intend to hold to recovery. Those amounts were $5 million
and $49 million for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and $42 million and
$165 million for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010, respectively. Refer to Note 1 for
Merrill Lynchs accounting policy regarding OTTI of
investment securities.
Information regarding investment securities subject to
Investment Accounting follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
Gains
|
|
Losses
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities, mortgage-backed and asset-backed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agency collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
$
|
55
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
55
|
|
Non-agency mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
548
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
490
|
|
Corporate asset-backed securities
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
845
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
787
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Available-for-Sale
Securities
|
|
$
|
1,238
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
(82
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
Gains
|
|
Losses
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agency residential mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
3,918
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
Agency collateralized mortgage obligations
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
Non-agency
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
731
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
4,718
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
4,661
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies
|
|
|
430
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Available-for-Sale
Securities
|
|
|
5,148
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
5,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held-to-Maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate debt and municipal
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
245
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,393
|
|
|
$
|
68
|
|
|
$
|
(125
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents fair value and unrealized losses,
after hedges, for
available-for-sale
securities, aggregated by investment category and length of time
that the individual securities have been in a continuous
unrealized loss position at September 30, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Less Than 1 Year
|
|
More Than 1 Year
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
Asset Category
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Non-agency
|
|
$
|
212
|
|
|
$
|
(22
|
)
|
|
$
|
119
|
|
|
$
|
(60
|
)
|
|
$
|
331
|
|
|
$
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
The following table presents fair value and unrealized losses,
after hedges, for
available-for-sale
securities, aggregated by investment category and length of time
that the individual securities have been in a continuous
unrealized loss position at December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than 1 Year
|
|
More Than 1 Year
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
Asset Category
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Agency residential mortgage backed securities
|
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
3,869
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
Non-agency
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
230
|
|
|
|
(73
|
)
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
3,922
|
|
|
$
|
(52
|
)
|
|
$
|
230
|
|
|
$
|
(73
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,152
|
|
|
$
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
The amortized cost and fair value of
available-for-sale
debt securities by expected maturity for mortgage-backed
securities and contractual maturity for other debt securities at
September 30, 2011 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Due in one year or less
|
|
$
|
759
|
|
|
$
|
739
|
|
Due after one year through five years
|
|
|
252
|
|
|
|
242
|
|
Due after five years through ten years
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Due after ten years
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total(1)
|
|
$
|
1,238
|
|
|
$
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Actual maturities may differ
from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right
to call or prepay their obligations with or without prepayment
penalties. |
The proceeds and gross realized gains (losses) from the sale of
available-for-sale
securities during the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
Three Months
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
September 30,
2010
|
|
September 30,
2010
|
|
Proceeds
|
|
$
|
423
|
|
|
$
|
3,876
|
|
|
$
|
139
|
|
|
$
|
14,966
|
|
Gross realized gains
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
412
|
|
Gross realized losses
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(270
|
)
|
|
|
At September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, Merrill
Lynch held certain investments that were accounted for under the
equity method of accounting, none of which were individually
material.
Note 9. Securitizations and Other Variable
Interest Entities
Merrill Lynch utilizes VIEs in the ordinary course of business
to support its own and its customers financing and
investing needs. Merrill Lynch securitizes loans and debt
securities using VIEs as a source of funding and as a means of
transferring the economic risk of the loans or debt securities
to third parties. Merrill Lynch also administers, structures or
invests in other VIEs including municipal bond trusts, CDOs and
other entities as described in more detail below.
The entity that has a controlling financial interest in a VIE is
referred to as the primary beneficiary and consolidates the VIE.
Merrill Lynch is deemed to have a controlling financial interest
and is the primary beneficiary of a VIE if it has both the power
to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly
impact the VIEs economic performance and an obligation to
absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could
potentially be significant to the VIE.
The tables below present the assets and liabilities of
consolidated and unconsolidated VIEs if Merrill Lynch has
continuing involvement with transferred assets or if Merrill
Lynch otherwise has a variable interest in the VIE. For
consolidated VIEs, these amounts are net of intercompany
balances. The tables also present Merrill Lynchs maximum
exposure to loss resulting from its involvement with
59
consolidated VIEs and unconsolidated VIEs in which Merrill Lynch
holds a variable interest as of September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010. Merrill Lynchs maximum exposure to
loss is based on the unlikely event that all of the assets in
the VIEs become worthless and incorporates not only potential
losses associated with assets recorded on Merrill Lynchs
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet but also potential losses
associated with off-balance sheet commitments such as unfunded
liquidity commitments and other contractual arrangements.
Merrill Lynchs maximum exposure to loss does not include
losses previously recognized.
Merrill Lynch invests in ABS issued by third party VIEs with
which it has no other form of involvement. These securities are
described in more detail in Note 8. In addition, Merrill
Lynch uses VIEs such as trust preferred securities trusts in
connection with its funding activities (see Note 12).
Except as described below, Merrill Lynch has not provided
financial support to consolidated or unconsolidated VIEs that it
was not contractually required to provide, nor does it intend to
do so.
Loan VIEs
Merrill Lynch securitizes mortgage loans that it originates or
purchases from third parties. In certain circumstances, Merrill
Lynch has continuing involvement with the securitized loans as
servicer of the loans. Merrill Lynch may also retain beneficial
interests in the securitization vehicles including senior and
subordinated securities, and the equity tranche. Except as
described below, Merrill Lynch does not provide guarantees to
the securitization vehicles and investors do not have recourse
to Merrill Lynch other than through standard representations and
warranties.
The following table summarizes certain information related to
Loan VIEs in which Merrill Lynch is either the transferor,
servicer or sponsor and holds a variable interest as of
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Agency
|
|
|
Agency
|
|
Prime
|
|
Subprime
|
|
Commercial Mortgage
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
Unconsolidated VIEs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum loss
exposure(1)
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
28
|
|
|
$
|
136
|
|
|
$
|
168
|
|
|
$
|
149
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior securities
held(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
74
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Subordinated securities
held(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Residual interests held
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total retained securities
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
56
|
|
|
$
|
76
|
|
|
$
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance
outstanding(3)
|
|
$
|
635
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
264
|
|
|
$
|
636
|
|
|
$
|
6,096
|
|
|
$
|
18,857
|
|
|
$
|
29,295
|
|
|
$
|
24,891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated VIEs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum loss
exposure(1)
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
41
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
46
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Maximum loss exposure excludes
liabilities for representations and warranties. |
(2) |
|
Substantially all of the
securities were in Level 2 in the fair value
hierarchy. |
(3) |
|
Principal balance outstanding
includes those loans that Merrill Lynch transferred and with
which it has continuing involvement. |
60
In accordance with consolidation guidance, Merrill Lynch
consolidates Loan VIEs in which it has a controlling financial
interest. For loan securitizations, Merrill Lynch is considered
to have a controlling financial interest (i.e., is the primary
beneficiary) when it is the servicer of the loans and also holds
a financial interest that could potentially be significant to
the entity. If Merrill Lynch is not the servicer of an entity or
does not hold a financial interest that could be significant to
the entity, Merrill Lynch does not have a controlling financial
interest and does not consolidate the entity. Merrill Lynch does
not have a controlling financial interest in and does not
consolidate agency trusts unless Merrill Lynch holds all of the
issued securities and has the unilateral right to liquidate the
trust.
Merrill Lynch sells mortgage loans to VIEs with various
representations and warranties related to, among other things,
the ownership of the loan, validity of the lien securing the
loan, absence of delinquent taxes or liens against the property
securing the loan, the process used in selecting the loans for
inclusion in a transaction, the loans compliance with any
applicable loan criteria established by the buyer, and the
loans compliance with applicable local, state and federal
laws. Under these representations and warranties, Merrill Lynch
may be required to repurchase mortgage loans with the identified
defects or indemnify or provide other recourse to the investor
or insurer. In such cases, Merrill Lynch bears any subsequent
credit loss on the mortgage loans. Merrill Lynchs
representations and warranties are generally not subject to
stated limits and extend over the life of the loans. See
Note 14.
Municipal Bond Securitizations
Merrill Lynch sponsors municipal bond trusts that hold
highly-rated, long-term, fixed-rate municipal bonds, some of
which are callable prior to maturity. A majority of the bonds
are rated AAA or AA and some benefit from insurance provided by
third parties. The trusts obtain financing by issuing
floating-rate
trust certificates that reprice on a frequent basis to third
party investors. Merrill Lynch may serve as remarketing agent
and/or
liquidity provider for the trusts. The floating-rate investors
have the right to tender the certificates at specified dates,
often with as little as seven days notice. Should Merrill
Lynch be unable to remarket the tendered certificates, it is
generally obligated to purchase them at par under standby
liquidity facilities unless the bonds credit rating has
declined below investment grade or there has been an event of
default or bankruptcy of the issuer and insurer.
Merrill Lynch also provides default protection or credit
enhancement to investors in certain municipal bond trusts
whereby Merrill Lynch guarantees the payment of interest and
principal on floating-rate certificates issued by these trusts.
If an investor holds the residual interest, that investor
typically has the unilateral ability to liquidate the trust at
any time, while Merrill Lynch typically has the ability to
trigger the liquidation of that trust only if the market value
of the bonds held in the trust declines below a specified
threshold. The weighted average remaining life of bonds held in
the trusts at September 30, 2011 was 10.9 years.
61
The following table summarizes certain information related to
municipal bond trusts in which Merrill Lynch holds a variable
interest as of September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Maximum Loss Exposure
|
|
$
|
4,361
|
|
|
$
|
1,476
|
|
|
$
|
5,837
|
|
|
$
|
4,451
|
|
|
$
|
1,543
|
|
|
$
|
5,994
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
4,361
|
|
|
$
|
341
|
|
|
$
|
4,702
|
|
|
$
|
4,451
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
4,706
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,361
|
|
|
$
|
341
|
|
|
$
|
4,702
|
|
|
$
|
4,451
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
4,706
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
5,274
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,274
|
|
|
$
|
4,642
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
4,642
|
|
Payables to Bank of America
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,287
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
5,287
|
|
|
$
|
4,644
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
4,644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets of VIEs
|
|
$
|
4,361
|
|
|
$
|
1,561
|
|
|
$
|
5,922
|
|
|
$
|
4,451
|
|
|
$
|
1,706
|
|
|
$
|
6,157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merrill Lynch consolidates municipal bond trusts when it has a
controlling financial interest. As transferor of assets into a
trust, Merrill Lynch has the power to determine which assets
would be held in the trust and to structure the liquidity
facilities, default protection and credit enhancement, if
applicable. In some instances, Merrill Lynch retains a residual
interest in such trusts and has loss exposure that could
potentially be significant to the trust through the residual
interest, liquidity facilities and other arrangements. Merrill
Lynch is also the remarketing agent, through which it has the
power to direct the activities that most significantly impact
economic performance. Accordingly, Merrill Lynch is the primary
beneficiary of and consolidates these trusts. In other
instances, one or more third party investor(s) hold(s) the
residual interest and, through that interest, has the unilateral
right to liquidate the trust. Merrill Lynch does not consolidate
these trusts.
In the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011,
Merrill Lynch was the transferor of assets into unconsolidated
municipal bond trusts and received cash proceeds from new
securitizations of $182 million and $509 million,
respectively, as compared with $226 million and
$1.0 billion, respectively, in the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2010. At September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, the principal balance outstanding for
unconsolidated municipal bond securitization trusts for which
Merrill Lynch was the transferor was $1.6 billion and
$1.7 billion, respectively.
Merrill Lynchs liquidity commitments to unconsolidated
municipal bond trusts totaled $1.1 billion and
$1.3 billion at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively.
CDOs
CDO vehicles hold diversified pools of fixed income securities,
typically corporate debt or asset-backed securities, which they
fund by issuing multiple tranches of debt and equity securities.
Synthetic CDOs enter into a portfolio of credit default swaps to
synthetically create exposure to fixed income securities. CLOs
are a subset of CDOs that hold pools of loans, typically
corporate loans or commercial mortgages. CDOs are typically
managed by third party portfolio managers. Merrill Lynch
transfers assets to these CDOs, holds securities issued by the
CDOs, and may be a derivative counterparty to the CDOs,
including credit default swap counterparty for synthetic CDOs.
Merrill Lynch has also entered into total return swaps with
certain CDOs whereby Merrill Lynch will absorb the economic
returns generated by specified assets held by the CDO. Merrill
Lynch receives fees for structuring CDOs and providing liquidity
support for super senior tranches of securities issued by
certain CDOs.
62
The following table summarizes certain information related to
CDO vehicles in which Merrill Lynch holds a variable interest as
of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Maximum Loss Exposure
|
|
$
|
1,672
|
|
|
$
|
2,449
|
|
|
$
|
4,121
|
|
|
$
|
2,216
|
|
|
$
|
2,987
|
|
|
$
|
5,203
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
1,791
|
|
|
$
|
412
|
|
|
$
|
2,203
|
|
|
$
|
2,727
|
|
|
$
|
569
|
|
|
$
|
3,296
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
771
|
|
|
|
771
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
890
|
|
|
|
890
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,802
|
|
|
$
|
1,290
|
|
|
$
|
3,092
|
|
|
$
|
2,730
|
|
|
$
|
1,582
|
|
|
$
|
4,312
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
2,437
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,437
|
|
|
|
3,161
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,437
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
2,450
|
|
|
$
|
3,161
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
3,169
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets of VIEs
|
|
$
|
1,802
|
|
|
$
|
34,082
|
|
|
$
|
35,884
|
|
|
$
|
2,730
|
|
|
$
|
42,782
|
|
|
$
|
45,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merrill Lynchs maximum exposure to loss is significantly
less than the total assets of the CDO vehicles in the table
above because Merrill Lynch typically has exposure to only a
portion of the total assets.
At September 30, 2011, Merrill Lynch had $2.6 billion
of aggregate liquidity exposure to CDOs. This amount includes
$872 million of commitments to CDOs to provide funding for
super senior exposures and $1.7 billion notional amount of
derivative contracts with unconsolidated VIEs, principally CDO
vehicles, which hold non-super senior CDO debt securities or
other debt securities on Merrill Lynchs behalf. Refer to
Note 14 for additional information. Merrill Lynchs
liquidity exposure to CDOs at September 30, 2011 is
included in the table above to the extent that Merrill Lynch
sponsored the CDO vehicle or the liquidity exposure is more than
insignificant compared to total assets of the CDO vehicle.
Liquidity exposure included in the table is reported net of
previously recorded losses.
Customer
Vehicles
Customer vehicles include credit-linked and equity-linked note
vehicles and repackaging vehicles, which are typically created
on behalf of customers who wish to obtain exposure to a specific
company or financial instrument. Credit-linked and equity-linked
note vehicles issue notes which pay a return that is linked to
the specific credit or equity risk. The vehicles purchase
high-grade assets as collateral and enter into CDS or equity
derivatives to synthetically create the credit or equity risk
required to pay the specified return on the notes issued by the
vehicles. Repackaging vehicles issue notes that are designed to
incorporate risk characteristics desired by customers of Merrill
Lynch. The vehicles hold debt instruments such as corporate
bonds, convertible bonds or ABS with the desired credit risk
profile. Merrill Lynch enters into derivatives with the vehicles
to change the interest rate or currency profile of the debt
instruments. If a vehicle holds convertible bonds and Merrill
Lynch retains the conversion option, Merrill Lynch is deemed to
have a controlling financial interest and consolidates the
vehicle.
63
The following table summarizes certain information related to
customer vehicles in which Merrill Lynch holds a variable
interest as of September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated(1)
|
|
Total
|
|
Maximum Loss Exposure
|
|
$
|
1,955
|
|
|
$
|
2,319
|
|
|
$
|
4,274
|
|
|
$
|
3,457
|
|
|
$
|
2,083
|
|
|
$
|
5,540
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
2,583
|
|
|
$
|
244
|
|
|
$
|
2,827
|
|
|
$
|
3,397
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
3,614
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
|
|
728
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
1,437
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,437
|
|
|
|
1,430
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,020
|
|
|
$
|
1,407
|
|
|
$
|
5,427
|
|
|
$
|
4,827
|
|
|
$
|
945
|
|
|
$
|
5,772
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
49
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
3,170
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,170
|
|
|
|
3,430
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,430
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
456
|
|
|
|
456
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
3,214
|
|
|
$
|
501
|
|
|
$
|
3,715
|
|
|
$
|
3,431
|
|
|
$
|
774
|
|
|
$
|
4,205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets of VIEs
|
|
$
|
4,020
|
|
|
$
|
5,111
|
|
|
$
|
9,131
|
|
|
$
|
4,827
|
|
|
$
|
5,952
|
|
|
$
|
10,779
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Maximum loss exposure, trading
assets and other liabilities have been revised from
$2,603 million, $737 million and $140 million,
respectively (as previously reported) to $2,083 million,
$217 million and $750 million, respectively. |
Merrill Lynch consolidates customer vehicles in which it has a
controlling financial interest. Merrill Lynch typically has
control over the initial design of the vehicle and may also have
the ability to replace the collateral assets. Merrill Lynch
consolidates these vehicles if it also absorbs potentially
significant gains or losses through derivative contracts or
investments. Merrill Lynch does not consolidate a vehicle if a
single investor controlled the initial design of the vehicle or
if Merrill Lynch does not have a variable interest that could
potentially be significant to the vehicle.
Merrill Lynch is typically the counterparty for the credit and
equity derivatives, and it may invest in securities issued by
the vehicles. Merrill Lynch may also enter into interest rate
and foreign currency derivatives with the vehicles. Merrill
Lynch had approximately $853 million of other liquidity
commitments, including written put options and collateral value
guarantees, with unconsolidated credit-linked and equity-linked
note vehicles at September 30, 2011.
Merrill Lynchs maximum exposure to loss from customer
vehicles includes the notional amount of the credit or equity
derivatives to which it is counterparty, net of losses
previously recorded, and Merrill Lynchs investment, if
any, in securities issued by the vehicles. It has not been
reduced to reflect the benefit of offsetting swaps with the
customers or collateral arrangements.
Real
Estate and other VIEs
Real Estate and other VIEs primarily includes a real estate
investment fund that is a VIE, investments in VIEs that hold
investment property, certain hedge fund investment entities, and
residential agency resecuritizations.
64
The following table summarizes certain information related to
Real Estate and other VIEs in which Merrill Lynch holds a
variable interest as of September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated
|
|
Total
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
Unconsolidated(1)
|
|
Total
|
|
Maximum Loss Exposure
|
|
$
|
454
|
|
|
$
|
2,163
|
|
|
$
|
2,617
|
|
|
$
|
857
|
|
|
$
|
3,389
|
|
|
$
|
4,246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading assets
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
404
|
|
|
$
|
435
|
|
|
$
|
263
|
|
|
$
|
1,326
|
|
|
$
|
1,589
|
|
Derivative contracts
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
337
|
|
|
|
337
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
327
|
|
|
|
309
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
382
|
|
Loans, notes, and mortgages
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
1,010
|
|
|
|
1,118
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
1,368
|
|
|
|
1,589
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
351
|
|
|
|
412
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
464
|
|
|
$
|
2,165
|
|
|
$
|
2,629
|
|
|
$
|
940
|
|
|
$
|
3,389
|
|
|
$
|
4,329
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On-balance sheet liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
181
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
191
|
|
|
$
|
127
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets of VIEs
|
|
$
|
464
|
|
|
$
|
18,424
|
|
|
$
|
18,888
|
|
|
$
|
940
|
|
|
$
|
20,614
|
|
|
$
|
21,554
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Maximum loss exposure, trading
assets and total assets of VIEs have been revised from
$2,150 million, $86 million and $6,391 million,
respectively (as previously reported), to $3,389 million,
$1,326 million and $20,614 million,
respectively. |
Merrill Lynch consolidates real estate and other VIEs in which
it has a controlling financial interest. Merrill Lynch has
established real estate investment funds designed to provide
returns to clients through limited partnership holdings. Merrill
Lynch was originally the general partner and the investment
advisor, making management decisions. In 2010, Merrill Lynch
transferred its management responsibilities to third parties but
retained a limited partnership interest in these funds.
