Exhibit 99.1
Item 7. Bank of America Corporation and Subsidiaries
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Table of Contents
Throughout the MD&A, we use certain acronyms and
abbreviations which are defined in the Glossary beginning on page 95.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This report may contain, and from time to time
our management may make, certain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as expects, anticipates,
believes, estimates and other similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as will, should, would and could are intended to identify such forward-looking statements.
These statements are not historical facts, but instead represent Bank of America Corporation and its subsidiaries (the Corporation) current expectations, plans or forecasts of the Corporations future results, integration plans and cost
savings, future loan modifications, effect of various legal proceedings discussed in Litigation and Regulatory Matters in Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements, growth opportunities,
business outlook, loan and deposit growth, mortgage production, credit losses, liquidity position and other similar matters. 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 the Corporations control. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, the Corporations forward-looking statements. You should
not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement and should consider all uncertainties and risks discussed in this report, including under Item 1A. Risk Factors, as well as those discussed in any of the Corporations
other subsequent SEC filings. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and the Corporation 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.
In addition to the other risk factors discussed under
Item 1A. Risk Factors in this report, possible events or factors that could cause results or performance to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include the following: negative economic conditions
that adversely affect the general economy, housing prices, the job market, consumer confidence and spending habits which may affect, among other things, the credit quality of our loan portfolios (the degree of the impact of which is dependent upon
the duration and severity of these conditions); the level and volatility of the capital markets, interest rates, currency values and other market indices which affect among other things the value of our assets and liabilities and, in turn, our
trading and investment portfolios; changes in consumer, investor and counterparty confidence in, and the related impact on, financial markets and institutions; the Corporations credit ratings and the credit ratings of our securitizations,
which are important to the Corporations liquidity, borrowing costs and trading revenues; estimates of fair value of certain of the Corporations assets and liabilities, which could change in value significantly from period to period;
legislative and regulatory actions in the United States and internationally which may increase the Corporations costs and adversely affect the Corporations businesses and economic conditions as a whole; the impact of litigation and
regulatory investigations, including costs, expenses, settlements and judgments; various monetary and fiscal policies and regulations of the U.S. and non-U.S. governments; changes in accounting standards, rules and interpretations and the impact on
the Corporations financial statements; increased globalization of the financial services industry and competition with other U.S. and international financial institutions; the Corporations ability to attract new employees and retain and
motivate existing employees; mergers and
acquisitions and their integration into the Corporation, including our ability to realize the benefits and costs savings from and limit any
unexpected liabilities acquired as a result of the Merrill Lynch acquisition; the Corporations reputation; and decisions to downsize, sell or close units or otherwise change the business mix of the Corporation.
The Corporation, headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina operates in 32 states, the District of Columbia and more than 30 foreign countries as of
December 31, 2008. The Corporation provides a diversified range of banking and nonbanking financial services and products domestically and internationally through six business segments: Deposits, Global Card Services, Home Loans & Insurance,
Global Banking, Global Markets and Global Wealth & Investment Management (GWIM).
At December 31, 2008, the
Corporation had $1.8 trillion in assets and approximately 243,000 full-time equivalent employees. Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements referred to in the MD&A are incorporated by reference into the MD&A. Certain prior period
amounts have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation.
2008 Economic Environment
2008 was a year in which the U.S. economy moved into an economic recession that deepened late in the fourth quarter, triggered in part by the
intensifying financial crisis. Housing activity and prices declined throughout the year. Consumer spending softened in the first half of 2008, and then declined in the second half, weighed down by the spike in energy prices that reduced real
purchasing power, weaker trends in employment, including underemployment, and personal income and the loss of household wealth resulting from declines in home prices and stock market valuations. Sales of automobiles, household durables and consumer
discretionary items were hit the hardest.
In response to the weaker demand, businesses cut production and employment, and postponed
capital spending plans. As a result of the financial crisis and the economic slowdown, federal government agencies including the U.S. Treasury Department (U.S. Treasury) and the Federal Reserve initiated several actions which changed the landscape
of the U.S. financial services industry. For more information related to these actions, see the Regulatory Initiatives discussion to follow.
The alternative lending facilities provided by the U.S. Treasury, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve along with aggressive interest rate cuts, failed to stem the increasing disruptions in the financial markets. In particular, the tax rebates
provided by the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 gave only a temporary boost to consumer spending. U.S. export growth, which had been the strongest sector of the economy in recent years, weakened with softer global economic conditions. The financial
crisis intensified in September 2008 following the collapse of several leading investment banks. Declines in employment intensified significantly in every month in 2008 and real GDP contracted sharply in the fourth quarter. In addition, mortgage,
corporate and the related counterparty credit spreads widened and heightened concerns about the impact of monoline insurers (monolines), auction rate securities (ARS), structured investment vehicles (SIVs) and other financial instruments adversely
impacted the financial markets.
The deteriorating economy continued to negatively impact the credit quality of our loan portfolios
with more rapid deterioration occurring in the latter part of 2008. The stress consumers experienced from depreciating home prices, rising unemployment, underemployment and tighter credit conditions resulted in a higher level of bankruptcy filings
during the year
as well as higher levels of delinquencies and losses in our consumer and small business portfolios. Housing value declines, a slowdown in consumer spending and the
turmoil in the global financial markets also impacted our commercial portfolios where we experienced higher levels of losses, particularly in the homebuilder sector of our commercial real estate portfolio. Commercial criticized utilized exposures
have also increased due to broader-based economic pressures. For more information on credit quality, see the Credit Risk Management discussion beginning on page 44.
Market dislocations throughout 2008, including the severe volatility, illiquidity and credit dislocations that were experienced in the debt and equity markets in the fourth quarter of 2008, adversely
impacted our CDOs and related subprime exposure as well as our other Global Markets exposures. Further, we have also incurred losses associated with investments in certain equity securities (e.g., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) and have
incurred losses on the buyback of ARS from our clients as discussed in the Recent Events discussion beginning on page 5. For more information on CDOs, the related ongoing exposure and the impacts of the continuing market dislocations (e.g.,
leveraged finance and CMBS writedowns), see the Global Markets discussion beginning on page 23.
The market dislocations have
continued to impact certain SIVs and have recently begun to impact senior debt issued by financial services companies. During 2008, we provided additional support to certain cash funds managed within GWIM by utilizing existing capital
commitments and purchasing certain investments from these funds. For more information on our cash funds support, see the GWIM discussion beginning on page 27.
Market conditions also impacted the ratings of certain monolines, which has adversely affected the pricing of certain municipal securities and the liquidity of the short-term public finance markets. We
have direct and indirect exposure to monolines and, in certain situations, recognized losses related to some of these exposures during 2008. For more information related to our monoline exposure, see the Industry Concentrations discussion on page
59.
The above conditions, together with deterioration in the overall economy, will continue to affect these and other global markets
in which we do business and will adversely impact our results in 2009. The degree of the impact is dependent upon the duration and severity of such conditions.
Regulatory Initiatives
On February 27, 2009, the FDIC passed an interim rule that allows it
to charge banks a special assessment of 20 basis points (bps) on insured deposits to replenish the deposit insurance fund. This special assessment will be collected in the third quarter of 2009. Additionally, beginning April 1, 2009, the FDIC will
increase fees by approximately two bps on insured deposits.
On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
(EESA) was signed into law. Pursuant to the EESA, the U.S. Treasury created the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to, among other things, invest in financial institutions through capital infusions and purchase mortgages, mortgage-backed
securities and certain other financial instruments from financial institutions, in an aggregate amount up to $700 billion, for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets.
Also pursuant to the EESA, on February 10, 2009 the U.S. Treasury announced the creation of the Financial Stability Plan. This plan outlined
five key initiatives; a new Capital Assistance Program (CAP) to help ensure that banking institutions have sufficient capital; the creation of a new Public-Private Investment Fund on an initial scale of up to $500 billion to accelerate the removal
of certain legacy assets from the balance
sheets of financial institutions; the expansion of the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) as discussed below; the extension of the FDICs Temporary
Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) to October 31, 2009; and a new framework of governance and oversight related to the use of funds of the Financial Stability Plan. As part of the CAP we will be subject to stress testing. The objective of
stress testing is an assessment of losses that could occur under certain economic scenarios, including economic conditions more severe than we currently anticipate. We received the terms of the stress test on February 25, 2009 and are currently in
the process of compiling the applicable information. The Federal supervising agencies will conclude their stress testing as soon as possible but no later than April 30, 2009.
On October 14, 2008, in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, established as part of the EESA, the U.S. Treasury announced a plan to invest up to $250 billion in certain eligible
financial institutions in the form of non-voting, senior preferred stock initially paying quarterly dividends at a five percent annual rate. This amount was subsequently increased to $350 billion. When the U.S. Treasury makes such preferred
investments in any company, it also receives 10-year warrants to acquire common shares. In connection with the U.S. Treasurys announcement, we were identified as one of the nine financial institutions to participate in the first $125 billion
of U.S. Treasury investments.
As a result in October 2008, we issued to the U.S. Treasury 600 thousand shares of Bank of America
Corporation Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series N (Series N Preferred Stock) with a par value of $0.01 per share for $15.0 billion. Also, as part of the initial $125 billion investment and in connection with the Merrill
Lynch & Co., Inc. (Merrill Lynch) acquisition, in January 2009 we issued to the U.S. Treasury 400 thousand shares of Bank of America Corporation Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series Q (Series Q Preferred Stock) with
a par value of $0.01 per share for $10.0 billion. The Series N and Series Q Preferred Stock initially pay quarterly dividends at a five percent annual rate that increases to nine percent after five years and have a call feature after three years. In
connection with these investments, we also issued to the U.S. Treasury 10-year warrants to purchase approximately 121.8 million shares of Bank of America Corporation common stock at an exercise price of $30.79 per share. In addition, as
discussed in Recent Events, in January 2009 as part of the Merrill Lynch acquisition we issued to the U.S. Treasury an additional 800 thousand shares of Bank of America Corporation Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series R
(Series R Preferred Stock) with a par value of $0.01 per share for $20.0 billion. The Series R Preferred Stock pays dividends at an eight percent annual rate and may only be redeemed after the Series N and Series Q Preferred Stock have been
redeemed. In connection with this investment, the Corporation also issued to the U.S. Treasury 10-year warrants to purchase approximately 150.4 million shares of Bank of America Corporation common stock at an exercise price of $13.30 per share.
Under the TARP Capital Purchase Program, dividend payments on, and repurchases of our outstanding preferred and common stock are
subject to certain restrictions. For more information on these restrictions, see Note 14 Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
On November 25, 2008 the U.S. Treasury, using its authority under the EESA, announced a plan to allocate $20 billion of TARP funds to the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York as credit protection for the newly established TALF. The TALF is intended to assist the credit markets in accommodating the credit needs of consumers and small businesses by facilitating the issuance of asset-backed
securities and improving the asset-backed securities markets. Under the TALF, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York will lend up to $200 billion on a nonrecourse basis to holders of newly issued AAA-rated asset-backed securities for a term of one
year. The underlying credit exposures of eligible securities used for collateral must be newly or recently originated auto loans, student loans, credit card loans,
small business loans guaranteed by the U.S. Small Business Administration, or commercial mortgage-backed securities. Originators of the credit exposures underlying the eligible asset-backed securities must have agreed to comply with, or already be
subject to, the executive compensation requirements of the EESA. As announced in connection with the Financial Stability Plan, the TALF may be expanded to as much as $1.0 trillion and eligible asset classes may be expanded later to include other
assets such as non-agency residential mortgage- backed securities and assets collateralized by corporate debt. The Corporation is currently evaluating the terms of this program.
The U.S. Department of Education implemented initiatives to ensure uninterrupted and timely access to federal student loans by taking steps to maintain stability in student lending through both the Federal
Family Education Loan (FFEL) Program and the Direct Loan Program. As part of these efforts, the U.S. Department of Education announced in November 2008 that it would provide liquidity support to one or more conforming Asset-Backed Commercial Paper
(ABCP) conduits. The conduits will purchase FFEL Program loans, providing longer-term stability to the marketplace. The U.S. Department of Education in turn will serve as a potential buyer of last resort or backstop to the conduits. As an additional
measure, the U.S. Department of Education will purchase certain 2007-2008 academic year FFEL Program loans. This will be a short-term program designed to act as a mechanism to minimize disruptions in the interim until the conduits are operational,
or until February 28, 2009, whichever occurs first. The Corporation is evaluating the terms of this initiative and participation in this program.
Due to liquidity issues in the short-term funding markets, the Federal Reserve implemented a temporary Term Auction Facility (TAF) program in which the Federal Reserve auctions term funds to depository institutions. The TAF is
a credit facility that allows a depository institution to place a bid for an advance from its local Federal Reserve Bank at an interest rate that is determined as the result of an auction. By allowing the Federal Reserve to inject term funds through
a broader range of counterparties and against a broader range of collateral than open market operations, this facility is aimed to help ensure that liquidity provisions can be disseminated efficiently even when the unsecured interbank markets are
under stress. The TAF will typically auction term funds with 28-day or 84-day maturities and is available to all depository institutions that are judged to be in generally sound financial condition by their local Federal Reserve Bank. Additionally,
all TAF credit must be fully collateralized. We are currently utilizing the TAF and have pledged residential, commercial mortgage and credit card loans as collateral.
In order to improve the ability of primary dealers to provide financing to participants in the securitization markets in exchange for any tri-party-eligible collateral the Federal Reserve created the
Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF). The PDCF provides discount window loans to primary dealers that will settle on the same business day and will mature on the following business day. The rate paid on the loan will be the same as the primary
credit rate at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In addition, primary dealers will be subject to a frequency-based fee after they exceed 45 days of use. The frequency-based fee will be based on an escalating scale and communicated to the primary
dealers in advance. The PDCF will remain available to primary dealers until October 30, 2009 or longer if conditions warrant. During 2008 we utilized this facility.
The Federal Reserve has also established the Term Securities Lending Facility (TSLF), a weekly loan facility, to promote liquidity in U.S. Treasury and other collateral markets and foster the functioning
of financial markets. The program offers U.S. Treasury securities held by the System Open Market Account (SOMA) for loan over a one-month term against
other program-eligible general collateral. Loans will be awarded to primary dealers based on competitive bidding, subject to a minimum fee requirement. The Open Market
Trading Desk of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York will auction general U.S. Treasury collateral (treasury bills, notes, bonds and inflation-indexed securities) held by SOMA for loan against all collateral currently eligible for tri-party
repurchase agreements arranged by the Open Market Trading Desk and separately against collateral and investment grade corporate securities, municipal securities, mortgage-backed securities, and asset-backed securities. The Corporation has utilized
this facility and has pledged agency mortgage-backed securities and private label mortgage-backed securities as collateral.
The FDIC
has implemented the TLGP to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the banking system. The TLGP is comprised of the Debt Guarantee Program (DGP) and the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAGP). Under the DGP, the FDIC will guarantee
all newly issued senior unsecured debt (e.g., promissory notes, unsubordinated unsecured notes and commercial paper) up to prescribed limits issued by participating entities beginning on October 14, 2008 and continuing through October 31,
2009. For eligible debt issued by that date, the FDIC will provide the guarantee coverage until the earlier of the maturity date of the debt or June 30, 2012. Under the TAGP, the FDIC will guarantee noninterest-bearing deposit accounts held at
FDIC-insured depository institutions. The unlimited deposit coverage will be voluntary for eligible institutions and would be in addition to the $250,000 FDIC deposit insurance per account that was included as part of the EESA. The TAGP coverage
became effective on October 14, 2008 and will continue for participating institutions until December 31, 2009.
Initially,
the DGP and TAGP were provided at no cost for the first 30 days and allowed for eligible institutions to opt out of such programs. An entity that chose not to opt out of either or both programs became a participating entity and will be assessed fees
for participation. Participants in the DGP will be charged an annualized fee between 50 and 100 bps, multiplied by the debt issued, and calculated for the maturity period of that debt, or through the term of the guarantee, whichever is earlier. Any
eligible entity that has not chosen to opt out of the TAGP will be assessed, on a quarterly basis, an annualized 10 bps fee on balances in noninterest-bearing transaction accounts that exceed the existing deposit insurance limit of $250,000. In
December 2008, Bank of America, N.A. issued $4.3 billion in long-term senior unsecured bank notes while the parent company issued $15.6 billion in long-term senior notes under the TLGP program. We have also issued short-term notes under this
program. In addition, we have participated in the TAGP program. For further discussion on our liquidity and capital, see Liquidity Risk and Capital Management beginning on page 38.
In addition to the TLGP, in September 2008, the U.S. Treasury implemented the Temporary Guarantee Program for Money Market Funds. This is a
voluntary and temporary program that is in effect through at least April 30, 2009. The program provides for a guarantee with respect to a fixed number of shares held by certain shareholders as of September 19, 2008, to receive $1.00
per share in the event that a participating fund no longer has a $1.00 per share net asset value and liquidates. With respect to such shares covered by the program, the guarantee payment would be equal to any shortfall between the amount received by
a shareholder in a liquidation and $1.00 per share. The eligible money market mutual funds pay a fee to the U.S. Treasury to participate in the program. Several money market funds managed within GWIM currently participate in the program.
In September and October 2008, the Federal Reserve announced the creation of the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual
Fund Liquidity Facility (AMLF), the Commercial Paper Funding Facility (CPFF) as well as the Money Market Investor Funding Facility (MMIFF). These facilities were created to provide liquidity to the U.S. short-term
debt markets in an effort to increase the availability of credit. Under the AMLF, nonrecourse loans are provided to U.S. financial institutions for the purchase of
U.S. dollar-denominated high-quality asset-backed commercial paper from money market mutual funds under certain conditions. The program is intended to assist money market funds that hold such paper in meeting demands for redemptions by investors and
to foster liquidity in the asset-backed commercial paper market and money markets more generally. Financial institutions will bear no credit risk associated with commercial paper purchased under the AMLF. Under the CPFF, registered issuers will be
allowed to sell commercial paper through a primary dealer to the CPFF subject to certain fees. Pricing will be based on whether the commercial paper is secured or unsecured. In addition, there are issuer-based limits on the amount of commercial
paper the facility will hold. Upon implementation of the MMIFF, senior secured funding will be provided to a series of special purpose vehicles to finance the purchase of U.S. dollar-denominated certificates of deposit and commercial paper with a
remaining maturity of 90 days or less issued by highly-rated financial institutions and from qualifying investors including U.S. money market mutual funds. We have participated in the AMLF and CPFF programs, and continue to evaluate participation in
the MMIFF program.
In July 2008 the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 was signed into law. This Act has several provisions
including the establishment of a voluntary program that permits the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to refinance eligible mortgages for certain qualified borrowers. Some of this Acts other provisions include changes to the FHA program,
increases in the limits on the principal balances of mortgage loans that the FHA and government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) can purchase, creating a new regulator for the GSEs, and establishing a registration system for loan originators.
In December 2008, federal bank regulators in the U.S. adopted final rules under the Federal Trade Commission Act changing existing
rules regarding Unfair and Deceptive Acts or Practices (UDAP). The final rules will change the way interest charges are handled in certain situations including increases in the rate during the first year after opening and increases in the rate
charged on pre-existing credit card balances. In addition, the final rules will increase the amount of time customers have to make their credit card payments, change the use of payment allocations related to interest charges and limit certain fees.
Further, federal bank regulators plan to adopt final rules to amend the Truth in Lending Act, requiring changes to the disclosures consumers receive in connection with credit card accounts and other revolving credit plans. Both of the above
final rules addressing credit card accounts take effect on July 1, 2010. As a result of the new regulations, we will likely make significant changes to our credit card practices. Also in December 2008, the federal bank regulators withdrew the
UDAP proposal related to overdraft services and fees on consumer deposit accounts. As an alternative, the Federal Reserve, under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, proposed amendments that would require banks to offer consumer deposit customers the
opportunity to opt out of overdraft services and fees. If the amendments are adopted as proposed, we would need to make significant changes in the manner in which we process transactions that affect consumer deposit accounts.
Recent Events
On
January 16, 2009, due to larger than expected 2008 fourth quarter losses of Merrill Lynch and as part of its commitment to support the financial markets stability, the U.S. government agreed to assist the Corporation in the Merrill Lynch
acquisition by agreeing to provide certain guarantees and capital.
The U.S. Treasury, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve have agreed in
principle to provide protection against the possibility of unusually large
losses on an asset pool of approximately $118.0 billion of financial instruments comprised of $81.0 billion of derivative assets and $37.0 billion of other financial
assets. The assets that would be protected under this agreement are expected generally to be domestic, pre-market disruption (i.e., originated prior to September 30, 2007) leveraged and commercial real estate loans, CDOs, financial guarantor
counterparty exposure, certain trading counterparty exposure and certain investment securities. These protected assets would be expected to exclude certain foreign assets and assets originated or issued on or after March 14, 2008. The majority
of the protected assets were added by the Corporation as a result of its acquisition of Merrill Lynch. This guarantee is expected to be in place for 10 years for residential assets and five years for non-residential assets unless the guarantee is
terminated by the Corporation at an earlier date. It is expected that the Corporation will absorb the first $10.0 billion of losses related to the assets while any additional losses will be shared between the Corporation (10 percent) and U.S.
government (90 percent). These assets would remain on our balance sheet and we would continue to manage these assets in the ordinary course of business as well as retain the associated income. The assets that would be covered by this guarantee are
expected to carry a 20 percent risk weighting for regulatory capital purposes. As a fee for this arrangement, we expect to issue to the U.S. Treasury and FDIC a total of $4.0 billion of a new class of preferred stock and to issue warrants to acquire
30.1 million shares of Bank of America common stock.
In connection with this arrangement we would continue with our current mortgage
loan modification programs discussed below. Any increase in the quarterly common stock dividend for the next three years would require the consent of the U.S. government.
If necessary, under this proposed agreement, the Federal Reserve will provide liquidity for the residual risk in the asset pool through a nonrecourse loan facility. As previously discussed, the Corporation
would be responsible for the first $10.0 billion in losses on the asset pool. Once additional losses exceed this amount by $8.0 billion we would be able to draw on this facility. This loan facility would terminate and any related funded loans would
mature on the termination dates of the U.S. governments guarantee. The Federal Reserve is expected to charge a fee of 20 bps per annum on undrawn amounts and a floating interest rate of the overnight index swap (OIS) rate plus 300 bps per
annum on funded amounts. Interest and fee payments would be with recourse to the Corporation.
Further, the U.S. Treasury invested an
additional $20.0 billion in the Corporation from the TARP. As a result, in January 2009, we issued to the U.S. Treasury 800 thousand shares of Series R Preferred Stock with a par value of $0.01 per share for $20.0 billion. The Series R
Preferred Stock pays dividends at an eight percent annual rate. In connection with this investment, the Corporation also issued to the U.S. Treasury 10-year warrants to purchase approximately 150.4 million shares of Bank of America Corporation
common stock at an exercise price of $13.30 per share.
Combined, these actions strengthen the Corporation and allow us to continue
business levels that both support the U.S. economy and create future value for shareholders. We would have the right to terminate the guarantee at any time with the consent of the U.S. government, and we would negotiate in good faith to an
appropriate fee or rebate in connection with any agreed upon termination. Additionally, under early termination we would prepay in full any related outstanding Federal Reserve loan.
In January 2009, the Board of Directors (the Board) declared a regular quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.01 per share, payable on
March 27, 2009 to common shareholders of record on March 6, 2009, as compared to the quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.32 per share paid on December 26, 2008 to common shareholders of record
on December 5, 2008. In October 2008, we reduced our regular quarterly cash dividend on common stock by 50 percent. In January 2009, we further reduced our
regular quarterly dividend to $0.01 per share. In addition in January 2009, we declared aggregate dividends on preferred stock of $909 million, including $145 million related to preferred stock exchanged in connection with the Merrill Lynch
acquisition, and in the fourth quarter of 2008 recorded aggregate dividends on preferred stock of $423 million. For further discussion on our liquidity and capital, see Liquidity Risk and Capital Management beginning on page 38.
In October 2008, prior to the U.S. Treasurys announcement of the TARP Capital Purchase Program previously discussed in Regulatory Initiatives,
we issued 455 million shares of common stock at $22.00 per share resulting in proceeds of $9.9 billion, net of underwriting expenses.
During 2008 we initiated loan modification programs projected to offer modifications for up to 630,000 borrowers, representing $100 billion in mortgage financings. In April 2008, we announced that the combined company would modify or
workout at least $40.0 billion in troubled mortgage loans in the next two years and estimated that these efforts will assist at least 265,000 customers. Under this program alone, by the end of 2008 Bank of America and Countrywide Financial
Corporation (Countrywide) had achieved workout solutions for over 190,000 borrowers.
In October 2008 in agreement with several state
attorneys general, the Corporation announced the Countrywide National Homeownership Retention Program. Under the program, we will systematically identify and seek to offer loan modifications for eligible Countrywide subprime and pay option
adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) borrowers whose loans are in delinquency or scheduled for an interest rate or payment change. Only customers who financed their primary residence with subprime or pay option ARMs originated and serviced by Countrywide
between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2007 are eligible for this program. In some cases, these programs overlap as loans modified under the first program include subprime and pay option ARMs.
During 2008, to help borrowers avoid foreclosure, Bank of America and Countrywide had completed over 230,000 modifications.
In addition to being committed to the loan modification programs, we continued to focus on extending new credit by extending approximately $115
billion of credit during the fourth quarter including $49 billion in commercial non-real estate; $45 billion in mortgages; nearly $8 billion in domestic card and unsecured consumer loans; nearly $7 billion in commercial real estate; approximately $5
billion in home equity products; and approximately $2 billion in Dealer Financial Services consumer credit.
In September 2008, we
announced an agreement in principle with the Massachusetts Securities Division under which we will offer to purchase at par ARS held by certain customers. Further in October 2008, we announced other agreements in principle with the SEC, the Office
of the New York State Attorney General (NYAG), and the North American Securities Administrators Association. These agreements are substantially similar except that the agreement with the NYAG requires the payment of a penalty. These agreements will
cover approximately $5.3 billion in ARS held by an estimated 5,600 of our customers. As of December 31, 2008, we repurchased $4.7 billion of ARS from our customers, more than 80 percent of our outstanding buyback commitment. In addition, during
2008 we recorded losses of $493 million in other income related to the buyback of ARS from our clients and also recorded a penalty of $50 million in other general operating expense.
Recent Accounting Developments
On September 15, 2008 the FASB
released exposure drafts which would amend SFAS 140 and FIN 46R. As written, the proposed amendments would, among other things, eliminate the concept of a QSPE and change the standards for consolidation of VIEs. The changes would be effective
for both existing and newly-created entities as of January 1, 2010. If adopted as written, the amendments would likely result in the consolidation of certain
QSPEs and VIEs that are not currently recorded on the Corporations Consolidated Balance Sheet (e.g., credit card securitization trusts). These consolidations may result in an increase in outstanding loans and on-balance sheet funding, higher
provision and allowance for credit losses as well as changes in the timing of recognition and classification in our income statement. In addition, regulatory capital amounts and ratios may be negatively impacted based on the outcome of the FASB and
regulatory agencies decisions. However, the impact on the Corporation cannot be determined until the FASB issues the final amendments to SFAS 140 and FIN 46R and the banking regulators provide guidance on how these amendments will impact
regulatory capital. See Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a further discussion of recently proposed and issued accounting pronouncements.
Merger Overview
On
January 1, 2009, we acquired Merrill Lynch through its merger with a subsidiary of the Corporation in exchange for common and preferred stock with a value of $29.1 billion, creating a premier financial services franchise with significantly
enhanced wealth management, investment banking and international capabilities. Under the terms of the merger agreement, Merrill Lynch common shareholders received 0.8595 of a share of Bank of America Corporation common stock in exchange for each
share of Merrill Lynch common stock. In addition, Merrill Lynch non-convertible preferred shareholders received Bank of America Corporation preferred stock having substantially identical terms. Merrill Lynch convertible preferred stock remains
outstanding and is convertible into Bank of America common stock at an equivalent exchange ratio. The acquisition added Merrill Lynchs approximately 16,000 financial advisors, $1.2 trillion of client assets and its interest in BlackRock, Inc.,
a publicly traded investment management company. In addition, the acquisition adds strengths in debt and equity underwriting, sales and trading, and merger and acquisition advice, creating significant opportunities to deepen relationships with
corporate and institutional clients around the globe. At January 1, 2009, Merrill Lynch increased our total assets by $651.6 billion and total liabilities by $627.9 billion.
On July 1, 2008, we acquired Countrywide through its merger with a subsidiary of the Corporation in exchange for stock with a value of $4.2
billion. Under the terms of the agreement, Countrywide shareholders received 0.1822 of a share of Bank of America Corporation common stock in exchange for each share of Countrywide common stock. The acquisition of Countrywide significantly improved
our mortgage originating and servicing capabilities, making us a leading mortgage originator and servicer.
On October 1, 2007,
we acquired all the outstanding shares of ABN AMRO North America Holding Company, parent of LaSalle Bank Corporation (LaSalle), for $21.0 billion in cash. With this acquisition, we significantly expanded our presence in metropolitan Chicago,
Illinois and Michigan, by adding LaSalles commercial banking clients, retail customers and banking centers.
On
July 1, 2007, we acquired all the outstanding shares of U.S. Trust Corporation for $3.3 billion in cash. U.S. Trust Corporation focuses exclusively on managing wealth for high net-worth and ultra high net-worth individuals and families. The
acquisition significantly increased the size and capabilities of our wealth management business and positioned us as one of the largest financial services companies managing private wealth in the U.S.
For more information related to these mergers, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Performance Overview
Net income was $4.0 billion, or $0.55 per diluted common share in 2008, as compared to $15.0 billion, or $3.30 per diluted common share in 2007.