Merrill Lynch invests in real estate lending vehicles and
establishes vehicles to hold real estate investments. In certain
instances these entities do not have sufficient equity to
finance operations and are therefore considered VIEs. Merrill
Lynch consolidates these vehicles when it has decision-making
power over the property held by the vehicle and absorbs
potentially significant gains or losses through its equity or
loan investment.
Other
Asset-backed Financing Arrangements
Merrill Lynch transferred pools of securities to certain
independent third parties and provided financing for
approximately 75 percent of the purchase price under
asset-backed financing arrangements. At September 30, 2011
and December 31, 2010, Merrill Lynchs maximum loss
exposure under these financing arrangements was
$5.4 billion and $6.5 billion, respectively,
substantially all of which was recorded as loans, notes and
mortgages on Merrill Lynchs Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet. All principal and interest payments have been received
when due in accordance with their contractual terms. These
arrangements are not included in the tables above because the
purchasers are not VIEs.
65
Note 10. Loans, Notes and Mortgages
Loans, notes, mortgages and related commitments to extend credit
include:
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer loans, which are substantially secured, including
residential mortgages, home equity loans, and other loans to
individuals for household, family, or other personal
expenditures; and
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans, including corporate and institutional loans
(including corporate and financial sponsor, non-investment grade
lending commitments), commercial mortgages, asset-backed loans,
small- and middle-market business loans, and other loans to
businesses.
|
The table below presents information on Merrill Lynchs
loans outstanding at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age Analysis of Outstanding Loans
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
90 Days or more
|
|
Total Past
|
|
or Less Than
|
|
Nonperforming
|
|
Measured at
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Due
|
|
30 Days Past Due
|
|
Loans(1)
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Consumer loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
433
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
476
|
|
Home equity
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
551
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial U.S.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
4,232
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
4,354
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
496
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
616
|
|
Commercial
non-U.S.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3,192
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3,249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial loans
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
7,920
|
|
|
|
286
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
8,219
|
|
Commercial loans measured at fair value
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
7,920
|
|
|
|
286
|
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
9,111
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(2)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,789
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,507
|
|
|
|
12,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
28
|
|
|
$
|
19,260
|
|
|
$
|
319
|
|
|
$
|
2,399
|
|
|
$
|
22,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(90
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
21,916
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age Analysis of Outstanding Loans
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current
|
|
|
|
Loans
|
|
|
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
90 Days or more
|
|
Total Past
|
|
or Less Than
|
|
Nonperforming
|
|
Measured at
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Past Due
|
|
Due
|
|
30 Days Past Due
|
|
Loans(1)
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Consumer loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
$
|
451
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
504
|
|
Home equity
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
577
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
636
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial U.S.
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
5,591
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5,822
|
|
Commercial real estate
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,632
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1,844
|
|
Commercial
non-U.S.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,824
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial loans
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
10,047
|
|
|
|
583
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
10,651
|
|
Commercial loans measured at fair value
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
318
|
|
|
|
318
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
10,047
|
|
|
|
583
|
|
|
|
318
|
|
|
|
10,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
11,496
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2,872
|
|
|
|
14,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
22,120
|
|
|
$
|
618
|
|
|
$
|
3,190
|
|
|
$
|
25,973
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
25,803
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes loans measured at fair
value. |
(2) |
|
Includes asset-backed loans and
loans
held-for-sale
of $9.3 billion and $3.0 billion, respectively, as of
September 30, 2011. |
(3) |
|
Includes asset-backed loans and
loans
held-for-sale
of $9.2 billion and $5.2 billion, respectively, as of
December 31, 2010. |
Merrill Lynch monitors the credit quality of its loans on an
ongoing basis. Merrill Lynchs commercial loans are
evaluated using pass rated or reservable criticized as the
primary credit quality indicators. The term reservable
criticized refers to those commercial loans that are internally
classified or listed by Merrill Lynch as special mention,
substandard or doubtful, which are asset categories defined by
regulatory authorities. These assets have an elevated risk and
may have a high probability of default or total loss. Pass rated
refers to all loans not considered reservable criticized. The
table below presents credit quality indicators on Merrill
Lynchs commercial loan portfolio, excluding loans
accounted for under the fair value option, at September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
Commercial Real
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
Estate
|
|
non-U.S.
|
|
|
Risk Ratings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass rated
|
|
$
|
4,057
|
|
|
$
|
317
|
|
|
$
|
3,050
|
|
Reservable criticized
|
|
|
297
|
|
|
|
299
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Commercial Credit
|
|
$
|
4,354
|
|
|
$
|
616
|
|
|
$
|
3,249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Commercial
|
|
Commercial Real
|
|
Commercial
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
Estate
|
|
non-U.S.
|
|
|
Risk Ratings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass rated
|
|
$
|
5,192
|
|
|
$
|
1,582
|
|
|
$
|
2,581
|
|
Reservable criticized
|
|
|
630
|
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Commercial Credit
|
|
$
|
5,822
|
|
|
$
|
1,844
|
|
|
$
|
2,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Activity in the allowance for loan losses, which is primarily
associated with commercial loans, is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
September 30,
2011
|
|
September 30,
2010
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses, at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
170
|
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
(73
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(73
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses, at end of period
|
|
$
|
90
|
|
|
$
|
189
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer loans, substantially all of which are collateralized,
consisted of approximately 23,000 individual loans at
September 30, 2011. Commercial loans consisted of
approximately 6,000 separate loans.
Merrill Lynchs outstanding loans include $3.0 billion
and $5.2 billion of loans held for sale at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
respectively. Loans held for sale are loans that Merrill Lynch
expects to sell prior to maturity. At September 30, 2011,
such loans consisted of $0.8 billion of consumer loans,
primarily residential mortgages, and $2.2 billion of
commercial loans. At December 31, 2010, such loans
consisted of $1.7 billion of consumer loans, primarily
residential mortgages, and $3.5 billion of commercial loans.
Merrill Lynch generally maintains collateral on secured loans in
the form of securities, liens on real estate, perfected security
interests in other assets of the borrower, and guarantees.
Consumer loans are typically collateralized by liens on real
estate and other property. Commercial secured loans primarily
include asset-based loans secured by financial assets such as
loan receivables and trade receivables where the amount of the
loan is based on the level of available collateral (i.e., the
borrowing base) and commercial mortgages secured by real
property. In addition, for secured commercial loans related to
the corporate and institutional lending business, Merrill Lynch
typically receives collateral in the form of either a first or
second lien on the assets of the borrower or the stock of a
subsidiary, which gives Merrill Lynch a priority claim in the
case of a bankruptcy filing by the borrower. In many cases,
where a security interest in the assets of the borrower is
granted, no restrictions are placed on the use of assets by the
borrower and asset levels are not typically subject to periodic
review; however, the borrowers are typically subject to
stringent debt covenants. Where the borrower grants a security
interest in the stock of its subsidiary, the subsidiarys
ability to issue additional debt is typically restricted.
68
In some cases, Merrill Lynch enters into single name and index
credit default swaps to mitigate credit exposure related to
funded and unfunded commercial loans. The notional value of
these swaps totaled $3.7 billion and $2.9 billion at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
The following tables provide information regarding Merrill
Lynchs net credit default protection associated with its
funded and unfunded commercial loans as of September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Credit Default Protection by Maturity Profile
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Less than or equal to one year
|
|
|
14
|
%
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
Greater than one year and less than or equal to five years
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
Greater than five years
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net credit default protection
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Credit Default Protection by Credit Exposure Debt
Rating
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Ratings(1)
|
|
Notional
|
|
Percent
|
|
Notional
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
AA
|
|
$
|
(647
|
)
|
|
|
17.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
(450
|
)
|
|
|
15.5
|
%
|
A
|
|
|
(1,727
|
)
|
|
|
46.7
|
|
|
|
(1,029
|
)
|
|
|
35.3
|
|
BBB
|
|
|
(716
|
)
|
|
|
19.4
|
|
|
|
(655
|
)
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
BB
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(359
|
)
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
B
|
|
|
(190
|
)
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
(224
|
)
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
CCC and below
|
|
|
(187
|
)
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
(194
|
)
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net credit default protection
|
|
$
|
(3,699
|
)
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
(2,911
|
)
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Merrill Lynch considers ratings
of BBB- or higher to meet the definition of investment
grade. |
Accounting
for Acquired Impaired Loans
Upon completion of the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of
America, Merrill Lynch adjusted the carrying value of its loans
to fair value. Certain of these loans were subject to the
requirements of Acquired Impaired Loan Accounting, which
addresses accounting for differences between contractual cash
flows and cash flows expected to be collected from an
investors initial investment in loans if those differences
are attributable, at least in part, to credit quality. Acquired
Impaired Loan Accounting requires impaired loans to be recorded
at estimated fair value and prohibits carrying over
or the creation of valuation allowances in the initial
accounting for loans acquired in a transfer that are within the
scope of Acquired Impaired Loan Accounting.
The estimated fair values for loans within the scope of Acquired
Impaired Loan Accounting are determined by discounting cash
flows expected to be collected using a discount rate for similar
instruments with adjustments that management believes a market
participant would consider in determining fair value. Cash flows
expected to be collected at acquisition are estimated using
internal prepayment, interest rate and credit risk models that
incorporate managements best estimate of certain key
assumptions, such as default rates, loss severity and prepayment
speeds. All other loans were remeasured at the present value of
contractual payments discounted to the prevailing interest rates
on the date of acquisition.
69
Under Acquired Impaired Loan Accounting, the excess of cash
flows expected at acquisition over the estimated fair value is
referred to as the accretable yield and is recognized in
interest income over the remaining life of the loans. The
difference between contractually required payments at
acquisition and the cash flows expected to be collected at
acquisition is referred to as the nonaccretable difference.
Changes in the expected cash flows from the date of acquisition
will either impact the accretable yield or result in a charge to
the provision for credit losses. Subsequent decreases to
expected principal cash flows will result in a charge to
provision for credit losses and a corresponding increase to
allowance for loan losses. Subsequent increases in expected
principal cash flows will result in recovery of any previously
recorded allowance for loan losses, to the extent applicable,
and an increase from expected cash flows to accretable yield for
any remaining increase. All changes in expected interest cash
flows will result in an increase or decrease of accretable yield.
In connection with Merrill Lynchs acquisition by Bank of
America, loans within the scope of Acquired Impaired Loan
Accounting had an unpaid principal balance of $5.6 billion
($2.7 billion consumer and $2.9 billion commercial)
and a carrying value of $4.2 billion ($2.3 billion
consumer and $1.9 billion commercial) as of January 1,
2009. The loans within the scope of Acquired Impaired Loan
Accounting, which were primarily commercial real estate loans,
had an unpaid principal balance of $0.7 billion and a
carrying value of $0.2 billion as of December 31,
2010, and were not material as of September 30, 2011.
Note 11. Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill
Goodwill is the cost of an acquired company in excess of the
fair value of identifiable net assets at the acquisition date.
Goodwill is tested annually (or more frequently under certain
conditions) for impairment at the reporting unit level in
accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles
Goodwill and Other (Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Accounting). If the fair value of the reporting unit
exceeds its carrying value, its goodwill is not deemed to be
impaired. If the fair value is less than the carrying value, a
further analysis is required to determine the amount of
impairment, if any. Based on the annual impairment analysis
completed during the third quarter of 2011, Merrill Lynch
determined that there was no impairment of goodwill as of the
June 30, 2011 test date.
The carrying amount of goodwill was $5.7 billion at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
Intangible
Assets
Intangible assets with definite lives at September 30, 2011
and December 31, 2010 consisted primarily of value assigned
to customer relationships. Intangible assets with definite lives
are tested for impairment in accordance with ASC 360,
Property, Plant and Equipment whenever certain conditions
exist which would indicate the carrying amounts of such assets
may not be recoverable. Intangible assets with definite lives
are amortized over their respective estimated useful lives.
Intangible assets with indefinite lives consist of value
assigned to the Merrill Lynch brand and are tested for
impairment in accordance with Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Accounting. Intangible assets with indefinite lives are not
amortized. Based on an impairment analysis conducted as of
June 30, 2011, the Merrill Lynch brand is not impaired.
The gross carrying amount of intangible assets with definite
lives was $3.1 billion at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010. Accumulated amortization of intangible
assets was $850 million and $618 million at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
respectively. The carrying amount of
70
intangible assets with indefinite lives was $1.5 billion as
of September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
Amortization expense for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 was
$78 million and $232 million, respectively.
Note 12. Borrowings and Deposits
Prior to Merrill Lynchs acquisition by Bank of America,
ML & Co. was the primary issuer of Merrill
Lynchs unsecured debt instruments. Debt instruments were
also issued by certain subsidiaries. Bank of America has not
assumed or guaranteed the long-term debt that was issued or
guaranteed by ML & Co. or its subsidiaries prior to
the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America.
Beginning late in the third quarter of 2009, in connection with
the update or renewal of certain Merrill Lynch international
securities offering programs, Bank of America agreed to
guarantee debt securities, warrants
and/or
certificates issued by certain subsidiaries of ML &
Co. on a going forward basis. All existing ML & Co.
guarantees of securities issued by those same Merrill Lynch
subsidiaries under various international securities offering
programs will remain in full force and effect as long as those
securities are outstanding, and Bank of America has not assumed
any of those prior ML & Co. guarantees or otherwise
guaranteed such securities. There were approximately
$5.2 billion of securities guaranteed by Bank of America at
September 30, 2011.
Following the completion of Bank of Americas acquisition
of Merrill Lynch, ML & Co. became a subsidiary of Bank
of America and established intercompany lending and borrowing
arrangements to facilitate centralized liquidity management.
Included in these intercompany agreements is a $75 billion
one-year revolving unsecured line of credit that allows
ML & Co. to borrow funds from Bank of America at a
spread to LIBOR that is reset periodically and is consistent
with other intercompany agreements. This credit line was renewed
effective January 1, 2011 with a maturity date of
January 1, 2012. The credit line will automatically be
extended by one year to the succeeding
January 1st unless Bank of America provides written
notice not to extend at least 45 days prior to the maturity
date. The agreement does not contain any financial or other
covenants. There were no outstanding borrowings against the line
of credit at September 30, 2011.
In addition to the $75 billion unsecured line of credit, a
$25 billion
364-day
revolving unsecured line of credit that allows ML &
Co. to borrow funds from Bank of America was established on
February 15, 2011. Interest on the line of credit is based
on prevailing short-term market rates. The agreement does not
contain any financial or other covenants. The line of credit
matures on February 14, 2012. There were no outstanding
borrowings against the line of credit at September 30, 2011.
Following the merger of BAS into MLPF&S, Bank of America
agreed to guarantee the short-term, senior unsecured obligations
issued by MLPF&S under its short-term master note program
on a going forward basis. In July 2011, Merrill Lynch decided to
reduce short-term unsecured obligations. At September 30,
2011, there were no longer any borrowings outstanding under this
program.
Also in connection with the merger of BAS into MLPF&S,
MLPF&S either assumed or established the following
agreements:
|
|
|
MLPF&S assumed an approximately $1.5 billion
subordinated loan agreement with Bank of America, which bears
interest based on a spread to LIBOR, and has a scheduled
maturity date of December 31, 2012. The loan agreement
contains a provision that automatically extends the loans
|
71
|
|
|
maturity by one year unless Bank of America provides
13 months written notice not to extend prior to the
scheduled maturity date.
|
|
|
|
MLPF&S assumed a $7 billion revolving subordinated
line of credit with Bank of America. The subordinated line of
credit bears interest based on a spread to LIBOR, and has a
scheduled maturity date of October 1, 2013. The revolving
subordinated line of credit contains a provision that
automatically extends the maturity by one year unless Bank of
America provides 13 months written notice not to extend
prior to the scheduled maturity date. At September 30,
2011, $1.1 billion was outstanding on the subordinated line
of credit.
|
|
|
On November 1, 2010, a $4 billion one-year revolving
unsecured line of credit that allows MLPF&S to borrow funds
from Bank of America was established. Interest on the line of
credit is based on prevailing short-term market rates. The
credit line will mature on November 1, 2012 and may
automatically be extended by one year to the succeeding
November 1st unless Bank of America provides written
notice not to extend at least 45 days prior to the maturity
date. At September 30, 2011, there were no borrowings
outstanding on the line of credit.
|
|
|
On February 22, 2011, a $15 billion
364-day
revolving unsecured line of credit that allows MLPF&S to
borrow funds from Bank of America was established. Interest on
the line of credit is based on prevailing short-term market
rates. The line of credit matures on February 21, 2012. At
September 30, 2011, approximately $2.4 billion was
outstanding on the line of credit.
|
The value of Merrill Lynchs debt instruments as recorded
on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets does not
necessarily represent the amount that will be repaid at
maturity. This is due to the following:
|
|
|
As a result of the acquisition by Bank of America, all debt
instruments were adjusted to fair value on January 1, 2009;
|
|
|
Certain debt issuances are accounted for at fair value and
incorporate changes in Merrill Lynchs creditworthiness as
well as other underlying risks (see Note 4);
|
|
|
Certain structured notes whose coupon or repayment terms are
linked to the performance of debt and equity securities,
indices, currencies or commodities reflect the fair value of
those risks; and
|
|
|
Certain debt issuances are adjusted for the impact of fair value
hedge accounting (see Note 6).
|
The tables below exclude Merrill Lynchs intercompany
transactions with Bank of America; see Note 2 for further
information. Total borrowings at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, which are comprised of short-term
borrowings, long-term borrowings and junior subordinated notes
(related to trust preferred securities), consisted of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Senior debt
|
|
$
|
66,115
|
|
|
$
|
80,130
|
|
Senior structured notes
|
|
|
30,726
|
|
|
|
40,678
|
|
Subordinated debt
|
|
|
12,235
|
|
|
|
11,358
|
|
Junior subordinated notes (related to trust preferred securities)
|
|
|
3,594
|
|
|
|
3,576
|
|
Other subsidiary financing
|
|
|
2,014
|
|
|
|
617
|
|
Debt issued by consolidated VIEs
|
|
|
10,931
|
|
|
|
11,316
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
125,615
|
|
|
$
|
147,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
Borrowings and deposits at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other unsecured short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
1,790
|
|
|
$
|
10,606
|
|
Short-term debt issued by consolidated
VIEs(1)
|
|
|
5,314
|
|
|
|
4,642
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
7,104
|
|
|
$
|
15,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
borrowings(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
obligations(3)
|
|
$
|
63,263
|
|
|
$
|
64,611
|
|
Variable-rate
obligations(4)(5)
|
|
|
46,037
|
|
|
|
57,566
|
|
Long-term debt issued by consolidated
VIEs(1)
|
|
|
5,617
|
|
|
|
6,674
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
114,917
|
|
|
$
|
128,851
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
$
|
12,277
|
|
|
$
|
12,826
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
See Note 9 for additional
information on debt issued by consolidated VIEs. |
(2) |
|
Excludes junior subordinated
notes (related to trust preferred securities). |
(3) |
|
Fixed-rate obligations are
generally swapped to variable rates. |
(4) |
|
Variable interest rates are
generally based on rates such as LIBOR, the U.S. Treasury Bill
Rate, or the Federal Funds Rate. |
(5) |
|
Includes structured
notes. |
See Note 5 for additional information on the fair value of
long-term borrowings.
The weighted-average interest rates for borrowings at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (excluding
structured products) were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
0.3
|
%
|
|
|
0.3
|
%
|
Long-term borrowings
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Junior subordinated notes (related to trust preferred securities)
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
Merrill Lynch also obtains standby letters of credit from
issuing banks to satisfy various counterparty collateral
requirements, in lieu of depositing cash or securities
collateral. Such standby letters of credit aggregated
$2.1 billion and $1.4 billion at September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
73
Long-Term
Borrowings
At September 30, 2011, long-term borrowings mature as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percentage of Total
|
|
|
Less than 1 year
|
|
$
|
29,601
|
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
1 2 years
|
|
|
14,223
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
2 3 years
|
|
|
24,161
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
3 4 years
|
|
|
5,288
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
4 5 years
|
|
|
3,943
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Greater than 5 years
|
|
|
37,701
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
114,917
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certain long-term borrowing agreements contain provisions
whereby the borrowings are redeemable at the option of the
holder (put options) at specified dates prior to
maturity. These borrowings are reflected in the above table as
maturing at their put dates, rather than their contractual
maturities. However, Merrill Lynch believes that a portion of
such borrowings will remain outstanding beyond their earliest
redemption date.
The maturity of certain structured notes whose coupon or
repayment terms are linked to the performance of debt and equity
securities, indices, currencies or commodities may be
accelerated based on the value of a referenced index or
security, in which case Merrill Lynch may be required to
immediately settle the obligation for cash or other securities.
These notes are included in the portion of long-term debt
maturing in less than a year.
Senior and subordinated debt obligations do not contain
provisions that could, upon an adverse change in ML &
Co.s credit rating, financial ratios, earnings or cash
flows, trigger a requirement for an early payment, additional
collateral support, changes in terms, acceleration of maturity,
or the creation of an additional financial obligation.
See Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
contained in the 2010 Annual Report for additional information
on Borrowings.
Note 13. Stockholders Equity and Earnings Per
Share
Common
Stock
As of the completion of the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank
of America on January 1, 2009, there have been
1,000 shares of ML & Co. common stock
outstanding, all of which are held by Bank of America.
74
Earnings
Per Share
Earnings per share data is not provided for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010
as Merrill Lynch was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of
America during those periods.
Note 14. Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees
Litigation
The following supplements the disclosure in Note 14 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements of Merrill Lynchs 2010
Annual Report and in Note 14 to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements of Merrill Lynchs Quarterly Reports
on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2011 and
June 30, 2011 (collectively, the prior commitments,
contingencies and guarantees disclosures).
In the ordinary course of business, Merrill Lynch and its
subsidiaries are routinely defendants in or parties to many
pending and threatened legal actions and proceedings, including
actions brought on behalf of various classes of claimants. These
actions and proceedings are generally based on alleged
violations of securities, environmental, employment, contract
and other laws. In some of these actions and proceedings, claims
for substantial monetary damages are asserted against Merrill
Lynch and its subsidiaries.
In the ordinary course of business, Merrill Lynch and its
subsidiaries are also subject to regulatory examinations,
information gathering requests, inquiries and investigations.
Certain subsidiaries of Merrill Lynch are registered
broker/dealers or investment advisors and are subject to
regulation by the SEC, the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (FINRA), the New York Stock Exchange, the
U.K.s Financial Services Authority (FSA) and
other domestic, international and state securities regulators.
In connection with formal and informal inquiries by those
agencies, such subsidiaries receive numerous requests, subpoenas
and orders for documents, testimony and information in
connection with various aspects of their regulated activities.
In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of
such litigation and regulatory matters, particularly where the
claimants seek very large or indeterminate damages or where the
matters present novel legal theories or involve a large number
of parties, Merrill Lynch generally cannot predict what the
eventual outcome of the pending matters will be, what the timing
of the ultimate resolution of these matters will be, or what the
eventual loss, fines or penalties related to each pending matter
may be.
In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, Merrill Lynch
establishes an accrued liability for litigation and regulatory
matters when those matters present loss contingencies that are
both probable and estimable. In such cases, there may be an
exposure to loss in excess of any amounts accrued. When a loss
contingency is not both probable and estimable, Merrill Lynch
does not establish an accrued liability. As a litigation or
regulatory matter develops, Merrill Lynch, in conjunction with
any outside counsel handling the matter, evaluates on an ongoing
basis whether such matter presents a loss contingency that is
probable and estimable. If, at the time of evaluation, the loss
contingency related to a litigation or regulatory matter is not
both probable and estimable, the matter will continue to be
monitored for further developments that would make such loss
contingency both probable and estimable. Once the loss
contingency related to a litigation or regulatory matter is
deemed to be both probable and estimable, Merrill Lynch will
establish an accrued liability with respect to such loss
contingency and record a corresponding amount of
litigation-related expense. Merrill Lynch continues to monitor
the matter for further developments that could affect the amount
of the accrued liability that
75
has been previously established. Excluding expenses of internal
or external legal service providers, litigation-related expenses
of approximately $390 million and $670 million were
recognized for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 as compared with approximately
$250 million and $430 million for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010.
For a limited number of the matters disclosed in this Note and
in the prior commitments, contingencies and guarantees
disclosures, for which a loss is probable or reasonably possible
in future periods, whether in excess of a related accrued
liability or where there is no accrued liability, Merrill Lynch
is able to estimate a range of possible loss. In determining
whether it is possible to provide an estimate of loss or range
of possible loss, Merrill Lynch reviews and evaluates its
material litigation and regulatory matters on an ongoing basis,
in conjunction with any outside counsel handling the matter, in
light of potentially relevant factual and legal developments.
These may include information learned through the discovery
process, rulings on dispositive motions, settlement discussions,
and other rulings by courts, arbitrators or others. In cases in
which Merrill Lynch possesses sufficient appropriate information
to develop an estimate of loss or range of possible loss, that
estimate is aggregated and disclosed below. There may be other
disclosed matters for which a loss is probable or reasonably
possible but such an estimate may not be possible. For those
matters where an estimate is possible, management currently
estimates the aggregate range of possible loss is $0 to
$1.3 billion in excess of the accrued liability (if any)
related to those matters. This estimated range of possible loss
is based upon currently available information and is subject to
significant judgment and a variety of assumptions, and known and
unknown uncertainties. The matters underlying the estimated
range will change from time to time, and actual results may vary
significantly from the current estimate. Those matters for which
an estimate is not possible are not included within this
estimated range. Therefore, this estimated range of possible
loss represents what Merrill Lynch believes to be an estimate of
possible loss only for certain matters meeting these criteria.
It does not represent Merrill Lynchs maximum loss
exposure. Information is provided below, or in the prior
commitments, contingencies and guarantees disclosures, regarding
the nature of all of these contingencies and, where specified,
the amount of the claim associated with these loss
contingencies. Based on current knowledge, management does not
believe that loss contingencies arising from pending matters,
including the matters described herein or in the prior
commitments, contingencies and guarantees disclosures, will have
a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position
or liquidity of Merrill Lynch. However, in light of the inherent
uncertainties involved in these matters, some of which are
beyond Merrill Lynchs control, and the very large or
indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an
adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be
material to Merrill Lynchs results of operations or cash
flows for any particular reporting period.
In re
Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation
On August 25, 2011, the district court, on remand from the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, dismissed the
objection by the last remaining putative class member. On
September 23, 2011, the objector filed a notice of appeal
challenging the district courts dismissal of the objection
to the settlement.
Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. Litigation
On September 23, 2011, the majority of the underwriter
defendants, including BAS, MLPF&S and approximately 40
others, reached an agreement in principle with the lead
plaintiffs to settle the securities class action as to the
settling underwriters. The settlement is subject to court
approval. MLFP&Ss portion of the settlement is not
material to Merrill Lynchs results of operations or
financial condition.
76
Mortgage-Backed
Securities Litigation
Merrill Lynch entities and their affiliates have been named as
defendants in several cases relating to their various roles as
issuer, originator, seller, depositor, sponsor, underwriter
and/or
controlling entity in MBS offerings, pursuant to which the MBS
investors were entitled to a portion of the cash flow from the
underlying pools of mortgages. These cases generally include
purported class action suits and actions by individual MBS
purchasers. Although the allegations vary by lawsuit, these
cases generally allege that the registration statements,
prospectuses and prospectus supplements for securities issued by
securitization trusts contained material misrepresentations and
omissions, in violation of Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the
Securities Act of 1933, Sections 10(b) and 20 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and/or state
securities laws and other state statutory and common laws.
These cases generally involve allegations of false and
misleading statements regarding: (i) the process by which
the properties that served as collateral for the mortgage loans
underlying the MBS were appraised; (ii) the percentage of
equity that mortgage borrowers had in their homes;
(iii) the borrowers ability to repay their mortgage
loans; (iv) the underwriting practices by which those
mortgage loans were originated; (v) the ratings given to
the different tranches of MBS by rating agencies; and
(vi) the validity of each issuing trusts title to the
mortgage loans comprising the pool for the securitization
(collectively MBS Claims). Plaintiffs in these cases
generally seek unspecified compensatory damages, unspecified
costs and legal fees and, in some instances, seek rescission. A
number of other entities (including the National Credit Union
Administration) have threatened legal actions against Merrill
Lynch and its affiliates concerning MBS offerings.
AIG
Litigation
On August 8, 2011, American International Group, Inc. and
certain of its affiliates (collectively, AIG) filed
a complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New
York County, in a case entitled American International Group,
Inc. et al. v. Bank of America Corporation et al. AIG
has named, among others, Merrill Lynch and a number of its
affiliates, subsidiaries and entities as defendants. AIGs
complaint asserts certain MBS Claims under federal securities
and common law pertaining to 349 MBS offerings, 145 of
which relate to Merrill Lynch entities, in which AIG alleges
that it purchased securities between 2005 and 2007. AIG seeks
rescission of its purchases or a rescissory measure of damages
or, in the alternative, compensatory damages of not less than
$10 billion as to all defendants, including the Merrill
Lynch defendants; punitive damages; and other unspecified
relief. Defendants removed the case to the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York, which has denied
AIGs motion to remand the case to state court.
Cambridge
Place Investment Management Litigation
Both Cambridge Place Investment Management matters were
remanded to the Massachusetts Superior Court for Suffolk County.
Charles
Schwab Litigation
The Charles Schwab matter was remanded to the Superior
Court of California for the County of San Francisco. On
October 13, 2011, plaintiffs dismissed the federal claims
with prejudice.
77
Federal
Home Loan Bank Litigations
Both Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago matters have been
remanded to the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois and the
Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles,
respectively.
In the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago action pending
in California, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint on
September 15, 2011 adding Bank of America and MLPF&S
as defendants and asserting new claims against BAS and
Countrywide entities. The amended complaint includes successor
liability claims against Bank of America as successor to
Countrywide and against MLPF&S as successor to BAS.
In the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco
matters, plaintiffs dismissed the federal claims with
prejudice on August 11, 2011. On September 8, 2011,
the court denied the defendants motions to dismiss the
state law claims in these actions.
On August 15, 2011, the court denied defendants
remaining motions to dismiss in the Federal Home Loan Bank of
Seattle actions.
Federal
Housing Finance Agency Litigation
On September 2, 2011, the Federal Housing Finance Agency
(FHFA), as conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac, filed complaints against Bank of America, BAS, MLPF&S
and other related entities, and certain current and former
officers and directors of these entities in two separate
actions. The actions are entitled, Federal Housing Finance
Agency v. Bank of America Corporation, et al., and
Federal Housing Finance Agency v. Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc., et al., both filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
The complaints assert certain MBS Claims relating to MBS issued
and/or
underwritten by Bank of America, BAS, MLPF&S and other
entities between 2005 and 2008 and purchased by either Fannie
Mae or Freddie Mac in their investment portfolio. The complaints
assert claims under both federal securities laws and state
common law. The FHFA seeks among other relief rescission of the
consideration Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac paid for the securities
or alternatively damages allegedly incurred by Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac. The FHFA also seeks recovery of punitive damages in
the Merrill Lynch action.
Merrill
Lynch MBS Litigation
On October 20, 2011, the parties reached an agreement in
principle to settle the action. The settlement is subject to
court approval.
Stichting
Pensioenfonds ABP (Merrill Lynch) Litigation
On August 19, 2010, Stichting Pensioenfonds ABP
(ABP) filed a complaint against Merrill Lynch,
Merrill Lynch Mortgage Lending, Inc., Merrill Lynch Mortgage
Investors, Inc. (MLMI), MLPF&S, First Franklin
Financial Corporation (First Franklin), and certain
current and former directors of MLMI, as well as certain other
defendants, in the Supreme Court of New York, New York County,
entitled Stichting Pensioenfonds v. Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc., et al. Defendants have removed
the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York. ABPs original complaint asserted
certain MBS Claims relating to 13 offerings of Merrill
Lynch-related MBS. On October 12, 2011, ABP filed an
amended complaint regarding the same offerings and adding
additional federal securities law
78
and state law claims. ABP seeks unspecified compensatory
damages, interest and legal fees, or alternatively rescission.
Region of
Puglia, Italy Criminal Investigation
On September 2, 2011, the public prosecutor in Bari, Puglia
filed a request with the court in Bari for the criminal
proceedings against Merrill Lynchs employee and the other
named individuals, as well as the related claim under Law 231
against Merrill Lynch International and another party, to
proceed to a preliminary hearing.
Commitments
At September 30, 2011, Merrill Lynchs commitments had
the following expirations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Commitment expiration
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 1
|
|
1 - 3
|
|
3 - 5
|
|
Over 5
|
|
|
Total
|
|
year
|
|
years
|
|
years
|
|
years
|
|
|
Lending commitments
|
|
$
|
7,444
|
|
|
$
|
2,505
|
|
|
$
|
2,194
|
|
|
$
|
2,324
|
|
|
$
|
421
|
|
Purchasing and other commitments
|
|
|
6,879
|
|
|
|
4,494
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
|
|
648
|
|
|
|
649
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
3,101
|
|
|
|
765
|
|
|
|
1,133
|
|
|
|
573
|
|
|
|
630
|
|
Commitments to enter into forward dated resale and securities
borrowing agreements
|
|
|
84,250
|
|
|
|
84,250
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Commitments to enter into forward dated repurchase and
securities lending agreements
|
|
|
52,584
|
|
|
|
52,584
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
154,258
|
|
|
$
|
144,598
|
|
|
$
|
4,415
|
|
|
$
|
3,545
|
|
|
$
|
1,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lending
Commitments
Merrill Lynch enters into commitments to extend credit,
predominantly at variable interest rates, in connection with
corporate finance, corporate and institutional transactions and
asset-based lending transactions. Clients may also be extended
loans or lines of credit collateralized by first and second
mortgages on real estate, certain liquid assets of small
businesses, or securities. These commitments usually have a
fixed expiration date and are contingent on certain contractual
conditions that may require payment of a fee by the
counterparty. Once commitments are drawn upon, Merrill Lynch may
require the counterparty to post collateral depending upon
creditworthiness and general market conditions. See Note 10
for additional information.
Commitments to extend credit are outstanding as of the date the
commitment letter is issued and are comprised of closed and
contingent commitments. Closed commitments represent the
unfunded portion of existing commitments available for draw
down. Contingent commitments are contingent on the borrower
fulfilling certain conditions or upon a particular event, such
as an acquisition. A portion of these contingent commitments may
be syndicated among other lenders or the counterparty may
replace the commitment with capital markets funding.
The contractual amounts of these commitments represent the
amounts at risk should the contract be fully drawn upon, the
client defaults, and the value of the existing collateral
becomes worthless. The total amount of outstanding commitments
may not represent future cash requirements, as commitments may
expire without being drawn.
79
For lending commitments where the loan will be classified as
held for sale upon funding, liabilities associated with unfunded
commitments are calculated at the lower of cost or fair value,
capturing declines in the fair value of the respective credit
risk. For loan commitments where the loan will be classified as
held for investment upon funding, liabilities are calculated
considering both market and historical loss rates. Loan
commitments either held by entities that apply the Broker-Dealer
Guide or for which the fair value option was elected are
accounted for at fair value.
Purchasing
and Other Commitments
Merrill Lynch had commitments to purchase partnership interests,
primarily related to private equity and principal investing
activities, of $0.4 billion and $0.6 billion at
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010,
respectively. Merrill Lynch also has entered into agreements
with providers of market data, communications, systems
consulting, and other office-related services. At
September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, minimum fee
commitments over the remaining life of these agreements totaled
$1.5 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively. Merrill
Lynch entered into commitments to purchase loans of
$3.4 billion, which, upon settlement of the commitment,
will be included in trading assets, loans held for investment or
loans held for sale at September 30, 2011. Such commitments
totaled $2.6 billion at December 31, 2010. Other
purchasing commitments amounted to $1.6 billion and
$0.8 billion at September 30, 2011 and
December 31, 2010, respectively.
In the normal course of business, Merrill Lynch enters into
commitments for underwriting transactions. Settlement of these
transactions as of September 30, 2011 would not have a
material effect on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet of
Merrill Lynch.
In connection with trading activities, Merrill Lynch enters into
commitments to enter into resale and securities borrowing and
also repurchase and securities lending agreements.
Operating
Leases
Merrill Lynch has entered into various non-cancelable long-term
lease agreements for premises that expire through 2028. Merrill
Lynch has also entered into various non-cancelable short-term
lease agreements, which are primarily commitments of less than
one year under equipment leases.
Guarantees
Merrill Lynch issues various guarantees to counterparties in
connection with certain transactions. Merrill Lynchs
guarantee arrangements and their expiration at
September 30, 2011 are summarized as follows (see
Note 6 for information related to derivative financial
instruments within the scope of Guarantees Accounting):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Less than 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Payout
|
|
year
|
|
1 - 3 years
|
|
3 - 5 years
|
|
Over 5 years
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Standby liquidity facilities
|
|
$
|
1,154
|
|
|
$
|
619
|
|
|
$
|
515
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
Residual value guarantees
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Standby letters of credit and other guarantees
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
80
Standby
Liquidity Facilities
Standby liquidity facilities are primarily comprised of
liquidity facilities provided to certain unconsolidated
municipal bond securitization VIEs. In these arrangements,
Merrill Lynch is required to fund these standby liquidity
facilities if certain contingent events take place (e.g., a
failed remarketing) and in certain cases if the fair value of
the assets held by the VIE declines below the stated amount of
the liquidity obligation. The potential exposure under the
facilities is mitigated by economic hedges
and/or other
contractual arrangements entered into by Merrill Lynch. Based
upon historical activity, it is considered remote that future
payments would need to be made under these guarantees.
Refer to Note 9 for further information.
Residual
Value Guarantees
At September 30, 2011, residual value guarantees of
$415 million consist of amounts associated with certain
power plant facilities. Payments under these guarantees would
only be required if the fair value of such assets declined below
their guaranteed value. As of September 30, 2011, no
payments have been made under these guarantees and the carrying
value of the associated liabilities was not material, as Merrill
Lynch believes that the estimated fair value of such assets was
in excess of their guaranteed value.
Standby
Letters of Credit and Other Guarantees
Merrill Lynch provides guarantees to certain counterparties in
the form of standby letters of credit in the amount of
$0.5 billion. Payment risk is evaluated based upon
historical payment activity.