Table 1 Business Segment Total Revenue and Net Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenue (1) |
|
|
|
|
Net Income (Loss) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Deposits |
|
$ |
18,145 |
|
|
$ |
16,641 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,232 |
|
|
$ |
4,932 |
|
Global Card Services (2) |
|
|
30,936 |
|
|
|
27,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,426 |
|
|
|
4,345 |
|
Home Loans & Insurance |
|
|
9,439 |
|
|
|
3,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
(2,359 |
) |
|
|
102 |
|
Global Banking |
|
|
16,512 |
|
|
|
14,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,486 |
|
|
|
4,196 |
|
Global Markets |
|
|
(3,924 |
) |
|
|
(1,312 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(4,965 |
) |
|
|
(3,812 |
) |
Global Wealth & Investment Management |
|
|
7,785 |
|
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,404 |
|
|
|
1,953 |
|
All Other (2) |
|
|
(4,917 |
) |
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1,216 |
) |
|
|
3,266 |
|
Total FTE basis |
|
|
73,976 |
|
|
|
68,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
14,982 |
|
FTE adjustment |
|
|
(1,194 |
) |
|
|
(1,749 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Consolidated |
|
$ |
72,782 |
|
|
$ |
66,833 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,008 |
|
|
$ |
14,982 |
|
(1) |
Total revenue is net of interest expense, and is on a FTE basis for the business segments and All Other. For more
information on a FTE basis, see Supplemental Financial Data beginning on page 12. |
(2) |
Global Card Services is presented on a managed basis with a corresponding offset recorded in All Other.
|
The table above presents total revenue and net income for the business segments and All Other and the following discussion presents a
summary of the related results. For more information on these results, see Business Segment Operations beginning on page 15.
· |
|
Deposits net income increased as higher revenue was partially offset by an increase in noninterest expense. Total revenue increased due to a higher
contribution from our ALM activities and growth in average deposits as well as higher service charges as a result of increased volume, new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle. Noninterest expense increased due to the
acquisitions of LaSalle and Countrywide combined with an increase in accounts and transaction volumes. For more information on Deposits, see page 16. |
· |
|
Global Card Services net income decreased as growth in revenue was more than offset by higher provision for credit losses. Total revenue grew due to higher
managed average loans and leases combined with the beneficial impact of the decrease in short-term interest rates on our funding costs as well as gains related to Global Card Services allocation of the Visa IPO and the sale of a card
portfolio. The increase in provision for credit losses was driven by portfolio deterioration and higher bankruptcies due to the impacts of a slowing economy. For more information on Global Card Services, see page 17.
|
· |
|
Home Loans & Insurance recorded a net loss as growth in revenue was more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and an increase in noninterest
expense. Total revenue increased due to higher average home equity loans and LHFS as well as increases in mortgage banking income and insurance income attributable to the Countrywide acquisition. Provision for credit losses increased due to higher
losses inherent in the home equity portfolio, reflective of deterioration in the housing markets. The increase in noninterest expense was driven by the Countrywide acquisition. For more information on Home Loans & Insurance, see page
19. |
· |
|
Global Bankings net income increased as higher revenue and lower noninterest expense was partially offset by increased provision for credit losses. Total
revenue increased from merger-related and organic average loan and deposit growth, as well as higher service charges, the acquisition of LaSalle and the gain related to Global Bankings allocation of the Visa IPO. These increases were
partially offset by market disruption charges from revenue sharing agreements with Global Markets. Provision for credit losses increased reflecting reserve increases and higher charge-offs primarily due to the continued weakness in the
housing markets on the homebuilder portfolio. Noninterest expense decreased primarily due to lower incentive compensation and |
|
the impact of certain benefits associated with the Visa IPO transactions. For more information on Global Banking, see page 21. |
· |
|
Global Markets reported a net loss as trading losses were partially offset by reduced performance-based incentive compensation. Total revenue decreased as an
increase in net interest income, primarily market-based, was more than offset by the market disruptions on various parts of our business. For more information on Global Markets, see page 23. |
· |
|
GWIMs net income decreased as the increase in revenue was more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and higher noninterest expenses. Total
revenue rose due to the full year impact of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle acquisitions and organic loan and deposit growth, partially offset by losses related to the support of certain cash funds and weaker equity markets. The increase in
provision for credit losses was driven by deterioration in the housing markets and the slowing economy. Noninterest expense increased due to the full year additions of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle. For more information on GWIM, see page
27. |
· |
|
All Other reported a net loss due to losses in equity investment income, higher credit costs primarily related to our ALM residential mortgage portfolio, and an
increase in merger and restructuring charges. In addition All Others results were adversely impacted by the absence of earnings after the sale of certain businesses and foreign operations in 2007 including the $1.5 billion gain recorded
on the sale of Marsico Capital Management, LLC (Marsico). These items were partially offset by an increase in gains on sales of debt securities. For more information on All Other, see page 31. |
Financial Highlights
Net
Interest Income
Net interest income on a FTE basis increased $10.4 billion to $46.6 billion for 2008 compared to 2007. The increase was driven by
strong loan growth, as well as the acquisitions of Countrywide and LaSalle, and the contribution from market-based net interest income related to our Global Markets business, which benefited from the steepening of the yield curve and product
mix. The net interest yield on a FTE basis increased 38 bps to 2.98 percent for 2008 compared to 2007, due to the improvement in market-based yield, the beneficial impact of the current interest rate environment and loan growth. Partially offsetting
these increases were the additions of lower yielding assets from the Countrywide and LaSalle
acquisitions. For more information on net interest income on a FTE basis, see Tables I and II beginning on page 83.
Noninterest Income
Table 2 Noninterest Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Card income |
|
$ |
13,314 |
|
|
$ |
14,077 |
|
Service charges |
|
|
10,316 |
|
|
|
8,908 |
|
Investment and brokerage services |
|
|
4,972 |
|
|
|
5,147 |
|
Investment banking income |
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
2,345 |
|
Equity investment income |
|
|
539 |
|
|
|
4,064 |
|
Trading account profits (losses) |
|
|
(5,911 |
) |
|
|
(4,889 |
) |
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
4,087 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
Insurance premiums |
|
|
1,833 |
|
|
|
761 |
|
Gains on sales of debt securities |
|
|
1,124 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
Other income (loss) |
|
|
(5,115 |
) |
|
|
897 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
27,422 |
|
|
$ |
32,392 |
|
Noninterest income decreased $5.0 billion to $27.4 billion in 2008 compared to 2007.
· |
|
Card income decreased $763 million primarily due to the negative impact of higher credit costs on securitized credit card loans and the related unfavorable change in value
of the interest-only strip as well as decreases in interchange income and late fees. Partially offsetting these decreases was higher debit card income. |
· |
|
Service charges grew $1.4 billion resulting from growth in new deposit accounts and the beneficial impact of the LaSalle acquisition. |
· |
|
Investment and brokerage services decreased $175 million primarily due to the absence of fees related to Marsico which was sold in late 2007 and the impact of
significantly lower valuations in the equity markets, partially offset by the full year impact of the U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle acquisitions. |
· |
|
Investment banking income decreased $82 million due to reduced advisory fees related to the slowing economy. |
· |
|
Equity investment income decreased $3.5 billion due to a reduction in gains from our Global Principal Investments portfolio attributable to the lack of liquidity in the
marketplace when compared to 2007 and other-than-temporary impairments taken on certain AFS marketable equity securities. |
· |
|
Trading account losses were $5.9 billion in 2008 driven by losses related to CDO exposure and the continuing impact of the market disruptions on various parts of
Global Markets. Contributing to these losses were severe volatility, illiquidity and credit dislocations in the debt and equity markets during the fourth quarter of 2008. For more information, see the Global Markets discussion
beginning on page 23. |
· |
|
Mortgage banking income increased $3.2 billion in large part as a result of the Countrywide acquisition which contributed significantly to increases in servicing income of
$1.7 billion and production income of $1.5 billion. |
· |
|
Insurance premiums increased $1.1 billion primarily due to the acquisition of Countrywide. |
· |
|
Gains on sales of debt securities increased $944 million driven by the sales of mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations.
|
· |
|
Other income decreased $6.0 billion due to Global Markets related writedowns (e.g., CDO exposure, leveraged finance loans and CMBS) of $5.3 billion and $1.1 billion
of losses associated with the support provided to certain cash funds managed within GWIM. In addition, 2008 was impacted by the absence of the $1.5 billion gain from the sale of Marsico recognized in 2007. Partially offsetting these items was
the gain of $776 million related to the Visa IPO. For more information on the Global Markets related writedowns, see page 23. |
Provision for Credit Losses
The provision for credit losses increased $18.4 billion to $26.8 billion for 2008 compared to 2007 due to higher net charge-offs and additions to the reserve. The
majority of the reserve additions were in consumer and small business portfolios, reflective of continued weakness in the housing markets and the slowing economy. Reserves were also increased on commercial portfolios for deterioration in the
homebuilder and non-real estate commercial portfolios within Global Banking. For further discussion, see Provision for Credit Losses on page 64.
Noninterest Expense
Table 3 Noninterest Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Personnel |
|
$ |
18,371 |
|
$ |
18,753 |
Occupancy |
|
|
3,626 |
|
|
3,038 |
Equipment |
|
|
1,655 |
|
|
1,391 |
Marketing |
|
|
2,368 |
|
|
2,356 |
Professional fees |
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
1,174 |
Amortization of intangibles |
|
|
1,834 |
|
|
1,676 |
Data processing |
|
|
2,546 |
|
|
1,962 |
Telecommunications |
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
1,013 |
Other general operating |
|
|
7,496 |
|
|
5,751 |
Merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
935 |
|
|
410 |
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
41,529 |
|
$ |
37,524 |
Noninterest expense increased $4.0 billion to $41.5 billion for 2008 compared to 2007,
primarily due to the acquisitions of Countrywide and LaSalle, which increased various expense categories, partially offset by a reduction in performance-based incentive compensation expense and the impact of certain benefits associated with the Visa
IPO transactions.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax
expense was $420 million for 2008 compared to $5.9 billion for 2007 resulting in effective tax rates of 9.5 percent and 28.4 percent. The effective tax rate decrease is due to permanent tax preference amounts (e.g., tax exempt income and tax
credits) offsetting a higher percentage of our pre-tax income. For more information on income tax expense, see Note 18 Income Taxes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Impact of Countrywide Acquisition
Effective July 1, 2008,
Countrywides results of operations are included in the Corporations consolidated results. For 2008, the Countrywide acquisition contributed approximately $1.3 billion to net interest income on a FTE basis, $3.4 billion to noninterest
income and $4.2 billion to noninterest expense. In addition, we recorded $750 million in provision for credit losses associated with deterioration in the SOP 03-3 loan portfolio subsequent to acquisition of these loans, which were initially recorded
at fair value. At July 1, 2008, after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments the Countrywide acquisition contributed $86.2 billion to total loans and leases, $17.4 billion to securities, $17.2 billion to MSRs and $63.0 billion to
total deposits.
The majority of Countrywides ongoing operations are recorded in Home Loans &
Insurance. Countrywides acquired first mortgage and discontinued real estate portfolios were recorded in All Other and are managed as part of our overall ALM activities. For more information on Countrywides impact in Home
Loans & Insurance, see the discussion beginning on page 19. For more information related to the Countrywide acquisition, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Balance Sheet Analysis
Table 4 Selected Balance Sheet Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
$ |
82,478 |
|
$ |
129,552 |
|
|
|
$ |
128,053 |
|
$ |
155,828 |
Trading account assets |
|
|
159,522 |
|
|
162,064 |
|
|
|
|
193,631 |
|
|
187,287 |
Debt securities |
|
|
277,589 |
|
|
214,056 |
|
|
|
|
250,551 |
|
|
186,466 |
Loans and leases, net of allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
908,375 |
|
|
864,756 |
|
|
|
|
893,353 |
|
|
766,329 |
All other assets |
|
|
389,979 |
|
|
345,318 |
|
|
|
|
378,391 |
|
|
306,163 |
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,817,943 |
|
$ |
1,715,746 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,843,979 |
|
$ |
1,602,073 |
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
$ |
882,997 |
|
$ |
805,177 |
|
|
|
$ |
831,144 |
|
$ |
717,182 |
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
206,598 |
|
|
221,435 |
|
|
|
|
272,981 |
|
|
253,481 |
Trading account liabilities |
|
|
57,287 |
|
|
77,342 |
|
|
|
|
75,270 |
|
|
82,721 |
Commercial paper and other short-term borrowings |
|
|
158,056 |
|
|
191,089 |
|
|
|
|
182,729 |
|
|
171,333 |
Long-term debt |
|
|
268,292 |
|
|
197,508 |
|
|
|
|
231,235 |
|
|
169,855 |
All other liabilities |
|
|
67,661 |
|
|
76,392 |
|
|
|
|
85,789 |
|
|
70,839 |
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,640,891 |
|
|
1,568,943 |
|
|
|
|
1,679,148 |
|
|
1,465,411 |
Shareholders equity |
|
|
177,052 |
|
|
146,803 |
|
|
|
|
164,831 |
|
|
136,662 |
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,817,943 |
|
$ |
1,715,746 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,843,979 |
|
$ |
1,602,073 |
At December 31, 2008, total assets were $1.8 trillion, an increase of $102.2 billion, or six percent, from December 31, 2007. The
increase in total assets was primarily attributable to the acquisition of Countrywide, which impacted various line items including loans and leases, debt securities, MSRs and other assets. In addition to Countrywide, debt securities also increased
due to net purchases of securities and the securitization of residential mortgage loans into mortgage-backed securities which we retained. Derivative assets, which are included in all other assets in the table above, increased due to mark-to-market
gains resulting from the reduced interest rate environment and the strengthening of the U.S. dollar versus certain foreign currencies. Partially offsetting these increases was a decrease in federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell primarily attributable to balance sheet efficiencies and the sale of our equity prime brokerage business.
Average total assets in 2008 increased $241.9 billion, or 15 percent, from 2007 primarily due to higher loans and leases and debt securities. The increase in average loans and leases was attributable to organic growth and the Countrywide
and LaSalle acquisitions. The increase in debt securities was driven by the same factors as noted above and the LaSalle acquisition.
At December 31, 2008, total liabilities were $1.6 trillion, an increase of $71.9 billion from December 31, 2007. The increase in total liabilities was attributable to the acquisition of Countrywide which impacted various line
items including deposits and long-term debt. In addition to Countrywide, deposits increased as we benefited from a consumer and business flight-to-safety resulting from market instability. Long-term debt increased due to the addition of Countrywide
and participation in the TLGP. Partially offsetting these increases was a decrease in commercial paper and other short-term borrowings due in part to the sale of our equity prime brokerage business.
Average total liabilities for 2008 increased $213.7 billion, or 15 percent from 2007. The increase in average total liabilities was attributable
to higher deposits and long-term debt to support growth in overall assets and the inclusion of liabilities associated with the Countrywide and LaSalle acquisitions.
Federal Funds Sold and
Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell and Trading Account Assets
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell
consist of excess reserves placed with other banks with a relatively short-term maturity and securities that have been purchased subject to an agreement to resell securities with substantially identical terms at a specified date for a specified
price. Trading account assets consist primarily of fixed income securities (including government and corporate debt), equity and convertible instruments. Period end and average federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell,
and trading account assets decreased $49.6 billion and $21.4 billion in 2008, attributable to balance sheet efficiencies and the sale of our equity prime brokerage business partially offset by an increase in the amount of our securities used to
hedge our MSRs. For additional information, see Market Risk Management beginning on page 67.
Debt Securities
Debt securities include fixed income securities such as mortgage-backed securities, foreign debt, ABS, municipal debt, U.S. government agencies and corporate debt.
We use the debt securities portfolio primarily to manage interest rate and liquidity risk and to take advantage of market conditions that create more economically attractive returns on these investments. The period end and average balances in the
debt securities portfolio increased $63.5 billion and $64.1 billion from 2007 due to net purchases of securities and the securitization of residential mortgage loans into mortgage-backed securities which we retained. These increases were also
impacted by the addition of Countrywide. In addition, average balances benefited from the full year impact of the LaSalle acquisition. For additional information on our AFS debt securities portfolio, see Market Risk Management Securities on
page 72 and Note 5 Securities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Loans and Leases, Net of Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses
Period end and average loans and leases, net of allowance for loan and lease losses increased $43.6 billion to $908.4 billion and $127.0 billion to $893.4 billion in 2008 compared to 2007 due to consumer and commercial organic
growth and the addition of Countrywide. The average consumer loan and lease portfolio increased $64.2 billion primarily due to organic growth and the addition of Countrywide. The average commercial loan and lease portfolio increased $70.5 billion
primarily due to organic growth and the acquisition of LaSalle which occurred in the fourth quarter of 2007. For a more detailed discussion of the loan portfolio and the allowance for credit losses, see Credit Risk Management beginning on page 44,
Note 6 Outstanding Loans and Leases and Note 7 Allowance for Credit Losses to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
All
Other Assets
Period end all other assets increased $44.7 billion at December 31, 2008, an increase of 13 percent from December 31,
2007, driven primarily by the acquisition of Countrywide, which impacted various line items, including MSRs and LHFS. In addition, the increase was driven by higher derivative assets due to mark-to-market gains resulting from the reduced interest
rate environment and the strengthening of the U.S. dollar versus certain foreign currencies.
Deposits
Period end and average deposits increased $77.8 billion to $883.0 billion and $114.0 billion to $831.1 billion in 2008 compared to 2007. The average increase was
due to a $95.3 billion increase in average domestic interest-bearing deposits and a $19.4 billion increase in average noninterest-bearing deposits. We categorize our deposits as core or market-based deposits. Core deposits are generally
customer-based and represent a stable, low-cost funding source that usually reacts more slowly to interest rate changes than market-based deposits. Core deposits include savings, NOW and money market accounts, consumer CDs and IRAs, and
noninterest-bearing deposits. Core deposits exclude negotiable CDs, public funds, other domestic time deposits and foreign interest-bearing deposits. Average core deposits increased $103.0 billion to $696.9 billion in 2008, a 17 percent increase
from the prior year. The increase was attributable to growth in our average NOW and money market accounts, average consumer CDs and IRAs and noninterest-bearing deposits due to the addition of Countrywide and the benefit we received from a consumer
and business flight-to-safety resulting from market instability. Average market-based deposit funding increased $11.0 billion to $134.3 billion in 2008 compared to 2007 due to an increase in negotiable CDs, public funds and other time deposits
related to the funding of growth in core and market-based assets. The increase in average deposits was also impacted by the assumption of deposits, primarily money market, consumer CDs, and other domestic time deposits associated with the LaSalle
merger.
Federal Funds Purchased and Securities Sold Under Agreements to Repurchase and Trading Account Liabilities
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase consist of deposits borrowed from other banks with a rela-
tively short-term maturity and securities that have been sold subject to an agreement to repurchase securities with substantially identical terms at a specified date
for a specified price. Trading account liabilities consist primarily of short positions in fixed income securities (including government and corporate debt), equity and convertible instruments. Period end federal funds purchased and securities sold
under agreements to repurchase, and trading account liabilities decreased $34.9 billion primarily due to the rebalancing of hedges for market movements and lower customer demand, and by the sale of our equity prime brokerage business. Average
federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase, and trading account liabilities increased $12.0 billion primarily due to the relative low cost and availability of short-term funding.
Commercial Paper and Other Short-term Borrowings
Commercial
paper and other short-term borrowings provide a funding source to supplement deposits in our ALM strategy. Period end commercial paper and other short-term borrowings decreased $33.0 billion to $158.1 billion in 2008 compared to 2007 due in part to
the sale of our equity prime brokerage business. Average commercial paper and other short-term borrowings increased $11.4 billion to $182.7 billion in 2008 due to an increase in short-term funding given the change in market conditions, partially
offset by the sale of our equity prime brokerage business.
Long-term Debt
Period end and average long-term debt increased $70.8 billion to $268.3 billion and $61.4 billion to $231.2 billion in 2008 compared to 2007. The increases were attributable to issuances to support growth
in overall assets and enhance our liquidity, and the inclusion of long-term debt associated with the Countrywide acquisition. Period end balances also benefited from our participation in the TLGP and average balances benefited from the LaSalle
acquisition. For additional information on the TLGP, see Regulatory Initiatives on page 3. For additional information on long-term debt, see Note 12 Short-term Borrowings and Long-term Debt to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Shareholders Equity
Period end
shareholders equity increased $30.2 billion due to the issuance of preferred stock including $15.0 billion to the U.S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, a common stock offering of $9.9 billion, $4.2 billion of
common stock issued in connection with the Countrywide acquisition, and net income. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in accumulated OCI and higher preferred dividend payments. The decrease in accumulated OCI was due to unrealized
losses incurred on our debt and marketable equity securities and the adverse impact of employee benefit plan adjustments driven by the difference between the assumed and actual rate of return on benefit plan assets during the year. For additional
information on our employee benefit plans, see Note 16 Employee Benefit Plans to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Average shareholders equity increased $28.2 billion due to the same period end factors discussed above,
except accumulated OCI benefited from the fair value adjustment related to our investment in China Construction Bank (CCB) which we began to fair value in the fourth quarter of 2007.
Table 5 Five Year Summary of Selected Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share information) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Income statement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
45,360 |
|
|
$ |
34,441 |
|
|
$ |
34,594 |
|
|
$ |
30,737 |
|
|
$ |
27,960 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
27,422 |
|
|
|
32,392 |
|
|
|
38,182 |
|
|
|
26,438 |
|
|
|
22,729 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
72,782 |
|
|
|
66,833 |
|
|
|
72,776 |
|
|
|
57,175 |
|
|
|
50,689 |
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
26,825 |
|
|
|
8,385 |
|
|
|
5,010 |
|
|
|
4,014 |
|
|
|
2,769 |
|
Noninterest expense, before merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
40,594 |
|
|
|
37,114 |
|
|
|
34,988 |
|
|
|
28,269 |
|
|
|
26,394 |
|
Merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
4,428 |
|
|
|
20,924 |
|
|
|
31,973 |
|
|
|
24,480 |
|
|
|
20,908 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
5,942 |
|
|
|
10,840 |
|
|
|
8,015 |
|
|
|
6,961 |
|
Net income |
|
|
4,008 |
|
|
|
14,982 |
|
|
|
21,133 |
|
|
|
16,465 |
|
|
|
13,947 |
|
Average common shares issued and outstanding (in thousands) |
|
|
4,592,085 |
|
|
|
4,423,579 |
|
|
|
4,526,637 |
|
|
|
4,008,688 |
|
|
|
3,758,507 |
|
Average diluted common shares issued and outstanding (in thousands) |
|
|
4,612,491 |
|
|
|
4,480,254 |
|
|
|
4,595,896 |
|
|
|
4,068,140 |
|
|
|
3,823,943 |
|
Performance ratios |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average assets |
|
|
0.22 |
% |
|
|
0.94 |
% |
|
|
1.44 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
% |
|
|
1.34 |
% |
Return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
1.80 |
|
|
|
11.08 |
|
|
|
16.27 |
|
|
|
16.51 |
|
|
|
16.47 |
|
Return on average tangible shareholders equity (1) |
|
|
5.31 |
|
|
|
25.94 |
|
|
|
39.06 |
|
|
|
32.30 |
|
|
|
30.98 |
|
Total ending equity to total ending assets |
|
|
9.74 |
|
|
|
8.56 |
|
|
|
9.27 |
|
|
|
7.86 |
|
|
|
9.03 |
|
Total average equity to total average assets |
|
|
8.94 |
|
|
|
8.53 |
|
|
|
8.90 |
|
|
|
7.86 |
|
|
|
8.12 |
|
Dividend payout |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
72.26 |
|
|
|
45.66 |
|
|
|
46.61 |
|
|
|
46.31 |
|
Per common share data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings |
|
$ |
0.56 |
|
|
$ |
3.35 |
|
|
$ |
4.66 |
|
|
$ |
4.10 |
|
|
$ |
3.71 |
|
Diluted earnings |
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
3.30 |
|
|
|
4.59 |
|
|
|
4.04 |
|
|
|
3.64 |
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
2.24 |
|
|
|
2.40 |
|
|
|
2.12 |
|
|
|
1.90 |
|
|
|
1.70 |
|
Book value |
|
|
27.77 |
|
|
|
32.09 |
|
|
|
29.70 |
|
|
|
25.32 |
|
|
|
24.70 |
|
Market price per share of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closing |
|
$ |
14.08 |
|
|
$ |
41.26 |
|
|
$ |
53.39 |
|
|
$ |
46.15 |
|
|
$ |
46.99 |
|
High closing |
|
|
45.03 |
|
|
|
54.05 |
|
|
|
54.90 |
|
|
|
47.08 |
|
|
|
47.44 |
|
Low closing |
|
|
11.25 |
|
|
|
41.10 |
|
|
|
43.09 |
|
|
|
41.57 |
|
|
|
38.96 |
|
Market capitalization |
|
$ |
70,645 |
|
|
$ |
183,107 |
|
|
$ |
238,021 |
|
|
$ |
184,586 |
|
|
$ |
190,147 |
|
Average balance sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
910,878 |
|
|
$ |
776,154 |
|
|
$ |
652,417 |
|
|
$ |
537,218 |
|
|
$ |
472,617 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
1,843,979 |
|
|
|
1,602,073 |
|
|
|
1,466,681 |
|
|
|
1,269,892 |
|
|
|
1,044,631 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
831,144 |
|
|
|
717,182 |
|
|
|
672,995 |
|
|
|
632,432 |
|
|
|
551,559 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
231,235 |
|
|
|
169,855 |
|
|
|
130,124 |
|
|
|
97,709 |
|
|
|
92,303 |
|
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
141,638 |
|
|
|
133,555 |
|
|
|
129,773 |
|
|
|
99,590 |
|
|
|
84,584 |
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
164,831 |
|
|
|
136,662 |
|
|
|
130,463 |
|
|
|
99,861 |
|
|
|
84,815 |
|
Asset quality (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for credit losses (3) |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
|
$ |
9,413 |
|
|
$ |
8,440 |
|
|
$ |
9,028 |
|
Nonperforming assets (4) |
|
|
18,232 |
|
|
|
5,948 |
|
|
|
1,856 |
|
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
2,315 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
1.33 |
% |
|
|
1.28 |
% |
|
|
1.40 |
% |
|
|
1.65 |
% |
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total nonperforming loans and leases (5) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
Net charge-offs |
|
$ |
16,231 |
|
|
$ |
6,480 |
|
|
$ |
4,539 |
|
|
$ |
4,562 |
|
|
$ |
3,113 |
|
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
1.79 |
% |
|
|
0.84 |
% |
|
|
0.70 |
% |
|
|
0.85 |
% |
|
|
0.66 |
% |
Nonperforming loans and leases as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
1.77 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.42 |
|
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total loans, leases and foreclosed properties (4, 5) |
|
|
1.96 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
Ratio of the allowance for loan and lease losses at December 31 to net charge-offs |
|
|
1.42 |
|
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
|
1.99 |
|
|
|
1.76 |
|
|
|
2.77 |
|
Capital ratios (period end) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-based capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 |
|
|
9.15 |
% |
|
|
6.87 |
% |
|
|
8.64 |
% |
|
|
8.25 |
% |
|
|
8.20 |
% |
Total |
|
|
13.00 |
|
|
|
11.02 |
|
|
|
11.88 |
|
|
|
11.08 |
|
|
|
11.73 |
|
Tier 1 Leverage |
|
|
6.44 |
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
6.36 |
|
|
|
5.91 |
|
|
|
5.89 |
|
(1) |
Tangible shareholders equity is a non-GAAP measure. For additional information on ROTE and a corresponding reconciliation
of tangible shareholders equity to a GAAP financial measure, see Supplemental Financial Data beginning on page 12. |
(2) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3 on asset
quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45. |
(3) |
Includes the allowance for loan and lease losses and the reserve for unfunded lending commitments.
|
(4) |
Balances and ratios do not include nonperforming LHFS and nonperforming AFS debt securities. |
(5) |
Balances and ratios do not include loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. |
Supplemental Financial Data
Table 6 provides a reconciliation of the supplemental financial data mentioned below with financial measures defined by GAAP. Other companies may define or calculate supplemental financial data differently.
Operating Basis Presentation
In managing our business, we may
at times look at performance excluding certain nonrecurring items. For example, as an alternative to net income, we view results on an operating basis, which represents net income excluding merger and restructuring charges. The operating basis of
presentation is not defined by GAAP. We believe that the exclusion of merger and restructuring charges, which represent events outside our normal operations, provides a meaningful year-to-year comparison and is more reflective of normalized
operations.
Net Interest Income FTE Basis
In addition, we view net interest income and related ratios and analysis (i.e., efficiency ratio, net interest yield and operating leverage) on a FTE basis. Although this is a non-GAAP measure, we believe managing the business with net
interest income on a FTE basis provides a more accurate picture of the interest margin for comparative purposes. To derive the FTE basis, net interest income is adjusted to reflect tax-exempt income on an equivalent before-tax basis with a
corresponding increase in income tax expense. For purposes of this calculation, we use the federal statutory tax rate of 35 percent. This measure ensures comparability of net interest income arising from taxable and tax-exempt sources.
Performance Measures
As previously mentioned, certain performance measures including the efficiency ratio, net
interest yield and operating leverage utilize net interest income (and thus total revenue) on a FTE basis. The efficiency ratio measures the costs expended to generate a dollar of revenue, and net interest yield evaluates how many basis points we
are earning over the cost of funds. Operating leverage measures the total percentage revenue growth minus the total percentage expense growth for the corresponding period. During our annual planning process, we set operating leverage and efficiency
targets for the Corporation and each line of business. We believe the use of these non-GAAP measures provides additional clarity in assessing our results. Targets vary by year and by business, and are based on a variety of factors including maturity
of the business, investment appetite, competitive environment, market factors, and other items (e.g., risk appetite). The aforementioned performance measures and ratios, return on average assets and dividend payout ratio, as well as those measures
discussed more fully below, are presented in Table 6.
Return on Average Common Shareholders Equity and Return on Average Tangible
Shareholders Equity
We also evaluate our business based upon ROE and ROTE measures. ROE and ROTE utilize non-GAAP allocation methodologies.
ROE measures the earnings contribution of a unit as a percentage of the shareholders equity allocated to that unit. ROTE measures our earnings contribution as a percentage of shareholders equity reduced by goodwill and intangible assets
(excluding MSRs). These measures are used to evaluate our use of equity (i.e., capital) at the individual unit level and are integral components in the analytics for resource allocation. In addition, profitability, relationship, and investment
models all use ROE as key measures to support our overall growth goal.