Representations
and Warranties
In prior years, Merrill Lynch and certain of its subsidiaries,
including First Franklin sold pools of first-lien residential
mortgage loans and home equity loans as private-label
securitizations (in a limited number of these securitizations,
monolines insured all or some of the securities), or in the form
of whole loans. Most of the loans sold in the form of whole
loans were subsequently pooled into private-label
securitizations sponsored by the third-party buyer of the whole
loans. In addition, Merrill Lynch and First Franklin securitized
first-lien residential mortgage loans generally in the form of
mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by the GSEs. In connection
with these transactions, Merrill Lynch made various
representations and warranties. These representations and
warranties, as governed by the agreements, related to, among
other things, the ownership of the loan, the validity of the
lien securing the loan, the absence of delinquent taxes or liens
against the property securing the loan, the process used to
select the loan for inclusion in a transaction, the loans
compliance with any applicable loan criteria, including
underwriting standards, and the loans compliance with
applicable federal, state and local laws. Breaches of these
representations and warranties may result in the requirement to
repurchase mortgage loans or to otherwise make whole or provide
other remedies to the GSEs, whole-loan buyers, securitization
trusts or monoline insurers (collectively,
repurchases). In such cases, Merrill Lynch would be
exposed to any credit loss on the repurchased mortgage loans
after accounting for any mortgage insurance or mortgage guaranty
payments that it may receive.
Subject to the requirements and limitations of the applicable
sales and securitization agreements, these representations and
warranties can be enforced by the GSEs, the whole-loan buyer,
the securitization trustee, or others as governed by the
applicable agreement or, in a limited number of first-lien and
home equity securitizations where monoline insurers have insured
all or some of the securities issued,
81
by the monoline insurer at any time. In the case of loans sold
to parties other than the GSEs, the contractual liability to
repurchase typically arises only if there is a breach of the
representations and warranties that materially and adversely
affects the interest of the investor or investors in the loan or
of the monoline insurer (as applicable). Contracts with the GSEs
do not contain an equivalent requirement. Merrill Lynch believes
that the longer a loan performs prior to default, the less
likely it is that an alleged breach of representations and
warranties had a material impact on the loans
performance. Historically, most demands for repurchase have
occurred within the first several years after origination,
generally after a loan has defaulted.
Merrill Lynchs credit loss would be reduced by any
recourse it may have to organizations (e.g., correspondents)
that, in turn, had sold such loans to Merrill Lynch based upon
its agreements with these organizations. When a loan is
originated by a correspondent or other third party, Merrill
Lynch typically has the right to seek a recovery of related
repurchase losses from that originator. Many of the
correspondent originators of loans in 2004 through 2008 are no
longer in business and Merrill Lynch is unable to recover valid
claims.
The fair value of the obligations to be absorbed under the
representations and warranties provided is recorded as an
accrued liability when the loans are sold. This liability for
probable losses is updated by accruing a representations and
warranties provision in non-interest expenses on the Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Earnings (Loss). This is done
throughout the life of the loan, as necessary when additional
relevant information becomes available. The methodology used to
estimate the liability for representations and warranties is a
function of the representations and warranties given and
considers a variety of factors, which include, depending on the
counterparty, actual defaults, estimated future defaults,
historical loss experience, estimated home prices, other
economic conditions, estimated probability that a repurchase
claim will be received, consideration of whether presentation
thresholds will be met, number of payments made by the borrower
prior to default and estimated probability that a loan will be
required to be repurchased. Merrill Lynch also considers bulk
settlements, including those of its affiliates, when determining
its estimated liability for representations and warranties. The
estimate of the liability for representations and warranties is
based upon currently available information, significant
judgment, and a number of factors, including those set forth
above, that are subject to change. Changes to any one of these
factors could significantly impact the estimate of the liability
and could have a material adverse impact on Merrill Lynchs
results of operations for any particular period. Given that
these factors vary by counterparty, Merrill Lynch analyzes
representations and warranties obligations based on the specific
counterparty, or type of counterparty, with whom the sale was
made.
Merrill Lynch has contested, and will continue to vigorously
contest any request for repurchase when it concludes that a
valid basis for repurchase does not exist. Merrill Lynch may
reach settlements in the future if opportunities arise on terms
it believes to be advantageous to Merrill Lynch.
Bank
of America BNY Mellon Settlement
On June 28, 2011, Bank of America and certain of its
non-Merrill Lynch subsidiaries entered into a settlement
agreement (subject to final court approval and certain other
conditions) with The Bank of New York Mellon (BNY
Mellon), as trustee, to resolve, among other claims, all
outstanding and potential claims related to alleged
representations and warranties breaches (including repurchase
claims) with respect to the 525 legacy first-lien and five
second-lien non-GSE residential mortgage-backed securitization
trusts containing loans principally originated between 2004 and
2008 and for which BNY Mellon acts as trustee or indenture
trustee (the BNY Mellon Settlement). As a result of
the experience gained by Bank of America and certain of its
non-Merrill Lynch affiliates in the BNY Mellon Settlement,
Merrill Lynch determined that it had sufficient experience to
record a $2.7 billion liability for representations and
warranties related to its repurchase exposure on private-label
securitizations in the nine months ended September 30, 2011.
82
Unresolved
Claims and Payments
The table below presents unresolved repurchase claims by
counterparty at September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unresolved Claims by Counterparty
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
GSEs
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
Monoline
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
|
517
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
625
|
|
|
$
|
624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The majority of these
repurchase claims are from whole loan buyers on subprime
loans. |
The pipeline of unresolved claims where Merrill Lynch believes a
valid defect has not been identified which would constitute an
actionable breach of representations and warranties was
$599 million at September 30, 2011. Through
September 30, 2011, approximately 9% of unresolved claims
that Merrill Lynch initially denied have subsequently been
resolved through repurchase or reimbursement payments and 27%
have been resolved through rescission. When a claim has been
denied and there has not been communication with the
counterparty for six months, Merrill Lynch views these claims as
inactive; however, they remain in the unresolved claims balance
until resolution.
As presented in the table below, during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011, Merrill Lynch paid
$16 million and $41 million to resolve
$26 million and $51 million of repurchase claims
through repurchase or indemnification payments to investors,
resulting in a loss on the related loans at the time of
repurchase or indemnification payment of $11 million and
$36 million. During both the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010, Merrill Lynch paid $39 million to
resolve $50 million of repurchase claims through
indemnification payments to investors for losses they incurred,
resulting in a loss on the related loans at the time of
repurchase or indemnification payment of $34 million. Cash
paid for loan repurchases includes the unpaid principal balance
of the loan plus past due interest. The amount of loss for loan
repurchases is reduced by the fair value of the underlying loan
collateral.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
Claims resolved
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase payments
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Indemnification payments
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total payments
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
41
|
|
|
$
|
39
|
|
|
$
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The repurchase of loans and indemnification payments related to
repurchase claims generally resulted from material breaches of
representations and warranties related to the loans
material compliance with the applicable underwriting standards,
including borrower misrepresentation, credit exceptions without
sufficient compensating factors and non-compliance with
underwriting procedures, although the actual representations and
warranties made in a sales transaction and the resulting
repurchase and indemnification activity can vary by transaction
or investor. A direct relationship between the type of
83
defect that causes the breach of representations and warranties
and the severity of the realized loss has not been observed.
Liability
for Representations and Warranties
The liability for representations and warranties is included in
Interest and other payables on the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets, and the related provision is included in
Non-interest expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Earnings (Loss). The table below presents a rollforward of
the liability for representations and warranties and includes
the provisions for non-GSE representation and warranties
exposure recorded in the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
2,847
|
|
|
$
|
197
|
|
|
$
|
213
|
|
|
$
|
378
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
Provision
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
2,847
|
|
|
$
|
186
|
|
|
$
|
2,847
|
|
|
$
|
186
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The liability for representations and warranties is established
when those obligations are both probable and reasonably
estimable. As noted above, in the nine months ended
September 30, 2011, Merrill Lynch recorded a provision for
representations and warranties related to its repurchase
exposure on private-label securitizations of $2.7 billion.
The representations and warranties provision may vary
significantly each period as the methodology used to estimate
the expense continues to be refined based on the level and type
of repurchase requests presented, defects identified, the latest
experience gained on repurchase requests and other relevant
facts and circumstances.
Estimated
Range of Possible Loss
Non-GSE
Counterparties
Merrill Lynch believes it is probable that additional claimants
may come forward with credible claims that meet the requirements
of the terms of the securitizations. Merrill Lynch believes that
with the additional $2.7 billion non-GSE representations
and warranties provision recorded in the nine months ended
September 30, 2011, related to the BNY Mellon Settlement,
it has provided for a substantial portion of its non-GSE
representations and warranties exposures. However, it is
reasonably possible that future representations and warranties
losses may occur in excess of the amounts recorded for these
exposures. In addition, Merrill Lynch has not recorded any
representations and warranties liability for potential monoline
exposures and certain potential whole loan exposures. Merrill
Lynch currently estimates that the range of possible loss
related to non-GSE representations and warranties exposure as of
September 30, 2011 could be up to $0.5 billion over
existing accruals. This estimate of the range of possible loss
for non-GSE representations and warranties does not represent a
probable loss, is based on currently available information,
significant judgment, and a number of assumptions, including
those set forth below, that are subject to change.
The methodology used to estimate the non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and the corresponding range of possible
loss considers a variety of factors including Merrill
Lynchs experience related to actual defaults, projected
future defaults, historical loss experience, estimated home
prices, other economic conditions and the experience of Merrill
Lynchs affiliates. Among the factors that
84
impact the non-GSE representations and warranties liability and
the corresponding range of possible loss are:
(1) contractual loss causation requirements, (2) the
representations and warranties provided, and (3) the
requirement to meet certain presentation thresholds. The first
factor is based on Merrill Lynchs belief that a non-GSE
contractual liability to repurchase a loan generally arises only
if the counterparties prove there is a breach of representations
and warranties that materially and adversely affects the
interest of the investor or all investors, or the monoline
insurer (as applicable), in a securitization trust and,
accordingly, Merrill Lynch believes that the repurchase
claimants must prove that the alleged representations and
warranties breach was the cause of the loss. The second factor
is related to the fact that non-GSE securitizations include
different types of representations and warranties than those
provided to the GSEs. Merrill Lynch believes the non-GSE
securitizations representations and warranties are less
rigorous and actionable than the explicit provisions of
comparable agreements with the GSEs without regard to any
variations that may have arisen as a result of dealings with the
GSEs. The third factor is related to the fact that certain
presentation thresholds need to be met in order for any
repurchase claim to be asserted under the non-GSE agreements. A
securitization trustee may investigate or demand repurchase on
its own action, and most agreements contain a threshold, for
example 25% of the voting rights per trust, that allows
investors to declare a servicing event of default under certain
circumstances or to request certain action, such as requesting
loan files, that the trustee may choose to accept and follow,
exempt from liability, provided the trustee is acting in good
faith. If there is an uncured servicing event of default, and
the trustee fails to bring suit during a
60-day
period, then, under most agreements, investors may file suit. In
addition to this, most agreements also allow investors to direct
the securitization trustee to investigate loan files or demand
the repurchase of loans, if security holders hold a specified
percentage, for example, 25%, of the voting rights of each
tranche of the outstanding securities. Although Merrill Lynch
continues to believe that presentation thresholds are a factor
in the determination of probable loss, given the BNY Mellon
Settlement, the upper end of the estimated range of possible
loss assumes that the presentation threshold can be met for all
of the non-GSE securitization transactions.
In addition, in the case of private-label securitizations, the
methodology used to estimate the non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and the corresponding range of possible
loss considers the experience resulting from the BNY Mellon
Settlement and assumes that the conditions to the BNY Mellon
Settlement are satisfied. Since the non-GSE transactions that
were included in the BNY Mellon Settlement differ from those
that were not included in the BNY Mellon Settlement, Merrill
Lynch adjusted the experience implied in the settlement in order
to determine the estimated non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and corresponding range of possible loss.
The judgmental adjustments made include consideration of the
differences in the mix of products in the securitizations, loan
originator, likelihood of claims differences, the differences in
the number of payments that the borrower has made prior to
default, and the sponsor of the securitization.
Future provisions
and/or
ranges of possible loss for non-GSE representations and
warranties may be significantly impacted if actual results are
different from Merrill Lynchs assumptions in its
predictive models, including, without limitation, those
regarding the ultimate resolution of the BNY Mellon Settlement,
estimated repurchase rates, economic conditions, home prices,
consumer and counterparty behavior, and a variety of judgmental
factors. Adverse developments with respect to one or more of the
assumptions underlying the liability for representations and
warranties and the corresponding estimated range of possible
loss could result in significant increases to future provisions
and/or this
range of possible loss estimate. For example, if courts were to
disagree with Merrill Lynchs interpretation that the
underlying agreements require a claimant to prove that the
representations and warranties breach was the cause of the loss,
it could significantly impact this estimated range of possible
loss. Additionally, if recent court rulings related to monoline
litigation, including one related to an affiliate of Merrill
Lynch, that have allowed sampling of loan files instead of a
loan-by-loan
review to determine if a representations and warranties breach
has occurred are followed generally by the courts, private-label
securitization investors may view litigation as a more
attractive alternative as compared to a
loan-by-loan
review. Finally, although Merrill Lynch believes that the
representations and warranties
85
typically given in non-GSE transactions are less rigorous and
actionable than those given in GSE transactions, Merrill Lynch
does not have significant loan-level experience to measure the
impact of these differences on the probability that a loan will
be repurchased.
There can be no assurance that final court approval of the BNY
Mellon Settlement will be obtained, that all conditions to the
BNY Mellon Settlement will be satisfied or, if certain
conditions in the BNY Mellon Settlement permitting withdrawal
are met, that Bank of America and certain of its non-Merrill
Lynch subsidiaries will not determine to withdraw from the
settlement. If final court approval is not obtained or if Bank
of America and such subsidiaries determine to withdraw from the
BNY Mellon Settlement in accordance with its terms, Merrill
Lynchs future representations and warranties losses could
be substantially greater than existing accruals and the
estimated range of possible losses over existing accruals
described above. Under an order entered by the court in
connection with the BNY Mellon Settlement, potentially
interested persons had the opportunity to give notice of an
intent to object to the settlement (including on the basis that
more information was needed) until August 30, 2011.
Approximately 44 groups or entities appeared prior to the
deadline. Certain of these groups or entities filed notices of
intent to object, made motions to intervene or both filed
motions to intervene and notices to object. These motions have
not yet been ruled on by the court. A number of investors
opposed to the settlement removed the proceeding to federal
court. In addition, the federal court denied BNY Mellons
motion to remand the proceeding to state court and BNY Mellon,
as well as investors that have intervened in support of the BNY
Mellon Settlement, have petitioned to appeal the denial of this
motion. It is currently not possible to predict how many of the
parties who have appeared in the court proceeding will
ultimately object to the BNY Mellon Settlement, whether the
objections will prevent receipt of final court approval or the
ultimate outcome of the court approval process, which can
include appeals and could take a substantial period of time. In
particular, the conduct of discovery and the resolution of the
objections to the settlement and any appeals could take a
substantial period of time and these factors, along with the
recent removal of the proceeding to federal court, could
materially delay the timing of final court approval.
Accordingly, it is not possible to predict when the court
approval process will be completed.
The liability for obligations under representations and
warranties with respect to GSE and non-GSE exposures and the
corresponding estimate of the range of possible loss for non-GSE
representations and warranties exposures do not include any
losses related to litigation matters disclosed in Note 14,
nor do they include any potential securities law or fraud claims
or potential indemnity or other claims against us. Merrill Lynch
is not able to reasonably estimate the amount of any possible
loss with respect to any such securities law (except to the
extent reflected in the aggregate range of possible loss for
litigation and regulatory matters disclosed in Note 14),
fraud or other claims against Merrill Lynch; however, such loss
could be material.
Whole
Loan Sales and Private-label Securitizations
Experience
The majority of repurchase claims that Merrill Lynch has
received are from third-party whole loan investors. In
connection with those transactions, Merrill Lynch provided
representations and warranties, and the whole loan investors may
retain those rights even when the loans were aggregated with
other collateral into private-label securitizations sponsored by
the whole-loan investors. Properly presented repurchase claims
for these whole loans are reviewed on a
loan-by-loan
basis. If, after Merrill Lynchs review, it does not
believe a claim is valid, it will deny the claim and generally
indicate a reason for the denial. When the counterparty agrees
with Merrill Lynchs denial of the claim, the counterparty
may rescind the claim. When there is disagreement as to the
resolution of the claim, meaningful dialogue and negotiation
between the parties is generally necessary to reach conclusion
on an individual claim. Generally, a whole loan sale claimant is
engaged in the repurchase process and Merrill Lynch and the
claimant reach resolution, either through
loan-by-loan
negotiation or at times, through a bulk settlement. Although the
timeline for resolution varies, once an actionable breach is
86
identified on a given loan, settlement is generally reached as
to that loan within 60 to 90 days. When a claim has been
denied and Merrill Lynch does not have communication with the
counterparty for six months, Merrill Lynch views these claims as
inactive; however, they remain in the outstanding claims balance
until resolution.
Merrill Lynch and its affiliates have limited experience with
loan-level private-label securitization repurchases as the
number of valid repurchase claims received has been limited. In
private-label securitizations certain presentation thresholds
need to be met in order for any repurchase claim to be asserted
by investors. The representations and warranties, as governed by
the private-label securitization agreements, generally require
that counterparties have the ability to both assert a claim and
actually prove that a loan has an actionable defect under the
applicable contracts. While Merrill Lynch believes the
agreements for private-label securitizations generally contain
less rigorous representations and warranties and place higher
burdens on investors seeking repurchases than the express
provisions of comparable agreements with the GSEs without regard
to any variations that may have arisen as a result of the
dealings with the GSEs, the agreements generally include a
representation that underwriting practices were prudent and
customary.
See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
contained in the 2010 Annual Report for additional information
on guarantees.
Note 15. Employee Benefit Plans
Merrill Lynch provides pension and other postretirement benefits
to its employees worldwide through defined contribution pension,
defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans. These
plans vary based on the country and local practices. Effective
January 1, 2009, the Bank of America Corporation Corporate
Benefits Committee assumed overall responsibility for the
administration of all of Merrill Lynchs employee benefit
plans. Merrill Lynch continues as the plan sponsor. Refer to
Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements contained
in the 2010 Annual Report for a complete discussion of employee
benefit plans.
Defined
Benefit Pension Plans
In 1988, Merrill Lynch purchased a group annuity contract that
guarantees the payment of benefits vested under the terminated
U.S. pension plan. Merrill Lynch, under a supplemental
agreement, may be responsible for, or benefit from, actual
experience and investment performance of the annuity assets.
Merrill Lynch made no contribution under this agreement for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and 2010.
Additional contributions may be required in the future under
this agreement.
87
The net periodic benefit cost of Merrill Lynchs plans for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 and 2010
included the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Defined
|
|
Defined
|
|
|
|
U.S. Defined
|
|
Defined
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
|
|
Benefit
|
|
|
|
Benefit
|
|
Benefit
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
Pension
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
Pension
|
|
Pension
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans(1)
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans(1)
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
|
|
(78
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Amortization of net actuarial losses
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
(10
|
)
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
(30
|
)
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately 95% of the
postretirement benefit obligation at September 30, 2011
relates to the U.S. postretirement plan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Three Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Defined
|
|
Defined
|
|
|
|
U.S. Defined
|
|
Defined
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
|
|
Benefit
|
|
|
|
Benefit
|
|
Benefit
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
Pension
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
Pension
|
|
Pension
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans(1)
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans
|
|
Plans(1)
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
-
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
-
|
|
Amortization of prior service cost
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Amortization of net actuarial losses
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
(7
|
)
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
(22
|
)
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately 96% of the
postretirement benefit obligation at September 30, 2010
relates to the U.S. postretirement plan. |
For the full year 2011, Merrill Lynch expects to contribute
approximately $1 million to its nonqualified pension plans,
$84 million to its
non-U.S. pension
plans, and $22 million to its postretirement health and
life plans. Through the third quarter of 2011, Merrill Lynch has
contributed $77 million to the
non-U.S. pension
plans and $17 million to its postretirement health and life
plans.