Table 6 Supplemental Financial Data and Reconciliations to GAAP Financial Measures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Operating basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating earnings |
|
$ |
4,638 |
|
|
$ |
15,240 |
|
|
$ |
21,640 |
|
|
$ |
16,740 |
|
|
$ |
14,358 |
|
Return on average assets |
|
|
0.25 |
% |
|
|
0.95 |
% |
|
|
1.48 |
% |
|
|
1.32 |
% |
|
|
1.37 |
% |
Return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
11.27 |
|
|
|
16.66 |
|
|
|
16.79 |
|
|
|
16.96 |
|
Return on average tangible shareholders equity |
|
|
6.14 |
|
|
|
26.38 |
|
|
|
40.00 |
|
|
|
32.84 |
|
|
|
31.89 |
|
Operating efficiency ratio (FTE basis) |
|
|
54.88 |
|
|
|
54.12 |
|
|
|
47.28 |
|
|
|
48.73 |
|
|
|
51.35 |
|
Dividend payout ratio |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
71.02 |
|
|
|
44.59 |
|
|
|
45.84 |
|
|
|
44.98 |
|
Operating leverage (FTE basis) |
|
|
(1.51 |
) |
|
|
(13.40 |
) |
|
|
3.80 |
|
|
|
5.74 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
FTE basis data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
46,554 |
|
|
$ |
36,190 |
|
|
$ |
35,818 |
|
|
$ |
31,569 |
|
|
$ |
28,677 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
73,976 |
|
|
|
68,582 |
|
|
|
74,000 |
|
|
|
58,007 |
|
|
|
51,406 |
|
Net interest yield |
|
|
2.98 |
% |
|
|
2.60 |
% |
|
|
2.82 |
% |
|
|
2.84 |
% |
|
|
3.17 |
% |
Efficiency ratio |
|
|
56.14 |
|
|
|
54.71 |
|
|
|
48.37 |
|
|
|
49.44 |
|
|
|
52.55 |
|
Reconciliation of net income to operating earnings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
4,008 |
|
|
$ |
14,982 |
|
|
$ |
21,133 |
|
|
$ |
16,465 |
|
|
$ |
13,947 |
|
Merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
Related income tax benefit |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
|
|
(298 |
) |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
(207 |
) |
Operating earnings |
|
$ |
4,638 |
|
|
$ |
15,240 |
|
|
$ |
21,640 |
|
|
$ |
16,740 |
|
|
$ |
14,358 |
|
Reconciliation of average shareholders equity to average tangible shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average shareholders equity |
|
$ |
164,831 |
|
|
$ |
136,662 |
|
|
$ |
130,463 |
|
|
$ |
99,861 |
|
|
$ |
84,815 |
|
Average goodwill |
|
|
(79,827 |
) |
|
|
(69,333 |
) |
|
|
(66,040 |
) |
|
|
(45,331 |
) |
|
|
(36,612 |
) |
Average intangible assets |
|
|
(9,502 |
) |
|
|
(9,566 |
) |
|
|
(10,324 |
) |
|
|
(3,548 |
) |
|
|
(3,184 |
) |
Average tangible shareholders equity |
|
$ |
75,502 |
|
|
$ |
57,763 |
|
|
$ |
54,099 |
|
|
$ |
50,982 |
|
|
$ |
45,019 |
|
Reconciliation of return on average assets to operating return on average assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average assets |
|
|
0.22 |
% |
|
|
0.94 |
% |
|
|
1.44 |
% |
|
|
1.30 |
% |
|
|
1.34 |
% |
Effect of merger and restructuring charges, net-of-tax |
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
Operating return on average assets |
|
|
0.25 |
% |
|
|
0.95 |
% |
|
|
1.48 |
% |
|
|
1.32 |
% |
|
|
1.37 |
% |
Reconciliation of return on average common shareholders equity to operating return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
1.80 |
% |
|
|
11.08 |
% |
|
|
16.27 |
% |
|
|
16.51 |
% |
|
|
16.47 |
% |
Effect of merger and restructuring charges, net-of-tax |
|
|
0.45 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.39 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
Operating return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
2.25 |
% |
|
|
11.27 |
% |
|
|
16.66 |
% |
|
|
16.79 |
% |
|
|
16.96 |
% |
Reconciliation of return on average tangible shareholders equity to operating return on average tangible shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average tangible shareholders equity |
|
|
5.31 |
% |
|
|
25.94 |
% |
|
|
39.06 |
% |
|
|
32.30 |
% |
|
|
30.98 |
% |
Effect of merger and restructuring charges, net-of-tax |
|
|
0.83 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
0.54 |
|
|
|
0.91 |
|
Operating return on average tangible shareholders equity |
|
|
6.14 |
% |
|
|
26.38 |
% |
|
|
40.00 |
% |
|
|
32.84 |
% |
|
|
31.89 |
% |
Reconciliation of efficiency ratio to operating efficiency ratio (FTE basis) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Efficiency ratio |
|
|
56.14 |
% |
|
|
54.71 |
% |
|
|
48.37 |
% |
|
|
49.44 |
% |
|
|
52.55 |
% |
Effect of merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
(1.26 |
) |
|
|
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
(1.09 |
) |
|
|
(0.71 |
) |
|
|
(1.20 |
) |
Operating efficiency ratio |
|
|
54.88 |
% |
|
|
54.12 |
% |
|
|
47.28 |
% |
|
|
48.73 |
% |
|
|
51.35 |
% |
Reconciliation of dividend payout ratio to operating dividend payout ratio |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend payout ratio |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
72.26 |
% |
|
|
45.66 |
% |
|
|
46.61 |
% |
|
|
46.31 |
% |
Effect of merger and restructuring charges, net-of-tax |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
(1.24 |
) |
|
|
(1.07 |
) |
|
|
(0.77 |
) |
|
|
(1.33 |
) |
Operating dividend payout ratio |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
71.02 |
% |
|
|
44.59 |
% |
|
|
45.84 |
% |
|
|
44.98 |
% |
Reconciliation of operating leverage to operating basis operating leverage (FTE basis) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leverage |
|
|
(2.81 |
)% |
|
|
(12.16 |
)% |
|
|
2.77 |
% |
|
|
6.67 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
Effect of merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
1.30 |
|
|
|
(1.24 |
) |
|
|
1.03 |
|
|
|
(0.93 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
Operating leverage |
|
|
(1.51 |
)% |
|
|
(13.40 |
)% |
|
|
3.80 |
% |
|
|
5.74 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/m = not meaningful
n/a = not applicable
Core Net Interest Income Managed Basis
We
manage core net interest income managed basis, which adjusts reported net interest income on a FTE basis for the impact of market-based activities and certain securitizations, net of retained securities. As discussed in the Global
Markets business segment section beginning on page 23, we evaluate our market-based results and strategies on a total market-based revenue approach by combining net interest income and noninterest income for Global Markets. We also adjust
for loans that we originated and subsequently sold into certain securitizations. These securitizations include off-balance sheet loans and leases, primarily credit card securitizations. Noninterest income, rather than net interest income and
provision for credit losses, is recorded for assets that have been securitized as we are compensated for servicing the securitized assets and record servicing income and gains or losses on securitizations, where appropriate. We believe the use of
this non-GAAP presentation provides additional clarity in managing our results. An analysis of core net interest income managed basis, core average earning assets managed basis and core net interest yield on earning assets
managed basis, which adjusts for the impact of these two non-core items from reported net interest income on a FTE basis, is shown below.
Core net interest income on a managed basis increased $8.1 billion to $49.5 billion for 2008 compared to 2007. The increase was driven by
strong loan growth, as well as the acquisitions of Countrywide and LaSalle. Core net interest income on a managed basis also benefited from the reduced interest rate
environment however this benefit was partially offset by the spread dislocation between the Federal Funds rate and LIBOR.
On a
managed basis, core average earning assets increased $213.1 billion to $1.3 trillion for 2008 compared to 2007 due to higher average managed loans and an increase in debt securities. The increase in managed loans was driven by higher consumer
managed loans resulting from organic growth and the acquisition of Countrywide. In addition, average commercial loans increased primarily due to organic growth and the acquisition of LaSalle which occurred in the fourth quarter of 2007. The average
balance in the debt securities portfolio increased from 2007 due to net purchases of securities, the securitization of residential mortgage loans into mortgage-backed securities which we retained and the LaSalle and Countrywide acquisitions.
Core net interest yield on a managed basis remained flat at 3.82 percent for 2008, as the beneficial impact of the current interest
rate environment and loan growth was offset by the addition of lower yielding assets from the Countrywide and LaSalle acquisitions.
Table 7 Core Net Interest Income Managed Basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
46,554 |
|
|
$ |
36,190 |
|
Impact of market-based net interest income (2) |
|
|
(6,011 |
) |
|
|
(2,718 |
) |
Core net interest income |
|
|
40,543 |
|
|
|
33,472 |
|
Impact of securitizations (3) |
|
|
8,910 |
|
|
|
7,841 |
|
Core net interest income managed basis |
|
$ |
49,453 |
|
|
$ |
41,313 |
|
Average earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
$ |
1,562,729 |
|
|
$ |
1,390,192 |
|
Impact of market-based earning assets (2) |
|
|
(368,751 |
) |
|
|
(412,587 |
) |
Core average earning assets |
|
|
1,193,978 |
|
|
|
977,605 |
|
Impact of securitizations (4) |
|
|
100,145 |
|
|
|
103,371 |
|
Core average earning assets managed basis |
|
$ |
1,294,123 |
|
|
$ |
1,080,976 |
|
Net interest yield contribution (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported |
|
|
2.98 |
% |
|
|
2.60 |
% |
Impact of market-based activities (2) |
|
|
0.42 |
|
|
|
0.82 |
|
Core net interest yield on earning assets |
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.42 |
|
Impact of securitizations |
|
|
0.42 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
Core net interest yield on earning assets managed basis |
|
|
3.82 |
% |
|
|
3.82 |
% |
(2) |
Represents the impact of market-based amounts included in Global Markets. |
(3) |
Represents the impact of securitizations utilizing actual bond costs. This is different from the business segment view which
utilizes funds transfer pricing methodologies. |
(4) |
Represents average securitized loans less accrued interest receivable and certain securitized bonds retained.
|
Business Segment Operations
Segment Description
The Corporation reports the results of its operations through six business segments: Deposits, Global Card
Services, Home Loans & Insurance, Global Banking, Global Markets and GWIM, with the remaining operations recorded in All Other. We changed the basis of presentation from three segments to the above six segments. The former
Global Consumer and Small Business Banking now is reflected in three separate business segments: Deposits, Global Card Services and Home Loans & Insurance. In order to better coordinate our consumer payments businesses,
we consolidated all our consumer and small business card products into Global Card Services; therefore, debit card has moved from Deposits to Global Card Services. The former Global Corporate and Investment Banking
now is divided into Global Banking and Global Markets. Prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation. These changes did not have an impact on the previously reported consolidated results of
the Corporation. For more information on our basis of presentation, selected financial information for the business segments and reconciliations to consolidated total revenue, net income and period end total asset amounts, see Note 22
Business Segment Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Basis of Presentation
We prepare and evaluate segment results using certain non-GAAP methodologies and performance measures, many of which are discussed in Supplemental Financial Data
beginning on page 12. We begin by evaluating the operating results of the segments which by definition exclude merger and restructuring charges. The segment results also reflect certain revenue and expense methodologies which are utilized to
determine net income. The net interest income of the business segments includes the results of a funds transfer pricing process that matches assets and liabilities with similar interest rate sensitivity and maturity characteristics.
Our ALM activities maintain an overall interest rate risk management strategy that incorporates the use of interest rate contracts to manage fluctuations in earnings that are caused by interest rate
volatility. Our goal is to manage interest rate sensitivity so that movements in interest rates do not significantly adversely affect net interest income. The results of the business segments will fluctuate based on the performance of corporate
ALM activities. ALM activities are recorded in the business segments such as external product pricing decisions, including deposit pricing strategies, the effects of our internal funds transfer pricing process as well as the net effects of
other ALM activities. In addition, certain residual impacts of the funds transfer pricing process are retained in All Other.
Also, the management accounting reporting process derives segment and business results by utilizing allocation methodologies for expense and capital. The net income derived for the business segments is dependent upon cost allocations using
an activity-based costing model and other methodologies and assumptions management believes are appropriate to reflect the results of the business segments.
Certain expenses not directly attributable to a specific business segment are allocated to the segments based on pre-determined means. The most significant of these expenses include data processing costs,
item processing costs and certain centralized or shared functions. Data processing costs are allocated to the segments based on equipment usage. Item processing costs are allocated to the segments based on the volume of items processed for each
segment. The costs of certain centralized or shared functions are allocated based on methodologies which reflect utilization.
Equity
is allocated to business segments and related businesses using a risk-adjusted methodology incorporating each units stand-alone credit, market, interest rate and operational risk components. The nature of these risks is discussed further
beginning on page 37. The Corporation benefits from the diversification of risk across these components, which is reflected as a reduction to allocated equity for each segment. Average equity is allocated to the business segments and the businesses,
and is impacted by the portion of goodwill that is specifically assigned to them.
Deposits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
$ |
11,274 |
|
|
$ |
10,454 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges |
|
|
6,803 |
|
|
|
6,003 |
|
All other income |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
6,871 |
|
|
|
6,187 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
18,145 |
|
|
|
16,641 |
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
588 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
8,942 |
|
|
|
8,453 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
8,214 |
|
|
|
7,600 |
|
Income tax expense (1) |
|
|
2,982 |
|
|
|
2,668 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
5,232 |
|
|
$ |
4,932 |
|
Net interest yield (1) |
|
|
3.20 |
% |
|
|
3.17 |
% |
Return on average equity |
|
|
21.04 |
|
|
|
19.79 |
|
Efficiency ratio (1) |
|
|
49.28 |
|
|
|
50.79 |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets (2) |
|
$ |
351,908 |
|
|
$ |
329,878 |
|
Total assets (2) |
|
|
380,681 |
|
|
|
352,414 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
358,796 |
|
|
|
324,553 |
|
Allocated equity |
|
|
24,862 |
|
|
|
24,918 |
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total earning assets (2) |
|
|
365,344 |
|
|
|
349,071 |
|
Total assets (2) |
|
|
392,036 |
|
|
|
383,315 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
376,974 |
|
|
|
342,344 |
|
(2) |
Total earning assets and total assets include asset allocations to match liabilities (i.e., deposits).
|
Deposits includes the results of consumer deposits activities which consist of a comprehensive range of products to consumers and small
businesses. In addition, Deposits includes our student lending and small business banking results, excluding business card, and the net effect of our ALM activities. In the U.S., we serve approximately 59 million consumer and small
business relationships through a franchise that stretches coast to coast through 32 states and the District of Columbia utilizing our network of 6,139 banking centers, 18,685 domestic branded ATMs, and telephone and Internet channels.
Our deposit products include traditional savings accounts, money market savings accounts, CDs and IRAs, and noninterest- and interest-bearing
checking accounts. Deposit products provide a relatively stable source of funding and liquidity. We earn net interest spread revenues from investing this liquidity in earning assets through client-facing lending and ALM activities. The revenue is
allocated to the deposit products using our funds transfer pricing process which takes into account the interest rates and maturity characteristics of the deposits. Deposits also generate fees such as account service fees, non-sufficient fund
fees, overdraft charges and ATM fees.
We added 2.2 million net new
retail checking accounts in 2008. These additions resulted from continued improvement in sales and service results in the Banking Center Channel and Online, and the success of new Affinity relationships and products such as Keep the
ChangeTM. During 2008, our active online banking customer base grew to 28.9 million subscribers, an increase of 5.1 million net subscribers from 2007. In addition, our active bill pay users paid $309.7 billion worth of bills
online during 2008.
Deposits includes the net impact of migrating customers and their related deposit balances between GWIM and Deposits. In 2008
and 2007, a total of $20.5 billion and $11.4 billion of deposits were migrated from Deposits to GWIM. The increase was mainly due to the initial migration of legacy LaSalle accounts and the acceleration of moving qualified clients into
GWIM as part of our growth initiatives for our mass affluent and retirement customers. After migration, the associated net interest income, service charges and noninterest expense are recorded in GWIM.
Net income increased $300 million, or six percent, to $5.2 billion compared to 2007 driven by higher net interest income and noninterest income
partially offset by an increase in noninterest expense.
Net interest income increased $820 million, or eight percent, driven by a
higher contribution from our ALM activities and growth in average deposits partially offset by the impact of competitive deposit pricing. Average deposits grew $34.2 billion, or 11 percent, due to organic growth, including customers
flight-to-safety, as well as the acquisitions of Countrywide and LaSalle. Organic growth was partially offset by the migration of customer relationships and related deposit balances to GWIM.
Noninterest income increased $684 million, or 11 percent, to $6.9 billion driven by higher service charges of $800 million, or 13 percent,
primarily as a result of increased volume, new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle.
Noninterest expense
increased $489 million, or six percent, to $8.9 billion compared to 2007, primarily due to the LaSalle and Countrywide acquisitions, combined with an increase in accounts and transaction volumes.
Global Card Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
$ |
19,305 |
|
|
$ |
16,391 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Card income |
|
|
10,033 |
|
|
|
10,170 |
|
All other income |
|
|
1,598 |
|
|
|
976 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
11,631 |
|
|
|
11,146 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
30,936 |
|
|
|
27,537 |
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses (2) |
|
|
19,574 |
|
|
|
11,317 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
9,161 |
|
|
|
9,369 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
2,201 |
|
|
|
6,851 |
|
Income tax expense (1) |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
2,506 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
1,426 |
|
|
$ |
4,345 |
|
Net interest yield (1) |
|
|
8.33 |
% |
|
|
7.79 |
% |
Return on average equity |
|
|
3.68 |
|
|
|
12.00 |
|
Efficiency ratio (1) |
|
|
29.61 |
|
|
|
34.02 |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
231,519 |
|
|
$ |
209,774 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
231,830 |
|
|
|
210,458 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
253,888 |
|
|
|
235,518 |
|
Allocated equity |
|
|
38,773 |
|
|
|
36,206 |
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
228,573 |
|
|
$ |
227,822 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
228,628 |
|
|
|
228,140 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
248,664 |
|
|
|
252,800 |
|
(2) |
Represents provision for credit losses on held loans combined with realized credit losses associated with the securitized loan
portfolio. |
Global Card Services provides a broad offering of products, including U.S. consumer and business card, consumer lending, international card
and debit card. We provide credit card products to customers in the U.S., Canada, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom. We offer a variety of co-branded and affinity credit and debit card products and are one of the leading issuers of credit cards
through endorsed marketing in the U.S. and Europe.
The Corporation reports its Global Card Services results on a managed
basis which is consistent with the way that management evaluates the results of Global Card Services. Managed basis assumes that securitized loans were not sold and presents earnings on these loans in a manner similar to the way loans that
have not been sold (i.e., held loans) are presented. Loan securitization is an alternative funding process that is used by the Corporation to diversify funding sources. Loan securitization removes loans from the Consolidated Balance Sheet through
the sale of loans to an off-balance sheet QSPE which is excluded from the Corporations Consolidated Financial Statements in accordance with GAAP.
Securitized loans continue to be serviced by the business and are subject to the same underwriting standards and ongoing monitoring as held loans. In addition, excess servicing income is exposed to similar credit risk and
repricing of interest rates as held loans. The financial market disruptions that began in 2007 continued to impact the economy and financial services sector. Late in the third quarter of 2008 and into the fourth quarter of 2008, liquidity for
asset-backed securitizations became disrupted and spreads have rose to historic highs, negatively impacting our credit card securitization programs. If these conditions persist, it could adversely affect our ability to access these markets at
favorable terms. For more information, see the Liquidity Risk and Capital Management discussion on page 38.
Net income decreased $2.9 billion, or 67
percent, to $1.4 billion compared to 2007 as growth in net interest income and noninterest income was more than offset by higher provision for credit losses of $8.3 billion.
Net interest income grew $2.9 billion, or 18 percent, to $19.3 billion driven by higher managed average loans and leases of $21.7 billion, or 10 percent, combined with the beneficial impact of the decrease
in short-term interest rates on our funding costs.
Noninterest income increased $485 million, or four percent, to $11.6 billion as
other income benefited from the $388 million gain related to Global Card Services allocation of the Visa IPO as well as a $283 million gain on the sale of a card portfolio. These increases were partially offset by the decrease in card
income of $137 million, or one percent, due to the unfavorable change in the value of the interest-only strip and decreases in interchange income driven by reduced retail volume and late fees. These decreases were partially offset by higher debit
card income due to new account and card growth, increased usage and the addition of LaSalle.
Provision for credit losses increased
$8.3 billion, or 73 percent, to $19.6 billion compared to 2007 primarily driven by portfolio deterioration and higher bankruptcies from impacts of the slowing economy, a lower level of foreign securitizations and growth-related seasoning of the
portfolio. For further discussion, see Provision for Credit Losses beginning on page 64.
Noninterest expense decreased $208
million, or two percent, to $9.2 billion compared to 2007, as the impact of certain benefits associated with the Visa IPO transactions and lower marketing expense were partially offset by higher personnel and technology-related expenses from
increased customer assistance and collections infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Key Statistics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Global Card Services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average total loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed |
|
$ |
231,519 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
209,774 |
|
Held |
|
|
127,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
106,490 |
|
Period end total loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed |
|
|
228,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
227,822 |
|
Held |
|
|
127,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
124,855 |
|
Managed net losses (1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
15,336 |
|
|
|
|
|
10,099 |
|
Percent (3) |
|
|
6.62 |
% |
|
|
|
|
4.81 |
% |
Credit Card (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average total loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed |
|
$ |
184,246 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
171,376 |
|
Held |
|
|
79,845 |
|
|
|
|
|
70,242 |
|
Period end total loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Managed |
|
|
182,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
183,691 |
|
Held |
|
|
81,274 |
|
|
|
|
|
80,724 |
|
Managed net losses (1): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
11,382 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,214 |
|
Percent (3) |
|
|
6.18 |
% |
|
|
|
|
4.79 |
% |
(1) |
Represents net charge-offs on held loans combined with realized credit losses associated with the securitized loan portfolio.
|
(2) |
Includes U.S., Europe, Canada consumer credit card and U.S. government card. Does not include business card, debit card and
consumer lending. |
(3) |
Ratios are calculated as managed net losses divided by average outstanding managed loans and leases during the year.
|
The table above and the following discussion presents select key indicators for the Global Card Services and credit card portfolios.
Managed Global Card Services net losses increased $5.2 billion to $15.3 billion, or 6.62 percent of average outstandings,
compared to $10.1 billion, or 4.81 percent in 2007. This increase was driven by portfolio deterioration and higher bankruptcies reflecting the impacts of the slowing economy. Additionally, portfolio deterioration during the second half of 2008 and
growth-related seasoning of the consumer lending portfolio drove a portion of the increase.
Managed credit card net losses increased
$3.2 billion to $11.4 billion, or 6.18 percent of average credit card outstandings compared to $8.2 billion, or 4.79 percent in 2007. The increase was driven by portfolio deterioration and higher bankruptcies reflecting the impacts of a slowing
economy.
For more information on credit quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45.
Home Loans & Insurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
$ |
3,439 |
|
|
$ |
1,899 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking income |
|
|
4,423 |
|
|
|
1,332 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
1,416 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
All other income |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
1,807 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
9,439 |
|
|
|
3,706 |
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
6,288 |
|
|
|
1,015 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
6,896 |
|
|
|
2,529 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(3,745 |
) |
|
|
162 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) (1) |
|
|
(1,386 |
) |
|
|
60 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(2,359 |
) |
|
$ |
102 |
|
Net interest yield (1) |
|
|
2.65 |
% |
|
|
2.37 |
% |
Return on average equity |
|
|
(24.41 |
) |
|
|
4.58 |
|
Efficiency ratio (1) |
|
|
73.07 |
|
|
|
68.26 |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
105,714 |
|
|
$ |
72,872 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
129,683 |
|
|
|
79,991 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
147,583 |
|
|
|
84,539 |
|
Allocated equity |
|
|
9,668 |
|
|
|
2,218 |
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
122,956 |
|
|
$ |
86,075 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
175,618 |
|
|
|
96,511 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
205,055 |
|
|
|
101,100 |
|
Home Loans &
Insurance generates revenue by providing an extensive line of consumer real estate products and services to customers nationwide. Home Loans & Insurance products are available to our customers through a retail network of personal
bankers located in 6,139 banking centers, mortgage loan officers in nearly 1,000 locations and through a sales force offering our customers direct telephone and online access to our products. These products are also offered through our correspondent
and wholesale loan acquisition channels. Home Loans & Insurance products include fixed and adjustable rate first-lien mortgage loans for home purchase and refinancing needs, reverse mortgages, home equity lines of credit and home
equity loans. First mortgage products are either sold into the secondary mortgage market to investors, while retaining MSRs and the Bank of America customer relationships, or are held on our balance sheet for ALM purposes. Home Loans &
Insurance is not impacted by the Corporations mortgage production retention decisions as Home Loans & Insurance is compensated for the decision on a management accounting basis with a corresponding offset recorded in All
Other. In addition, Home Loans & Insurance offers property, casualty, life, disability and credit insurance.
Effective July 1, 2008, Countrywides results of operations are included in the Corporations consolidated results. While the results of deposit operations are included in Deposits, the majority of Countrywides
ongoing operations are recorded in Home Loans & Insurance. Countrywides acquired first mortgage and discontinued real estate portfolios were recorded in All Other and are managed as part of our overall ALM activities.
For more information related to the Countrywide acquisition, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Home Loans & Insurances net income decreased $2.5 billion to a net loss of $2.4 billion compared to 2007 as growth in noninterest income and net interest income was more than offset
by higher provision for credit losses and an increase in noninterest expense.
Net interest income grew $1.5 billion,
or 81 percent, driven primarily by an increase in average home equity loans and LHFS. The growth in average home equity loans of $32.4 billion, or 45 percent, and a $5.5 billion increase in LHFS were attributable to the Countrywide and LaSalle
acquisitions as well as increases in our home equity portfolio as a result of slower prepayment speeds and organic growth.
Noninterest income increased $4.2 billion to $6.0 billion compared to 2007 driven by increases in mortgage banking income and insurance income. Mortgage banking income grew $3.1 billion due primarily to the acquisition of Countrywide
combined with increases in the value of MSR economic hedge instruments partially offset by a decrease in value of MSRs. For more information, see the mortgage banking income discussion which follows. Insurance income increased $1.1 billion due to
the acquisition of Countrywide.
Provision for credit losses increased $5.3 billion to $6.3 billion compared to 2007. This increase
was driven primarily by higher losses inherent in the home equity portfolio, reflective of deterioration in the housing markets particularly in geographic areas that have experienced higher levels of declines in home prices. In addition, most home
equity loans are secured by second lien positions significantly reducing and, in some cases, resulting in no collateral value after consideration of the first lien position. This drove more severe charge-offs as borrowers defaulted. For further
discussion, see Provision for Credit Losses beginning on page 64.
Noninterest expense increased $4.4 billion to $6.9 billion
primarily driven by the Countrywide acquisition.
Mortgage Banking Income
We categorize Home Loans & Insurances mortgage banking income into production and servicing income.
Production income is comprised of revenue from the fair value gains and losses recognized on our IRLCs and LHFS, and the related secondary market execution, and costs related to
representations and warranties given in the sales transactions and other obligations incurred in the sales of mortgage loans. In addition, production income includes
revenue for transfers of mortgage loans from Home Loans & Insurance to the ALM portfolio related to the Corporations mortgage production retention decisions which is eliminated in consolidation in All Other.
Servicing activities primarily include collecting cash for principal, interest and escrow payments from borrowers, disbursing customer draws for
lines of credit and accounting for and remitting principal and interest payments to investors and escrow payments to third parties. Our workout efforts are also part of our servicing activities, along with responding to customer inquiries and
supervising foreclosures and property dispositions. Servicing income includes ancillary income derived in connection with these activities such as late fees and MSR valuation adjustments, net of economic hedge activities.
The following table summarizes the components of mortgage banking income:
Mortgage banking income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Production income |
|
$ |
2,119 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
733 |
|
Servicing income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servicing fees and ancillary income |
|
|
3,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
903 |
|
Impact of customer payments |
|
|
(3,313 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(766 |
) |
Fair value changes of MSRs, net of economic hedge results |
|
|
1,906 |
|
|
|
|
|
462 |
|
Other servicing-related revenue |
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net servicing income |
|
|
2,304 |
|
|
|
|
|
599 |
|
Total mortgage banking income |
|
$ |
4,423 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,332 |
|
Production income increased $1.4 billion in 2008 compared to 2007. This increase was driven
by the Countrywide acquisition which resulted in higher volumes, and an improvement in margins.
Net servicing income increased $1.7
billion in 2008 compared to 2007 due primarily to increases in the value of the MSR economic hedge instruments of $8.6 billion partially offset by changes in the fair value of MSRs of $6.7 billion. Generally, when mortgage interest rates decline, as
occurred during the second half of 2008, there is an increase in the value of instruments used to economically hedge MSRs and a corresponding decrease in the value of MSRs. The decrease in the value of MSRs during the second half of 2008 was
tempered by the expectation that weakness in the housing market would decrease the impact of market interest rates on expected future prepayments. For further discussion on MSRs and the related hedge instruments, see Mortgage Banking Risk Management
on page 75.
The
following table presents select key indicators for Home Loans & Insurance.
Home Loans
& Insurance Key Statistics
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except as noted) |
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Loan production |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home Loans & Insurance: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage |
|
$ |
128,945 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
93,304 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
31,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
69,226 |
|
Total Corporation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage |
|
|
140,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
104,385 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
40,490 |
|
|
|
|
|
84,183 |
|
Period end |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing portfolio (in billions) (1) |
|
|
2,057.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
516.9 |
|
Mortgage loans serviced for investors (in billions) |
|
|
1,654 |
|
|
|
|
|
259 |
|
Mortgage servicing rights: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
12,733 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,053 |
|
Capitalized mortgage servicing rights (% of loans serviced) |
|
|
77 |
bps |
|
|
|
|
118 |
bps |
(1) Servicing of residential mortgage loans, home equity lines of credit, home equity loans and
discontinued real estate mortgage loans. |
|
Home Loans & Insurances first mortgage and home equity production were
$128.9 billion and $32.0 billion in 2008 compared to $93.3 billion and $69.2 billion in 2007. The increase of $35.6 billion in first mortgage production was due to the acquisition of Countrywide partially offset by decreased activity in the mortgage
market. The decrease of $37.2 billion in home equity production was primarily due to more stringent underwriting guidelines for home equity lines of credit and loans, and lower consumer demand.
The servicing portfolio at December 31, 2008 was $2.1 trillion, $1.5 trillion higher than at December 31, 2007, driven by the Countrywide
acquisition. Included in this amount was $1.7 trillion of residential first mortgage, home equity lines of credit and home equity loans serviced for others.
At December 31, 2008, the consumer MSR balance was $12.7 billion, which represented 77 bps of the related unpaid principal balance as compared to $3.1 billion, or 118 bps of the related principal
balance at December 31, 2007. The increase in the consumer MSR balance was driven by $17.2 billion of MSRs that we acquired from Countrywide which was partially offset by the impact of mortgage rates falling substantially during the fourth
quarter of 2008. As a result of the decline in rates, the value of the MSRs decreased driven by a significant increase in expected prepayments which reduced the expected life of the consumer MSRs. This resulted in the 41 bps decrease in the
capitalized MSRs as a percentage of loans serviced. MSR economic hedge results were more than sufficient to offset this decrease.
Global Banking
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
$ |
10,577 |
|
|
$ |
8,670 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges |
|
|
3,209 |
|
|
|
2,642 |
|
Investment banking income |
|
|
1,459 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
All other income |
|
|
1,267 |
|
|
|
1,976 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
5,935 |
|
|
|
6,043 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
16,512 |
|
|
|
14,713 |
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
3,130 |
|
|
|
658 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
6,377 |
|
|
|
7,406 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
7,005 |
|
|
|
6,649 |
|
Income tax expense (1) |
|
|
2,519 |
|
|
|
2,453 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
4,486 |
|
|
$ |
4,196 |
|
Net interest yield (1) |
|
|
3.25 |
% |
|
|
3.32 |
% |
Return on average equity |
|
|
9.31 |
|
|
|
11.47 |
|
Efficiency ratio (1) |
|
|
38.62 |
|
|
|
50.33 |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
318,325 |
|
|
$ |
254,250 |
|
Total earning assets (2) |
|
|
325,761 |
|
|
|
261,405 |
|
Total assets (2) |
|
|
380,124 |
|
|
|
308,832 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
176,381 |
|
|
|
147,619 |
|
Allocated equity |
|
|
48,204 |
|
|
|
36,589 |
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
328,574 |
|
|
$ |
301,830 |
|
Total earning assets (2) |
|
|
338,913 |
|
|
|
310,273 |
|
Total assets (2) |
|
|
391,930 |
|
|
|
362,394 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
214,755 |
|
|
|
173,858 |
|
(2) |
Total assets include asset allocations to match liabilities (i.e., deposits). |
Global Banking provides a wide range of lending-related products and services, integrated working capital management, treasury solutions
and investment banking services to clients worldwide through our network of proprietary offices and client relationship teams along with various product partners. Our clients include multinationals, middle-market and business banking companies,
financial institutions, commercial real estate firms and governments. Our lending products and services include commercial and corporate bank loans and commitment facilities, real estate lending, leasing and asset-based lending and indirect consumer
loans. Our capital management and treasury solutions include treasury management, trade finance, foreign exchange, short-term credit facilities and short-term investing options. Our investment banking services provide our commercial and corporate
issuer clients with debt and equity underwriting and distribution capabilities as well as merger-related advisory services. Global Banking also contains the results for the economic hedging of our credit risk to certain exposures utilizing
various risk mitigation tools. Our clients are supported in offices throughout the world that are divided into four distinct geographic regions: U.S. and Canada; Asia; Europe, Middle East, and Africa; and Latin America. For more information on our
foreign operations, see Foreign Portfolio beginning on page 62.
Net income increased $290 million, or seven percent, to $4.5
billion in 2008 compared to 2007 as increases in total revenue and lower noninterest expense were partially offset by an increase in provision for credit losses.
Net interest income increased $1.9 billion, or 22 percent, driven by growth in average loans and leases of $64.1 billion, or 25 percent, and average deposits of $28.8 billion, or 19 percent. The increase
in average
loans and leases and average deposits was driven by the LaSalle acquisition and organic growth. The organic growth in average loans and leases was primarily in
commercial domestic and real estate loans. Deposit growth was accentuated by our clients flight-to-safety, notably seen in activity in our large corporate and hedge fund clients, and contributed to overall total deposit growth during
the latter part of 2008. Noninterest income decreased $108 million, or two percent, as Global Bankings share of market disruption charges were partially offset by an increase in service charges and the $388 million gain related to
Global Bankings allocation of the Visa IPO. The increase in service charges was driven by organic growth, changes in our pricing structure and the LaSalle acquisition. For more information on market disruption charges please see
Global Markets discussion on beginning on page 23.
The provision for credit losses increased $2.5 billion to $3.1 billion in
2008 compared to 2007. The increase was primarily driven by reserve increases and higher charge-offs primarily due to the continued weakness in the housing markets on the homebuilder portfolio. Also contributing to this increase were higher
commercial domestic and foreign net charge-offs which increased from very low prior year levels and higher net charge-offs and reserve increases in the retail dealer-related loan portfolios due to deterioration and seasoning of the portfolio
reflective of growth.
Noninterest expense decreased $1.0 billion, or 14 percent, primarily due to lower incentive compensation and
the impact of certain benefits associated with the Visa IPO transactions, partially offset by the addition of LaSalle.
Global Banking Revenue
Global Banking also evaluates its revenue from two primary client segments, global commercial banking and global corporate and investment banking. Global
commercial banking primarily includes revenue related to our commercial and business banking clients, who are generally defined as companies with sales between $2 million and $2 billion including middle-market and multinational clients as well as
commercial real estate clients. Global corporate and investment banking primarily includes revenue related to our large corporate clients including multinationals which are generally defined as companies with sales in excess of $2 billion.
Additionally, global corporate and investment banking revenue also includes debt and equity underwriting and merger-related advisory services (net of revenue-sharing with Global Markets). The following table presents further detail regarding
Global Banking revenue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Global Banking revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global commercial banking |
|
$ |
11,375 |
|
$ |
9,053 |
Global corporate and investment banking |
|
|
5,137 |
|
|
5,660 |
Total Global Banking revenue |
|
$ |
16,512 |
|
$ |
14,713 |
Global Banking revenue increased $1.8 billion to $16.5 billion in 2008 compared to
2007.
· |
|
Global commercial banking revenue increased $2.3 billion, or 26 percent, in 2008 compared to 2007 driven by increases in net interest income and all other income. Average
loans and leases increased by $44.5 billion to $222.7 billion or 25 percent reflecting organic growth and the LaSalle acquisition. Credit-related revenue increased approximately $1.2 billion to $5.4 billion, or 29 percent, driven by higher balances
and increased credit spreads due to market rates, and higher service fee income. Average deposit balances increased $14.9 billion to $108.4 billion, or 16 percent driven by organic growth and the LaSalle acquisition. Treasury services-related
revenue increased approximately $1.1 billion to $5.9 billion, or 23 percent, as the increase in balances and Global Bankings allocation of the Visa IPO gain was partially offset by the reduction in market-based interest rates.
|
· |
|
Global corporate and investment banking revenue decreased $523 million, or nine percent, in 2008 compared to 2007 driven primarily by $1.4 billion of losses from Global
Bankings share of market disruption charges. Average loans and leases increased $19.6 billion to $95.6 billion, or 26 percent, reflecting organic growth and the LaSalle |
|
acquisition. Credit-related revenue increased approximately $415 million to $2.4 billion, or 21 percent, driven by the improved economic hedging results of our
exposures to certain corporate clients, higher service fee income and higher balances. Average deposit balances increased $13.8 billion to $67.9 billion or 26 percent driven by organic growth and the LaSalle acquisition. Treasury Services-related
revenue increased approximately $275 million to $2.7 billion, or 11 percent, as the increase in balances were partially offset by a reduction in market-based interest rates and lower card income. Investment banking-related revenue attributed to this
client segment remained relatively flat, and is discussed in more detail below, inclusive of the portion shared with Global Markets. |
Investment Banking Income
Product
specialists within Global Markets work closely with Global Banking on the underwriting and distribution of debt and equity securities and certain other products. In order to reflect the efforts of Global Markets and
Global Banking in servicing our clients with the best product capabilities, we allocate revenue to the two segments based on relative contribution. Therefore, in order to provide a complete discussion of our consolidated investment
banking income, we have included the following table that presents total investment banking income for the consolidated Corporation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Investment banking income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advisory fees |
|
$ |
287 |
|
|
$ |
443 |
|
Debt underwriting |
|
|
1,685 |
|
|
|
1,650 |
|
Equity underwriting |
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
|
2,596 |
|
|
|
2,412 |
|
Other (1) |
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
Total investment banking income |
|
$ |
2,263 |
|
|
$ |
2,345 |
|
(1) |
Other includes the intercompany elimination of investment banking income on the Corporations own debt and equity
issuances that is recorded in All Other and other miscellaneous Global Banking investment banking fees (e.g., leasing). |
Investment banking income decreased $82 million, or three percent in 2008 compared to 2007. Advisory fees decreased $156 million or 35 percent, due to reduced activity attributable to the slowing economy. Equity underwriting
income increased $305 million, or 96 percent, driven by fees earned on the Corporations stock issuances during 2008 for which Global Banking was compensated on a management accounting basis with a corresponding offset shown in Other in
the table above.
Global Markets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Net interest income (1) |
|
$ |
5,141 |
|
|
$ |
2,306 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment and brokerage services |
|
|
752 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
Investment banking income |
|
|
1,249 |
|
|
|
1,112 |
|
Trading account profits (losses) |
|
|
(5,809 |
) |
|
|
(4,830 |
) |
All other income (loss) |
|
|
(5,257 |
) |
|
|
(718 |
) |
Total noninterest income (loss) |
|
|
(9,065 |
) |
|
|
(3,618 |
) |
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
(3,924 |
) |
|
|
(1,312 |
) |
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
3,891 |
|
|
|
4,741 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(7,765 |
) |
|
|
(6,054 |
) |
Income tax expense (benefit) (1) |
|
|
(2,800 |
) |
|
|
(2,242 |
) |
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(4,965 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,812 |
) |
Return on average equity |
|
|
(35.18 |
)% |
|
|
(43.31 |
)% |
Efficiency ratio |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading-related assets (2) |
|
$ |
338,074 |
|
|
$ |
357,186 |
|
Total market-based earning assets |
|
|
360,896 |
|
|
|
402,912 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
366,195 |
|
|
|
406,237 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
429,234 |
|
|
|
452,861 |
|
Allocated equity |
|
|
14,114 |
|
|
|
8,803 |
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total trading-related assets (2) |
|
$ |
244,174 |
|
|
$ |
304,210 |
|
Total market-based earning assets |
|
|
237,618 |
|
|
|
351,791 |
|
Total earning assets |
|
|
243,275 |
|
|
|
356,834 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
308,193 |
|
|
|
407,515 |
|
(2) |
Includes assets which are not considered earning assets (i.e., derivative assets) |
Global Markets provides financial products, advisory services, financing, securities clearing, settlement and custody services globally to
our institutional investor clients in support of their investing and trading activities. We also work with our commercial and corporate issuer clients to provide debt and equity underwriting and distribution capabilities and risk management products
using interest rate, equity, credit, currency and commodity derivatives, foreign exchange, fixed income and mortgage-related products. The business may take positions in these products and participate in market-making activities dealing in
government securities, equity and equity-linked securities, high-grade and high-yield corporate debt securities, commercial paper, mortgage-backed securities and ABS. Underwriting debt and equity, securities research and certain market-based
activities are executed through Banc of America Securities, LLC which is our primary dealer.
Global Markets
recognized a net loss of $5.0 billion in 2008 compared to a net loss of $3.8 billion in 2007. Sales and trading revenue was a net loss of $6.9 billion as compared to a net loss of $2.6 billion. These decreases were driven by losses related to CDO
exposure and the continuing impact of the market disruptions on various parts of our business including the severe volatility, illiquidity and credit dislocations that were experienced in the debt and equity markets in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Partially offsetting these declines were favorable results in our rates and currencies products. In addition, noninterest expense declined $850 million primarily due to lower performance-based incentive compensation.
Sales and Trading Revenue
The following table presents further detail regarding the Corporations sales and trading revenue. Sales and trading revenue includes all revenue that is
earned within Global Markets with the exception of investment banking income and net interest income on the loans for which the fair value option has been
elected. Global Banking originates certain deal-related transactions with our corporate and commercial clients that are managed and distributed by Global Markets. In order to reflect the relative contribution of each business segment,
a revenue-sharing agreement has been implemented which attributes revenue accordingly. Therefore, in order to provide a complete discussion of our sales and trading revenue, we have included the following table and related discussion that presents
total sales and trading revenue for the consolidated Corporation. Sales and trading revenue is segregated into fixed income from rates and currencies (primarily interest rate and foreign exchange contracts), commodities (primarily futures, forward,
swaps and options), credit products (primarily investment and noninvestment grade corporate debt obligations, credit derivatives and public finance), structured products (primarily CMBS, residential mortgage-backed securities, structured credit
trading and CDOs), and equity income from equity-linked derivatives and cash equity activity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Sales and trading revenue (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rates and currencies |
|
$ |
2,527 |
|
|
$ |
1,736 |
|
Commodities |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Credit products |
|
|
(2,523 |
) |
|
|
(508 |
) |
Structured products |
|
|
(7,741 |
) |
|
|
(5,162 |
) |
Total fixed income |
|
|
(7,603 |
) |
|
|
(3,885 |
) |
Equity income |
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
Total sales and trading revenue |
|
$ |
(6,863 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,590 |
) |
(1) |
Includes $1.4 billion and $100 million of market disruption charges allocated to Global Banking in 2008 and 2007. |
Sales and trading revenue declined $4.3 billion to a loss of $6.9 billion compared to 2007.
· |
|
Rates and currencies revenue increased $791 million compared to 2007 as Global Markets took advantage of trending volatility in interest rates and foreign exchange
markets which also drove favorable client flows. |
· |
|
Commodities revenue increased $85 million compared to 2007 as Global Markets took advantage of increased volatility in commodities markets.
|
· |
|
Credit products revenue declined $2.0 billion to a loss of $2.5 billion compared to 2007. During 2008, we incurred losses of $1.1 billion, net of $286 million of fees, on
leveraged loans and the forward leveraged finance commitments as investor confidence faded and liquidity became largely non-existent. The few institutions that were in a position to acquire additional loans, required discount equivalent yields in
excess of one-month LIBOR plus 1,000 bps in some instances, thus applying downward pressure to pricing mechanisms, especially during the fourth quarter of 2008. Losses incurred on our leveraged exposure were not concentrated in any one type (senior
secured or subordinated/senior unsecured) and were generally due to wider new issuance credit spreads as compared to the negotiated spreads. Credit products also incurred losses on ARS of $898 million which included $312 million representing
Global Markets losses on the buyback from our customers. A significant portion of these losses ($750 million) were concentrated in student loan ARS. For further discussion on our ARS exposure, see Industry Concentrations beginning on
page 59 and for a discussion on GWIMs ARS losses on the buyback from our customers see page 27. |
At December 31, 2008, we had no forward leveraged finance commitments and the carrying value of our leveraged funded positions held for distribution was $2.8 billion. At December 31, 2007, the carrying value of the
Corporations forward leveraged finance commitments and leveraged funded positions held for distribution were $11.9 billion and $5.9 billion. The elimination of our forward leveraged finance commitments was due to the funding of previously
outstanding commitments, approximately 66 percent of which were distributed through syndication, and client-terminated commitments. Pre-market disruption exposure originated prior to September 30, 2007 had a carrying value of $1.5 billion at
December 31, 2008 as compared to $5.9 billion at December 31, 2007. At December 31, 2008, 66 percent of the leveraged funded positions held for distribution were senior secured with an approximate carrying value of $1.9 billion of
which $1.4 billion were originated prior to September 30, 2007.
· |
|
Structured products revenue was a loss of $7.7 billion, which represented a decline in revenue of $2.6 billion compared to the prior year. The decrease was driven by $4.8
billion of losses resulting from our CDO exposure, which includes our super senior, warehouse, and sales and trading positions, and our hedging activities including counterparty credit risk valuations. See the detailed CDO exposure discussion to
follow. Also, structured products was adversely impacted by $944 million of losses (net of hedges) on CMBS funded debt and the forward finance commitments for 2008, and $545 million in losses associated with equity investments we made in
acquisition-related financing transactions. In addition, 2008 included losses related to other structured products including $738 million of losses for counterparty credit risk valuations related to our structured credit trading business. Other
structured products, including residential mortgage-backed securities as well as other residual structured credit positions were negatively impacted by spread widening and extreme dislocations in basis correlations in both domestic and foreign
markets that occurred in the fourth quarter of 2008. The results of 2007 were adversely impacted by the |
|
market disruptions that began during the third quarter of 2007. |
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, we held $6.9 billion and $13.6 billion of funded CMBS debt of which $6.0 billion and $8.9
billion were primarily floating-rate acquisition-related financings to major, well- known operating companies. In addition, at December 31, 2008 and 2007, we had forward finance commitments of $700 million and $2.2 billion. The decrease in
funded CMBS debt was driven by securitizations and loan sales, while the decrease in forward finance commitments was driven by the funding of outstanding commitments and the business decision not to enter into any new floating-rate
acquisition-related financings. Forward finance commitments at December 31, 2008 were comprised primarily of fixed-rate conduit product financings. The $944 million of losses recorded during 2008 associated with our CMBS exposure were
concentrated in the more difficult to hedge floating-rate debt.
· |
|
Equity products revenue decreased $555 million to $740 million compared to 2007 primarily due to lower trading results in the institutional derivatives businesses and
decreased volume. |
Collateralized Debt Obligation Exposure at December 31, 2008
CDO vehicles hold diversified pools of fixed income securities. CDO vehicles issue multiple tranches of
debt securities, including commercial paper, mezzanine and equity securities.
Our CDO exposure can be divided into funded and
unfunded super senior liquidity commitment exposure, other super senior exposure (i.e., cash positions and derivative contracts), warehouse, and sales and trading positions. For more information on our CDO liquidity commitments, refer to
Collateralized Debt Obligation Vehicles as part of Off- and On-Balance Sheet Arrangements beginning on page 32. Super senior exposure represents the most senior class of commercial paper or notes that are issued by the CDO vehicles. These financial
instruments benefit from the subordination of all other securities issued by the CDO vehicles.
During 2008, we recorded CDO-related
losses of $4.8 billion compared to $5.6 billion in 2007 including losses on super senior exposure of $3.6 billion and $4.0 billion. Also included in CDO-related losses in 2008 were $707 million of losses on purchased securities from liquidated CDO
vehicles. These securities were purchased from the vehicles at auction and the losses were recorded subsequent to their purchase. CDO-related losses reduced trading account profits (losses) by $1.6 billion and other income by $3.2 billion. Also
included during 2008 were net gains of $893 million related to our hedging activity, $315 million of losses related to subprime sales and trading and CDO warehouse positions, and $1.1 billion of losses to cover counterparty risk on our CDO and
subprime-related exposure. The losses recorded in other income noted above were other-than-temporary impairment charges related to CDOs and purchased securities classified as AFS debt securities at December 31, 2008. Also we had unrealized
losses on uninsured other super senior cash positions and purchased securities from liquidated CDOs of $422 million (pre-tax) in accumulated OCI at December 31, 2008.
The CDO and related markets continued to deteriorate during 2008, experiencing significant illiquidity impacting the availability and reliability of transparent pricing. At December 31, 2008, we
valued these CDO structures consistent with how we valued them at December 31, 2007. We assumed the CDO structures would terminate and looked through the structures to the underlying net asset values of the securities. We were able to obtain
security values using either external pricing services or offsetting trades for approximately 94 percent of the CDO exposure for which we used the average of all prices obtained by security. The majority
of the remaining positions where no pricing quotes were available were valued using matrix pricing by aligning the value to securities that had similar vintage of
underlying assets and ratings, using the lowest rating between the rating services. The remaining securities were valued as interest-only strips, based on estimated average life, exposure type and vintage of the underlying assets. We assigned a zero
value to the CDO positions for which an event of default has been triggered and liquidation notice has been issued. The value of cash held by the trustee for all CDO structures was also incorporated into the resulting net asset value. In addition,
we were able to obtain security values using the same methodology as the CDO exposure for approximately 65 percent of the purchased securities from liquidated CDOs. Similarly, the majority of the remaining positions where no pricing quotes were
available were valued using matrix pricing and projected cash flows.
As presented in the following table, during 2008, our super
senior net exposure, excluding purchased securities from liquidated CDOs,
decreased $8.4 billion to $3.3 billion at December 31, 2008, driven by paydowns, liquidations and writedowns. Including purchased securities, our super senior net
exposure decreased $6.3 billion to $5.3 billion at December 31, 2008. In addition, during the year we reclassified $5.6 billion of super senior liquidity commitments to other super senior exposure. This amount represents the net exposure, after
insurance and writedowns, at the time of reclassification of five CDO vehicles and a CDO conduit to which we had an aggregate gross liquidity exposure of $11.5 billion at December 31, 2007. As described further within the Collateralized Debt
Obligation Vehicles section beginning on page 34, we no longer have liquidity exposure to these vehicles. Instead, we now hold cash positions, including super senior securities issued by the CDOs.
The following table presents a rollforward of our super senior CDO exposure for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Super Senior Collateralized Debt Obligation Exposure Rollforward
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
December 31, 2007 Net Exposure |
|
Reclassifications (1) |
|
|
2008 Net Writedowns / Adjustments (2) |
|
|
Paydowns / Liquidations / Other |
|
|
December 31, 2008 Net Exposure |
Super senior liquidity commitments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High grade |
|
$ |
5,166 |
|
$ |
(3,917 |
) |
|
$ |
(486 |
) |
|
$ |
(287 |
) |
|
$ |
476 |
Mezzanine |
|
|
358 |
|
|
(337 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CDO-squared |
|
|
2,227 |
|
|
(1,318 |
) |
|
|
(548 |
) |
|
|
(361 |
) |
|
|
|
Total super senior liquidity commitments |
|
|
7,751 |
|
|
(5,572 |
) |
|
|
(1,055 |
) |
|
|
(648 |
) |
|
|
476 |
Other super senior exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High grade |
|
|
2,125 |
|
|
3,917 |
|
|
|
(1,328 |
) |
|
|
(2,207 |
) |
|
|
2,507 |
Mezzanine |
|
|
795 |
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
(606 |
) |
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
297 |
CDO-squared |
|
|
959 |
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
(1,023 |
) |
|
|
(1,254 |
) |
|
|
|
Total other super senior |
|
|
3,879 |
|
|
5,572 |
|
|
|
(2,957 |
) |
|
|
(3,690 |
) |
|
|
2,804 |
Total super senior |
|
$ |
11,630 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(4,012 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,338 |
) |
|
$ |
3,280 |
Purchased securities from liquidated CDOs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(707 |
) |
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
|
2,030 |
Total |
|
$ |
11,630 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(4,719 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,601 |
) |
|
$ |
5,310 |
(1) |
Represents CDO exposure that was reclassified from super senior liquidity commitments to other super senior exposure
as the Corporation is no longer providing liquidity. |
(2) |
Net of insurance and includes $422 million (pre-tax) of unrealized losses recorded in accumulated OCI.
|
The following table presents our super senior CDO exposure at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Super Senior Collateralized Debt Obligation Exposure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total CDO Exposure at December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subprime Exposure (1) |
|
Non-Subprime Exposure (2) |
|
Total CDO Net Exposure |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Gross |
|
Insured (3) |
|
|
Net of Insured Amount |
|
Cumulative Write- downs (4,5) |
|
|
Net Exposure |
|
Gross |
|
Insured (3) |
|
|
Net of Insured Amount |
|
Cumulative Write- downs (4,5) |
|
|
Net Exposure |
|
December 31 2008 |
|
December 31 2007 |
Super senior liquidity commitments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High grade |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
542 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
542 |
|
$ |
(66 |
) |
|
$ |
476 |
|
$ |
476 |
|
$ |
5,166 |
Mezzanine |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
358 |
CDO-squared |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,227 |
Total super senior liquidity commitments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
476 |
|
|
476 |
|
|
7,751 |
Other super senior exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High grade |
|
|
4,330 |
|
|
(2,519 |
) |
|
|
1,811 |
|
|
(1,127 |
) |
|
|
684 |
|
|
3,445 |
|
|
(728 |
) |
|
|
2,717 |
|
|
(894 |
) |
|
|
1,823 |
|
|
2,507 |
|
|
2,125 |
Mezzanine |
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
(238 |
) |
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
795 |
CDO-squared |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
959 |
Total other super senior |
|
|
4,865 |
|
|
(2,519 |
) |
|
|
2,346 |
|
|
(1,365 |
) |
|
|
981 |
|
|
3,785 |
|
|
(1,068 |
) |
|
|
2,717 |
|
|
(894 |
) |
|
|
1,823 |
|
|
2,804 |
|
|
3,879 |
Total super senior |
|
$ |
4,865 |
|
$ |
(2,519 |
) |
|
$ |
2,346 |
|
$ |
(1,365 |
) |
|
$ |
981 |
|
$ |
4,327 |
|
$ |
(1,068 |
) |
|
$ |
3,259 |
|
$ |
(960 |
) |
|
$ |
2,299 |
|
$ |
3,280 |
|
$ |
11,630 |
Purchased securities from liquidated CDOs |
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
(707 |
) |
|
|
2,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,030 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,602 |
|
$ |
(2,519 |
) |
|
$ |
5,083 |
|
$ |
(2,072 |
) |
|
$ |
3,011 |
|
$ |
4,327 |
|
$ |
(1,068 |
) |
|
$ |
3,259 |
|
$ |
(960 |
) |
|
$ |
2,299 |
|
$ |
5,310 |
|
$ |
11,630 |
(1) |
Classified as subprime when subprime consumer real estate loans make up at least 35 percent of the ultimate underlying
collaterals original net exposure value. |
(2) |
Includes highly-rated collateralized loan obligations and commercial mortgage-backed securities super senior exposure.
|
(3) |
Insured exposures are presented prior to $2.1 billion of cumulative writedowns. |
(4) |
Net of insurance excluding losses taken on liquidated CDOs. |
(5) |
Cumulative write-downs on subprime and non-subprime exposures include unrealized losses of $111 million and $311 million
(pre-tax) and are recorded in accumulated OCI. |
At December 31, 2008, we held $2.5 billion of purchased insurance on our subprime super senior CDO exposure of which 71 percent was provided by monolines in the
form of CDS, total-return-swaps (TRS) or financial guarantees. In the case of default, we look to the underlying securities and then to recovery on purchased insurance. At December 31, 2008, these contracts were valued at $1.9 billion by
referencing the fair value of the CDO which is valued in the same manner as the unhedged portion. We have adjusted these values downward by a total of $1.1 billion to date to reflect the counterparty credit risk to the issuers of the insurance. In
addition, we held collateral in the form of cash and marketable securities of $401 million related to our purchased insurance. The underlying insured CDOs are collateralized with approximately 38 percent of subprime assets of which approximately 53
percent are of higher quality vintages from 2005 and prior.
In addition, at December 31, 2008 we held $1.1 billion of
purchased insurance on our non-subprime super senior CDO exposure all of which was provided by monolines in the form of CDS, TRS or financial guarantees. At December 31, 2008, these contracts were valued at $146 million by
referencing the fair value of the CDO which is valued in the same manner as the unhedged portion. We have adjusted these values downward by a total of $40 million to date to reflect counterparty credit risk to the issuers of the insurance. For
more information on our credit exposure to monolines, see Industry Concentrations beginning on page 59.
At December 31, 2008,
the carrying value of the super senior exposure in the form of cash positions, liquidity commitments, and derivative contracts consisted of net subprime super senior exposure of $981 million and net non-subprime super senior exposure of $2.3
billion. In addition, we had $2.0 billion of exposure in purchased securities from liquidated CDOs. For more information on our super senior liquidity exposure, see the CDO discussion beginning on page 34.
The table below presents the carrying values of our subprime net exposures including subprime collateral content and percentages of recent
vintages.
At December 31, 2008, the Corporation did not have any subprime super senior liquidity commitments. Net other
subprime super senior
exposure was $981 million at December 31, 2008. Other subprime super senior exposure consists primarily of cash securities and CDS on CDO positions. The
collateral supporting the high grade exposure consisted of about 45 percent subprime content, of which approximately 12 percent was made up of 2006 and 2007 vintages while the remaining amount was comprised of higher quality vintages from 2005 and
prior. The collateral supporting the mezzanine exposure consisted of approximately 35 percent subprime content, of which approximately 66 percent is comprised of later vintages. We recorded losses associated with these exposures of $3.0 billion in
2008.
In addition, at December 31, 2008, we had $2.0 billion of exposure in purchased securities from liquidated CDOs. These
purchased securities were carried at approximately 34 percent of their original net exposure amount and approximately 27 percent of the underlying assets are subprime.
We also had net non-subprime super senior exposure of $2.3 billion which primarily included CMBS super senior exposures and highly rated CLO exposures. The net non-subprime super senior exposure is
comprised of $476 million of high grade super senior liquidity commitment exposure and $1.8 billion of high grade other super senior exposure. We recorded losses of $592 million associated with these exposures in 2008. These losses were primarily
driven by spread widening and impairments of principal from the CMBS exposure in these super senior CDOs. These non-subprime super senior exposures experienced additional impairments of principal as credit conditions deteriorated in the corporate
debt and commercial mortgage markets during the second half of 2008.
In addition to the super senior exposure including purchased
securities at December 31, 2008, we also had exposure with a market value of $563 million in our CDO sales and trading portfolio, of which approximately $233 million was classified as subprime. This subprime exposure is carried at
approximately 22 percent of par value and includes $137 million of secondary trading positions and $96 million of positions in legacy warehouses.