Note 16. Regulatory Requirements
As a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, a bank holding
company that is also a financial holding company, Merrill Lynch
is subject to the oversight of, and inspection by, the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Certain U.S. and
non-U.S. subsidiaries
are subject to various securities and banking regulations and
capital adequacy requirements promulgated by the regulatory and
exchange authorities of the countries in which they operate.
These regulatory restrictions may impose regulatory capital
requirements and
88
limit the amounts that these subsidiaries can pay in dividends
or advance to ML & Co. The principal regulated
subsidiaries of ML & Co. are discussed below.
Securities
Regulation
As a registered broker-dealer and futures commission merchant,
MLPF&S is subject to the uniform net capital requirements
of SEC
Rule 15c3-1,
and the Commodity Futures Trading Commissions
(CFTC) Regulation 1.17. MLPF&S has elected
to compute the minimum capital requirement in accordance with
the Alternative Net Capital Requirement as permitted
by SEC
Rule 15c3-1.
At September 30, 2011, MLPF&Ss regulatory net
capital as defined by
Rule 15c3-1
was $10.8 billion and exceeded the minimum requirement of
$864 million by $9.9 billion.
In accordance with the Alternative Net Capital Requirement,
MLPF&S is required to maintain tentative net capital in
excess of $1 billion, net capital in excess of
$500 million, and notify the SEC in the event its tentative
net capital is less than $5 billion. As of
September 30, 2011, MLPF&S had tentative net capital
and net capital in excess of the minimum and notification
requirements.
Merrill Lynch International (MLI), a U.K. regulated
investment firm, is subject to capital requirements of the
U.K.s FSA. Financial resources, as defined, must exceed
the total financial resources requirement set by the FSA. At
September 30, 2011, MLIs financial resources were
$19.8 billion, exceeding the minimum requirement by
$3.2 billion.
Merrill Lynch Japan Securities Co., Ltd. (MLJS), a
Japan-based regulated broker-dealer, is subject to capital
requirements of the Japanese Financial Services Agency
(JFSA). Net capital, as defined, must exceed 120% of
the total risk equivalents requirement of the JFSA. At
September 30, 2011, MLJSs net capital was
$1.7 billion, exceeding the minimum requirement by
$0.9 billion.
Banking
Regulation
Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited (MLIB), an
Ireland-based regulated bank, is subject to the capital
requirements of the Central Bank of Ireland. MLIB is required to
meet minimum regulatory capital requirements under the European
Union (EU) banking law as implemented in Ireland by
the Central Bank of Ireland. At September 30, 2011,
MLIBs financial resources were $14.1 billion,
exceeding the minimum requirement by $4.2 billion.
89
|
|
Item 2.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
Forward-Looking
Statements
This report on
Form 10-Q,
the documents that it incorporates by reference and the
documents into which it may be incorporated by reference may
contain, and from time to time Merrill Lynch & Co.,
Inc. (ML & Co. and, together with its
subsidiaries, Merrill Lynch, the
Company, the Corporation,
we, our or us) and its
management may make certain statements that constitute
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. When used in this
report, we, us and our may
refer to ML & Co. individually, ML & Co. and
its subsidiaries, or certain of ML & Co.s
subsidiaries or affiliates. These statements can be identified
by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or
current facts. Forward-looking statements often use words such
as expects, anticipates,
believes, estimates,
targets, intends, plans,
goal and other similar expressions or future or
conditional verbs such as will, may,
might, should, would and
could. The forward-looking statements made represent
the current expectations, plans or forecasts of Merrill Lynch
regarding its future results and revenues and future business
and economic conditions more generally, including statements
concerning: the planned schedule and details for implementation
and completion of, and the expected impact from, Phase 1 and
Phase 2 of Project New BAC; the potential impact of the European
Union (EU) financial relief plan; Merrill
Lynchs belief that with the $2.7 billion
representations and warranties provision recorded in the nine
months ended September 30, 2011 for
non-government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs)
representations and warranties exposures, it will provide for a
substantial portion of these non-GSE representations and
warranties exposures; representations and warranties liabilities
(also commonly referred to as reserves) and estimated range of
possible loss, expenses and repurchase claims and resolution of
those claims and any related securities, fraud indemnity or
other claims; Merrill Lynchs intention to vigorously
contest any requests for repurchase for which it concludes that
a valid basis does not exist; the impact on economic conditions
and Merrill Lynch arising from any changes to the credit rating
or perceived creditworthiness of instruments issued, insured or
guaranteed by the U.S. Government, or of institutions,
agencies or instrumentalities directly linked to the
U.S. Government; charges to income tax expense resulting
from reductions in the United Kingdom (U.K.)
corporate income tax rate; the estimated annual cost of the U.K.
bank levy; credit trends and conditions, including credit
losses, credit reserves, charge-offs, delinquency trends and
nonperforming asset levels; sales and trading revenues; the
higher level of intercompany service fees from Bank of America
in 2011; liquidity; the revenue impact resulting from, and any
mitigation actions taken in response to, the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Financial
Reform Act), including the impact of the Volcker Rule, the
risk retention rules and derivatives regulations; that it is our
objective to maintain high-quality credit ratings; Merrill
Lynchs ability to substitute or make changes to certain
over-the-counter (OTC) derivative contracts; the
estimated range of possible loss, and the impact on Merrill
Lynch, of various legal proceedings discussed in Note 14 to
the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements; and other
matters relating to Merrill Lynch. The foregoing is not an
exclusive list of all forward-looking statements we make. These
statements are not guarantees of future results or performance
and involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that
are difficult to predict and often are beyond control. Actual
outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed
in, or implied by, our forward-looking statements.
You should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking
statement and should consider the following uncertainties and
risks, as well as the risks and uncertainties more fully
discussed elsewhere in this report, in Item 1A. Risk
Factors in our 2010 Annual Report, and in any of
ML & Co.s subsequent Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) filings: Merrill Lynchs
ability to implement, manage and realize the anticipated
benefits, revenue increases and cost savings from Project New
BAC; the accuracy and variability of estimates and assumptions
in determining the estimated liability
and/or
estimated range of possible loss for representations and
warranties exposures to the GSEs, monolines and private-label
and other investors; the adequacy of the liability
and/or range
of possible
90
loss estimates for the representations and warranties
exposures to the GSEs, monolines, and private-label
securitization and other investors; the ability to resolve any
representations and warranties obligations and any related
securities, fraud indemnity or other claims with monolines, and
private-label investors and other investors, including those
monolines and investors from whom we have not yet received
claims or with whom we have not yet reached any resolutions; the
satisfaction of the conditions to the BNY Mellon Settlement; the
risk of a subsequent credit rating downgrade of the
U.S. Government; negative economic conditions generally,
including continued weakness in the U.S. housing market,
high unemployment in the U.S., as well as economic challenges in
many
non-U.S. countries
in which we operate; the level and volatility of the capital
markets, interest rates, currency values and other market
indices; changes in consumer, investor and counterparty
confidence in, and the related impact on, financial markets and
institutions, including Merrill Lynch as well as its business
partners; Merrill Lynchs credit ratings, including the
risk that Merrill Lynch or its securities will be the subject of
additional or further credit rating downgrades in addition to
the downgrade by Moodys Investors Service, Inc.
(Moodys) in the third quarter of 2011; Merrill
Lynchs ability to substitute or make changes to certain
OTC derivative contracts, including as a result of certain
limitations such as counterparty willingness, regulatory
limitations or naming Bank of America, N.A. as the new
counterparty and the type or amount of collateral required; the
impact resulting from international and domestic sovereign
credit uncertainties including the effectiveness of the EU
financial relief plan; estimates of the fair value of certain of
our assets and liabilities; legislative and regulatory actions
in the U.S. (including the impact of the Financial Reform
Act and related regulations and interpretations) and
internationally; the identification and effectiveness of any
initiatives to mitigate the negative impact of the Financial
Reform Act; the impact of litigation and regulatory
investigations, including costs, expenses, settlements and
judgments as well as any collateral effects on Merrill
Lynchs ability to do business and access the capital
markets; various monetary, tax and fiscal policies and
regulations of the U.S. and
non-U.S. governments;
changes in accounting standards, rules and interpretations,
inaccurate estimates or assumptions in the application of
accounting policies, including in determining reserves,
applicable guidance regarding goodwill accounting and the impact
on Merrill Lynchs financial statements; increased
globalization of the financial services industry and competition
with other U.S. and international financial institutions;
the adequacy of Merrill Lynchs risk management framework;
Merrill Lynchs ability to attract new employees and retain
and motivate existing employees; technology changes instituted
by Merrill Lynch, its counterparties or competitors; Merrill
Lynchs ability to integrate with Bank of America; Merrill
Lynchs reputation, including the effects of continuing
intense public and regulatory scrutiny of Merrill Lynch and the
financial services industry; the effects of any unauthorized
disclosures of our or our customers private or
confidential information and any negative publicity directed
toward Merrill Lynch; and decisions to downsize, sell or close
units or otherwise change the business mix of Merrill Lynch.
Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are
made, and Merrill Lynch undertakes no obligation to update any
forward-looking statement to reflect the impact of circumstances
or events that arise after the date the forward-looking
statement was made.
Introduction
Merrill Lynch was formed in 1914 and became a publicly traded
company on June 23, 1971. In 1973, we created the holding
company, ML & Co., a Delaware corporation that,
through its subsidiaries, is one of the worlds leading
capital markets, advisory and wealth management companies. We
are a leading global trader and underwriter of securities and
derivatives across a broad range of asset classes, and we serve
as a strategic advisor to corporations, governments,
institutions and individuals worldwide.
91
Bank of
America Acquisition and Basis of Presentation
On January 1, 2009, Merrill Lynch was acquired by Bank of
America Corporation (Bank of America) through the
merger of a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America with and
into ML & Co. with ML & Co. continuing as
the surviving corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank
of America. Upon completion of the acquisition, each outstanding
share of ML & Co. common stock was converted into
0.8595 shares of Bank of America common stock. As of the
completion of the acquisition, ML & Co. Series 1
through Series 8 preferred stock were converted into Bank
of America preferred stock with substantially identical terms to
the corresponding series of Merrill Lynch preferred stock
(except for additional voting rights provided to the Bank of
America securities). The Merrill Lynch 9.00% Mandatory
Convertible Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series 2, and
9.00% Mandatory Convertible Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock,
Series 3 that remained issued and outstanding subsequent to
the completion of the acquisition were automatically converted
into Bank of America common stock on October 15, 2010 in
accordance with the terms of these securities.
As discussed below, on November 1, 2010, Banc of America
Securities Holdings Corporation (BASH), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America, merged into
ML & Co., with ML & Co. as the surviving
corporation (the BASH Merger). In accordance with
Accounting Standards Codification (ASC)
805-10,
Business Combinations, Merrill Lynchs Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements appearing in Part I,
Item 1 of this
Form 10-Q
include the historical results of BASH and subsidiaries as if
the BASH Merger had occurred as of January 1, 2009, the
date at which both entities were first under common control of
Bank of America. Merrill Lynch has recorded the assets and
liabilities acquired in connection with the BASH Merger at their
historical carrying values.
Merger
With BASH
On November 1, 2010, ML & Co. merged with BASH.
In addition, as a result of the BASH Merger, Banc of America
Securities LLC (BAS), a wholly-owned broker-dealer
subsidiary of BASH, became a wholly-owned broker-dealer
subsidiary of ML & Co. Subsequently, on
November 1, 2010, BAS was merged into Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated
(MLPF&S), a wholly-owned broker-dealer
subsidiary of ML & Co., with MLPF&S as the
surviving corporation in this merger (the MLPF&S
Merger). As a result of the MLPF&S Merger,
MLPF&S remained a direct wholly-owned broker-dealer
subsidiary of ML & Co. and an indirect wholly-owned
broker-dealer subsidiary of Bank of America.
Business
Segments
Pursuant to ASC 280, Segment Reporting, operating
segments represent components of an enterprise for which
separate financial information is available that is regularly
evaluated by the chief operating decision maker in determining
how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The
business activities of Merrill Lynch are included within certain
of the operating segments of Bank of America. Detailed financial
information related to the operations of Merrill Lynch, however,
is not provided to Merrill Lynchs chief operating decision
maker. As a result, Merrill Lynch does not contain any
identifiable operating segments under Segment Reporting, and
therefore the financial information of Merrill Lynch is
presented as a single segment.
Form 10-Q
Presentation
As a result of the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of
America, certain information is not required in this
Form 10-Q
as permitted by general Instruction H of
Form 10-Q.
We have also abbreviated
92
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations as permitted by general
Instruction H.
Company
Results
We reported net earnings of $133 million and a net loss of
$903 million for three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011 as compared with a net loss of
$380 million and net earnings of $2.5 billion for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2010. Revenues,
net of interest expense (net revenues) for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2011 were
$5.9 billion and $20.6 billion compared with
$5.7 billion and $21.8 billion for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2010, respectively. Our pre-tax
loss was $390 million and $2.2 billion for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2011 compared with a
pre-tax loss of $266 million and pre-tax earnings of
$3.8 billion for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010, respectively.
Our results for the three months ended September 30, 2011
included an increase in revenues associated with the valuation
of certain of our long-term debt liabilities as compared with
the prior year period. During the quarter ended
September 30, 2011, we recorded net gains of
$2.9 billion due to the impact of the widening of Merrill
Lynchs credit spreads on the carrying value of certain of
our long-term debt liabilities, primarily structured notes,
while in the quarter ended September 30, 2010, we recorded
net losses of $0.3 billion due to the narrowing of our
credit spreads. The results for the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 also benefited from a more favorable
effective income tax rate as compared with the prior year. Such
results were partially offset by lower principal transactions
revenues associated with our trading activities, lower
investment banking revenue due to a decline in underwriting
fees, lower other revenues due to a loss from the sale of a
private equity investment, and higher non-interest expenses,
including higher compensation and benefits and other expense.
Our results for the nine months ended September 30, 2011
included net gains of $2.7 billion due to the impact of the
widening of Merrill Lynchs credit spreads on the carrying
value of certain of our long-term debt liabilities, while in the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 we recorded net gains
of $1.1 billion due to the widening of our credit spreads.
Our results for the nine months ended September 30, 2011
were adversely affected by a $2.7 billion provision for
representations and warranties related to our repurchase
exposure on private-label securitizations. On June 28,
2011, Bank of America and certain of its non-Merrill Lynch
subsidiaries entered into a settlement agreement (that is
subject to final court approval and certain other conditions) to
resolve, among other claims, all outstanding and potential
claims related to alleged representations and warranties
breaches (including repurchase claims) with respect to a number
of non-GSE residential mortgage-backed securitization trusts. As
a result of the experience gained by Bank of America and certain
of its non-Merrill Lynch affiliates from this settlement
agreement, Merrill Lynch determined that it had sufficient
experience to record the $2.7 billion liability for
representations and warranties related to its repurchase
exposure on private-label securitizations during the quarter
ended June 30, 2011. See Off-Balance Sheet
Exposures Representations and Warranties for
further information. Lower principal transaction revenues
associated with our trading activities and higher non-interest
expenses also contributed to the decline in net earnings for the
nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Our net earnings (loss) applicable to our common shareholder was
$133 million and $(903) million for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011, respectively, as compared
with net (losses) earnings of $(418) million and
$2.4 billion for the three and nine month periods of 2010,
respectively. As a result of the conversion of ML &
Co.s Series 2 and Series 3 Mandatory Convertible
Preferred Stock into shares of Bank of America common stock in
October 2010, there were no preferred stock dividends recorded
during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Preferred stock dividends of $38 million and
$114 million were recorded in the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2010.
93
Transactions
with Bank of America
Merrill Lynch has entered into various transactions with Bank of
America, primarily in connection with certain sales and trading
and financing activities. Total net revenues and non-interest
expenses related to transactions with Bank of America for the
three months ended September 30, 2011 were
$288 million and $537 million, respectively. Such
revenues and expenses for the nine months ended
September 30, 2011 were $822 million and
$1,766 million, respectively. Total net revenues and
non-interest expenses related to transactions with Bank of
America for the three months ended September 30, 2010 were
net losses of $111 million and expenses of
$365 million, respectively. Such revenues and expenses for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010 were net losses of
$100 million and expenses of $816 million,
respectively. Non-interest expenses for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011 reflect increased
intercompany service fees resulting from the integration of Bank
of Americas and Merrill Lynchs methodologies for
allocating expenses associated with shared services to their
subsidiaries. The results for the nine months ended
September 30, 2011 and September 30, 2010 included
gains of $5 million and $282 million, respectively,
from the sale of approximately $3.7 billion and
$11.2 billion, respectively, of
available-for-sale
securities to Bank of America. These transfers were made to
enable Bank of America or its non-Merrill Lynch subsidiaries to
more efficiently manage the existing portfolio of similar
available-for-sale
securities. See Note 2 to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for further information.
Merger
with BASH
See Introduction Merger With BASH for
further information on this transaction.
Credit
Ratings Actions
On September 21, 2011, Moodys downgraded Bank of
Americas and ML & Co.s long-term senior
unsecured debt ratings to Baa1from A2, and short-term debt
ratings to Prime-2 from Prime-1. These long-term credit ratings
now incorporate two notches of uplift due to systemic support,
down from four notches previously. The outlook on the long-term
senior unsecured ratings of Bank of America and ML &
Co. remained negative. These actions concluded a review for
downgrade announced on June 2, 2011.
In addition, the other two major credit ratings agencies,
Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC
(S&P) and Fitch, Inc. (Fitch) have
indicated they will reevaluate, and could reduce the uplift they
include in Bank of Americas (and consequently, our)
ratings for government support, for reasons arising from
financial services regulatory reform proposals or legislation.
There can be no assurance that S&P and Fitch will refrain
from downgrading Bank of Americas (and consequently, our)
credit ratings. While certain potential impacts of a downgrade
are contractual and quantifiable, the full scope of consequences
of a credit ratings downgrade is inherently uncertain, as it
depends upon numerous dynamic, complex and inter-related factors
and assumptions, including whether any downgrade of our
long-term credit ratings precipitates downgrades to our
short-term credit ratings, and assumptions about the behavior of
various customers, investors and counterparties, whose responses
to a downgrade cannot be determined in advance. Under the terms
of certain OTC derivative contracts and other trading
agreements, certain counterparties to those agreements have
required us to provide additional collateral or to terminate
these contracts or agreements or provide other remedies.
For information regarding the risks associated with adverse
changes in our credit ratings, see Executive
Overview Transactions with Affiliates,
Funding and Liquidity Credit Ratings,
Note 6 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements,
Item 1A. Risk Factors of Merrill Lynchs Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011 as well as
Item 1A. Risk Factors of Merrill Lynchs 2010 Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
94
Project
New BAC
Project New BAC is a two-phase, enterprise-wide initiative to
streamline workflows and processes, align businesses and
expenses more closely with Bank of Americas overall
strategic plan and operating principles, and increase revenues.
Phase 1 evaluations focused on Bank of Americas consumer
businesses, related support and technology and operations
functions. Phase 2 evaluations will focus on businesses and
related support and technology and operations functions not
subject to evaluation under Phase 1.
Phase 1 evaluations were completed during September 2011 and
resulted in Bank of Americas recently-announced management
reorganization and clarification of initiatives to align Bank of
Americas businesses with specific customer groups.