Subprime Super Senior Collateralized Debt Obligation Carrying Values (1)
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vintage of Subprime Collateral |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Subprime Net Exposure |
|
Carrying Value as a Percent of Original Net Exposure |
|
|
Subprime Content of Collateral (2) |
|
|
Percent in 2006/2007 Vintages |
|
|
Percent in 2005/Prior Vintages |
|
Other super senior exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High grade |
|
$ |
684 |
|
38 |
% |
|
45 |
% |
|
12 |
% |
|
88 |
% |
Mezzanine |
|
|
297 |
|
56 |
|
|
35 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
34 |
|
Total other super senior |
|
$ |
981 |
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased securities from liquidated CDOs |
|
|
2,030 |
|
34 |
|
|
27 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
74 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,011 |
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Classified as subprime when subprime consumer real estate loans make up at least 35 percent of the ultimate
underlying collaterals original net exposure value. |
(2) |
Based on current net exposure value. |
Global Wealth & Investment Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Total |
|
|
Global Wealth Management |
|
|
U.S. Trust (1) |
|
|
Columbia Management |
|
|
Other |
|
Net interest income (2) |
|
$ |
4,775 |
|
|
$ |
3,150 |
|
|
$ |
1,547 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
65 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment and brokerage services |
|
|
4,058 |
|
|
|
1,001 |
|
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
All other income (loss) |
|
|
(1,048 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(1,119 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Total noninterest income |
|
|
3,010 |
|
|
|
1,059 |
|
|
|
1,416 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
7,785 |
|
|
|
4,209 |
|
|
|
2,963 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
4,923 |
|
|
|
1,799 |
|
|
|
1,829 |
|
|
|
1,130 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
2,198 |
|
|
|
1,849 |
|
|
|
1,031 |
|
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) (2) |
|
|
794 |
|
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
(274 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
1,404 |
|
|
$ |
1,165 |
|
|
$ |
649 |
|
|
$ |
(466 |
) |
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest yield (2) |
|
|
2.98 |
% |
|
|
2.58 |
% |
|
|
3.01 |
% |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Return on average equity (3) |
|
|
12.01 |
|
|
|
60.59 |
|
|
|
13.93 |
|
|
|
(66.33 |
)% |
|
|
n/m |
|
Efficiency ratio (2) |
|
|
63.23 |
|
|
|
42.75 |
|
|
|
61.73 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Period end total assets (4) |
|
$ |
187,995 |
|
|
$ |
136,105 |
|
|
$ |
57,167 |
|
|
$ |
2,923 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Total |
|
|
Global Wealth Management |
|
|
U.S. Trust (1) |
|
|
Columbia Management |
|
|
Other |
|
Net interest income (2) |
|
$ |
3,917 |
|
|
$ |
2,752 |
|
|
$ |
1,046 |
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
122 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment and brokerage services |
|
|
3,781 |
|
|
|
950 |
|
|
|
1,233 |
|
|
|
1,434 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
All other income (loss) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
(367 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
3,637 |
|
|
|
1,095 |
|
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
3,847 |
|
|
|
2,338 |
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
4,491 |
|
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
Income (before income taxes |
|
|
3,049 |
|
|
|
2,119 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
Income tax expense (2) |
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
1,953 |
|
|
$ |
1,335 |
|
|
$ |
469 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
141 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest yield (2) |
|
|
3.11 |
% |
|
|
2.81 |
% |
|
|
2.71 |
% |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Return on average equity (3) |
|
|
19.76 |
|
|
|
92.72 |
|
|
|
20.43 |
|
|
|
2.20 |
% |
|
|
n/m |
|
Efficiency ratio (2) |
|
|
59.45 |
|
|
|
44.22 |
|
|
|
68.79 |
|
|
|
98.83 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Period end total assets (4) |
|
$ |
155,200 |
|
|
$ |
112,941 |
|
|
$ |
51,045 |
|
|
$ |
1,942 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
(1) |
In July 2007, the operations of the acquired U.S. Trust Corporation were combined with the former Private
Bank creating U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management. The results of the combined business were reported for periods beginning on July 1, 2007. Prior to July 1, 2007, the results solely reflect that of the former
Private Bank. |
(3) |
Average allocated equity for GWIM was $11.7 billion and $9.9 billion in 2008 and 2007.
|
(4) |
Total assets include asset allocations to match liabilities (i.e., deposits). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
89,400 |
|
$ |
84,601 |
|
|
|
$ |
87,592 |
|
$ |
73,474 |
Total earning assets (1) |
|
|
178,240 |
|
|
144,572 |
|
|
|
|
160,509 |
|
|
125,893 |
Total assets (1) |
|
|
187,995 |
|
|
155,200 |
|
|
|
|
169,796 |
|
|
133,911 |
Total deposits |
|
|
175,107 |
|
|
144,865 |
|
|
|
|
159,525 |
|
|
124,871 |
(1) |
Total earning assets and total assets include asset allocations to match liabilities (i.e., deposits).
|
GWIM provides a wide offering of customized banking, investment and brokerage services tailored to meet the changing wealth management
needs of our individual and institutional customer base. Our clients have access to a range of services offered through three primary businesses: Global Wealth Management; U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management (U.S. Trust);
and Columbia Management (Columbia). In addition, Other primarily includes the results of Institutional Retirement, Alternative Investments and other administrative items. ALM activities are recorded in the businesses. These results
were previously recorded in Other.
On January 1, 2009, we acquired Merrill Lynch in exchange for common and preferred
stock with a value of $29.1 billion. The acquisition added Merrill Lynchs approximately 16,000 financial advisors and its economic ownership of approximately 50 percent (primarily preferred stock) in BlackRock, Inc., a publicly traded
investment management company. For more information related to the Merrill Lynch acquisition, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
In December 2007, we completed the sale of Marsico. Prior year Marsico business results have been transferred from GWIM to All Other to
better facilitate year-over-year comparisons.
Net income decreased $549 million, or 28 percent, to $1.4 billion in 2008 as
increases in net interest income and investment and brokerage services income were more than offset by losses associated with the support provided to certain cash funds managed within Columbia, increases in provision for credit losses and
noninterest expense as well as losses related to the buyback of ARS.
Net interest income increased $858 million, or 22 percent, to
$4.8 billion due to higher margin on ALM activities, the acquisitions of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle, and growth in average deposit and loan balances partially offset by spread compression driven by deposit mix and competitive deposit
pricing. GWIM average deposit growth benefited from the migration of customer relationships and related balances from Deposits, organic growth and the U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle acquisitions. A more detailed discussion
regarding migrated customer relationships and related balances is provided in the following Global Wealth Management discussion.
Noninterest income decreased $627 million, or 17 percent, to $3.0 billion driven by an additional $1.1 billion in losses during 2008 related to the support provided to certain cash funds managed within Columbia and losses of $181
million related to the buyback of ARS. These losses were partially offset by an increase of $277 million in investment and brokerage services resulting from the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition partially offset by the impact of significantly lower
valuations in the equity markets.
Provision for credit losses increased $650 million to $664 million as a result of higher credit
costs primarily in Global Wealth Management due to the deterioration in the housing markets and the impacts of a slower economy.
Noninterest expense increased $432
million, or 10 percent, to $4.9 billion due to the addition of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle, and higher initiative spending partially offset by lower discretionary incentive compensation.
Client Assets
The following table presents client assets which consist of AUM, client brokerage assets and assets in custody.
Client Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Assets under management |
|
$ |
523,159 |
|
|
$ |
643,531 |
|
Client brokerage assets |
|
|
172,106 |
|
|
|
222,661 |
|
Assets in custody |
|
|
133,726 |
|
|
|
167,575 |
|
Less: Client brokerage assets and assets in custody included in assets under management |
|
|
(78,487 |
) |
|
|
(87,071 |
) |
Total net client assets |
|
$ |
750,504 |
|
|
$ |
946,696 |
|
AUM decreased $120.4 billion, or 19 percent, to $523.2 billion as of December 31,
2008 compared to 2007. Client brokerage assets decreased by $50.6 billion, or 23 percent, and assets in custody decreased $33.8 billion, or 20 percent. These decreases were driven by significant market declines.
Global Wealth Management
Global Wealth Management
includes Banc of America Investments, our full-service retail brokerage business, and our Premier Banking channel. Global Wealth Management brings personalized banking and investment expertise through priority service with
client-dedicated teams. Global Wealth Management provides a high-touch client experience through a network of approximately 5,500 client facing associates to our affluent customers with a personal wealth profile of at least $100,000 of
investable assets.
Global Wealth Management includes the impact of migrating qualifying affluent customers, including their
related deposit balances, from Deposits to our Global Wealth Management model. After migration, the associated net interest income, service charges and noninterest expense is recorded in Global Wealth Management. The change
reported in the financial results of Global Wealth Management includes both the impact of migration, as well as the impact of incremental organic growth from providing a broader array of financial products and services to Global Wealth
Management customers. For 2008 and 2007, a total of $20.5 billion and $11.4 billion of deposits were migrated from Deposits to Global Wealth Management. The increase was driven by the initial migration of legacy LaSalle accounts
and the migration of qualified clients into Global Wealth Management as part of our growth initiatives for our mass affluent and retirement customers.
Net income decreased $170 million, or 13 percent, to $1.2 billion compared to the same period in 2007 driven by an increase in provision for credit losses and $131
million in losses related to the buyback of ARS partially offset by an increase in net interest income. Net interest income increased $398 million, or 14 percent, driven by higher margin on ALM activities and growth in average deposit and loan
balances due to the acquisitions of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle, partially offset by spread compression driven by deposit mix and competitive deposit pricing. Average deposit growth also benefited from the migration of customer relationships
and related balances from Deposits, organic growth and the U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle acquisitions. Provision for credit losses increased $534 million primarily driven by higher credit costs in the home equity portfolio reflective of
deterioration in the housing markets and the impacts of a slowing economy. Noninterest expense increased $98 million primarily due to the addition of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle.
U.S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management
In July 2007, the acquisition of U.S. Trust Corporation
was completed for $3.3 billion in cash combining it with the Private Bank to form U.S. Trust. The results of the combined business were reported for periods beginning on July 1, 2007. Prior to July 1, 2007, the results solely reflect
that of the former Private Bank. U.S. Trust provides comprehensive wealth management solutions to wealthy and ultra-wealthy clients with investable assets of more than $3 million. In addition, U.S. Trust provides resources and
customized solutions to meet clients wealth structuring, investment management, trust and banking needs as well as specialty asset management services (oil and gas, real estate, farm and ranch, timberland, private businesses and tax advisory).
Clients also benefit from access to resources available through the Corporation including capital markets products, large and complex financing solutions, and its extensive banking platform.
Net income increased $180 million, or 38 percent, to $649 million compared to 2007, due to higher net interest income and noninterest income
partially offset by higher noninterest expenses and provision for credit losses. Net interest income increased $501 million, or 48 percent, due to higher margin on ALM activities, the U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle acquisitions as well as
organic growth in average deposits and average loans and leases. This growth was partially offset by spread compression, driven by deposit mix and competitive deposit pricing. Noninterest income increased $124 million, or 10 percent, driven by
higher investment and brokerage services income due to the acquisitions which was partially offset by the impact of significantly lower valuations in the equity markets. In addition, noninterest income was impacted by $50 million in losses related
to the buyback of ARS previously discussed. Provision for credit losses increased $117 million to $103 million compared to the same period in 2007 primarily due to higher credit costs in our home equity and residential mortgage portfolios reflective
of deterioration in the housing markets and the impacts of a slowing economy. The absence of a prior year reserve reduction of $54 million also contributed to the increase in provision. Noninterest expense increased $221 million, or 14 percent, due
primarily to the acquisitions of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle.
Columbia Management
Columbia is an asset management business serving the needs of both institutional clients and individual customers. Columbia provides asset management products and services, including mutual
funds and separate accounts. Columbia mutual fund offerings provide a broad array of
investment strategies and products including equity, fixed income (taxable and nontaxable) and money market (taxable and nontaxable) funds. Columbia distributes
its products and services to institutional clients and individuals directly through Global Wealth Management, U.S. Trust, Global Banking and nonproprietary channels including other brokerage firms.
In December 2007, we completed the sale of Marsico. Prior year Marsico business results have been transferred from Columbia to All
Other to better facilitate year-over-year comparisons.
Net income decreased $474 million to a loss of $466 million due to $1.1
billion in losses related to support provided to certain cash funds as discussed below, compared to losses of $382 million in 2007. These items were partially offset by an increase of $62 million in investment and brokerage services income. The
increase in investment and brokerage services income was driven by the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition partially offset by the impact of significantly lower valuations in the equity markets. In addition, noninterest expense increased $78 million
driven by the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition.
Cash Funds Support
Beginning in the second half of 2007, we provided support to certain cash funds managed within Columbia. The funds for
which we provided support typically invested in high quality, short-term securities with a portfolio weighted average maturity of 90 days or less, including securities issued by SIVs and senior debt holdings of financial service companies. Due to
market disruptions, certain investments in SIVs and the senior debt securities were downgraded by the rating agencies and experienced a decline in fair value. We entered into capital commitments under which the Corporation provided cash to these
funds in the event the net asset value per unit of a fund declined below certain thresholds. The capital commitments expire no later than the third quarter of 2010. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, we had gross (i.e., funded and unfunded) capital
commitments to the funds of $1.0 billion and $565 million. During 2008 and 2007, we incurred losses of $695 million and $382 million related to these capital commitments. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the remaining loss exposure on capital
commitments was $300 million and $183 million.
Additionally, during 2008 we purchased $1.7 billion of investments and recorded losses
of $366 million related to these securities and $52 million of other-than-temporary impairment losses recorded subsequent to purchase. During 2007, we purchased $585 million of certain investments from the funds and subsequently recorded
other-than-temporary impairment losses in All Other of $394 million. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, we held AFS debt securities with a fair value of $698 million and $163 million of which $279 million and $163 million were
classified as nonperforming AFS securities. At December 31, 2008, $272 million of unrealized losses on these investments were recorded in accumulated OCI. The decline in value of these securities was driven by the lack of market liquidity
and the overall deterioration of the financial markets. These unrealized losses are recorded in accumulated OCI as we expect to recover the full principal amount of such investments. No such losses were recorded in accumulated OCI at
December 31, 2007. For additional information on the valuation of our AFS securities, see Note 5 Securities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We may from time to time, but are under no obligation to, provide additional support to funds managed within Columbia. Future support, if any, may take the form of additional capital
commitments to the funds or the purchase of assets from the funds.
We do not consolidate the cash funds managed within Columbia
because the subordinated support provided by the Corporation will not absorb a majority of the variability created by the assets of the funds. In
reaching this conclusion, we considered both interest rate and credit risk. The cash funds had total AUM of $185.9 billion and $189.5 billion at December 31, 2008
and 2007.
During 2008, federal government agencies initiated several actions in response to the current financial crisis and economic
slowdown to provide liquidity in these markets. As of December 31, 2008 several money market funds managed within Columbia participated in certain programs, including the U.S. Treasurys Temporary Guarantee Program for Money Market
Funds and the AMLF. For more information on these programs, see Regulatory Initiatives on page 3.
Other
Other primarily includes the results of Institutional Retirement, Alternative Investments and other administrative items.
Net income decreased $85 million to $56 million compared to 2007. This decrease was primarily driven by lower net interest income as well as
increased noninterest expense. Net interest income decreased $57 million, or 47 percent, to $65 million primarily due to lower earnings credits on lower economic capital balances. In addition, noninterest expense increased $35 million, or 27
percent, to $165 million compared to 2007 primarily driven by higher expenses related to growth initiatives for our mass affluent and retirement customers.
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Reported Basis (1) |
|
|
Securitization Offset (2) |
|
|
As Adjusted |
|
|
|
|
Reported Basis (1) |
|
|
Securitization Offset (2) |
|
|
As Adjusted |
|
Net interest income (3) |
|
$ |
(7,957 |
) |
|
$ |
8,701 |
|
|
$ |
744 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(7,447 |
) |
|
$ |
8,027 |
|
|
$ |
580 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Card income |
|
|
2,165 |
|
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
2,817 |
|
|
|
(3,356 |
) |
|
|
(539 |
) |
Equity investment income |
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,745 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,745 |
|
Gains on sales of debt securities |
|
|
1,131 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,131 |
|
|
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179 |
|
All other income (loss) |
|
|
(521 |
) |
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
(302 |
) |
|
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
3,040 |
|
|
|
(2,031 |
) |
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,190 |
|
|
|
(3,068 |
) |
|
|
4,122 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
(4,917 |
) |
|
|
6,670 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
|
4,959 |
|
|
|
4,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
(3,770 |
) |
|
|
6,670 |
|
|
|
2,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
(5,208 |
) |
|
|
4,959 |
|
|
|
(249 |
) |
Merger and restructuring charges (4) |
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
410 |
|
All other noninterest expense |
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(2,486 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,486 |
) |
|
|
|
|
4,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,416 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) (3) |
|
|
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(1,216 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,216 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
3,266 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,266 |
|
Average Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
135,787 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
$ |
135,787 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
134,032 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
$ |
134,032 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
106,861 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
106,861 |
|
|
|
|
|
96,201 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
96,201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period-end Balance Sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
136,160 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
$ |
136,160 |
|
|
|
|
|
140,039 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
140,039 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
87,520 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
87,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
119,295 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
119,295 |
|
(1) |
Provision for credit losses represents the provision for credit losses in All Other combined with the Global Card
Services securitization offset. |
(2) |
The securitization offset on net interest income is on a funds transfer pricing methodology consistent with the way
funding costs are allocated to the businesses. |
(4) |
For more information on merger and restructuring charges, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the
Consolidated Financial Statements. |
Global Card
Services is reported on a managed basis which includes a securitization impact adjustment which has the effect of assuming that loans that have been securitized were not sold and presents these loans in a manner similar to the way
loans that have not been sold are presented. All Others results include a corresponding securitization offset which removes the impact of these securitized loans in order to present the consolidated results on a GAAP basis
(i.e., held basis). See the Global Card Services section beginning on page 17 for information on the Global Card Services managed results. The following All Other discussion focuses on the results on an as adjusted basis
excluding the securitization offset. For additional information, see Note 22 Business Segment Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
In addition to the securitization offset discussed above, All Other includes our Equity Investments businesses and Other.
Equity Investments includes Global Principal Investments, Corporate Investments and Strategic Investments. Global Principal Investments is
comprised of a diversified portfolio of investments in privately-held and publicly-traded companies at all stages of their life cycle from start-up to buyout. These investments are made either directly in a company or held through a fund and are
accounted for at fair value. In addition, Global Principal Investments has unfunded equity commitments related to some of these investments. For more information on these commitments, see Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the
Consolidated Financial Statements. Global Principal Investments equity investments had a carrying value of $3.8 billion and $4.2 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Corporate Investments primarily includes investments in publicly-traded debt and equity securities and funds which are accounted for as AFS
marketable equity securities. Strategic Investments includes investments of $19.7 billion in CCB, $2.5 billion in Banco Itaú, $2.1 billion in Grupo Financiero Santander, S.A. (Santander) and other investments. In 2008, under the terms of our
purchase option we increased our ownership in CCB by
purchasing 25.6 billion common shares for approximately $9.2 billion. These recently purchased shares are accounted for at cost in other assets and are
non-transferable until August 2011. In addition, in January 2009, we sold 5.6 billion common shares of our initial investment in CCB for $2.8 billion, reducing our ownership to 16.7 percent and resulting in a pre-tax gain of approximately $1.9
billion. The remaining initial investment of 13.5 billion common shares is accounted for at fair value and recorded as AFS marketable equity securities in other assets with an offset, net-of-tax, to accumulated OCI. These shares became
transferable in October 2008. The restricted shares of Banco Itaú are carried at fair value with an offset, net-of-tax, to accumulated OCI and are accounted for as AFS marketable equity securities. Prior to the second quarter of 2008, these
shares were accounted for at cost. Our investment in Santander is accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Income associated with Equity Investments is recorded in equity investment income.
Other includes the residential mortgage portfolio associated with ALM activities, the residual impact of the cost allocation processes,
merger and restructuring charges, intersegment eliminations, and the results of certain businesses that are expected to be or have been sold or are in the process of being liquidated. Other also includes certain amounts associated with ALM
activities, including the residual impact of funds transfer pricing allocation methodologies, amounts associated with the change in the value of derivatives used as economic hedges of interest rate and foreign exchange rate fluctuations that do not
qualify for SFAS 133 hedge accounting treatment, foreign exchange rate fluctuations related to SFAS 52 revaluation of foreign denominated debt issuances, certain gains (losses) on sales of whole mortgage loans, and gains (losses) on sales of debt
securities. Other also includes adjustments to noninterest income and income tax expense to remove the FTE impact of items (primarily low-income housing tax credits) that have been grossed up within noninterest income to a FTE amount in the
business segments.
Net income decreased $4.5 billion to a net loss of $1.2 billion due to a decrease in total revenue combined with increases in provision for credit
losses and merger and restructuring charges.
Net interest income increased $164 million primarily due to increased net interest
income related to our Corporate Treasury function partially offset by the reclassification to card income related to our funds transfer pricing for Global Card Services securitizations.
Noninterest income declined $3.1 billion to $1.0 billion driven by decreases in equity investment income of $3.5 billion and all other income (loss)
of $1.0 billion partially offset by increases in gains on sales of debt securities of $952 million and card income of $454 million.
The following table presents the components of All Others equity investment income and a reconciliation to the total consolidated equity investment income for 2008 and 2007.
Components of Equity Investment Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
Global Principal Investments |
|
$ |
(84 |
) |
|
$ |
2,217 |
Corporate Investments |
|
|
(520 |
) |
|
|
445 |
Strategic and other investments |
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
1,083 |
Total equity investment income included in All Other |
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
3,745 |
Total equity investment income (loss) included in the business segments |
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
319 |
Total consolidated equity investment income |
|
$ |
539 |
|
|
$ |
4,064 |
Components of Equity Investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Global Principal Investments |
|
$ |
3,812 |
|
$ |
4,179 |
Corporate Investments |
|
|
2,583 |
|
|
2,935 |
Strategic and other investments |
|
|
25,027 |
|
|
24,192 |
Total equity investments included in All Other |
|
$ |
31,422 |
|
$ |
31,306 |
Equity investment income decreased $3.5 billion primarily due to losses from our Global
Principal Investments portfolio attributable to the lack of liquidity in the marketplace. In addition, we incurred other-than-temporary impairment losses on AFS marketable equity securities of $661 million which included writedowns on Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac preferred securities and a number of other equity securities where we did not believe that the declines in value would be recoverable.
All other income (loss) decreased due to the absence of the $1.5 billion gain on the sale of our Marsico business during 2007 partially offset by losses in 2007 of $394 million on securities after they were purchased at fair
value from certain cash funds managed within GWIM. In 2008, losses on securities purchased from cash funds were recorded within GWIM. In addition, All Others results were adversely impacted by the absence of earnings due
to the sale of certain businesses and foreign operations in 2007. These decreases were partially offset by increases in card income driven by the funds transfer pricing allocations discussed in net interest income above. Further, losses were
partially offset by increases in gains on sales of mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations.
Provision for credit losses increased $3.1 billion to $2.9 billion primarily due to higher credit costs related to our ALM residential mortgage
portfolio reflective of deterioration in the housing markets and the impacts of a slowing economy. Additionally, deterioration in our Countrywide discontinued real estate portfolio subsequent to the July 1, 2008 acquisition as well as the
absence of 2007 reserve reductions also contributed to the increase in provision.
Merger and restructuring charges increased $525
million to $935 million due to the integration costs associated with the Countrywide and LaSalle acquisitions. For additional information on merger and restructuring charges, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Off- and On-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the ordinary course of business, we support our customers financing needs by facilitating their access to the commercial paper market. In addition, we
utilize certain financing arrangements to meet our balance sheet management, funding and liquidity needs. For additional information on our liquidity risk, see Liquidity Risk and Capital Management beginning on page 38. These activities utilize
SPEs, typically in the form of corporations, limited liability companies, or trusts, which raise funds by issuing short-term commercial paper or similar instruments to third party investors. These SPEs typically hold various types of financial
assets whose cash flows are the primary source of repayment for the liabilities of the SPEs. Investors have recourse to the assets in the SPE and often benefit from other credit enhancements, such as overcollateralization in the form of excess
assets in the SPE, liquidity facilities, and other arrangements. As a result, the SPEs can typically obtain a favorable credit rating from the rating agencies, resulting in lower financing costs for our customers.
We have liquidity agreements, SBLCs or other arrangements with the SPEs, as described below, under which we are obligated to provide funding in the
event of a market disruption or other specified event or otherwise provide credit support to the entities (hereinafter referred to as liquidity exposure). We manage our credit risk and any market risk on these arrangements by subjecting them to our
normal underwriting and risk management processes. Our credit ratings and changes thereto will affect the borrowing cost and liquidity of these SPEs. In addition, significant changes in counterparty asset valuation and credit standing may also
affect the ability of the SPEs to issue commercial paper. The contractual or notional amount of these commitments as presented in Table 8, represents our maximum possible funding obligation and is not, in managements view, representative of
expected losses or funding requirements.
Table 8 Special Purpose Entities Liquidity Exposure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
VIEs |
|
|
|
QSPEs |
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Consolidated (1) |
|
Unconsolidated |
|
|
|
Unconsolidated |
|
Total |
Commercial paper conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-seller conduits |
|
$ |
11,304 |
|
$ |
41,635 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
52,939 |
Asset acquisition conduits |
|
|
1,121 |
|
|
2,622 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,743 |
Other corporate conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
1,578 |
Home equity securitizations (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,064 |
|
|
13,064 |
Municipal bond trusts |
|
|
396 |
|
|
3,872 |
|
|
|
|
2,921 |
|
|
7,189 |
Customer-sponsored conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
980 |
Credit card securitizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
946 |
|
|
946 |
Collateralized debt obligation vehicles (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
542 |
Total liquidity exposure |
|
$ |
12,821 |
|
$ |
49,651 |
|
|
|
$ |
18,509 |
|
$ |
80,981 |
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007 |
|
|
VIEs |
|
|
|
QSPEs |
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Consolidated (1) |
|
Unconsolidated |
|
|
|
Unconsolidated |
|
Total |
Commercial paper conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-seller conduits |
|
$ |
16,984 |
|
$ |
47,335 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
64,319 |
Asset acquisition conduits |
|
|
1,623 |
|
|
6,399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,022 |
Other corporate conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,263 |
|
|
4,263 |
Municipal bond trusts |
|
|
7,359 |
|
|
3,120 |
|
|
|
|
2,988 |
|
|
13,467 |
Customer-sponsored conduits |
|
|
|
|
|
1,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,724 |
Collateralized debt obligation vehicles (3) |
|
|
3,240 |
|
|
9,026 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,266 |
Total liquidity exposure |
|
$ |
29,206 |
|
$ |
67,604 |
|
|
|
$ |
7,251 |
|
$ |
104,061 |
(1) |
We consolidate VIEs when we are the primary beneficiary and absorb the majority of the expected losses or expected residual
returns of the VIEs or both. |
(2) |
Home equity securitizations were added in connection with the Countrywide acquisition. |
(3) |
For additional information on our CDO exposures at December 31, 2008 and 2007 and related writedowns, see the CDO
discussion beginning on page 24. |
The table above presents
our liquidity exposure to these consolidated and unconsolidated SPEs, which include VIEs and QSPEs. VIEs are SPEs which lack sufficient equity at risk or whose equity investors do not have a controlling financial interest. QSPEs are SPEs whose
activities are strictly limited to holding and servicing financial assets. Liquidity commitments to Corporation-sponsored VIEs and other VIEs in which the Corporation holds a variable interest are disclosed in Note 9 Variable Interest
Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
At December 31, 2008 the Corporations total liquidity exposure to
SPEs was $81.0 billion, a decrease of $23.1 billion from December 31, 2007. The decrease was attributable to lower liquidity exposure in all categories, primarily CDOs and multi-seller conduits, partially offset by the addition of
Countrywides home equity securitizations.
Multi-Seller Conduits
We administer four multi-seller conduits, three of which are unconsolidated, which provide a low-cost funding alternative to our
customers by facilitating their access to the commercial paper market. These conduits are discussed in more detail in Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Due to the market disruptions, the conduits experienced difficulties in issuing commercial paper during certain periods of 2008. At
December 31, 2008, we held $2 million of commercial paper issued by the conduits, including $1 million issued by the unconsolidated conduits in trading account assets. We did not hold any commercial paper issued by the conduits at
December 31, 2007.
Asset Acquisition Conduits
We administer three commercial paper conduits which acquire assets on behalf of the Corporation or our customers and obtain
funding through the issuance of commercial paper and subordinated securities to third par-
ties. Repayment of the commercial paper and certificates is assured by total return swap contracts between us and the conduits. With respect to two of the conduits,
which are unconsolidated, we are reimbursed through total return swap contracts with our customers. These conduits are discussed in more detail in Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Due to the market disruptions, the conduits experienced difficulties in issuing commercial paper during certain periods of 2008. The
Corporation held $1 million and $27 million of commercial paper and certificates issued by the conduits in trading account assets at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Other Corporate Conduits
We
administer several other corporate conduits that hold primarily high-grade, long-term municipal, corporate, and mortgage-backed securities. These conduits obtain funding by issuing commercial paper to third party investors. We have entered into
derivative contracts which provide interest rate, currency and a pre-specified amount of credit protection to the entities in exchange for the commercial paper rate. These conduits are discussed in more detail in Note 9 Variable Interest
Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Due to the market disruptions, these conduits experienced difficulties in
issuing commercial paper during certain periods of 2008 and at December 31, 2008, we held $145 million of the commercial paper in trading account assets. We did not hold any commercial paper issued by the conduits at December 31, 2007.
Home Equity Securitizations
We evaluate all of our home equity securitizations for their potential to experience a rapid amortization event by estimating the amount and timing of future losses on
the underlying loans and the excess spread
available to cover such losses and by evaluating any estimated shortfalls in relation to contractually defined triggers. As of December 31, 2008, $13.1 billion of
outstanding principal balances of our home equity securitization transactions were in rapid amortization. Another $2.8 billion of outstanding principal balances in our home equity securitization transactions are expected to enter rapid amortization.
The Corporation is responsible for funding additional borrower draws on home equity lines of credit underlying our securitization
transactions. When transactions enter rapid amortization, principal collections on underlying loans are used to pay investor interests. This has the effect of extending the time period for which the Corporations advances are outstanding and we
may not receive reimbursement for all of the funds advanced to borrowers, as senior bondholders and monoline insurers have priority for repayment. While the available credit line for home equity securitization transactions in or expected to be in
rapid amortization was approximately $1.0 billion at December 31, 2008, a maximum funding obligation attributable to rapid amortization cannot be calculated as the borrower has the ability to pay down and redraw balances. The amount in Table 8
equals the principal balance of the outstanding trust certificates that are subject to rapid amortization or $13.1 billion at December 31, 2008. This amount is significantly higher than the amount we expect to fund. The charges we will
ultimately record as a result of the rapid amortization events are dependent on the performance of the loans, the amount of subsequent draws, and the timing of related cash flows. At December 31, 2008, the reserve for losses on expected future
draw obligations on the home equity securitizations in or expected to be in rapid amortization was $345 million. For additional information on home equity securitizations, see Note 8 Securitizations to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Municipal Bond Trusts
We administer municipal bond trusts that hold highly rated, long-term, fixed-rate municipal bonds. The trusts obtain financing by issuing floating-rate trust certificates
that reprice on a weekly basis to third party investors. We serve as remarketing agent and liquidity provider for the trusts. These trusts are discussed in more detail in Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, we held $688 million and $125 million of floating rate certificates issued by
unconsolidated municipal bond trusts in trading account assets. This increase is attributable to illiquidity in the marketplace that occurred during the second half of 2008.
Customer-Sponsored Conduits
We
provide liquidity facilities to conduits that are sponsored by our customers and which provide them with direct access to the commercial paper market. We are typically one of several liquidity providers for a customers conduit. We do not
provide SBLCs or other forms of credit enhancement to these conduits. Assets of these conduits consist primarily of auto loans, student loans and credit card receivables. The liquidity commitments benefit from structural protections which vary
depending upon the program, but given these protections, the exposures are viewed to be of investment grade quality.
These
commitments are included in Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. As we typically provide less than 20 percent of the total liquidity commitments to these conduits and do not provide other
forms of support, we have concluded that we do not hold a significant variable interest in the conduits and they are not included in our discussion of VIEs in Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Credit Card Securitizations
During the second half of 2008, we entered into a liquidity support agreement related to our commercial paper program that obtains financing by issuing tranches of commercial paper backed by
credit card receivables to third party investors from a trust sponsored by the Corporation. If certain criteria are met, such as not being able to reissue the commercial paper due to market illiquidity, the commercial paper maturity dates can
be extended to 390 days from the original issuance date. This extension would cause the outstanding commercial paper to convert to an interest bearing note and subsequent credit card receivable collections would be applied to the outstanding note
balance. If any of the investor notes are still outstanding at the end of the extended maturity period, our liquidity commitment obligates us to purchase maturity notes in order to retire the investor notes. As a maturity note holder, we would be
entitled to the remaining cash flows from the collateralizing credit card receivables. At December 31, 2008 there were no maturity notes outstanding and we held $5.0 billion of investment grade securities in AFS debt securities issued by the
trust due to illiquidity in the marketplace. For more information on how our credit card securitizations impact our liquidity, see the Liquidity Risk and Capital Management discussion on page 38.
Collateralized Debt Obligation Vehicles
CDO vehicles hold diversified pools of fixed income securities which they fund by issuing multiple tranches of debt securities, including commercial paper, and equity
securities. We provided liquidity support in the form of written put options to several CDOs totaling $542 million and $10.0 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. In addition, we provided other liquidity support to a CDO conduit of $2.3
billion at December 31, 2007. These CDOs are discussed in more detail in Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The decrease in liquidity support was primarily due to the termination of $7.0 billion of put options for three CDOs and the termination of a $2.3 billion liquidity commitment to the CDO conduit, all of
which were liquidated during 2008. Additionally, our liquidity support was reduced by $2.2 billion as put options related to two CDOs were consolidated on our balance sheet following a change in contractual arrangements and for which we now hold all
of the remaining outstanding commercial paper. At December 31, 2008, we have effectively eliminated our liquidity support for these CDOs.
At December 31, 2008, we held commercial paper of $323 million on the balance sheet that was issued by one unconsolidated CDO. At December 31, 2007, we held commercial paper of $6.6 billion that was issued by unconsolidated CDOs
and the CDO conduit.
For more information on our super senior CDO exposure and related writedowns, see our CDO exposure discussion
beginning on page 24. As noted in the Super Senior Collateralized Debt Obligation Exposure, on page 25, we had net liquidity exposure of $476 million at December 31, 2008, which is net of cumulative writedowns of $66 million. At
December 31, 2007, we had net liquidity exposure of $7.8 billion. This amount reflects gross exposure of $12.3 billion less insurance of $1.8 billion and cumulative writedowns of $2.7 billion.
Obligations and Commitments
We have contractual obligations to make future payments on debt and lease agreements. Additionally, in the normal course of business, we enter into contractual arrangements whereby we commit to future purchases of products or services from
unaffiliated parties. Obligations that are legally binding agreements whereby we agree to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time are defined as
purchase obligations. Included in purchase obligations in Table 9 are vendor con-
tracts of $6.2 billion, commitments to purchase securities of $7.9 billion and commitments to purchase loans of $14.3 billion. The most significant of our vendor
contracts include communication services, processing services and software contracts. Other long-term liabilities include our contractual funding obligations related to the Qualified Pension Plans, Nonqualified Pension Plans and Postretirement
Health and Life Plans (the Plans). Obligations to the Plans are based on the current and projected obligations of the Plans, performance of the Plans assets and any participant contributions, if applicable. During 2008 and 2007, we contributed
$1.6 billion and $243 million to the Plans, and we expect to make at least $229 million of contributions during 2009. The following table does not include UTBs of $3.5 billion associated with FIN 48 and tax-related interest and penalties of $677
million.
Debt, lease, equity and other obligations are more fully discussed in Note 12 Short-term Borrowings and
Long-term Debt and Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The Plans and UTBs are more fully discussed in Note 16 Employee Benefit Plans and Note 18 Income Taxes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Table 9 presents total long-term debt and other obligations at December 31, 2008.
Many of our lending relationships contain funded and unfunded elements. The funded portion is reflected on our balance sheet. For
lending relationships carried at historical cost, the unfunded component of these commitments is not recorded on our balance sheet until a draw is made under the credit facility; however, a reserve is established for probable losses. For lending
commitments for which we have elected to account for under SFAS 159, the fair value of the commitment is recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities.
For more information on these commitments and guarantees, including equity commitments, see Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. For more
information on the adoption of SFAS 159, see Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We enter into commitments to extend credit such as loan commitments, SBLCs and commercial letters of credit to meet the financing needs of our customers. For a summary of the total unfunded, or off-balance sheet, credit extension commitment
amounts by expiration date, see the table in Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other Commitments
We provided support to cash funds managed
within GWIM by purchasing certain assets at fair value and by committing to provide a limited amount of capital to the funds. For more information, see Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Fair Values of Level 3 Assets and Liabilities
Financial assets and liabilities whose values are based on prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable and are significant to the overall fair value measurement are
classified as Level 3 under the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS 157. The Level 3 financial assets and liabilities include private equity investments, consumer MSRs, ABS, highly structured, complex or long-dated derivative contracts and
certain CDOs, for which there is not an active market for identical assets from which to determine fair value or where sufficient, current market information about similar assets to use as observable, corroborated data for all significant inputs
into a valuation model is not available. In these cases, the fair values of these Level 3 financial assets and liabilities are determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, a net asset value approach for certain structured
securities, or similar techniques, for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.
Valuations of products using models or other techniques are sensitive to assumptions used for the significant inputs. Where market data is available, the inputs used for valuation reflect that information as of our valuation date.
Inputs to valuation models are considered unobservable if they are supported by little or no market activity. In periods of extreme volatility, lessened liquidity or in illiquid markets, there may be more variability in market pricing or a lack of
market data to use in the valuation process. An illiquid market is one in which little or no observable activity has occurred or one that lacks willing buyers or willing sellers. Fair value adjustments include adjustments for
counterparties credit risk as well as our own credit risk and liquidity as appropriate, to determine a fair value measurement. Judgment is then applied in formulating those inputs. Our valuation risk, however, is mitigated through valuation
adjustments for particular inputs, performance of stress testing of those inputs to understand the impact that varying assumptions may have on the valuation and other review processes performed to ensure appropriate valuation.
For example, at December 31, 2008, classified within Level 3 are $2.4 billion of AFS debt securities, $887 million of trading account assets
and $934 million of net derivative assets associated with our CDO exposure. Substantially all of these AFS debt securities were acquired as a result of our liquidity obligations to certain CDOs. For more information regarding our CDO exposure, the
types of assets underlying these exposures (e.g., percentage of subprime assets and vintages) and related valuation techniques see our CDO exposure discussion on page 24.
Consumer MSRs are also included in Level 3 assets as valuing these MSRs requires significant management judgment and estimation. The Corporation uses an option-adjusted spread (OAS) valuation approach to
determine the fair value of MSRs which factors in prepayment risk. This approach consists of projecting servicing cash flows under multiple inter-
Table 9 Long-term Debt and Other Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Due in 1 year or less |
|
Due after 1 year through 3 years |
|
Due after 3 years through 5 years |
|
Due after 5 years |
|
Total |
Long-term debt and capital leases |
|
$ |
42,882 |
|
$ |
76,433 |
|
$ |
49,471 |
|
$ |
99,506 |
|
$ |
268,292 |
Purchase obligations (1) |
|
|
19,326 |
|
|
7,743 |
|
|
1,198 |
|
|
144 |
|
|
28,411 |
Operating lease obligations |
|
|
2,316 |
|
|
3,829 |
|
|
2,701 |
|
|
8,320 |
|
|
17,166 |
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
395 |
|
|
779 |
|
|
516 |
|
|
532 |
|
|
2,222 |
Total long-term debt and other obligations |
|
$ |
64,919 |
|
$ |
88,784 |
|
$ |
53,886 |
|
$ |
108,502 |
|
$ |
316,091 |
(1) |
Obligations that are legally binding agreements whereby we agree to purchase products or services with a specific
minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time are defined as purchase obligations. |
est rate scenarios and discounting these cash flows using risk-adjusted discount rates. The key economic assumptions used in valuations of MSRs include weighted
average lives of the MSRs and the OAS levels. For more information on Level 3 MSRs and their sensitivity to prepayment rates and OAS levels, see Note 21 Mortgage Servicing Rights to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
For additional information on our Level 1, 2 and 3 fair value measurements, including the valuation techniques utilized to determine their fair
values, see Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles and Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements and Complex Accounting Estimates on page 76.
Valuation-related issues confronted by credit market participants, including the Corporation, in the current market include uncertainty resulting
from a significant decline in market activity for certain credit products; significant increase in dependence on model-related assumptions, and/or unobservable model inputs; doubts about the quality of the market information used as inputs, often
because it is not clear whether observable transactions are distressed sales; and significant downgrades of structured products by ratings agencies. For example, valuations of certain CDO securities and related written put options declined
significantly in response to market concerns. Additionally, liquidity issues in the ARS sector impacted the value of such securities. It is possible that the economic value of these securities could be different as the cash flows from the underlying
assets may ultimately be higher or lower than the assumptions used in current valuation models. With the exception of the changes discussed below, there have been no significant changes to the valuation methodologies used to value Level 3 assets and
liabilities during the period.
The table below presents a reconciliation for all Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair
value on a recurring basis during 2008, including realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in earnings and OCI. Level 3 assets, before the impact of counterparty netting related to our derivative positions, were $59.4 billion as of
December 31, 2008 and represented approximately 10 percent of assets measured at fair value (or three percent of total assets). Level 3 liabilities, before the impact of counterparty netting related to our derivative positions, were $8.0
billion as of December 31, 2008 and represented approximately nine percent of the liabilities measured at fair value (or less than one percent of total liabilities). See Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial
Statements for a table that presents the fair value of Level 1, 2 and 3 assets and liabilities at December 31, 2008.
Countrywide
Acquisition
The Countrywide acquisition on July 1, 2008 added consumer MSRs of $17.2 billion,
trading account assets of $1.4 billion, LHFS of $1.4 billion, accrued expenses and other liabilities of $1.2 billion related to certain secured financings and AFS debt securities of $528 million to our Level 3 assets and liabilities. Activity
subsequent to July 1, 2008 has been included in the reconciling items in the table below.
Included in Earnings and Other Comprehensive Income
During 2008, we recognized losses
of $12.1 billion on Level 3 assets and liabilities which were primarily related to losses on consumer MSRs, trading account assets and AFS debt securities partially offset by gains on net derivatives. The losses on consumer MSRs were due to declines
in mortgage rates which resulted in a significant increase in expected prepayments causing large decreases in the value of our consumer MSRs. These consumer MSR losses were more than offset by economic hedge gains of which approximately $750 million
were classified as Level 3. The losses in our trading account assets were due to widening credit spreads on our trading account positions and losses related to CDOs and ARS. The losses on AFS debt securities were primarily driven by
other-than-temporary impairment on CDO-related exposures and losses on certain investments we purchased from our GWIM cash funds. The gains in net derivatives were driven by positive valuation adjustments on our IRLCs, MSR hedge gains, and
gains recognized on hedges of our Level 3 trading account assets. We also recorded unrealized losses of $1.7 billion (pre-tax) through OCI during 2008, due to widening credit spreads on mortgage-backed securities collateralized by first liens on
residential real estate, as well as temporary impairments recognized on commercial paper and term notes. These decreases were partially offset by the unrealized gains on privately placed mortgage-backed securities that were transferred into Level 3
during 2008.
Level 3 financial instruments, such as our consumer MSRs may be economically hedged with derivatives not classified as
Level 3; therefore, gains or losses associated with Level 3 financial instruments may be offset by gains or losses associated with financial instruments classified in other levels of the fair value hierarchy. The net losses recorded in earnings and
OCI did not have a significant impact on our liquidity or capital resources.
Table 10 Level 3 Fair Value Measurements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Net Derivatives(1) |
|
|
Trading Account Assets |
|
|
Available- for-Sale Debt Securities |
|
|
Loans and Leases(2) |
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Rights |
|
|
Loans Held-for- Sale(2) |
|
|
Other Assets(3) |
|
|
Accrued Expenses and Other Liabilities(2) |
|
Balance, January 1, 2008 |
|
$ |
(1,203 |
) |
|
$ |
4,027 |
|
|
$ |
5,507 |
|
|
$ |
4,590 |
|
|
$ |
3,053 |
|
|
$ |
1,334 |
|
|
$ |
3,987 |
|
|
$ |
(660 |
) |
Countrywide acquisition |
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
1,407 |
|
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,188 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,212 |
) |
Included in earnings |
|
|
2,531 |
|
|
|
(3,222 |
) |
|
|
(2,509 |
) |
|
|
(780 |
) |
|
|
(7,115 |
) |
|
|
(1,047 |
) |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
(169 |
) |
Included in OCI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases, issuances, and settlements |
|
|
1,380 |
|
|
|
(2,055 |
) |
|
|
2,754 |
|
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
(393 |
) |
|
|
(542 |
) |
|
|
(550 |
) |
|
|
101 |
|
Transfers into (out of) Level 3 |
|
|
(253 |
) |
|
|
7,161 |
|
|
|
14,110 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,212 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
2,270 |
|
|
$ |
7,318 |
|
|
$ |
18,702 |
|
|
$ |
5,413 |
|
|
$ |
12,733 |
|
|
$ |
3,382 |
|
|
$ |
3,572 |
|
|
$ |
(1,940 |
) |
(1) |
Net derivatives at December 31, 2008 included derivative assets of $8.3 billion and derivative liabilities of $6.0
billion. Net derivatives acquired in connection with Countrywide included derivative assets of $107 million and derivative liabilities of $292 million as of July 1, 2008. |
(2) |
Amounts represent items which are accounted for at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 including commercial loan
commitments and certain secured financings recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities. |
(3) |
Other assets include equity investments held by Global Principal Investments and certain retained interests in securitization
vehicles, including interest-only strips. |
Purchases, Issuances and Settlements
During 2008, we had net purchases of $2.8 billion of Level 3 AFS debt securities, net settlements of $2.1 billion of Level 3 trading account assets, and net purchases of
$1.4 billion in net derivatives. The net purchases in Level 3 AFS debt securities were driven by the addition of certain securities that were purchased from our GWIM cash funds, as well as purchases of ARS, mortgage-backed securities and
collateralized mortgage obligations. These purchases were partially offset by settlements of certain CDO-related exposures. The settlements for trading account assets were primarily related to the liquidation of certain CDO vehicles, partially
offset by the purchase of ARS pursuant to our agreements to purchase certain ARS from our customers. For more information on our ARS agreements see Recent Events on page 5. The net settlements of derivative liabilities were driven by the
extinguishment of our liquidity exposure to certain CDO vehicles.
Transfers into or out of Level 3
Transfers into or out of Level 3 are made if the inputs used in the financial models measuring the fair
values of the assets and liabilities became unobservable or observable, respectively, in the current marketplace. These transfers are effective as of the beginning of the quarter, therefore Table 10 considers any gains or losses occurring on these
assets and liabilities during each quarter that they are classified as Level 3.
During 2008, several transfers were made into or out
of Level 3. AFS debt securities of $14.1 billion and trading account assets of $7.2 billion were transferred into Level 3. Included in the $14.1 billion of AFS debt securities were assets of certain consolidated multi-seller conduits and securities
in the form of commercial paper issued by CDOs. Included in the $7.2 billion of transfers of trading account assets were student loan ARS, certain bond positions, and asset-backed securities. These assets were transferred due to a lack of liquidity
in the marketplace. In light of the illiquidity, we implemented a change to our valuation approach for these instruments, basing the valuation on assumptions about the weighted average life of the security, estimated future coupons to be paid and
spreads observed in pricing of similar instruments.
Managing Risk
Overview
Our management governance structure enables us to
manage all major aspects of our business through our planning and review process that includes strategic, financial, associate, customer and risk planning. We derive much of our revenue from managing risk from customer transactions for profit. In
addition to qualitative factors, we utilize quantitative measures to optimize risk and reward trade offs in order to achieve growth targets and financial objectives while reducing the variability of earnings and minimizing unexpected losses. Risk
metrics that allow us to measure performance include economic capital targets and corporate risk limits. By allocating economic capital to a line of business, we effectively manage the ability to take on risk. Review and approval of business plans
incorporate approval of economic capital allocation, and economic capital usage is monitored through financial and risk reporting. Industry, country, trading, asset allocation and other limits supplement the allocation of economic capital. These
limits are based on an analysis of risk and reward in each line of business and management is responsible for tracking and reporting performance measurements as well as any exceptions to guidelines or limits. Our risk management process continually
evaluates risk and appropriate metrics needed to measure it.
Our business exposes us to the following major risks: strategic,
liquidity, credit, market, compliance and operational risk. Strategic risk is the risk that adverse business decisions, ineffective or inappropriate busi-
ness plans or failure to respond to changes in the competitive environment, business cycles, customer preferences, product obsolescence, execution and/or other
intrinsic risks of business will impact our ability to meet our objectives. Liquidity risk is the inability to accommodate liability maturities and deposit withdrawals, fund asset growth and meet contractual obligations through unconstrained access
to funding at reasonable market rates. Credit risk is the risk of loss arising from a borrowers or counterpartys inability to meet its obligations. Market risk is the risk that values of assets and liabilities or revenues will be
adversely affected by changes in market conditions, such as interest rate movements. Compliance risk is the risk posed by the failure to manage regulatory, legal and ethical issues that could result in monetary damages, losses or harm to the
banks reputation or image. Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or external events. The following sections, Strategic Risk Management on page 38, Liquidity Risk and
Capital Management beginning on page 38, Credit Risk Management beginning on page 44, Market Risk Management beginning on page 67, and Compliance and Operational Risk Management beginning on page 75, address in more detail the specific procedures,
measures and analyses of the major categories of risk that we manage.
Risk Management Processes and Methods
We have established and continually enhance control processes and use various methods to align risk-taking and risk management throughout our organization. These
control processes and methods are designed around three lines of defense: lines of business, enterprise functions and Corporate Audit.
The lines of business are the first line of defense and are responsible for identifying, quantifying, mitigating and monitoring all risks within their lines of business, while certain enterprise-wide risks are managed
centrally. For example, except for trading-related business activities, interest rate risk associated with our business activities is managed centrally as part of our ALM activities. Line of business management makes and executes the business plan
and is closest to the changing nature of risks and, therefore, we believe is best able to take actions to manage and mitigate those risks. Our lines of business prepare periodic self-assessment reports to identify the status of risk issues,
including mitigation plans, if appropriate. These reports roll up to executive management to ensure appropriate risk management and oversight, and to identify enterprise-wide issues. Our management processes, structures and policies aid us in
complying with laws and regulations and provide clear lines for decision-making and accountability. Wherever practical, we attempt to house decision-making authority as close to the transaction as possible while retaining supervisory control
functions from both in and outside of the lines of business.
The key elements of the second line of defense are our Risk Management,
Compliance, Finance and Treasury, Human Resources, and Legal functions. These groups are independent of the lines of businesses and are organized on both a line of business and enterprise-wide basis. For example, for Risk Management, a senior risk
executive is assigned to each of the lines of business and is responsible for the oversight of all the risks associated with that line of business. Enterprise-level risk executives have responsibility to develop and implement polices and practices
to assess and manage enterprise-wide credit, market and operational risks.
Corporate Audit, the third line of defense, provides an
independent assessment of our management and internal control systems. Corporate Audit activities are designed to provide reasonable assurance that resources are adequately protected; significant financial, managerial and operating information is
materially complete, accurate and reliable; and
employees actions are in compliance with corporate policies, standards, procedures, and applicable laws and regulations.
We use various methods to manage risks at the line of business levels and corporate-wide. Examples of these methods include planning and
forecasting, risk committees and forums, limits, models, and hedging strategies. Planning and forecasting facilitates analysis of actual versus planned results and provides an indication of unanticipated risk levels. Generally, risk committees and
forums are composed of lines of business, risk management, treasury, compliance, legal and finance personnel, among others, who actively monitor performance against plan, limits, potential issues, and introduction of new products. Limits, the amount
of exposure that may be taken in a product, relationship, region or industry, seek to align corporate-wide risk goals with those of each line of business and are part of our overall risk management process to help reduce the volatility of market,
credit and operational losses. Models are used to estimate market value and net interest income sensitivity, and to estimate expected and unexpected losses for each product and line of business, where appropriate. Hedging strategies are used to
manage the risk of borrower or counterparty concentration risk and to manage market risk in the portfolio.
The formal processes used
to manage risk represent only one portion of our overall risk management process. Corporate culture and the actions of our associates are also critical to effective risk management. Through our Code of Ethics, we set a high standard for our
associates. The Code of Ethics provides a framework for all of our associates to conduct themselves with the highest integrity in the delivery of our products or services to our customers. We instill a risk-conscious culture through communications,
training, policies, procedures, and organizational roles and responsibilities. Additionally, we continue to strengthen the linkage between the associate performance management process and individual compensation to encourage associates to work
toward corporate-wide risk goals.
Oversight
The
Board oversees the risk management of the Corporation through its committees, management committees and the Chief Executive Officer. The Boards Audit Committee monitors (1) the effectiveness of our internal controls, (2) the
integrity of our Consolidated Financial Statements and (3) compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. In addition, the Audit Committee oversees the internal audit function and the independent registered public accountant. The
Boards Asset Quality Committee oversees credit and market risks and related topics that may impact our assets and earnings. The Finance Committee, a management committee, oversees the development and performance of the policies and strategies
for managing the strategic, credit, market, and operational risks to our earnings and capital. The Asset Liability Committee (ALCO), a subcommittee of the Finance Committee, oversees our policies and processes designed to assure sound market risk
and balance sheet management. The Global Markets Risk Committee (GRC) has been designated by ALCO as the primary governance authority for Global Markets Risk Management. The Compliance and Operational Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the Finance
Committee, oversees our policies and processes designed to assure sound operational and compliance risk management. The Credit Risk Committee (CRC), a subcommittee of the Finance Committee, oversees and approves our adherence to sound credit risk
management policies and practices. Certain CRC approvals are subject to the oversight of the Boards Asset Quality Committee. The Executive Management Team (i.e., Chief Executive Officer and select executives of the management team) reviews our
corporate strategies and objectives, evaluates business performance, and reviews business plans including economic capital allocations to the Corporation and lines
of business. Management continues to direct corporate-wide efforts to address the Basel Committee on Banking Supervisions new risk-based capital standards (Basel
II). The Audit Committee and Finance Committee oversee managements plans to comply with Basel II. For additional information, see the Basel II discussion on page 42 and Note 15 Regulatory Requirements and Restrictions to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Strategic Risk Management
Strategic risk is the risk that adverse business decisions, ineffective or inappropriate business plans, or failure to respond to changes in the competitive
environment, business cycles, customer preferences, product obsolescence, execution and/or other intrinsic risks of business will impact our ability to meet our objectives. We use our planning process to help manage strategic risk. A key component
of the planning process aligns strategies, goals, tactics and resources throughout the enterprise. The process begins with the creation of a corporate-wide business plan which incorporates an assessment of the strategic risks. This business plan
establishes the corporate strategic direction. The planning process then cascades through the lines of business, creating business line plans that are aligned with the Corporations strategic direction. At each level, tactics and metrics are
identified to measure success in achieving goals and assure adherence to the plans. As part of this process, the lines of business continuously evaluate the impact of changing market and business conditions, and the overall risk in meeting
objectives. See the Compliance and Operational Risk Management section on page 75 for a further description of this process. Corporate Audit in turn monitors, and independently reviews and evaluates, the plans and measurement processes.
One of the key tools we use to manage strategic risk is economic capital allocation. Through the economic capital allocation process we
effectively manage each line of businesss ability to take on risk. Review and approval of business plans incorporate approval of economic capital allocation, and economic capital usage is monitored through financial and risk reporting.
Economic capital allocation plans for the lines of business are incorporated into the Corporations operating plan that is approved by the Board on an annual basis.
Liquidity Risk and Capital Management
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity is the ongoing ability to accommodate liability maturities and deposit withdrawals, fund asset growth and business operations, and meet contractual
obligations through unconstrained access to funding at reasonable market rates. Liquidity management involves forecasting funding requirements and maintaining sufficient capacity to accommodate fluctuations in asset and liability levels due to
changes in our business operations or unanticipated events. Sources of liquidity include deposits and other customer-based funding, and wholesale market-based funding.
We manage liquidity at two levels. The first is the liquidity of the parent company, which is the holding company that owns the banking and nonbanking subsidiaries. The second is the liquidity of the
banking subsidiaries. The management of liquidity at both levels is essential because the parent company and banking subsidiaries have different funding needs and sources, and are subject to certain regulatory guidelines and requirements. Through
ALCO, the Finance Committee is responsible for establishing our liquidity policy as well as approving operating and contingency procedures, and monitoring liquidity on an ongoing basis. Corporate Treasury is responsible for planning and executing
our funding activities and strategy.
In order to ensure adequate liquidity through the full range of potential operating environments and market conditions, we conduct our liquidity management and
business activities in a manner that will preserve and enhance funding stability, flexibility, and diversity. Key components of this operating strategy include a strong focus on customer-based funding, maintaining direct relationships with wholesale
market funding providers, and maintaining the ability to liquefy certain assets when, and if, requirements warrant. Credit markets substantially deteriorated over the past 18 months and access to non-guaranteed market-based funding has diminished
for financial institutions. For these reasons we have utilized various government institutions (e.g., Federal Reserve, U.S. Treasury and FDIC) funding programs to enhance our liquidity position. Many of these facilities are temporary in nature, but
have provided significant market stability and have allowed many banks to maintain a healthy liquidity profile.
We develop and
maintain contingency funding plans for both the parent company and bank liquidity positions. These plans evaluate our liquidity position under various operating circumstances and allow us to ensure that we would be able to operate through a period
of stress when access to normal sources of funding is constrained. The plans project funding requirements during a potential period of stress, specify and quantify sources of liquidity, outline actions and procedures for effectively managing through
the problem period, and define roles and responsibilities. They are reviewed and approved annually by ALCO.
Under normal business
conditions, primary sources of funding for the parent company include dividends received from its banking and nonbanking subsidiaries, and proceeds from the issuance of senior and subordinated debt, as well as commercial paper and equity. Primary
uses of funds for the parent company include repayment of maturing debt and commercial paper, share repurchases, dividends paid to shareholders, and subsidiary funding through capital or debt.
Our borrowing costs and ability to raise funds are directly impacted by our credit ratings. The credit ratings of Bank of America Corporation and
Bank of America, N.A. as of February 27, 2009 are reflected in the table below.
The cost and availability of unsecured and
secured financing are impacted by changes in our credit ratings. A reduction in these ratings or the ratings of other asset-backed securitizations could have an adverse effect on our access to credit markets and the related cost of funds. Some of
the primary factors in maintaining our credit ratings include a stable and diverse earnings stream, strong capital ratios, strong credit quality and risk management controls, diverse funding sources and disciplined liquidity monitoring procedures.
If the Corporations long-term credit rating was incrementally downgraded by one level by the rating agencies, we estimate the
incremental cost of funds and the potential lost funding would continue to be negligible for senior and subordinated debt and short-term bank debt. Additionally, we do not believe that funding requirements for VIEs and other third party commitments
would be significantly impacted. However, if the Corporations short-term credit rating was downgraded by one level,
our incremental cost of funds and potential lost funding may be material due to the negative impacts on our commercial paper programs.
Since October 2008, Bank of America has had the ability to issue long-term senior unsecured debt through the TLGP program. This program gives
us the ability to issue AAA-rated debt backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government regardless of our current credit rating. For further information regarding this program, see Regulatory Initiatives beginning on page 3.
The parent company maintains a cushion of excess liquidity that would be sufficient to fully fund the holding company and nonbank affiliate
operations for an extended period during which funding from normal sources is disrupted. The primary measure used to assess the parent companys liquidity is the Time to Required Funding during such a period of liquidity disruption.
Since deposits are taken by the bank operating subsidiaries and not by the parent company, this measure is not dependent on the bank operating subsidiaries stable deposit balances. This measure assumes that the parent company is unable to
generate funds from debt or equity issuance, receives no dividend income from subsidiaries, and no longer pays undeclared dividends to shareholders while continuing to meet nondiscretionary uses needed to maintain operations and repayment of
contractual principal and interest payments owed by the parent company and affiliated companies. Under this scenario, the amount of time the parent company and its nonbank subsidiaries can operate and meet all obligations before the current liquid
assets are exhausted is considered the Time to Required Funding. ALCO approves the target range set for this metric, in months, and monitors adherence to the target. Maintaining excess parent company cash helps to facilitate the target
range of 21 to 27 months for Time to Required Funding and is the primary driver of the timing and amount of the Corporations debt issuances. After incorporating the impacts of the Corporations acquisition of Merrill Lynch,
including the $10.0 billion of Series Q Preferred Stock issued in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, Time to Required Funding increased to 23 months at December 31, 2008, compared to 19 months at December 31,
2007. Excluding the impacts of Merrill Lynch acquisition and Series Q Preferred Stock issuance would result in a significantly higher Time to Required Funding as we had taken certain liquidity actions prior to December 31, 2008 in
preparation for the Merrill Lynch acquisition. The bank operating subsidiaries maintain sufficient funding capacity to address large increases in funding requirements such as deposit outflows. This capacity is comprised of available wholesale market
capacity, liquidity derived from a reduction in asset levels and various secured funding sources.
The primary sources of funding
for our banking subsidiaries include customer deposits and wholesale market-based funding. Primary uses of funds for the banking subsidiaries include growth in the core asset portfolios, including loan demand, and in the ALM portfolio. We use the
ALM portfolio primarily to manage interest rate risk and liquidity risk.