Implementation of Phase 1 recommendations began during the
fourth quarter of 2011. Phase 2 evaluations began in October
2011 and are expected to continue through April 2012. Reductions
in the areas subject to evaluation for Phase 2 have not yet
been fully identified, however, they are expected to be lower
than Phase 1. All aspects of New BAC are expected to be
implemented by the end of 2014.
When reductions in employment levels associated with the
implementation of New BAC are probable of occurring and the
amounts can be reasonably estimated, the associated severance
costs will be recognized. There were no material expenses
related to New BAC recorded in the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2011.
European
Union Sovereign Risks
In 2010, a financial crisis emerged in Europe, triggered by high
sovereign budget deficits and rising direct and contingent
sovereign debt in Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain,
which created concerns about the ability of these EU countries
to continue to service their sovereign debt obligations. These
conditions impacted financial markets and resulted in credit
ratings downgrades for, and high and volatile bond yields on the
sovereign debt of many EU countries. Certain European countries
continue to experience varying degrees of financial stress and
yields on government-issued bonds in Greece, Ireland, Italy,
Portugal and Spain have risen and remain volatile. Despite
assistance packages to certain of these countries, the creation
of a joint EU-International Monetary Fund European
Financial Stability Facility in May 2010 and additional expanded
financial assistance to Greece, uncertainty over the outcome of
the EU governments financial support programs and worries
about sovereign finances persisted. Market concerns over the
direct and indirect exposure of certain European banks and
insurers to these EU countries resulted in a widening of credit
spreads and increased costs of funding for these financial
institutions. On October 27, 2011, representatives of 17 EU
countries announced a financial relief plan that involves a
write off of certain sovereign debt by European banks,
requirements regarding European bank capital ratios and
increases in available rescue funds. Although financial markets
initially responded favorably to the announcement of this plan,
details remain to be negotiated, and implementation is subject
to certain contingencies and risks.
U.K.
Corporate Income Tax Rate Change
On July 19, 2011, the U.K. 2011 Finance Bill was enacted,
which reduced the corporate income tax rate. As a result of the
reduction, we recorded a charge of $774 million due to the
remeasurement of our U.K. net deferred tax assets. For
additional information, see Results of
Operations Quarter Ended September 30, 2011
Compared With Quarter Ended September 30, 2010.
U.K. Bank
Levy
The U.K. government bank levy legislation was enacted on
July 19, 2011. The rate on banks operating in the U.K. has
been set at 7.5 basis points (bps) for
short-term liabilities and 3.75 bps for long-term
liabilities for 2011 and will increase to 7.8 bps for
short-term liabilities and 3.9 bps for long-term
liabilities beginning in 2012. Based on current estimates, the
cost of the bank levy is expected to be approximately
$70 million for 2011, of which $50 million was accrued
as of September 30, 2011, and is non-deductible for U.K.
tax purposes.
95
Financial
Reform Act
The Financial Reform Act, which was signed into law on
July 21, 2010, enacts sweeping financial regulatory reform
and has altered and will continue to alter the way in which we
conduct certain businesses, increase our costs and reduce our
revenues. Many aspects of the Financial Reform Act remain
subject to final rulemaking and will take effect over several
years, making it difficult to anticipate the precise impact on
Merrill Lynch, our customers or the financial services industry.
Background
Provisions in the Financial Reform Act limit banking
organizations from engaging in proprietary trading and certain
investment activity regarding hedge funds and private equity
funds as discussed below. The Financial Reform Act increases
regulation of the derivative markets. The Financial Reform Act
also provides for resolution authority to establish a process to
unwind large systemically important financial companies; creates
a new regulatory body to set requirements regarding the terms
and conditions of consumer financial products and expands the
role of state regulators in enforcing consumer protection
requirements over banks; includes new minimum leverage and
risk-based capital requirements for large financial
institutions; and requires securitizers to retain a portion of
the risk that would otherwise be transferred to investors in
certain securitization transactions. Many of these provisions
have begun to be phased-in or will be phased-in over the next
several months or years and will be subject both to further
rulemaking and the discretion of applicable regulatory bodies.
The Financial Reform Act may have a significant and negative
impact on our earnings through reduced revenues, higher costs
and new restrictions, as well as a reduction in available
capital. The ultimate impact of the Financial Reform Act on our
businesses and results of operations will depend on regulatory
interpretation and rulemaking, as well as the success of any of
our actions to mitigate the negative earnings impact of certain
provisions.
Limitations
on Certain Activities
On October 11, 2011, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency (the OCC), the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC) and the SEC
released for comment proposed regulations implementing
limitations on proprietary trading as well as the sponsorship of
or investment in hedge funds (the Volcker Rule)
established by the Financial Reform Act. The proposed
regulations include clarifications to the definition of
proprietary trading and distinctions between permitted and
prohibited activities. The comment period ends on
January 13, 2012 and sometime thereafter final regulations
will be promulgated. However, in light of the complexity of the
proposed regulations and the likelihood that a substantial
number of comments will be submitted (the proposal requests
comments on over 1,300 questions on 400 different topics), it is
not possible to predict the content of the final regulations. In
addition, the Commodities Futures and Trading Commission has not
yet issued its proposed regulations under the Volcker Rule.
The statutory provisions of the Volcker Rule will become
effective on July 21, 2012, whether or not the final
regulations are adopted, and it gives certain financial
institutions two years from the effective date, with
opportunities for additional extensions, to bring activities and
investments into compliance. Although we completely exited our
proprietary trading business as of June 30, 2011 in
anticipation of the Volcker Rule, the ultimate impact of the
Volcker Rule on us remains uncertain. However, it is possible
that the implementation of the Volcker Rule could limit or
restrict our remaining trading activities. Implementation of the
Volcker Rule could also limit or restrict our ability to sponsor
and hold ownership interests in hedge funds, private equity
funds and other subsidiary operations. Additionally,
implementation of the Volcker Rule could increase our
operational and compliance costs and reduce our trading revenues
and adversely affect our results of operations. For additional
information about our proprietary trading business, see
Results of Operations Quarter Ended
September 30, 2011 Compared With Quarter Ended
September 30, 2010.
96
Transactions
with Affiliates
The terms of certain OTC derivative contracts and other trading
agreements of Merrill Lynch provide that upon the occurrence of
certain specified events, such as a change in our credit
ratings, we may be required to provide additional collateral or
to provide other remedies, or our counterparties may have the
right to terminate or otherwise diminish our rights under these
contracts or agreements. Following the recent downgrade of our
credit ratings, we have engaged in discussions with certain
derivative and other counterparties regarding their rights under
these agreements. In response to counterparties inquiries
and requests, we have discussed and in some cases substituted
derivative contracts and other trading agreements, including
naming Bank of America, N.A. as the new counterparty. Our
ability to substitute or make changes to these agreements to
meet counterparties requests may be subject to certain
limitations, including counterparty willingness, regulatory
limitations on naming Bank of America, N.A. as the new
counterparty, and the type or amount of collateral required. It
is possible that such limitations on our ability to substitute
or make changes to these agreements, including naming Bank of
America, N.A. as the new counterparty, could adversely affect
our results of operations.
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Change between the
|
|
% Change between the
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
Sept. 30, 2011 and
|
|
Sept. 30, 2011 and
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
the Three Months
|
|
the Nine Months
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
Ended Sept. 30,
|
|
Ended Sept. 30,
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2010
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal transactions
|
|
|
$
|
2,781
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,125
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,243
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,381
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
%
|
|
|
(17
|
)%
|
Commissions
|
|
|
|
1,441
|
|
|
|
|
4,478
|
|
|
|
|
1,351
|
|
|
|
|
4,317
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Managed account and other fee-based revenues
|
|
|
|
1,354
|
|
|
|
|
3,976
|
|
|
|
|
1,114
|
|
|
|
|
3,328
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
Investment banking
|
|
|
|
1,016
|
|
|
|
|
4,162
|
|
|
|
|
1,326
|
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
10
|
|
Earnings from equity method investments
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
328
|
|
|
|
|
281
|
|
|
|
|
658
|
|
|
|
|
(75
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
Other revenues(1)
|
|
|
|
(904
|
)
|
|
|
|
2,288
|
|
|
|
|
436
|
|
|
|
|
2,593
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
|
5,758
|
|
|
|
|
21,357
|
|
|
|
|
5,751
|
|
|
|
|
22,077
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Interest and dividend revenues
|
|
|
|
2,314
|
|
|
|
|
6,220
|
|
|
|
|
2,245
|
|
|
|
|
6,985
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
Less interest expense
|
|
|
|
2,202
|
|
|
|
|
6,945
|
|
|
|
|
2,260
|
|
|
|
|
7,235
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (expense)
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
(725
|
)
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
(250
|
)
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues, net of interest expense
|
|
|
|
5,870
|
|
|
|
|
20,632
|
|
|
|
|
5,736
|
|
|
|
|
21,827
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation and benefits
|
|
|
|
3,638
|
|
|
|
|
12,146
|
|
|
|
|
3,507
|
|
|
|
|
11,593
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Communications and technology
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
|
1,338
|
|
|
|
|
493
|
|
|
|
|
1,465
|
|
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
Occupancy and related depreciation
|
|
|
|
385
|
|
|
|
|
1,056
|
|
|
|
|
351
|
|
|
|
|
1,053
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Brokerage, clearing, and exchange fees
|
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
|
|
882
|
|
|
|
|
227
|
|
|
|
|
781
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
Advertising and market development
|
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
|
718
|
|
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
|
660
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Office supplies and postage
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
Provision for representations and warranties
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
1,090
|
|
|
|
|
3,535
|
|
|
|
|
973
|
|
|
|
|
2,177
|
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest expenses
|
|
|
|
6,260
|
|
|
|
|
22,864
|
|
|
|
|
6,002
|
|
|
|
|
18,015
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax (loss) earnings
|
|
|
|
(390
|
)
|
|
|
|
(2,232
|
)
|
|
|
|
(266
|
)
|
|
|
|
3,812
|
|
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
Income tax (benefit) expense
|
|
|
|
(523
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1,329
|
)
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
1,286
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss)
|
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
2,526
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (loss) applicable to common stockholder
|
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
|
$
|
(903
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
(418
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
2,412
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
2011 and 2010 amounts include
other income and
other-than-temporary
impairment losses on
available-for-sale
debt securities. The
other-than-temporary
impairment losses were $5 million and $49 million for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011,
respectively, and were $42 million and $165 million
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2010,
respectively. |
N/M = Not meaningful.
Quarterly
Consolidated Results of Operations
Our net earnings for the quarter ended September 30, 2011
were $133 million compared with a net loss of
$380 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
Net revenues for the third quarter of 2011 were
$5.9 billion compared with $5.7 billion in the prior
year period.
Quarter
Ended September 30, 2011 Compared With Quarter Ended
September 30, 2010
Principal transactions revenues include both realized and
unrealized gains and losses on trading assets and trading
liabilities and investment securities classified as trading.
Principal transactions revenues were $2.8 billion for the
quarter ended September 30, 2011 compared with
$1.2 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
The increase primarily reflected an increase in revenues
associated with the valuation of certain of our liabilities. In
the quarter ended September 30, 2011, we recorded net gains
98
of $2.9 billion due to the impact of the widening of
Merrill Lynchs credit spreads on the carrying value of
certain of our long-term debt liabilities, primarily structured
notes, as compared with net losses of $0.3 billion from
such long-term debt liabilities recorded in the quarter ended
September 30, 2010 due to the narrowing of our credit
spreads. In addition, we recorded an increase in revenues as
compared with the prior year period of $0.8 billion due to
valuation adjustments associated with the consideration of our
own creditworthiness in the fair value of certain derivative
liabilities, as our credit spreads widened throughout the
quarter ended September 30, 2011. These increases were
partially offset by lower trading revenues as compared with the
prior year period, primarily in our credit, equity and mortgage
products businesses. Trading revenue may continue to be
adversely affected by lower client activity and adverse market
conditions as a result of, among other things, the European
sovereign debt crisis, uncertainty regarding the outcome of the
evolving domestic regulatory landscape, our credit ratings and
market volatility. Revenues from credit products decreased due
to adverse market conditions that existed throughout the quarter
ended September 30, 2011, including significant levels of
volatility in the credit markets and decreased client activity
as a result of the European sovereign debt crisis. Revenues from
equity products decreased primarily driven by lower revenues
within the equity derivatives trading business. Revenues from
mortgage products decreased primarily due to a less favorable
trading environment as compared with the prior year, including
widening credit spreads. In addition, revenues from proprietary
trading activities declined and reflected the wind-down of that
business.
Included in principal transactions revenues are net revenues
associated with activities we have identified as
proprietary trading, which is conducted separately
from our customer trading activities. Our proprietary trading
operations have engaged in trading activities in a variety of
products, including stocks, bonds, currencies and commodities.
In response to developments relating to the Volcker Rule
discussed above, we have exited our proprietary trading business
as of June 30, 2011. The revenues from these operations for
the quarter ended September 30, 2010 were
$322 million, of which $277 million were included
within principal transactions revenues. The remainder of the
revenues for these operations were primarily recorded within net
interest revenues. See also Executive Overview
Financial Reform Act Limitations on Certain
Activities.
Net interest income (expense) is a function of (i) the
level and mix of total assets and liabilities, including trading
assets, deposits, financing and lending transactions, and
trading strategies associated with our businesses, and
(ii) the prevailing level, term structure and volatility of
interest rates. Net interest income (expense) is an integral
component of trading activity. In assessing the profitability of
our client facilitation and trading activities, we view
principal transactions and net interest income (expense) in the
aggregate as net trading revenues. Changes in the composition of
trading inventories and hedge positions can cause the mix of
principal transactions and net interest income (expense) to
fluctuate from period to period. Net interest income was
$112 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2011
as compared with net interest expense of $15 million in the
quarter ended September 30, 2010. The increase was
primarily due to lower financing costs, partially offset by
lower net interest revenues generated from our trading
activities.
Commissions revenues primarily arise from agency transactions in
listed and OTC equity securities and commodities and options.
Commissions revenues also include distribution fees for
promoting and distributing mutual funds. Commissions revenues
were $1.4 billion for the quarter ended September 30,
2011, an increase of 7% from the prior year period. The majority
of the increase was attributable to our global equity products
business, primarily reflecting higher single-stock trading
volumes in the U.S., which increased 18% from the prior year
period.
Managed account and other fee-based revenues primarily consist
of asset-priced portfolio service fees earned from the
administration of separately managed and other investment
accounts for retail investors, annual account fees, and certain
other account-related fees. Managed account and other fee-based
revenues were $1.4 billion for the quarter ended
September 30, 2011, an increase of 22% from
99
the prior year period. The increase was driven by higher
fee-based revenues from our global wealth management activities,
reflecting higher levels of fee-based assets from which such
revenues are generated as well as increased revenues from fees
on new accounts and asset management fees. The increase in
fee-based assets was due to both strong client flows into
long-term products and market appreciation.
Investment banking revenues include (i) origination
revenues representing fees earned from the underwriting of debt,
equity and equity-linked securities, as well as loan syndication
and commitment fees and (ii) advisory services revenues
including merger and acquisition and other investment banking
advisory fees. Total investment banking revenues were
$1.0 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2011,
a decrease of 23% from the prior year period. Underwriting
revenues decreased 29% to $747 million, which was primarily
due to lower debt and equity underwriting fees consistent with a
decline in global fee pools due to weakening markets for debt
and equity underwritings. Equity underwriting fees in the
quarter ended September 30, 2011 included $125 million
of revenues from Bank of America in connection with the sale of
a portion of its interest in China Construction Bank. Revenues
from advisory services decreased 1% to $269 million.
Earnings from equity method investments include our pro rata
share of income and losses associated with investments accounted
for under the equity method of accounting. Earnings from equity
method investments were $70 million for the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 compared with $281 million for the
quarter ended September 30, 2010. The decrease reflected
lower revenues from certain equity method investments, including
BlackRock, Inc. (BlackRock), which was sold during
the quarter ended June 30, 2011. Refer to Note 8 to
the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the 2010
Annual Report for further information on equity method
investments.
Other revenues include gains and losses on investment
securities, including certain
available-for-sale
securities, gains and losses on private equity investments, and
gains and losses on loans and other miscellaneous items. Other
revenues were ($904) million in the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 as compared with $436 million in
the quarter ended September 30, 2010. The decrease was due
to lower revenues from certain investments, including a loss of
approximately $975 million recorded in the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 resulting from the sale of the majority
of our stake in a private equity investment.
Compensation and benefits expenses were $3.6 billion in the
quarter ended September 30, 2011, an increase of 4% from
the prior year period. The increase reflected higher salary and
other employee compensation costs as compared with the prior
year period related to increased headcount levels from
investments in infrastructure and personnel associated with
further development of the business. Amortization expense
associated with stock-based compensation awards and severance
costs also increased. These increases were partially offset by
lower incentive-based compensation accruals as compared with the
prior year, reflecting a decline in net revenues (after giving
effect to the impact of net revenues associated with the
valuation of certain of our long-term debt and derivative
liabilities).
Non-compensation expenses were $2.6 billion in the quarter
ended September 30, 2011 compared with $2.5 billion in
the prior year period. Communications and technology expenses
were $432 million, a decrease of 12% primarily due to lower
technology equipment and systems consulting costs. Brokerage,
clearing and exchange fees were $279 million, an increase
of 23% primarily due to higher brokerage and other fees. Other
expenses were $1.1 billion for the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 as compared with $1.0 billion in
the prior year period. The increase was primarily driven by
higher net intercompany service fees from Bank of America. Such
net intercompany service fees were approximately
$560 million in the quarter ended September 30, 2011,
an increase of approximately $240 million from the prior
year period. Higher litigation costs also contributed to the
increase. These increases were partially offset by lower expense
associated with non-controlling interests of certain
100
principal investments, as well as a loss of $165 million
associated with a real estate private equity fund that was
recorded in the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
As discussed above, included within Merrill Lynchs
non-interest expenses are intercompany service fees from Bank of
America. Beginning in 2011, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch
integrated their methodologies for allocating expenses
associated with shared services to their subsidiaries. As a
result of this integration, during 2011 Merrill Lynch will incur
a higher level of intercompany service fees from Bank of America
as compared with the prior year.
The income tax benefit for the three months ended
September 30, 2011 was $523 million compared with an
income tax expense of $114 million for the three months
ended September 30, 2010. The effective tax rate was 134.1%
for the third quarter of 2011 compared with (42.9%) in the prior
year. Income tax expense for the third quarter of 2010 included
a $388 million charge for the revaluation of our U.K. net
deferred tax assets using a lower U.K. corporate income tax rate
and would have reflected an income tax benefit on a pre-tax loss
without that item. The 134.1% effective tax rate for the quarter
ended September 30, 2011 was driven primarily by a
$593 million benefit for capital loss deferred tax assets
recognized in connection with the liquidation of certain
subsidiaries, a $255 million release of a valuation
allowance provided for capital loss carryforward tax benefits
and by the recognition of $234 million of previously
unrecognized tax benefits associated with certain jurisdictions.
These benefits were partially offset by the $774 million
impact of the U.K. corporate income tax rate reduction referred
to below.
On July 19, 2011, the U.K. 2011 Finance Bill was enacted,
which reduced the U.K. corporate income tax rate to 26%
beginning on April 1, 2011, and then to 25% effective
April 1, 2012. These reductions will favorably affect
income tax expense on future U.K. earnings, but also required us
to remeasure our U.K. net deferred tax assets using the lower
tax rates. The income tax benefit for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2011 included a $774 million
charge for the remeasurement. If corporate income tax rates were
to be reduced to 23% by 2014, as suggested in U.K. Treasury
announcements and assuming no change in the deferred tax asset
balance, a charge to income tax expense of approximately
$400 million for each one percent reduction in the rate
would result in each period of enactment.
Year-to-Date
Consolidated Results of Operations
For the nine months ended September 30, 2011, our net loss
was $903 million compared with net earnings of
$2.5 billion in the prior year period. Our pre-tax loss was
$2.2 billion for the nine months ended September 30,
2011 compared with pre-tax income of $3.8 billion for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010.
Nine
Months Ended September 30, 2011 Compared With Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010
Net revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2011
were $20.6 billion compared with $21.8 billion in the
prior year period. The decrease primarily reflected lower
principal transaction revenues. Principal transaction revenues
were $6.1 billion for the nine months ended
September 30, 2011, a decrease of 17% from the prior year
period. The decline was primarily driven by lower revenues
associated with our trading activities, primarily due to
mortgage products as a result of less favorable market
conditions and credit valuation adjustments related to financial
guarantors. Revenues from credit and rates and currencies
products and from proprietary trading activities also declined.
These decreases in principal transaction revenues were partially
offset by an increase in revenues associated with the valuation
of certain of our liabilities. In the nine months ended
September 30,
101
2011, we recorded net revenues of $2.7 billion due to the
impact of the widening of our credit spreads on the carrying
value of certain of our long-term debt liabilities, primarily
structured notes, as compared with net gains of
$1.1 billion from such long-term debt liabilities in the
nine months ended September 30, 2010. We also recorded
increased revenues from the valuation of derivative liabilities
due to changes in our credit spreads. Net interest expense was
$725 million compared with $250 million in the prior
year period primarily due to lower net interest revenues
generated from our trading activities. Earnings from equity
method investments were $328 million compared with
$658 million in the prior year period. The decline was due
to lower earnings from certain equity method investments,
primarily BlackRock. Other revenues were $2.3 billion, a
decrease of $305 million from the prior year period. The
decrease in other revenues was primarily associated with lower
revenues from certain investments, partially offset by a gain
from the sale of our remaining investment in BlackRock. In
November 2010, we sold a substantial portion of our investment
in BlackRock, which resulted in a reduction of our economic
interest in BlackRock from approximately 34% to approximately
7%. In June 2011, we sold all of our remaining shares of
BlackRocks Series B preferred stock, which resulted
in a pre-tax gain of $377 million. These decreases in net
revenues were partially offset by higher managed account and
other fee-based revenues.
Compensation and benefits expenses were $12.1 billion for
the nine months ended September 30, 2011, an increase of 5%
from the prior year period. The increase included higher
amortization expense associated with stock-based compensation
awards, including awards granted to retirement-eligible
employees, as compared with the prior year. In addition, salary
and other employee compensation costs were higher as compared
with the prior year period related to increased headcount levels
from investments in infrastructure and personnel associated with
further development of the business. These increases were
partially offset by lower incentive-based compensation accruals
and a charge for an incremental U.K. employer payroll tax that
was recorded in the nine months ended September 30, 2010.
In April 2010, the U.K. enacted into law a one-time employer
payroll tax on bonuses awarded to employees of applicable
banking entities between December 9, 2009 and April 5,
2010. The impact of this tax was approximately $330 million
and was included in our compensation and benefits expense for
the quarter ended June 30, 2010.
Non-compensation expenses were $10.7 billion for the nine
months ended September 30, 2011 and $6.4 billion in
the prior year period. Non-compensation expenses in 2011
included a charge of $2.7 billion associated with
representations and warranties made in connection with certain
mortgage and home equity loan transactions. See
Off-Balance Sheet Exposures Representations
and Warranties for further information. Communications and
technology expenses were $1.3 billion, a decrease of 9%
primarily due to lower technology equipment and systems
consulting costs. Brokerage, clearing and exchange fees were
$882 million, an increase of 13% primarily due to higher
brokerage and other fees. Other expenses were $3.5 billion
compared with $2.2 billion in the prior year period. The
increase was primarily driven by higher net intercompany service
fees from Bank of America.
The income tax benefit was $1.3 billion for the nine months
ended September 30, 2011 compared with an income tax
expense of $1.3 billion for the prior year period. The
effective tax rate for the nine months ended September 30,
2011 was 59.5% compared with 33.7% in the prior year period. The
2011 effective tax rate was higher than for 2010 as the impact
of net tax benefit items described above increased the income
tax benefit booked on 2011 pre-tax loss whereas for
2010 net tax benefits decreased tax expense booked on
pre-tax income.
Off-Balance Sheet
Exposures
As a part of our normal operations, we enter into various
off-balance sheet arrangements that may require future payments.
The table and discussion below outline our significant
off-balance sheet
102
arrangements, as well as their future expirations, as of
September 30, 2011. Refer to Note 14 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
Less than 1
|
|
1-3
|
|
3-5
|
|
Over 5
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
Payout
|
|
year
|
|
years
|
|
years
|
|
years
|
|
|
Standby liquidity facilities
|
|
$
|
1,154
|
|
|
$
|
619
|
|
|
$
|
515
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
Residual value guarantees
|
|
|
415
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
-
|
|
Standby letters of credit and other guarantees
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
Standby
Liquidity Facilities
We provide standby liquidity facilities primarily to certain
unconsolidated municipal bond securitization variable interest
entities (VIEs). In these arrangements, we are
required to fund these standby liquidity facilities if certain
contingent events take place (e.g., a failed remarketing) and in
certain cases if the fair value of the assets held by the VIE
declines below the stated amount of the liquidity obligation.
The potential exposure under the facilities is mitigated by
economic hedges
and/or other
contractual arrangements entered into by Merrill Lynch. Refer to
Note 9 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for further information.
Residual
Value Guarantees
At September 30, 2011, residual value guarantees of
$415 million consisted of amounts associated with certain
power plant facilities.
Standby
Letters of Credit and Other Guarantees
At September 30, 2011, we provided guarantees to certain
counterparties in the form of standby letters of credit in the
amount of $0.5 billion.
Representations
and Warranties
In prior years, Merrill Lynch and certain of its subsidiaries,
including First Franklin Financial Corporation (First
Franklin) sold pools of first-lien residential mortgage
loans and home equity loans as private-label securitizations (in
a limited number of these securitizations, monolines insured all
or some of the securities), or in the form of whole loans. Most
of the loans sold in the form of whole loans were subsequently
pooled into private-label securitizations sponsored by the
third-party buyer of the whole loans. In addition, Merrill Lynch
and First Franklin securitized first-lien residential mortgage
loans generally in the form of mortgage-backed securities
guaranteed by the GSEs. In connection with these transactions,
Merrill Lynch made various representations and warranties.
Breaches of these representations and warranties may result in
the requirement to repurchase mortgage loans or to otherwise
make whole or provide other remedies to the GSEs, whole-loan
buyers, securitization trusts or monoline insurers
(collectively, repurchases). In such cases, Merrill
Lynch would be exposed to any credit loss on the repurchased
mortgage loans after accounting for any mortgage insurance or
mortgage guaranty payments that it may receive.
Subject to the requirements and limitations of the applicable
sales and securitization agreements, these representations and
warranties can be enforced by the GSEs, the whole-loan buyer,
the securitization trustee, or others as governed by the
applicable agreement or, in a limited number of first-lien and
103
home equity securitizations where monoline insurers have insured
all or some of the securities issued, by the monoline insurer at
any time. In the case of loans sold to parties other than the
GSEs, the contractual liability to repurchase typically arises
only if there is a breach of the representations and warranties
that materially and adversely affects the interest of the
investor or investors in the loan or of the monoline insurer (as
applicable). Contracts with the GSEs do not contain an
equivalent requirement.
For additional information about accounting for representations
and warranties and our representations and warranties claims and
exposures, see Note 14 to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements and Item 1A. Risk Factors of Merrill
Lynchs Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 as well as
Item 1A. Risk Factors of Merrill Lynchs 2010 Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
Merrill Lynch has contested, and will continue to vigorously
contest any request for repurchase when it concludes that a
valid basis for repurchase does not exist. Merrill Lynch may
reach settlements in the future if opportunities arise on terms
it believes to be advantageous to Merrill Lynch.
Bank
of America BNY Mellon Settlement
On June 28, 2011, Bank of America and certain of its
non-Merrill Lynch subsidiaries entered into a settlement
agreement (subject to final court approval and certain other
conditions) with The Bank of New York Mellon (BNY
Mellon), as trustee, to resolve, among other claims, all
outstanding and potential claims related to alleged
representations and warranties breaches (including repurchase
claims) with respect to the 525 legacy first-lien and five
second-lien non-GSE residential mortgage-backed securitization
trusts containing loans principally originated between 2004 and
2008 and for which BNY Mellon acts as trustee or indenture
trustee (the BNY Mellon Settlement). As a result of
the experience gained by Bank of America and certain of its
non-Merrill Lynch affiliates in the BNY Mellon Settlement,
Merrill Lynch determined that it had sufficient experience to
record a $2.7 billion liability for representations and
warranties related to its repurchase exposure on private-label
securitizations in the nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Unresolved
Claims and Payments
The table below presents unresolved repurchase claims by
counterparty at September 30, 2011 and December 31,
2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unresolved Claims by Counterparty
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
GSEs
|
|
$
|
42
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
Monoline
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
|
517
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
625
|
|
|
$
|
624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The majority of these
repurchase claims are from whole-loan buyers on subprime
loans. |
The pipeline of unresolved claims where Merrill Lynch believes a
valid defect has not been identified which would constitute an
actionable breach of representations and warranties was
$599 million at September 30, 2011. Through
September 30, 2011, approximately 9% of unresolved claims
that Merrill Lynch initially denied have subsequently been
resolved through repurchase or reimbursement payments and 27%
have been resolved through rescission. When a claim has been
denied and there has not been
104
communication with the counterparty for six months, Merrill
Lynch views these claims as inactive; however, they remain in
the unresolved claims balance until resolution.
As presented in the table below, during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2011, Merrill Lynch paid
$16 million and $41 million to resolve
$26 million and $51 million of repurchase claims
through repurchase or indemnification payments to investors,
resulting in a loss on the related loans at the time of
repurchase or indemnification payment of $11 million and
$36 million. During both the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2010, Merrill Lynch paid $39 million to
resolve $50 million of repurchase claims through
indemnification payments to investors for losses they incurred,
resulting in a loss on the related loans at the time of
repurchase or indemnification payment of $34 million. Cash
paid for loan repurchases includes the unpaid principal balance
of the loan plus past due interest. The amount of loss for loan
repurchases is reduced by the fair value of the underlying loan
collateral.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
(dollars in millions)
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
Claims resolved
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase payments
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Indemnification payments
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total payments
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
41
|
|
|
$
|
39
|
|
|
$
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The repurchase of loans and indemnification payments related to
repurchase claims generally resulted from material breaches of
representations and warranties related to the loans
material compliance with the applicable underwriting standards,
including borrower misrepresentation, credit exceptions without
sufficient compensating factors and non-compliance with
underwriting procedures, although the actual representations and
warranties made in a sales transaction and the resulting
repurchase and indemnification activity can vary by transaction
or investor. A direct relationship between the type of defect
that causes the breach of representations and warranties and the
severity of the realized loss has not been observed.
Liability
for Representations and Warranties
The liability for representations and warranties is included in
Interest and other payables on the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets and the related provision is included in
Non-interest expenses on the Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Earnings (Loss). The methodology used to estimate the
liability for representations and warranties is a function of
the representations and warranties given and considers a variety
of factors, which include, depending on the counterparty, actual
defaults, estimated future defaults, historical loss experience,
estimated home prices, other economic conditions, estimated
probability that a repurchase claim will be received,
consideration of whether presentation thresholds will be met,
number of payments made by the borrower prior to default and
estimated probability that a loan will be required to be
repurchased as well as other relevant facts and circumstances,
such as bulk settlements and identity of the counterparty or
type of counterparty, with whom a sale was made. The estimate of
the liability for representations and warranties is based on
currently available information, significant judgment and a
number of factors, including those set forth above, that are
subject to change. Changes to any one of these factors could
significantly impact the estimate of the liability and could
have a material adverse impact on our results of operations for
any particular period.
At September 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the
liability for representations and warranties was
$2.8 billion and $213 million, respectively. As noted
above, in the nine months ended September 30,
105
2011, we recorded a provision for representations and warranties
related to our repurchase exposure on private-label
securitizations of $2.7 billion.
Estimated
Range of Possible Loss for Non-GSEs
Merrill Lynch believes it is probable that additional claimants
may come forward with credible claims that meet the requirements
of the terms of the securitizations. Merrill Lynch believes that
with the additional $2.7 billion non-GSE representations
and warranties provision recorded in the nine months ended
September 30, 2011, related to the BNY Mellon Settlement,
it has provided for a substantial portion of its non-GSE
representations and warranties exposures. However, it is
reasonably possible that future representations and warranties
losses may occur in excess of the amounts recorded for these
exposures. In addition, Merrill Lynch has not recorded any
representations and warranties liability for potential monoline
exposures and certain potential whole loan exposures. Merrill
Lynch currently estimates that the range of possible loss
related to non-GSE representations and warranties exposure as of
September 30, 2011 could be up to $0.5 billion over
existing accruals. This estimate of the range of possible loss
for non-GSE representations and warranties does not represent a
probable loss, is based on currently available information,
significant judgment, and a number of assumptions, including
those set forth below, that are subject to change.
The methodology used to estimate the non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and the corresponding range of possible
loss considers a variety of factors including Merrill
Lynchs experience related to actual defaults, projected
future defaults, historical loss experience, estimated home
prices, other economic conditions and the experience of Merrill
Lynchs affiliates. Among the factors that impact the
non-GSE representations and warranties liability and the
corresponding range of possible loss are: (1) contractual
loss causation requirements, (2) the representations and
warranties provided, and (3) the requirement to meet
certain presentation thresholds. The first factor is based on
our belief that a non-GSE contractual liability to repurchase a
loan generally arises only if the counterparties prove there is
a breach of representations and warranties that materially and
adversely affects the interest of the investor or all investors,
or the monoline insurer (as applicable), in a securitization
trust and, accordingly, we believe that the repurchase claimants
must prove that the alleged representations and warranties
breach was the cause of the loss. The second factor is related
to the fact that non-GSE securitizations include different types
of representations and warranties than those provided to the
GSEs. We believe the non-GSE securitizations
representations and warranties are less rigorous and actionable
than the explicit provisions of comparable agreements with the
GSEs without regard to any variations that may have arisen as a
result of dealings with the GSEs. The third factor is related to
the fact that certain presentation thresholds need to be met in
order for any repurchase claim to be asserted under the non-GSE
agreements. A securitization trustee may investigate or demand
repurchase on its own action, and most agreements contain a
threshold, for example 25% of the voting rights per trust, that
allows investors to declare a servicing event of default under
certain circumstances or to request certain action, such as
requesting loan files, that the trustee may choose to accept and
follow, exempt from liability, provided the trustee is acting in
good faith. If there is an uncured servicing event of default,
and the trustee fails to bring suit during a
60-day
period, then, under most agreements, investors may file suit. In
addition to this, most agreements also allow investors to direct
the securitization trustee to investigate loan files or demand
the repurchase of loans, if security holders hold a specified
percentage, for example, 25%, of the voting rights of each
tranche of the outstanding securities. Although Merrill Lynch
continues to believe that presentation thresholds are a factor
in the determination of probable loss, given the BNY Mellon
Settlement, the upper end of the estimated range of possible
loss assumes that the presentation threshold can be met for all
of the non-GSE securitization transactions.
In addition, in the case of private-label securitizations, the
methodology used to estimate the non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and the corresponding range of possible
loss considers the experience resulting from the BNY Mellon
Settlement and assumes that the conditions to the BNY
106
Mellon Settlement are satisfied. Since the non-GSE transactions
that were included in the BNY Mellon Settlement differ from
those that were not included in the BNY Mellon Settlement,
Merrill Lynch adjusted the experience implied in the settlement
in order to determine the estimated non-GSE representations and
warranties liability and corresponding range of possible loss.
The judgmental adjustments made include consideration of the
differences in the mix of products in the securitizations, loan
originator, likelihood of claims differences, the differences in
the number of payments that the borrower has made prior to
default, and the sponsor of the securitization.
Future provisions
and/or
ranges of possible loss for non-GSE representations and
warranties may be significantly impacted if actual results are
different from our assumptions in our predictive models,
including, without limitation, those regarding the ultimate
resolution of the BNY Mellon Settlement, estimated repurchase
rates, economic conditions, home prices, consumer and
counterparty behavior, and a variety of judgmental factors.
Adverse developments with respect to one or more of the
assumptions underlying the liability for representations and
warranties and the corresponding estimated range of possible
loss could result in significant increases to future provisions
and/or this
range of possible loss estimate. For example, if courts were to
disagree with our interpretation that the underlying agreements
require a claimant to prove that the representations and
warranties breach was the cause of the loss, it could
significantly impact this estimated range of possible loss.
Additionally, if recent court rulings related to monoline
litigation, including one related to an affiliate of ours, that
have allowed sampling of loan files instead of a
loan-by-loan
review to determine if a representations and warranties breach
has occurred are followed generally by the courts, private-label
securitization investors may view litigation as a more
attractive alternative as compared to a
loan-by-loan
review. Finally, although Merrill Lynch believes that the
representations and warranties typically given in non-GSE
transactions are less rigorous and actionable than those given
in GSE transactions, Merrill Lynch does not have significant
loan-level experience to measure the impact of these differences
on the probability that a loan will be repurchased.
There can be no assurance that final court approval of the BNY
Mellon Settlement will be obtained, that all conditions to the
BNY Mellon Settlement will be satisfied or, if certain
conditions into the BNY Mellon Settlement permitting withdrawal
are met, that Bank of America and certain of its non-Merrill
Lynch subsidiaries will not determine to withdraw from the
settlement. If final court approval is not obtained or if Bank
of America and such subsidiaries determine to withdraw from the
BNY Mellon Settlement in accordance with its terms, Merrill
Lynchs future representations and warranties losses could
be substantially greater than existing accruals and the
estimated range of possible losses over existing accruals
described above. Under an order entered by the court in
connection with the BNY Mellon Settlement, potentially
interested persons had the opportunity to give notice of an
intent to object to the settlement (including on the basis that
more information was needed) until August 30, 2011.
Approximately 44 groups or entities appeared prior to the
deadline. Certain of these groups or entities filed notices of
intent to object, made motions to intervene or both filed
motions to intervene and notices to object. These motions have
not yet been ruled on by the court. A number of investors
opposed to the settlement removed the proceeding to federal
court. In addition, the federal court denied BNY Mellons
motion to remand the proceeding to state court and BNY Mellon,
as well as investors that have intervened in support of the BNY
Mellon Settlement, have petitioned to appeal the denial of this
motion. It is currently not possible to predict how many of the
parties who have appeared in the court proceeding will
ultimately object to the BNY Mellon Settlement, whether the
objections will prevent receipt of final court approval or the
ultimate outcome of the court approval process, which can
include appeals and could take a substantial period of time. In
particular, the conduct of discovery and the resolution of the
objections to the settlement and any appeals could take a
substantial period of time and these factors, along with the
recent removal of the proceeding to federal court, could
materially delay the timing of final court approval.
Accordingly, it is not possible to predict when the court
approval process will be completed.
The liability for obligations under representations and
warranties with respect to GSE and non-GSE exposures and the
corresponding estimate of the range of possible loss for non-GSE
representations
107
and warranties exposures do not include any losses related to
litigation matters disclosed in Note 14 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, nor do they include any
potential securities law or fraud claims or potential indemnity
or other claims against us. Merrill Lynch is not able to
reasonably estimate the amount of any possible loss with respect
to any such securities law (except to the extent reflected in
the aggregate range of possible loss for litigation and
regulatory matters disclosed in Note 14 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements), fraud or other claims
against us; however, such loss could be material.