Table 11 Credit Ratings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank of America Corporation |
|
|
|
Bank of America, N.A. |
|
|
Senior Debt |
|
Subordinated Debt |
|
Commercial Paper |
|
|
|
Short-term Borrowings |
|
Long-term Debt |
Moodys Investors Service |
|
A1 |
|
A2 |
|
P-1 |
|
|
|
P-1 |
|
Aa2 |
Standard & Poors |
|
A+ |
|
A |
|
A-1 |
|
|
|
A-1+ |
|
AA- |
Fitch Ratings |
|
A+ |
|
A |
|
F1+ |
|
|
|
F1+ |
|
A+ |
One ratio that can be used to monitor the stability of our funding composition and takes into account our deposit balances is the loan to domestic deposit
ratio. This ratio reflects the percent of loans and leases that are funded by domestic core deposits, a relatively stable funding source. A ratio below 100 percent indicates that our loan portfolio is completely funded by domestic core deposits. The
ratio was 118 percent at December 31, 2008 compared to 127 percent at December 31, 2007.
ALCO determines prudent parameters
for wholesale market-based borrowing and regularly reviews the funding plan for the bank subsidiaries to ensure compliance with these parameters. The contingency funding plan for the banking subsidiaries evaluates liquidity over a 12-month period in
a variety of business environment scenarios assuming different levels of earnings performance and credit ratings as well as public and investor relations factors. Funding exposure related to our role as liquidity provider to certain off-balance
sheet financing entities is also measured under a stress scenario. In this analysis, ratings are downgraded such that the off-balance sheet financing entities are not able to issue commercial paper and backup facilities that we provide are drawn
upon. In addition, potential draws on credit facilities to issuers with ratings below a certain level are analyzed to assess potential funding exposure.
The financial market disruptions that began in 2007 continued to impact the economy and financial services sector during 2008. The unsecured funding markets remained stressed and experienced short-term periods of
illiquidity during the second half of the year as prime money market fund managers remained focused on redemptions and increased their portfolio composition to shorter and more liquid government-sponsored assets. As a result of the disruptions, the
Corporation shifted to issuing FDIC guaranteed TLGP debt in the fourth quarter to generate material funding in the capital markets.
Our primary banking subsidiary, Bank of America, N.A., is maintaining historically high levels of cash with the Federal Reserve each day as well as ensuring an unused portion of high quality collateral is available to generate cash at all
times. Further, Bank of America, N.A. maintains additional collateral that could utilize the Federal Reserves balance sheet through the Discount Window in the event of a deep and prolonged shock to funding markets.
The Corporation also utilizes overnight repo markets. During the most severe liquidity disruptions in the overnight repo markets we did not
experience liquidity issues. Nonetheless, we have recently reduced overnight funding exposure at both the parent and banking subsidiary levels.
In addition, liquidity for ABS disappeared and issuance spreads rose to historic highs, negatively impacting our credit card securitization programs. If these conditions persist it could adversely affect our ability to access
these markets at favorable terms in the future. Approximately $20.7 billion of debt issued through our U.S. credit card securitizations trust will mature in the upcoming 12 months. The U.S. credit card securitization trust had approximately $88.6
billion and $84.8 billion in outstanding securitized loans at December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the trust excess spread was 5.64 percent and 6.64 percent. If the 3-month average excess spread declines below 4.50 percent, the residual excess cash
flows that are typically returned to the Corporation will be held by a trustee up to certain levels as additional credit enhancements to the investors. If the excess spread were to decline to zero percent, the trust would enter into early
amortization, repayment of the debt issued through our credit card securitizations would be accelerated and the Corporation will have to fund all future credit card loan advances on-balance sheet. This could adversely impact the Corporations
liquidity and capital.
As specifically permitted by the terms of the transaction documents, and in an effort to address the recent
decline in the excess spread due to the performance of the underlying credit card receivables in the U.S.
credit card securitization trust, an additional subordinated security totaling approximately $8.0 billion will be issued by the trust to the Corporation in the first
quarter of 2009. This security will provide additional credit enhancement to the trust and its investors. In addition, upon completion of requirements set forth in transaction documents, we plan to allocate a percentage of new receivables into the
trust that, when collected, will be applied to finance charges, which is expected to increase the yield in the trust. These actions are not expected to have a significant impact on the Corporations results of operations. If these actions
had occurred on December 31, 2008, the impact would have increased our Tier 1 risk-weighted assets by approximately $75 billion or six percent.
While market conditions have been challenging, we experienced a significant increase in deposits as we benefited from a consumer and business flight-to-safety in the second half of 2008. We have also taken direct actions to
enhance our liquidity position during 2008 including receiving cash proceeds of $34.7 billion on the issuance of preferred stock, $9.9 billion of common stock, net of underwriting expenses, $8.5 billion of senior notes, $1.0 billion of Eurodollar
floating rate notes and $15.6 billion of debt issued under the TLGP by the parent company. Included in the $34.7 billion of cash proceeds on the issuance of preferred stock is $15.0 billion related to the Series N Preferred Stock that was issued in
connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, which is discussed further below. Furthermore, in January 2009, the Corporation issued Series Q Preferred Stock for an additional $10.0 billion of cash proceeds in connection with the TARP
Capital Purchase Program.
In addition, in January 2009, the U.S. government agreed to assist in the Merrill Lynch acquisition by
making a further investment in the Corporation of $20.0 billion in preferred stock. Further, the U.S. government has agreed in principle to provide protection against the possibility of unusually large losses on $118.0 billion in selected capital
markets exposure, primarily from the former Merrill Lynch portfolio. As a fee for this arrangement, we expect to issue to the U.S. Treasury and FDIC a total of $4.0 billion of a new class of preferred stock and to issue warrants to acquire 30.1
million shares of Bank of America common stock. For more information, see the Recent Events section on page 5.
Lastly, Bank of
America, N.A. issued $10.0 billion of senior unsecured bank notes, of which $6.0 billion included an extendible feature, $4.3 billion of debt under the TLGP, and $43.1 billion in short term bank notes. Also, several funding programs have been made
available through the Federal Reserve which are more fully described in Regulatory Initiatives on page 3.
A majority of the long-term
liquidity obtained by the Corporation under the TLGP since the announcement of the Merrill Lynch acquisition was completed in preparation for the funding needs of the combined organizations. We will continue to manage the liquidity position of the
combined company through our ALM activities. Merrill Lynch had long-term debt outstanding with a fair value of $189.4 billion at acquisition. As the organizations integrate, the Corporation intends to utilize the capital markets to maintain its
Time to Required Funding within the approved ALCO guidelines.
Regulatory Capital
At December 31, 2008, the Corporation operated its banking activities primarily under three charters: Bank of America, N.A., FIA Card Services, N.A., and
Countrywide Bank, FSB. Effective October 17, 2008, LaSalle Bank, N.A. merged with and into Bank of America, N.A., with Bank of America, N.A. as the surviving entity. As a regulated financial services company, we are governed by certain
regulatory capital requirements. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., and FIA Card Services, N.A., were classified as well-capitalized for regulatory purposes, the highest classification. Effective
July 1, 2008, we
acquired Countrywide Bank, FSB which is regulated by the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) and is, therefore, subject to OTS capital requirements. Countrywide Bank,
FSB is required by OTS regulations to maintain a tangible equity ratio of at least two percent to avoid being classified as critically undercapitalized. At December 31, 2008, Countrywide Bank, FSBs tangible equity ratio was
6.64 percent and was classified as well-capitalized for regulatory purposes. Management believes that the Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., FIA Card Services, N.A. and Countrywide Bank, FSB will remain well-capitalized.
Certain corporate sponsored trust companies which issue trust preferred securities (Trust Securities) are not consolidated pursuant
to FIN 46R. In accordance with FRB guidance, the FRB allows Trust Securities to qualify as Tier 1 Capital with revised quantitative limits that would be effective on March 31, 2009. As a result, we include Trust Securities in Tier 1 Capital.
Such limits restricted core capital elements to 15 percent for internationally active bank holding companies. In addition, the FRB
revised the qualitative standards for capital instruments included in regulatory capital. Internationally active bank holding companies are those with consolidated assets greater than $250 billion or on-balance sheet exposure greater than $10
billion. At December 31, 2008, the Corporations restricted core capital elements comprised 14.7 percent of total core capital elements. The Corporation expects to remain fully compliant with the revised limits prior to the implementation
date of March 31, 2009.
Table 12 reconciles the Corporations total shareholders equity to Tier 1 and Total Capital
as defined by the regulations issued by the FRB, the FDIC, the OCC and the OTS at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
At
December 31, 2008, the Corporations Tier 1 Capital, Total Capital and Tier 1 Leverage ratios were 9.15 percent, 13.00 percent, and 6.44 percent, respectively. See Note 15 Regulatory Requirements and Restrictions to the
Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the Corporations regulatory capital.
The Corporation calculates
tangible common equity as common shareholders equity less goodwill and intangible assets (excluding MSRs) divided by total assets less goodwill and intangible assets (excluding MSRs). Our tangible common equity ratio decreased to 2.83 percent
at December 31, 2008 as compared to 3.35 percent at December 31, 2007 as the favorable impact to common equity from the issuance of common stock and net income during the year was more than offset by dividend payments and an increased loss
in accumulated OCI. Management remains focused on balance sheet discipline and
reducing non-core business asset levels to improve this ratio in future periods. Unlike the Tier 1 Capital ratio, the tangible common equity ratio is subject
to fluctuations in accumulated OCI, including unrealized losses on AFS debt securities that we expect to return to par upon their maturity, which adversely impacted this ratio at December 31, 2008.
On January 1, 2009, we completed the acquisition of Merrill Lynch and subsequently issued an additional $10.0 billion of preferred stock in
connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program. In addition, on January 16, 2009, the U.S. government agreed to assist in the Merrill Lynch acquisition by making a further investment in the Corporation of $20.0 billion in preferred stock.
Further, the U.S. government has agreed in principle to provide protection against the possibility of unusually large losses on $118.0 billion in selected capital markets exposure, primarily from the former Merrill Lynch portfolio. As a fee for this
arrangement, we expect to issue to the U.S. Treasury and FDIC a total of $4.0 billion of a new class of preferred stock. On a pro forma basis the net impact of the additional capital actions and the acquisition of Merrill Lynch would result in a
Tier 1 Capital ratio of approximately 10.7 percent and tangible common equity ratio of 2.6 percent at December 31, 2008.
Management continuously evaluates opportunities to build to the Corporations capital position. During this heightened period of market stress, there is limited ability to source meaningful private-sector capital. Management therefore
remains focused on managing asset-levels appropriately ensuring we deploy TARP funds to core lending businesses and trimming other assets in non-core businesses. The Merrill Lynch balance sheet ended the year at approximately $650 billion;
down from $875 billion at September 30, 2008. These reductions provided significant benefit to capital, while not forgoing meaningful earnings to the Corporation. Management is also focused on disciplined expense management to further
contribute to the Corporations capital position through earnings generation. The government actions noted above ensures the Corporation has adequate capital to manage through this earnings cycle, but we are clearly focused on evaluating
opportunities to repay the U. S. government as soon as possible. Obviously the earnings environment and overall health of markets will dictate the pace in which we are able to accomplish these objectives. Further, management is engaged in holistic
stress-testing of the Corporations earnings, capital, and liquidity position. Management recognizes the interdependencies and the importance of planning under a wide range of potential scenarios in light of the historic volatility witnessed
over the past 18 months.
Table 12 Reconciliation of Tier 1 and Total Capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
$ |
177,052 |
|
|
$ |
146,803 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(81,934 |
) |
|
|
(77,530 |
) |
Nonqualifying intangible assets (1) |
|
|
(4,195 |
) |
|
|
(5,239 |
) |
Effect of net unrealized (gains) losses on AFS debt and marketable equity securities and net (gains) losses on derivatives recorded in accumulated OCI,
net-of-tax |
|
|
5,479 |
|
|
|
(2,149 |
) |
Unamortized net periodic benefit costs recorded in accumulated OCI, net-of-tax |
|
|
4,642 |
|
|
|
1,301 |
|
Trust securities |
|
|
18,105 |
|
|
|
16,863 |
|
Other |
|
|
1,665 |
|
|
|
3,323 |
|
Total Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
120,814 |
|
|
|
83,372 |
|
Long-term debt qualifying as Tier 2 Capital |
|
|
31,312 |
|
|
|
31,771 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
23,071 |
|
|
|
11,588 |
|
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
Other (2) |
|
|
(3,957 |
) |
|
|
6,471 |
|
Total Capital |
|
$ |
171,661 |
|
|
$ |
133,720 |
|
(1) |
Nonqualifying intangible assets of the Corporation are comprised of certain core deposit intangibles, affinity relationships
and other intangibles. |
(2) |
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, includes 45 percent of the pre-tax fair value adjustment of $3.5 billion and
$6.0 billion related to the Corporations stock investment in CCB. |
Basel II
In June 2004, the Basel II Accord was published with
the intent of more closely aligning regulatory capital requirements with underlying risks. Similar to economic capital measures, Basel II seeks to address credit risk, market risk, and operational risk.
While economic capital is measured to cover unexpected losses, the Corporation also maintains a certain threshold in terms of regulatory capital
to adhere to legal standards of capital adequacy. These thresholds or leverage ratios will continue to be utilized for the foreseeable future.
The Basel II Final Rule (Basel II Rules), which was published on December 7, 2007, establish requirements for the U.S. implementation and provide detailed capital requirements for credit and operational risk under
Pillar 1, supervisory requirements under Pillar 2 and disclosure requirements under Pillar 3. We are still awaiting final rules for market risk requirements under Basel II.
The Basel II Rules allowed U.S. financial institutions to begin parallel reporting as early as 2008, upon successful development and approval of a formal Implementation Plan, which was approved during the
third quarter of 2008. During the parallel period, the resulting capital calculations under both the current (Basel I) rules and the Basel II Rules should be reported to the financial institutions regulatory supervisors for
examination and compliance for at least four consecutive quarterly periods. Once the parallel period and subsequent three-year transition period are successfully completed, the financial institution will utilize Basel II as their means of
capital adequacy assessment, measurement and reporting and discontinue use of Basel I.
With the acquisition of Countrywide during
2008 and Merrill Lynch effective January 1, 2009, the Corporation has 24 months from the date of each acquisition to fully incorporate and transition all data necessary to successfully complete the more robust Basel II calculations. We continue
to work with the FRB, OCC, OTS and FDIC (collectively, the Agencies) and with our transition team to meet these timelines and expect to meet or exceed these requirements.
We continue execution efforts to ensure preparedness with all Basel II requirements. The goal is to achieve full compliance by the end of the three-year implementation period in 2011. Further,
internationally Basel II was implemented in several countries during 2008, while others will begin implementation in 2009 and beyond.
Common Share
Issuances and Repurchases
In January of 2009, the Corporation issued common stock in connection with its acquisition of Merrill Lynch and
warrants to purchase common stock in connection with preferred stock issuances to the U.S. government. For additional information regarding the Merrill Lynch acquisition, see Note 2 Merger and Restructuring Activity to the Consolidated
Financial Statements. For additional information regarding the issuance of warrants to purchase common stock, see Note 25 Subsequent Events to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We may repurchase shares, subject to
certain restrictions including those imposed by the U.S. government, from time to time, in the open market or in private transactions through our approved repurchase programs. We did not repurchase any shares of the Corporations common stock
during 2008 and we issued 107 million shares in connection with the Countrywide acquisition and 17.8 million shares under employee stock plans. In addition, in October 2008, we issued 455 million shares of common stock at $22.00 per
share with proceeds of $9.9 billion, net of underwriting expenses.
To replace the expiring stock repurchase program, in July 2008,
the Board authorized a stock repurchase program of up to 75 million shares of the Corporations common stock at an aggregate cost not to exceed $3.75 billion that is limited to a period of 12 to 18 months. This program is also subject to
the repurchase restrictions.
For more information on our common share issuances and repurchases, see Note 14
Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Common Stock Dividends
The table below is a summary of our regular quarterly cash dividends on common stock as of February 27, 2009. In October 2008, to position our dividend to
better match our earnings, we announced a 50 percent reduction in our regular quarterly cash dividend on common stock to $0.32 per share. In January 2009, we further reduced our regular quarterly dividend to $0.01 per share. The declaration of
common stock dividends is subject to restrictions that are described in detail in Note 14 Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Preferred Stock Issuances
In October 2008, in connection with
the TARP Capital Purchase Program, created as part of the EESA, we issued to the U.S. Treasury 600 thousand shares of Series N Preferred Stock with a par value of $0.01 per share for $15.0 billion. In addition, in January of 2009 we issued an
additional $30.0 billion of preferred stock to the U.S. government. Further, the U.S. government has agreed in principle to provide protection against the possibility of unusually large losses on $118.0 billion in selected capital markets exposure,
primarily from the former Merrill Lynch portfolio. As a fee for this arrangement, we expect to issue to the U.S. Treasury and FDIC a total of $4.0 billion of a new class of preferred stock. For more information on the January 2009 issuances and the
U.S. government guarantee, see Recent Events beginning on page 5 and Note 25 Subsequent Events to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Under the TARP Capital Purchase Program dividend payments on, and repurchases of, our outstanding preferred stock are subject to certain restrictions. For more information on these restrictions, see Note 14
Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Table 13 Common Stock Dividend Summary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Declaration Date |
|
Record Date |
|
Payment Date |
|
Dividend per Share |
January 16, 2009 |
|
March 6, 2009 |
|
March 27, 2009 |
|
$ |
0.01 |
October 6, 2008 |
|
December 5, 2008 |
|
December 26, 2008 |
|
|
0.32 |
July 23, 2008 |
|
September 5, 2008 |
|
September 26, 2008 |
|
|
0.64 |
April 23, 2008 |
|
June 6, 2008 |
|
June 27, 2008 |
|
|
0.64 |
January 23, 2008 |
|
March 7, 2008 |
|
March 28, 2008 |
|
|
0.64 |
In May and June 2008, we issued 117 thousand shares of Bank of America Corporation 8.20% Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series H with a par
value of $0.01 per share for $2.9 billion.
In April 2008, we issued 160 thousand shares of Bank of America Corporation
Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series M with a par value of $0.01 per share for $4.0 billion. The fixed rate is 8.125 percent through May 14, 2018 and then adjusts to three-month LIBOR plus 364 bps thereafter.
In January 2008, we issued 240 thousand shares of Bank of America Corporation Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred
Stock, Series K with a par value of $0.01 per share for $6.0 billion. The fixed rate is 8.00 percent through January 29, 2018 and then adjusts to three-month LIBOR plus 363 bps thereafter. In addition, we issued 6.9 million shares of
Bank of America Corporation 7.25% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock, Series L with a par value of $0.01 per share for $6.9 billion.
For additional information on the issuance of preferred stock, see Note 14 Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Preferred Stock Dividends
In 2008, we declared a total of $1.3 billion in cash dividends on our various series
of preferred stock, which does not include $130 million of fourth quarter 2008 Series N cumulative preferred dividends not declared as of year end. In addition, in January 2009, we declared aggregate dividends on preferred stock of $909 million,
including $145 million related to preferred stock exchanged in connection with the Merrill Lynch acquisition. We estimate that the potential aggregate cash dividends on various series of our preferred stock in the first quarter of 2009, subject to
the Boards future declaration and assuming no conversion of convertible shares, will be $1.4 billion. For additional information on our preferred stock, see Note 14 Shareholders Equity and Earnings Per Common Share to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following table is a summary of our cash dividends on preferred stock as of
February 27, 2009.
Table 14 Preferred Stock Cash Dividend Summary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
Notional Amount (in millions) |
|
Declaration Date |
|
|
Record Date |
|
Payment Date |
|
Per Annum Dividend Rate |
|
|
Dividend per Share |
Series B |
|
$ |
1 |
|
January 16, 2009 |
|
|
April 10, 2009 |
|
April 24, 2009 |
|
7.00 |
% |
|
$ |
1.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 6, 2008 |
|
|
January 9, 2009 |
|
January 23, 2009 |
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 23, 2008 |
|
|
October 8, 2008 |
|
October 24, 2008 |
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 23, 2008 |
|
|
July 9, 2008 |
|
July 25, 2008 |
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
January 23, 2008 |
|
|
April 11, 2008 |
|
April 25, 2008 |
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
Series D (1) |
|
$ |
825 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
February 27, 2009 |
|
March 16, 2009 |
|
6.204 |
% |
|
$ |
0.38775 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, 2008 |
|
|
November 28, 2008 |
|
December 15, 2008 |
|
6.204 |
|
|
|
0.38775 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
|
|
August 29, 2008 |
|
September 15, 2008 |
|
6.204 |
|
|
|
0.38775 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2008 |
|
|
May 30, 2008 |
|
June 16, 2008 |
|
6.204 |
|
|
|
0.38775 |
|
|
|
|
|
January 3, 2008 |
|
|
February 29, 2008 |
|
March 14, 2008 |
|
6.204 |
|
|
|
0.38775 |
Series E (1) |
|
$ |
2,025 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
January 30, 2009 |
|
February 17, 2009 |
|
Floating |
|
|
$ |
0.25556 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, 2008 |
|
|
October 31, 2008 |
|
November 17, 2008 |
|
Floating |
|
|
|
0.25556 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
|
|
July 31, 2008 |
|
August 15, 2008 |
|
Floating |
|
|
|
0.25556 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2008 |
|
|
April 30, 2008 |
|
May 15, 2008 |
|
Floating |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
January 3, 2008 |
|
|
January 31, 2008 |
|
February 15, 2008 |
|
Floating |
|
|
|
0.33342 |
Series H (1) |
|
$ |
2,925 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
January 15, 2009 |
|
February 2, 2009 |
|
8.20 |
% |
|
$ |
0.51250 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, 2008 |
|
|
October 15, 2008 |
|
November 3, 2008 |
|
8.20 |
|
|
|
0.51250 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
(2) |
|
July 15, 2008 |
|
August 1, 2008 |
|
8.20 |
|
|
|
0.3929 |
Series I (1) |
|
$ |
550 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
March 15, 2009 |
|
April 1, 2009 |
|
6.625 |
% |
|
$ |
0.41406 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, 2008 |
|
|
December 15, 2008 |
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
6.625 |
|
|
|
0.41406 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
|
|
September 15, 2008 |
|
October 1, 2008 |
|
6.625 |
|
|
|
0.41406 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2008 |
|
|
June 15, 2008 |
|
July 1, 2008 |
|
6.625 |
|
|
|
0.41406 |
|
|
|
|
|
January 3, 2008 |
|
|
March 15, 2008 |
|
April 1, 2008 |
|
6.625 |
|
|
|
0.41406 |
Series J (1) |
|
$ |
1,035 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
January 15, 2009 |
|
February 2, 2009 |
|
7.25 |
% |
|
$ |
0.45312 |
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, 2008 |
|
|
October 15, 2008 |
|
November 3, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
0.45312 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
|
|
July 15, 2008 |
|
August 1, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
0.45312 |
|
|
|
|
|
April 3, 2008 |
|
|
April 15, 2008 |
|
May 1, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
0.45312 |
|
|
|
|
|
January 3, 2008 |
(2) |
|
January 15, 2008 |
|
February 1, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
0.35750 |
Series K (3, 4) |
|
$ |
6,000 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
|
|
January 15, 2009 |
|
January 30, 2009 |
|
Fixed-to-Floating |
|
|
$ |
40.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
July 3, 2008 |
(2) |
|
July 15, 2008 |
|
July 30, 2008 |
|
Fixed-to-Floating |
|
|
|
40.00 |
Series L |
|
$ |
6,900 |
|
December 16, 2008 |
|
|
January 1, 2009 |
|
January 30, 2009 |
|
7.25 |
% |
|
$ |
18.1250 |
|
|
|
|
|
September 16, 2008 |
|
|
October 1, 2008 |
|
October 30, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
18.1250 |
|
|
|
|
|
June 13, 2008 |
|
|
July 1, 2008 |
|
July 30, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
18.1250 |
|
|
|
|
|
March 14, 2008 |
(2) |
|
April 1, 2008 |
|
April 30, 2008 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
18.3264 |
Series M (3, 4) |
|
$ |
4,000 |
|
October 2, 2008 |
(2) |
|
October 31, 2008 |
|
November 17, 2008 |
|
Fixed-to-Floating |
|
|
$ |
44.0104 |
Series N |
|
$ |
15,000 |
|
January 5, 2009 |
(2) |
|
January 31, 2009 |
|
February 17, 2009 |
|
5.00 |
% |
|
$ |
371.53 |
Series Q |
|
$ |
10,000 |
|
January 21, 2009 |
(2) |
|
January 31, 2009 |
|
February 17, 2009 |
|
5.00 |
% |
|
$ |
125 |
Series R |
|
$ |
20,000 |
|
January 21, 2009 |
(2) |
|
January 31, 2009 |
|
February 17, 2009 |
|
8.00 |
% |
|
$ |
161.11 |
(1) |
Dividends per depositary share, each representing a 1/1000th interest in a share of preferred stock.
|
(3) |
Initially pays dividends semi-annually. |
(4) |
Dividends per depository share, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of preferred stock.
|
Credit Risk Management
The housing downturn and the financial market disruptions that began in the second half of 2007 have continued to affect the economy and the financial services sector in 2008. The housing downturn and the broader economic
slowdown accelerated during the second half of 2008 and negatively impacted the credit quality of both our consumer and commercial portfolios. The depth and breadth of the downturn as well as the resulting impacts on the credit quality of our
portfolios remain unclear. However, we expect continued market turbulence and economic uncertainty to continue well into 2009. This will result in higher credit losses and provision for credit losses in future periods.
Credit risk is the risk of loss arising from the inability of a borrower or counterparty to meet its obligations. Credit risk can also arise from
operational failures that result in an erroneous advance, commitment or investment of funds. We define the credit exposure to a borrower or counterparty as the loss potential arising from all product classifications including loans and leases,
deposit overdrafts, derivatives, assets held-for-sale and unfunded lending commitments that include loan commitments, letters of credit and financial guarantees. Derivative positions are recorded at fair value and assets held-for-sale are recorded
at fair value or the lower of cost or fair value. Certain loans and unfunded commitments are accounted for at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. Credit risk for these categories of assets is not accounted for as part of the allowance for credit
losses but as part of the fair value adjustment recorded in earnings in the period incurred. For derivative positions, our credit risk is measured as the net replacement cost in the event the counterparties with contracts in a gain position to us
fail to perform under the terms of those contracts. We use the current mark-to-market value to represent credit exposure without giving consideration to future mark-to-market changes. The credit risk amounts take into consideration the effects of
legally enforceable master netting agreements and cash collateral. Our consumer and commercial credit extension and review procedures take into account funded and unfunded credit exposures. For additional information on derivatives and credit
extension commitments, see Note 4 Derivatives and Note 13 Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
For credit risk purposes, we evaluate our consumer businesses on both a held and managed basis. Managed basis assumes that credit card loans that have been securitized were not sold and presents earnings
on these loans in a manner similar to the way loans that have not been sold (i.e., held loans) are presented. We evaluate credit performance on a managed basis as the credit card receivables that have been securitized are subject to the same
underwriting, servicing, ongoing monitoring and collection standards as held loans. In addition to the discussion of credit quality statistics of both held and managed credit card loans included in this section, refer to the Global Card
Services discussion on page 17. For additional information on our managed portfolio and securitizations, see Note 8 Securitizations to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We manage credit risk based on the risk profile of the borrower or counterparty, repayment sources, the nature of underlying collateral, and other
support given current events, conditions and expectations. We classify our portfolios as either consumer or commercial and monitor credit risk in each as discussed below.
We continue to refine our credit standards to meet the changing economic environment. We have adjusted our underwriting criteria, as well as enhanced our line management and collection strategies across
the consumer businesses in an attempt to mitigate losses. We have increased our collections and customer assistance infrastructure in order to enhance customer support.
In our domestic consumer credit card business, we have implemented a number of initiatives to mitigate losses including increased use of
judgmental lending, adjusted underwriting, account and line management standards, particularly in higher-risk geographies, and increased collections staffing levels.
In response to the significant deterioration in our consumer real estate portfolio we have implemented initiatives including underwriting changes on newly originated consumer real estate loans which increased the minimum FICO score and reduced the
maximum loan-to-value (LTVs) and combined loan-to-values (CLTVs). Additional LTV and CLTV reductions were implemented for higher risk geographies. In our home equity portfolio, we have also reduced unfunded lines on deteriorating accounts with
declining equity positions.
In response to weakness in our direct/indirect portfolio, we have implemented several initiatives to
mitigate losses. In our consumer lending business we have increased the use of judgmental lending and tighter underwriting and account management standards for higher risk customers and higher-risk geographies. In our automotive and dealer-related
portfolios, we have tightened underwriting criteria and improved the risk-based pricing for purchased loans.
To mitigate losses in
the commercial businesses, we have increased the frequency and intensity of portfolio monitoring, hedging activity and our efforts in managing the exposure when we begin to see signs of deterioration. As part of our underwriting process we have
increased scrutiny around stress analysis and required pricing and structure to reflect current market dynamics. Given the volatility of the financial markets, we increased the frequency of various tests designed to understand what the volatility
could mean to our underlying credit risk. Given the single name risk associated with the problems in the financial markets, we used a real-time counterparty event management process to monitor key counterparties. A number of initiatives have also
been implemented in our small business commercial domestic portfolio including changes to underwriting thresholds, augmented by a granular decision making process by experienced underwriters including increasing minimum FICO scores and
lowering initial line assignments. We have also decreased credit lines on higher risk customers in higher risk states and industries.
Further, we are increasing our customer assistance and collections infrastructure and have instituted a number of other initiatives related to our credit portfolios in an attempt to mitigate losses and enhance our support for our customers.
To help homeowners avoid foreclosure, Bank of America and Countrywide modified approximately 230,000 home loans during 2008. The majority of these home retention solutions were extended as part of a broader initiative to offer modifications for
approximately $100 billion in mortgage financing for up to 630,000 borrowers over the next several years. In addition to being committed to the loan modification programs the Corporation continued to focus on lending by extending more than $115
billion of new credit during the fourth quarter. For more information, see Recent Events on page 5.
On July 1, 2008, the
Corporation acquired Countrywide creating one of the largest mortgage originators and servicers. We will continue our practice of not originating subprime mortgages and certain nontraditional mortgages, and as such will not offer products such as
Countrywides pay-option and payment advantage ARMs (pay option loans), which we classify as discontinued real estate in the Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management discussion. We have significantly curtailed the production of other
nontraditional mortgages, such as certain low-documentation loans.