Experience
with Non-GSE Investors
As presented in the table below, Merrill Lynch, including First
Franklin, sold loans originated from 2004 to 2008 (primarily
subprime and alt-A) with an original principal balance of
$132 billion through private-label securitizations or in
the form of whole loan sales that were subject to
representations and warranties liabilities, of which
approximately $62 billion in principal has been paid off,
$45 billion has defaulted or is severely delinquent (i.e.,
180 days or more past due) and $38 billion remains
outstanding as of September 30, 2011.
As it relates to private-label securitizations, a contractual
liability to repurchase mortgage loans generally arises only if
counterparties prove there is a breach of the representations
and warranties that materially and adversely affects the
interest of the investor or all investors in a securitization
trust or of the monoline insurer (as applicable). Merrill Lynch
believes that the longer a loan performs, the less likely it is
that an alleged representations and warranties breach had a
material impact on the loans performance or that a breach
even exists. Because the majority of the borrowers in this
population would have made a significant number of payments if
they are not yet 180 days or more past due, we believe that
the principal balance at the greatest risk for repurchase claims
in this population of private-label securitization investors is
a combination of loans that have already defaulted and those
that are currently severely delinquent. Additionally, the
obligation to repurchase loans also requires that counterparties
have the contractual right to demand repurchase of the loans
(presentation thresholds). While Merrill Lynch believes the
agreements for private-label securitizations generally contain
less rigorous representations and warranties and place higher
burdens on investors seeking repurchases than the explicit
provisions of the comparable agreements with the GSEs without
regard to any variations that may have arisen as a result of
dealings with the GSEs, the agreements generally include a
representation that underwriting practices were prudent and
customary.
The following table details the population of loans originated
between 2004 and 2008 and the population of loans sold as whole
loans or in non-GSE private-label securitizations by entity
together with the defaulted and severely delinquent loans
stratified by the number of payments the borrower made prior to
default or becoming severely delinquent at September 30,
2011. In connection with these transactions, we provided
representations and warranties, and the whole loan investors may
retain those rights even when the whole loans were aggregated
with other collateral into private-label securitizations
sponsored by the whole loan investors. As shown in the table, at
least 25 payments have been made on approximately 62% of the
defaulted and severely delinquent loans. Merrill Lynch believes
many of the defaults observed in these securitizations have
been, and continue to be, driven by external factors, such as
the substantial depreciation in home prices, persistently high
unemployment and other negative economic trends, diminishing the
likelihood that any loan defect (assuming one exists at all) was
the cause of a loans default. As of September 30,
2011, approximately 34% of the loans sold to non-GSEs that were
originated between 2004 and 2008 have defaulted or are severely
delinquent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal Balance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defaulted or Severely Delinquent
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrower
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrower
|
|
|
Original
|
|
Principal
|
|
Principal
|
|
Defaulted
|
|
Defaulted
|
|
Made Less
|
|
Borrower
|
|
Borrower
|
|
Made More
|
(dollars in billions)
|
|
Principal
|
|
Balance
|
|
Balance
|
|
Principal
|
|
or Severely
|
|
than 13
|
|
Made 13 to
|
|
Made 25 to
|
|
Than 36
|
Entity
|
|
Balance
|
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
Over 180 Days
|
|
Balance
|
|
Delinquent
|
|
Payments
|
|
24 Payments
|
|
36 Payments
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
Merrill Lynch (excluding First Franklin)
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
First Franklin
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total(1)
|
|
$
|
132
|
|
|
$
|
38
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
$
|
45
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes transactions sponsored
by Merrill Lynch where no representations or warranties were
made. |
Private-label securitization investors generally do not have the
contractual right to demand repurchase of loans directly or the
right to access loan files. The majority of the claims that we
have received are from third-party whole-loan investors.
Legal
Matters
Merrill Lynch has been named as a defendant in various legal
actions, including arbitrations, class actions, and other
litigation arising in connection with its activities as a global
diversified financial services institution. Refer to
Note 14 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for further information, including the estimated aggregate range
of possible loss.
Derivatives
We record all derivative transactions at fair value on our
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. We do not monitor our
exposure to derivatives based on the notional amount because
that amount is not a relevant indicator of our risk to these
contracts, as it is generally not indicative of the amount that
we would owe on the contract. Instead, a risk framework is used
to define risk tolerances and establish limits to help to ensure
that certain risk-related losses occur within acceptable,
predefined limits. Since derivatives are recorded on the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at fair value, the
disclosure of the notional amounts is not a relevant indicator
of risk. Derivatives that meet the accounting definition of a
guarantee and credit derivatives are included in Note 6 to
the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Involvement
with VIEs
We transact with VIEs in a variety of capacities, including
those that we help establish as well as those initially
established by third parties. We utilize VIEs in the ordinary
course of business to support our own and our customers
financing and investing needs. Merrill Lynch securitizes loans
and debt securities using VIEs as a source of funding and a
means of transferring the economic risk of the loans or debt
securities to third parties. We also administer, structure or
invest in or enter into derivatives with other VIEs, including
multi-seller conduits, municipal bond trusts, CDOs and other
entities, as described in more detail below. Our involvement
with VIEs can vary and we are required to continuously reassess
prior consolidation and disclosure conclusions. Refer to
Note 1 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for a discussion of our consolidation accounting policy and for
information regarding new VIE accounting rules that became
effective on January 1, 2010. Types of VIEs with which we
have historically transacted include:
|
|
|
|
|
Municipal bond securitization VIEs: VIEs that
issue medium-term paper, purchase municipal bonds as collateral
and purchase a guarantee to enhance the creditworthiness of the
collateral.
|
|
|
|
Asset-backed securities VIEs: VIEs that issue
different classes of debt, from super senior to subordinated,
and equity and purchase assets as collateral, including
residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, auto leases and
credit card receivables.
|
|
|
|
CDOs: VIEs that issue different classes of
debt, from super senior to subordinated, and equity and purchase
securities, including asset-backed securities collateralized by
residential mortgages, commercial mortgages, auto leases and
credit card receivables as well as corporate bonds.
|
|
|
|
Synthetic CDOs: VIEs that issue different
classes of debt, from super senior to subordinated, and equity,
purchase high-grade assets as collateral and enter into a
portfolio of credit default swaps to synthetically create the
credit risk of the issued debt.
|
109
|
|
|
|
|
Credit-linked note VIEs: VIEs that issue
notes linked to the credit risk of a company, purchase
high-grade assets as collateral and enter into credit default
swaps to synthetically create the credit risk to pay the return
on the notes.
|
|
|
|
Trust preferred security VIEs: These VIEs hold
junior subordinated debt issued by ML & Co. or our
subsidiaries, and issue preferred stock on substantially the
same terms as the junior subordinated debt to third party
investors. We also provide a parent guarantee, on a junior
subordinated basis, of the distributions and other payments on
the preferred stock to the extent that the VIEs have funds
legally available. The debt we issue into the VIE is classified
as long-term borrowings on our Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets. The ML & Co. parent guarantees of its own
subsidiaries are not required to be recorded in the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
Funding
We fund our assets primarily with a mix of secured and unsecured
liabilities through a globally coordinated funding strategy with
Bank of America. We fund a portion of our trading assets with
secured liabilities, including repurchase agreements, securities
loaned and other short-term secured borrowings, which are less
sensitive to our credit ratings due to the underlying
collateral. Refer to Note 12 to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional information regarding our
borrowings.
Beginning late in the third quarter of 2009, in connection with
the update or renewal of certain Merrill Lynch international
securities offering programs, Bank of America agreed to
guarantee debt securities, warrants
and/or
certificates issued by certain subsidiaries of ML &
Co. on a going forward basis. All existing ML & Co.
guarantees of securities issued by those same Merrill Lynch
subsidiaries under various international securities offering
programs will remain in full force and effect as long as those
securities are outstanding, and Bank of America has not assumed
any of those prior ML & Co. guarantees or otherwise
guaranteed such securities. There were approximately
$5.2 billion of securities guaranteed by Bank of America at
September 30, 2011. In addition, Bank of America has
guaranteed the performance of Merrill Lynch on certain
derivative transactions. The aggregate amount of such derivative
liabilities was approximately $3.0 billion at
September 30, 2011.
Following the completion of Bank of Americas acquisition
of Merrill Lynch, ML & Co. became a subsidiary of Bank
of America and established intercompany lending and borrowing
arrangements to facilitate centralized liquidity management.
Included in these intercompany agreements is a $75 billion
one-year revolving unsecured line of credit that allows
ML & Co. to borrow funds from Bank of America at a
spread to LIBOR that is reset periodically and is consistent
with other intercompany agreements. This credit line was renewed
effective January 1, 2011 with a maturity date of
January 1, 2012. The credit line will automatically be
extended by one year to the succeeding
January 1st unless Bank of America provides written
notice not to extend at least 45 days prior to the maturity
date. The agreement does not contain any financial or other
covenants. There were no outstanding borrowings against the line
of credit at September 30, 2011.
In addition to the $75 billion unsecured line of credit, a
$25 billion
364-day
revolving unsecured line of credit that allows ML &
Co. to borrow funds from Bank of America was established on
February 15, 2011. Interest on the line of credit is based
on prevailing short-term market rates. The agreement does not
contain any financial or other covenants. The line of credit
matures on
110
February 14, 2012. There were no outstanding borrowings
against the line of credit at September 30, 2011.
Following the merger of BAS into MLPF&S, Bank of America
agreed to guarantee the short-term, senior unsecured obligations
issued by MLPF&S under its short-term master note program
on a going forward basis. In July 2011, Merrill Lynch decided to
reduce short-term unsecured obligations. At September 30,
2011, there were no longer any borrowings outstanding under this
program.
Also in connection with the merger of BAS into MLPF&S,
MLPF&S either assumed or established the following
agreements:
|
|
|
|
|
MLPF&S assumed an approximately $1.5 billion
subordinated loan agreement with Bank of America, which bears
interest based on a spread to LIBOR, and has a scheduled
maturity date of December 31, 2012. The loan agreement
contains a provision that automatically extends the loans
maturity by one year unless Bank of America provides
13 months written notice not to extend prior to the
scheduled maturity date.
|
|
|
|
MLPF&S assumed a $7 billion revolving subordinated
line of credit with Bank of America. The subordinated line of
credit bears interest based on a spread to LIBOR, and has a
scheduled maturity date of October 1, 2013. The revolving
subordinated line of credit contains a provision that
automatically extends the maturity by one year unless Bank of
America provides 13 months written notice not to extend
prior to the scheduled maturity date. At September 30,
2011, $1.1 billion was outstanding on the subordinated line
of credit.
|
|
|
|
On November 1, 2010, a $4 billion one-year revolving
unsecured line of credit that allows MLPF&S to borrow funds
from Bank of America was established. Interest on the line of
credit is based on prevailing short-term market rates. The
credit line will mature on November 1, 2012 and may
automatically be extended by one year to the succeeding
November 1st unless Bank of America provides written
notice not to extend at least 45 days prior to the maturity
date. At September 30, 2011, there were no borrowings
outstanding on the line of credit.
|
|
|
|
On February 22, 2011, a $15 billion
364-day
revolving unsecured line of credit that allows MLPF&S to
borrow funds from Bank of America was established. Interest on
the line of credit is based on prevailing short-term market
rates. The line of credit matures on February 21, 2012. At
September 30, 2011, approximately $2.4 billion was
outstanding on the line of credit.
|
In addition to the funding agreements described above, Merrill
Lynch has entered into certain lending arrangements with Bank of
America. Included in these arrangements is a $50 billion
one-year revolving line of credit that allows Bank of America to
borrow funds from Merrill Lynch at a spread to LIBOR that is
reset periodically and is consistent with other intercompany
agreements. The line of credit matures on January 1, 2012
and will automatically be extended by one year to the succeeding
January 1st unless Merrill Lynch provides written
notice not to extend at least 45 days prior to the maturity
date. Approximately $7.1 billion and $6.1 billion were
outstanding under this line of credit as of September 30,
2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively. In addition, in
October, 2011, Merrill Lynch entered into a short-term revolving
credit facility that will allow Bank of America to borrow up to
an additional $25 billion.
Credit
Ratings
Our borrowing costs and ability to raise funds are directly
impacted by our credit ratings. In addition, credit ratings may
be important to customers or counterparties when we compete in
certain markets and when we seek to engage in certain
transactions, including OTC derivatives. Thus, it is our
objective to maintain high-quality credit ratings. Credit
ratings and outlooks are opinions on our
111
creditworthiness and that of our obligations or securities,
including long-term debt, short-term borrowings and other
securities.
Following the acquisition of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America,
the major credit ratings agencies have indicated that the
primary drivers of Merrill Lynchs credit ratings are Bank
of Americas credit ratings. Bank of Americas credit
ratings are subject to ongoing review by the ratings agencies
and thus may change from time to time based on a number of
factors, including Bank of Americas financial strength,
performance, prospects and operations as well as factors not
under Bank of Americas control. There can be no assurance
that Bank of America will maintain its current credit ratings,
or that additional downgrades will not occur.
The three primary ratings agencies, Moodys, S&P and
Fitch, have indicated that, as a systemically important
financial institution, Bank of Americas (and consequently
ML & Co.s) credit ratings currently reflect
their expectation that, if necessary, Bank of America would
receive significant support from the U.S. government. All
three ratings agencies have been reevaluating Bank of
Americas ratings and have indicated that they could reduce
the uplift they include in those ratings for government support,
for reasons arising from financial services regulatory reform
proposals or legislation. Moodys initiated a rating review
of Bank of America and ML & Co., placing our ratings
on review for possible downgrade due to its view that the
current level of U.S. government support incorporated into
those ratings may no longer be appropriate. Moodys
concluded its review on September 21, 2011, and downgraded
the long term ratings of Bank of America and ML & Co.
by two notches due to its decision to lower the amount of uplift
for potential support it incorporates into those ratings.
Moodys also downgraded Bank of Americas and
ML & Co.s short-term rating by one notch. In
addition, S&P and Fitch have indicated they would
reevaluate, and could reduce the uplift they include in Bank of
Americas (and consequently, our) ratings for government
support, for reasons arising from financial services regulatory
reform proposals or legislation. There can be no assurance that
S&P and Fitch will refrain from downgrading Bank of
Americas (and consequently, our) credit ratings as well.
Currently, the long-term / short-term senior debt
ratings and ratings outlooks expressed by the ratings agencies
for both Bank of America and ML & Co. are as follows:
Baa1/P-2
(negative) by Moodys;
A/A-1
(negative) by S&P; and A+/F1+ (Rating Watch Negative) by
Fitch. MLPF&Ss long-term / short-term
senior debt ratings and outlooks are
A+/A-1
(negative) by S&P and A+/F1+ (Rating Watch Negative) by
Fitch. Merrill Lynch International (MLI), a
U.K.-based broker-dealer subsidiary of ML & Co., has a
long-term / short-term senior debt rating and outlook
of A+/A-1
(negative) by S&P. Merrill Lynch International Bank Limited
an Ireland-based broker-dealer subsidiary of ML & Co.,
has long-term / short-term senior debt ratings and
outlook of A+/F1+ (Rating Watch Negative) by Fitch.
A further reduction in certain of our credit ratings could
likely have a material adverse effect on our liquidity,
potential loss of access to credit markets, the related cost of
funds, our businesses and on certain trading revenues,
particularly in those businesses where counterparty
creditworthiness is critical. In addition, under the terms of
certain OTC derivative contracts and other trading agreements,
the counterparties to those agreements may require us to provide
additional collateral or to terminate these contracts or
agreements which could cause us to sustain losses and/or
adversely impact our liquidity. If Bank of Americas or
ML & Cos short-term credit ratings, or those of
our bank or broker-dealer subsidiaries, were downgraded by one
or more levels, the potential loss of access to short-term
funding sources such as repo financing, and the effect on our
incremental cost of funds could be material. For information
regarding the additional collateral and termination payments
that would be required in connection with certain OTC derivative
contracts and other trading agreements as a result of such a
credit ratings downgrade, see Note 6 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, Item 1A. Risk Factors of
Merrill Lynchs Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011 and
Item 1A. Risk Factors of Merrill Lynchs 2010 Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
112
In addition to Bank of Americas credit ratings, other
factors that influence our credit ratings (as well as those for
Bank of America) include changes to the ratings agencies
methodologies for our industry or certain security types, the
ratings agencies assessment of the general operating
environment for financial services companies, our mortgage
exposures, our relative positions in the markets in which we
compete, reputation, liquidity position, diversity of funding
sources, funding costs, the level and volatility of earnings,
corporate governance and risk management policies, capital
position, capital management practices and current or future
regulatory and legislative initiatives.
During the quarter, Moodys and S&P placed the
sovereign rating of the United States on review for possible
downgrade due to the probability of a default on the
governments debt obligations because of a failure to
increase the debt limit. On August 2, 2011, Moodys
affirmed its Aaa rating and assigned a negative outlook. On
August 5, 2011, S&P downgraded the long-term sovereign
credit rating on the United States to AA+ and affirmed the
short-term rating; the outlook is negative. On August 16,
2011, Fitch affirmed its long-term ratings on the United States
at AAA with a stable outlook. All three ratings agencies have
indicated that they will continue to assess fiscal projections
and consolidation measures, as well as the medium-term economic
outlook for the United States.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
Not required pursuant to General Instruction H(2).
|
|
Item 4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
As of the end of the period covered by this report and pursuant
to
Rule 13a-15(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange
Act), Merrill Lynchs management, including the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an
evaluation of the effectiveness and design of Merrill
Lynchs disclosure controls and procedures (as that term is
defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
of the Exchange Act). Based upon that evaluation, the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that
Merrill Lynchs disclosure controls and procedures were
effective, as of the end of the period covered by this report,
in recording, processing, summarizing and reporting information
required to be disclosed by Merrill Lynch in reports that it
files or submits under the Exchange Act, within the time periods
specified in the SECs rules and forms.
In addition, no change in Merrill Lynchs internal control
over financial reporting (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
of the Exchange Act) occurred during the quarter ended
September 30, 2011 that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, Merrill Lynchs
internal control over financial reporting.
113
PART II
Other Information
|
|
Item 1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
Legal and
Regulatory Matters
See Note 14 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements, which is incorporated by reference in this
Item 1, for litigation and regulatory matters that
supplement the disclosure in Note 14 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements included in Merrill Lynchs 2010
Annual Report and in Note 14 to the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements included in Merrill Lynchs Quarterly
Reports on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly periods ended March 31, 2011 and
June 30, 2011.
There are no material changes from the risk factors set forth
under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors in
Merrill Lynchs 2010 Annual Report on
Form 10-K
and Part II, Item 1A. Risk Factors in the
Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2011.
An exhibit index has been filed as part of this report and is
incorporated herein by reference.
114
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
Merrill Lynch &
Co., Inc.
(Registrant)
Jennifer M. Hill
Chief Financial Officer
Peter D. Taube
Chief Accounting Officer
and Controller
Date: November 3, 2011
115
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
Description
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
Statement re: computation of
ratios.(1)
|
|
31.1
|
|
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a)
Certification of the Chief Executive
Officer.(1)
|
|
31.2
|
|
|
|
Rule 13a-14(a)
Certification of the Chief Financial
Officer.(1)
|
|
32.1
|
|
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.(1)
|
|
32.2
|
|
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.(1)
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
The following materials from Merrill Lynch & Co.,
Inc.s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the three and nine month periods ended September 30,
2011, formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting
Language): (i) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Earnings (Loss), (ii) the Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets, (iii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash
Flows, (iv) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Comprehensive Income (Loss), and (v) the Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, tagged as blocks of
text.(1)
|
116