In addition, we will continue to offer first-lien mortgages
conforming to the underwriting standards of GSEs and the government, including loans supported by the FHA and the Department of Veterans Affairs and other loans designed for low and moderate income borrowers (e.g., Community Reinvestment Act loans).
We will also continue to offer first-lien non-conforming loans, interest-only fixed-rate and ARMs that are subject to a 10-year minimum interest-only period, and fixed-period ARMs.
On January 1, 2009, the Corporation acquired Merrill Lynch which contributed to both our consumer and commercial loans and commitments.
Acquired consumer loans consist of residential mortgages, home equity loans and lines of credit and direct/indirect and other loans. Commercial loans were comprised of both investment and non-investment grade loans and include exposures to CMBS,
monolines and leveraged finance. Consistent with other acquisitions, we will incorporate the acquired assets into our overall credit risk management processes and enhance disclosures where appropriate.
Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management
Credit risk management for the consumer portfolio begins with initial underwriting and continues throughout a borrowers credit cycle. Statistical techniques in conjunction with experiential judgment
are used in all aspects of portfolio management including underwriting, product pricing, risk appetite, setting credit limits, operating processes and metrics to quantify and balance risks and returns. Statistical models are built using detailed
behavioral information from external sources such as credit bureaus and/or internal historical experience. These models are a component of our consumer credit risk management process and are used in part to help determine both new and existing
credit decisions, portfolio management strategies including authorizations and line management, collection practices and strategies, determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses, and economic capital allocations for credit risk.
For information on our accounting policies regarding delinquencies, nonperforming status and charge-offs for the consumer
portfolio, see Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Management of Consumer Credit Risk Concentrations
Consumer credit risk is evaluated and managed with a goal that credit concentrations do not result in undesirable levels of risk. We review,
measure and manage credit exposure in numerous ways such as by product and geography in order to achieve the desired mix. Additionally, credit protection is purchased on certain portions of our portfolio to enhance our overall risk management
position.
The merger with Merrill Lynch will increase our concentrations to certain products and loan types. These increases are
primarily in the residential mortgage, home equity and direct/indirect portfolios.
Consumer Credit Portfolio
Overall, consumer credit quality indicators deteriorated during 2008 as our customers were negatively impacted by the slowing economy. Continued weakness in the
housing markets, rising unemployment and underemployment, and tighter credit conditions resulted in rising credit risk across all our consumer portfolios. The deterioration in the consumer credit quality indicators accelerated during the fourth
quarter.
Table 15 presents our consumer loans and leases and our managed credit card portfolio, and related credit quality
information. Loans that were acquired from Countrywide that were considered impaired were written down to fair value at acquisition in accordance with SOP 03-3. Refer to the SOP 03-3 discussion beginning on page 48 for more information. In addition
to being included in the Outstandings column below, these loans are also shown separately, net of purchase accounting adjustments, for increased transparency in the SOP 03-3 Portfolio column.
Table 15 Consumer Loans and Leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
Nonperforming (1, 2, 3) |
|
|
|
Accruing Past Due 90 Days or More (3, 4) |
|
|
|
SOP 03-3 Portfolio (5) |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
Held basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
247,999 |
|
$ |
274,949 |
|
|
|
$ |
7,044 |
|
$ |
1,999 |
|
|
|
$ |
372 |
|
$ |
237 |
|
|
|
$ |
9,949 |
Home equity |
|
|
152,547 |
|
|
114,820 |
|
|
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
1,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,163 |
Discontinued real estate (6) |
|
|
19,981 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
18,097 |
Credit card domestic |
|
|
64,128 |
|
|
65,774 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
2,197 |
|
|
1,855 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
17,146 |
|
|
14,950 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Direct/Indirect consumer (7) |
|
|
83,436 |
|
|
76,538 |
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
1,370 |
|
|
745 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Other consumer (8) |
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
4,170 |
|
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Total held |
|
$ |
588,679 |
|
$ |
551,201 |
|
|
|
$ |
9,908 |
|
$ |
3,442 |
|
|
|
$ |
4,311 |
|
$ |
3,113 |
|
|
|
$ |
42,209 |
Supplemental managed basis data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit card domestic |
|
$ |
154,151 |
|
$ |
151,862 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
$ |
5,033 |
|
$ |
4,170 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
28,083 |
|
|
31,829 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
717 |
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
Total credit card managed |
|
$ |
182,234 |
|
$ |
183,691 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
$ |
5,750 |
|
$ |
4,884 |
|
|
|
|
n/a |
(1) |
The definition of nonperforming does not include consumer credit card and consumer non-real estate loans and leases. These
loans are charged off no later than the end of the month in which the account becomes 180 days past due. |
(2) |
Nonperforming held consumer loans and leases as a percentage of outstanding consumer loans and leases were 1.68 percent (1.81
percent excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio) and 0.62 percent at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(3) |
Balances do not include loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 even though the customer may be contractually past due.
Loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 were written down to fair value upon acquisition and accrete interest income over the remaining life of the loan. |
(4) |
Accruing held consumer loans and leases past due 90 days or more as a percentage of outstanding consumer loans and leases were
0.73 percent (0.79 percent excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio) and 0.57 percent at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(5) |
Represents acquired loans from Countrywide that were considered impaired and written down to fair value at the acquisition date
in accordance with SOP 03-3. These amounts are included in the Outstandings column in this table. |
(6) |
Discontinued real estate includes pay option loans and subprime loans obtained in connection with the acquisition of
Countrywide. The Corporation no longer originates these products. |
(7) |
Outstandings include foreign consumer loans of $1.8 billion and $3.4 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
|
(8) |
Outstandings include consumer finance loans of $2.6 billion and $3.0 billion, and other foreign consumer loans of $618 million
and $829 million at and December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
Table 16 Consumer Net Charge-offs/Net Losses and Related Ratios
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs/Losses |
|
|
|
Net Charge-off/Loss Ratios (1, 2) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Held basis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
925 |
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
|
0.36 |
% |
|
0.02 |
% |
Home equity |
|
|
3,496 |
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
2.59 |
|
|
0.28 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
16 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
0.15 |
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
4,161 |
|
|
3,063 |
|
|
|
6.57 |
|
|
5.29 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
551 |
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
3.34 |
|
|
3.06 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
3,114 |
|
|
1,373 |
|
|
|
3.77 |
|
|
1.96 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
399 |
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
10.46 |
|
|
6.18 |
|
Total held |
|
$ |
12,662 |
|
$ |
5,423 |
|
|
|
2.21 |
|
|
1.07 |
|
Supplemental managed basis data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit card domestic |
|
$ |
10,054 |
|
$ |
6,960 |
|
|
|
6.60 |
|
|
4.91 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
1,328 |
|
|
1,254 |
|
|
|
4.17 |
|
|
4.24 |
|
Total credit card managed |
|
$ |
11,382 |
|
$ |
8,214 |
|
|
|
6.18 |
|
|
4.79 |
|
(1) |
Net charge-off/loss ratios are calculated as held net charge-offs or managed net losses divided by average outstanding held or
managed loans and leases during the year for each loan and lease category. |
(2) |
Net charge-off ratios excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio were 2.73 percent for home equity, 1.33 percent for discontinued real
estate and 2.29 percent for the total held portfolio for 2008. These are the only product classifications materially impacted by SOP 03-3 for 2008. For these loan and lease categories the dollar amounts of the net charge-offs were unchanged.
|
n/a = not applicable
Table 16 presents net
charge-offs and related ratios for our consumer loans and leases and net losses and related ratios for our managed credit card portfolio for 2008 and 2007. The reported net charge-off ratios for residential mortgage, home equity and discontinued
real estate benefit from the addition of the Countrywide SOP 03-3 portfolio as the initial fair value adjustments recorded on those loans at acquisition would have already included the estimated credit losses. The reported net charge-offs for
residential mortgage do not include the benefits of amounts reimbursable under cash collateralized synthetic securitizations. Adjusting for the benefit of this credit protection, the residential mortgage net charge-off ratio in 2008 would have
been reduced by four bps.
In certain cases, the inclusion of the SOP 03-3 portfolio, which was written down to fair value at
acquisition, may impact portfolio credit statistics and trends. We believe that the presentation of information adjusted to exclude the impacts of the SOP 03-3 portfolio is more representative of the ongoing operations and credit quality of the
business. As a result, in the discussions below of the residential mortgage, home equity and discontinued real estate portfolios, we supplement certain reported statistics with information that is adjusted to exclude the impacts of the SOP 03-3
portfolio. In addition, beginning on page 48, we separately disclose information on the SOP 03-3 portfolio.
Residential Mortgage
The residential mortgage portfolio, which excludes the
discontinued real estate portfolio acquired with Countrywide, makes up the largest percentage of our consumer loan portfolio at 42 percent of consumer loans and leases (44 percent excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio) at December 31, 2008.
Approximately 14 percent of the residential portfolio is in GWIM and represents residential mortgages that are originated for the home purchase and refinancing needs of our affluent customers. The remaining portion of the portfolio is mostly
in All Other, and is comprised of both purchased loans, including certain loans from the Countrywide portfolio, as well as residential loans originated for our customers which are used in our overall ALM activities.
Outstanding loans and leases decreased $27.0 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007 due to sales and conversions of loans into
retained mortgage backed securities totaling $56.8 billion as
well as paydowns partially offset by new loan originations and the addition of the Countrywide portfolio. The Countrywide acquisition added $26.8 billion of
residential mortgage outstandings, of which $9.9 billion are included in the SOP 03-3 portfolio. Nonperforming balances increased $5.0 billion due to the impacts of weak housing and economic conditions and the addition of the non SOP 03-3
Countrywide portfolio due to subsequent credit deterioration after acquisition. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest of $372 million and $237 million were related to repurchases pursuant to
our servicing agreements with Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) mortgage pools where repayments are insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Net charge-offs increased $869 million to $925 million for 2008, or 0.36 percent of total average residential mortgage loans compared to 0.02
percent for 2007. The increase was reflective of the impacts of the weak housing markets and the slowing economy. See page 48 for more information on the SOP 03-3 residential mortgage portfolio.
We mitigate a portion of our credit risk through synthetic securitizations which are cash collateralized and provide mezzanine risk protection
which will reimburse us in the event that losses exceed 10 bps of the original pool balance. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, $109.3 billion and $140.5 billion of mortgage loans were protected by these agreements. As of December 31, 2008,
$146 million of credit and other related costs recognized in 2008 were reimbursable under these structures. In addition, we have entered into credit protection agreements with GSEs on $9.6 billion and $32.9 billion as of December 31, 2008 and
2007, providing full protection on conforming residential mortgage loans that become severely delinquent. Combined these structures provided risk mitigation for approximately 48 percent and 63 percent of our residential mortgage portfolio at
December 31, 2008 and 2007. The reduction in the protection was driven by an increase in loan sales and securitizations during the period, some of which were insured, and the percentage of protection was also impacted by the addition of
Countrywide mortgages resulting from the acquisition. Our regulatory risk-weighted assets are reduced as a result of these risk protection transactions because we transferred a portion of our credit risk to unaffiliated parties. At December 31,
2008 and 2007, these transactions had the cumulative effect of reducing our risk-weighted assets by
Table 17 Residential Mortgage State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming |
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
84,847 |
|
35.6 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
2,028 |
|
28.8 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
411 |
|
44.4 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
15,787 |
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,012 |
|
14.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
154 |
|
16.6 |
|
New York |
|
|
15,539 |
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
255 |
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
0.5 |
|
Texas |
|
|
10,804 |
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
315 |
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
2.2 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
9,696 |
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
229 |
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
3.5 |
|
Other U.S./Foreign |
|
|
101,377 |
|
42.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,205 |
|
45.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
303 |
|
32.8 |
|
Total residential mortgage loans (excluding SOP 03-3 loans) |
|
$ |
238,050 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
7,044 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
925 |
|
100.0 |
% |
Total SOP 03-3 residential mortgage loans (1) |
|
|
9,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total residential mortgage loans |
|
$ |
247,999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents acquired loans from Countrywide that were considered impaired and written down to fair value at the
acquisition date in accordance with SOP 03-3. See page 48 for the discussion of the characteristics of the SOP 03-3 loans. |
$34.0 billion and $49.0 billion, and strengthened our Tier 1 Capital ratio at December 31, 2008 and 2007 by 24 bps and 27 bps.
Excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio, residential mortgage loans with greater than 90 percent refreshed LTV represented 23 percent of the portfolio
and those loans with refreshed FICO lower than 620 represented eight percent of the portfolio. In addition, residential mortgage loans to borrowers in the state of California represented 36 percent and 32 percent of total residential
mortgage loans at December 31, 2008 and 2007. The Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) within California represented 13 percent and 11 percent of the total residential mortgage portfolio at December 31,
2008 and 2007. In addition, residential mortgage loans to borrowers in the state of Florida represented seven percent and six percent of the total residential mortgage portfolio at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Additionally, 56 percent and 40
percent of loans in California and Florida are in reference pools of synthetic securitizations, as described above, which provide mezzanine risk protection. Total credit risk on three percent of our mortgage loans in Florida has been mitigated
through the purchase of protection from government sponsored entities. The table above presents outstandings, nonperforming loans and net charge-offs by certain state concentrations for the residential mortgage portfolio.
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) encourages banks to meet the credit needs of their communities for housing and other purposes, particularly
in neighborhoods with low or moderate incomes. At December 31, 2008, our CRA portfolio comprised seven percent of the total ending residential mortgage loan balances but comprised 24 percent of nonperforming residential mortgage
loans. This portfolio also comprised 27 percent of residential mortgage net charge-offs during 2008. While approximately 48 percent of our residential mortgage portfolio carries risk mitigation protection, only a small portion of our CRA
portfolio is covered by this protection.
Home Equity
At December 31, 2008, approximately 79 percent of the home equity portfolio was included in Home Loans &
Insurance, while the remainder of the portfolio was primarily in GWIM. Outstanding home equity loans increased $37.7 billion, or 33 percent, at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007, primarily due to the Countrywide
acquisition which added approximately $29.0 billion in home equity loans of which $14.2 billion is included in the SOP 03-3 portfolio. An additional $25.0 billion in organic growth and draws on existing lines was partially offset by
paydowns and net charge-offs. See page 49 for more information on the SOP 03-3 home equity portfolio.
Home equity unused lines of credit totaled $107.4 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to $120.1 billion at December 31, 2007. The $12.7 billion
decrease was driven primarily by higher account utilization due to draws on existing lines as well as line management initiatives on deteriorating accounts with declining equity positions partially offset by the addition of the Countrywide portfolio
which added $4.5 billion of unused lines related to the non SOP 03-3 portfolio. The home equity utilization rate was 52 percent at December 31, 2008 compared to 44 percent at December 31, 2007. The increase was driven by the same factors as
previously discussed as well as the addition of the Countrywide portfolio which had a higher utilization rate.
Nonperforming home
equity loans increased $1.3 billion compared to December 31, 2007 and net charge-offs increased $3.2 billion to $3.5 billion for 2008, or 2.59 percent (2.73 percent excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio) of total average home equity loans compared
to 0.28 percent in 2007. These increases were driven by continued weakness in the housing markets, the slowing economy and seasoning of vintages originated in periods of higher growth. Additionally, the increase was driven by high refreshed CLTV
loans in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant declines in home prices. Home price declines coupled with the fact that most home equity loans are secured by second lien positions have significantly reduced and in some cases
resulted in no collateral value after consideration of the first lien position. This drove more severe charge-offs as borrowers defaulted.
Excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio, home equity loans with greater than 90 percent refreshed CLTV comprised 37 percent of the home equity portfolio at December 31, 2008, and represented 85 percent of net charge-offs for 2008. In
addition, loans with a refreshed FICO lower than 620 represented 10 percent of the home equity loans at December 31, 2008. The 2006 vintage loans, which represent $34.2 billion, or 25 percent of our home equity portfolio, continue to season and
have a higher refreshed CLTV and accounted for approximately 49 percent of net charge-offs for 2008. The portfolios 2007 vintages, which represent 26 percent of the portfolio, are showing similar asset quality characteristics as the 2006
vintages and accounted for 28 percent of net charge-offs in 2008. Additionally, legacy Bank of America discontinued the program of purchasing non-franchise originated loans in the second quarter of 2007. These purchased loans represented only three
percent of the portfolio but accounted for 17 percent of net charge-offs for 2008.
Table 18 Home Equity State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
Nonperforming |
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
38,015 |
|
27.5 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
857 |
|
32.1 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,464 |
|
41.9 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
17,893 |
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
597 |
|
22.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
788 |
|
22.6 |
|
New Jersey |
|
|
8,929 |
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
96 |
|
2.7 |
|
New York |
|
|
8,602 |
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
176 |
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
96 |
|
2.7 |
|
Massachusetts |
|
|
6,008 |
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
1.6 |
|
Other U.S./Foreign |
|
|
58,937 |
|
42.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
866 |
|
32.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
996 |
|
28.5 |
|
Total home equity loans (excluding SOP 03-3 loans) |
|
$ |
138,384 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
2,670 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
3,496 |
|
100.0 |
% |
Total SOP 03-3 home equity loans (1) |
|
|
14,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total home equity loans |
|
$ |
152,547 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Represents acquired loans from Countrywide that were considered impaired and written down to fair value at the
acquisition date in accordance with SOP 03-3. See the SOP 03-3 Portfolio section below for the discussion of the characteristics of the SOP 03-3 loans. |
Excluding the SOP 03-3 portfolio, our home equity loan portfolio in the states of California and Florida represented in aggregate 40 percent and
39 percent of outstanding home equity loans at December 31, 2008 and 2007. These states accounted for $1.5 billion, or 55 percent, of nonperforming home equity loans at December 31, 2008. In addition, these states represented 65 percent of
the home equity net charge-offs for 2008. In the New York area, the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island MSA made up 11 percent of outstanding home equity loans at December 31, 2008 but comprised only five percent of net charge offs for
2008. The Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana MSA within California made up 11 percent of outstanding home equity loans at December 31, 2008 and 11 percent of net charge-offs for 2008. The table above presents outstandings, nonperforming loans and
net charge-offs by certain state concentrations for the home equity portfolio.
Discontinued Real
Estate
The discontinued real estate portfolio, totaling $20.0 billion at December 31, 2008,
consisted of pay-option and subprime loans obtained in connection with the acquisition of Countrywide. At acquisition, the majority of the discontinued real estate portfolio was considered impaired and, in accordance with SOP 03-3, written down to
fair value. At December 31, 2008 the SOP 03-3 portfolio comprised $18.1 billion of the $20.0 billion discontinued real estate portfolio. This portfolio is included in All Other and is managed as part of our overall ALM activities. See
the SOP 03-3 portfolio discussion to follow for more information on the discontinued real estate portfolio.
At December 31,
2008, the non SOP 03-3 discontinued real estate portfolio was $1.9 billion. Loans with greater than 90 percent refreshed LTVs and CLTVs comprised 13 percent of this portfolio and those with refreshed FICO scores lower than 620 represented 17 percent
of the portfolio. California represented 31 percent of the portfolio and 22 percent of the nonperforming loans while Florida represented 10 percent of the portfolio and 17 percent of the nonperforming loans at December 31, 2008. The Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana MSA within California made up 14 percent of outstanding discontinued real estate loans at December 31, 2008.
SOP 03-3 Portfolio
Loans acquired with
evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination and for which it is probable at purchase that we will be unable to collect all contractually required payments are accounted for under SOP
03-3. Evidence of credit quality deterioration as of the purchase date may include statistics such as past due status, refreshed borrower credit scores, and refreshed
LTVs, some of which were not immediately available as of the purchase date. SOP 03-3 addresses accounting for differences between contractual and expected cash flows to be collected from the Corporations initial investment in loans if those
differences are attributable, at least in part, to credit quality. SOP 03-3 requires that acquired impaired loans be recorded at fair value and prohibits carrying over or the creation of valuation allowances in the initial accounting for
loans acquired that are within the scope of this SOP. The SOP 03-3 portfolio associated with the acquisition of LaSalle did not materially impact results during 2008 and is excluded from the following discussion.
In accordance with SOP 03-3, certain acquired loans of Countrywide that were considered impaired were written down to fair value at the
acquisition date. As a result, there were no reported net charge-offs in 2008 on these loans as the initial fair value at acquisition date would have already considered the estimated credit losses on these loans. As of December 31, 2008, the
carrying value was $42.2 billion, excluding the $750 million in incremental allowance, and the unpaid principal balance of these loans was $55.4 billion. SOP 03-3 does not apply to loans Countrywide previously securitized as they are not held on the
Corporations Balance Sheet. During 2008, had the acquired portfolios not been subject to SOP 03-3, we would have recorded additional net charge-offs of $3.6 billion, of which approximately 13 percent would have been due to conforming
accounting adjustments. Subsequent to the July 1, 2008 acquisition of Countrywide, the SOP 03-3 portfolio experienced further credit deterioration due to weakness in the housing markets and the impacts of a slowing economy. As such, we
established a $750 million allowance for loan loss through a charge to the provision for credit losses comprised of $584 million for discontinued real estate loans and $166 million for home equity loans. For further information regarding loans
accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3, see Note 6 Outstanding Loans and Leases to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
In the following paragraphs we provide additional information on the residential mortgage, home equity and discontinued real estate loans that were accounted for under SOP 03-3. Since these loans were written down to fair value upon
acquisition, we are reporting this information separately. In certain cases, we supplement the reported statistics on these SOP 03-3 portfolios with information that is presented as if the acquired loans had not been subject to SOP 03-3.
Table 19 SOP 03-3 Portfolio Residential Mortgage State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
SOP 03-3 Net Charge-offs (1) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
5,598 |
|
56.3 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
177 |
|
40.4 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
771 |
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
103 |
|
23.5 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
553 |
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
3.2 |
|
Maryland |
|
|
251 |
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
1.4 |
|
Texas |
|
|
147 |
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
1.1 |
|
Other U.S. / Foreign |
|
|
2,629 |
|
26.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
133 |
|
30.4 |
|
Total SOP 03-3 residential mortgage loans |
|
$ |
9,949 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
438 |
|
100.0 |
% |
(1) |
Represents additional net charge-offs for 2008 had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3. |
Residential Mortgage
The residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio outstandings were $9.9 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 24 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio. Those loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than 620 represented 26 percent of
the residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008. Refreshed LTVs greater than 90 percent after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments and refreshed LTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid principal balance
represented 58 percent and 82 percent of the residential mortgage portfolio.
California represented approximately 56 percent of the
outstanding residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio and Florida represented approximately eight percent at December 31, 2008. Had the acquired portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3 the residential mortgage portfolio would have recorded
additional net charge-offs of $438 million. The table above presents outstandings net of purchase accounting adjustments and net charge-offs had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3, by certain state concentrations.
Home Equity
The home equity SOP 03-3 outstandings were $14.2 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 34 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio. Those loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than
620 represented 19 percent of the home equity SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008. Refreshed CLTVs greater than 90 percent repre-
sented 80 percent of the home equity portfolio after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments. Refreshed CLTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid
principal balance represented 88 percent of the home equity portfolio at December 31, 2008.
California represented
approximately 36 percent of the outstanding home equity SOP 03-3 portfolio and Florida represented approximately seven percent at December 31, 2008. Had the acquired portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3 the home equity portfolio would have
recorded additional net charge-offs of $1.5 billion. The table below presents outstandings net of purchase accounting adjustments and net charge-offs had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3, by certain state concentrations.
Discontinued Real Estate
The discontinued real estate SOP 03-3 portfolio outstandings were $18.1 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 42 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio. Those
loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than 620 represented 32 percent of the discontinued real estate SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008. Refreshed LTVs and CLTVs greater than 90 percent represented 40 percent of the discontinued real
estate portfolio after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments. Refreshed LTVs and CLTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid principal balance represented 73 percent of the discontinued real estate portfolio at December 31,
2008.
Table 20 SOP 03-3 Portfolio Home Equity State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
SOP 03-3 Net Charge-offs (1) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
5,133 |
|
36.2 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
744 |
|
49.8 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
914 |
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
186 |
|
12.4 |
|
Arizona |
|
|
629 |
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
5.3 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
532 |
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
2.8 |
|
Colorado |
|
|
404 |
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
1.5 |
|
Other U.S. / Foreign |
|
|
6,551 |
|
46.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
421 |
|
28.2 |
|
Total SOP 03-3 home equity loans |
|
$ |
14,163 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,494 |
|
100.0 |
% |
(1) |
Represents additional net charge-offs for 2008 had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3.
|
Table 21 SOP 03-3 Portfolio Discontinued Real Estate State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
SOP 03-3 Net Charge-offs (1) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
9,987 |
|
55.2 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,010 |
|
59.4 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
1,831 |
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
275 |
|
16.2 |
|
Arizona |
|
|
666 |
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
3.6 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
580 |
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
2.8 |
|
Washington |
|
|
492 |
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
0.5 |
|
Other U.S./ Foreign |
|
|
4,541 |
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
297 |
|
17.5 |
|
Total SOP 03-3 discontinued real estate loans |
|
$ |
18,097 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,699 |
|
100.0 |
% |
(1) |
Represents additional net charge-offs for 2008 had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3.
|
California represented approximately 55 percent of the outstanding discontinued real estate SOP 03-3 portfolio and Florida represented
approximately 10 percent at December 31, 2008. Had the acquired portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3 the discontinued real estate portfolio would have recorded additional net charge-offs of $1.7 billion. The table above presents outstandings
net of purchase accounting adjustments and net charge-offs had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3, by certain state concentrations.
Pay option ARMs have interest rates that adjust monthly and minimum required payments that adjust annually (subject to resetting of the loan if minimum payments are made and deferred interest limits are reached). Annual payment adjustments
are subject to a 7.5 percent maximum change. To ensure that contractual loan payments are adequate to repay a loan, the fully amortizing loan payment amount is re-established after the initial five or 10-year period and again every five years
thereafter. These payment adjustments are not subject to the 7.5 percent limit and may be substantial due to changes in interest rates and the addition of unpaid interest to the loans balance. Payment advantage ARMs have interest rates that
are fixed for an initial period of five years. Payments are subject to reset if the minimum payments are made and deferred interest limits are reached. If interest deferrals cause the loans principal balance to reach a certain level within the
first 10 years of the loans, the payment is reset to the interest-only payment; then at the 10-year point, the fully amortizing payment is required.
The difference between the frequency of changes in the loans interest rates and payments along with a limitation on changes in the minimum monthly payments to 7.5 percent per year can result in payments that are not
sufficient to pay all of the monthly interest charges (i.e., negative amortization). Unpaid interest charges are added to the loan balance until the loans balance increases to a specified limit, which is no more than 115 percent of the
original loan amount, at which time a new monthly payment amount adequate to repay the loan over its remaining contractual life is established.
At December 31, 2008 the unpaid principal balance of pay option loans was $23.2 billion, with a carrying amount of $18.2 billion, including $16.8 billion of loans that were impaired at acquisition. The total unpaid
principal balance of pay option loans with accumulated negative amortization was $21.2 billion and accumulated negative amortization from the original loan balance was $1.3 billion. The percentage of borrowers electing to make only the minimum
payment on option arms was 57 percent at December 31, 2008. We continue to evaluate our exposure to payment resets on the acquired negatively amortizing loans and have
taken into consideration several assumptions regarding this evaluation (e.g., prepayment rates). We also continue to evaluate the potential for resets on the SOP 03-3
pay option portfolio. Based on our expectations, four percent, 31 percent and 20 percent of the pay option loan portfolio is expected to be reset in 2009, 2010, and 2011, respectively. Approximately nine percent is expected to be reset thereafter,
and approximately 36 percent are expected to repay prior to being reset.
We manage these SOP 03-3 portfolios, including
consideration for the home retention programs to modify troubled mortgages, consistent with our other consumer real estate practices. These programs are in line with the Corporations original expectations upon acquisition and will not impact
the Corporations purchase accounting adjustments. For more information, see Recent Events beginning on page 5.
Credit Card Domestic
The consumer domestic credit card portfolio is managed in
Global Card Services. Outstandings in the held domestic credit card loan portfolio decreased $1.6 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 due to higher securitized balances and risk mitigation initiatives
partially offset by lower payment rates. Held domestic loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest increased $342 million from December 31, 2007.
Net charge-offs for the held domestic portfolio increased $1.1 billion to $4.2 billion for 2008, or 6.57 percent of total average held credit card domestic loans compared to 5.29 percent for 2007.
The increase was reflective of the slowing economy including rising unemployment, underemployment and higher bankruptcies particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant home price declines.
Managed domestic credit card outstandings increased $2.3 billion to $154.2 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007
due in part to lower payment rates partially offset by risk mitigation initiatives. Managed net losses increased $3.1 billion to $10.1 billion for 2008, or 6.60 percent of total average managed domestic loans compared to 4.91 percent in 2007. The
increase in managed net losses was driven by the same factors as described in the held discussion above.
Our managed credit card
domestic loan portfolio in the states of California and Florida represented in aggregate 24 percent of credit card domestic outstandings at December 31, 2008. These states represented 31 percent of the credit card domestic
net losses for 2008. Table 22 presents asset quality indicators by certain state concentrations for the managed credit card domestic portfolio.
Table 22 Credit Card Domestic State Concentrations Managed
Basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
Accruing Past Due 90 Days or More |
|
|
|
|
Net Losses |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
24,191 |
|
15.7 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
997 |
|
19.8 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,916 |
|
19.1 |
% |
Florida |
|
|
13,210 |
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
642 |
|
12.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
12.2 |
|
Texas |
|
|
10,262 |
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
293 |
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
634 |
|
6.3 |
|
New York |
|
|
9,368 |
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
263 |
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
531 |
|
5.3 |
|
New Jersey |
|
|
6,113 |
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
172 |
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
316 |
|
3.1 |
|
Other U.S. |
|
|
91,007 |
|
58.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,666 |
|
53.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,434 |
|
54.0 |
|
Total credit card domestic loans |
|
$ |
154,151 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
5,033 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
10,054 |
|
100.0 |
% |
Managed consumer credit card unused lines of credit, for both domestic and foreign credit card, totaled $789.1 billion at December 31, 2008
compared to $846.0 billion at December 31, 2007. The $56.9 billion decrease was driven primarily by account management initiatives on higher risk customers in higher risk states and inactive accounts.
Credit Card Foreign
The consumer foreign credit card portfolio is managed in Global Card Services. Outstandings in the held foreign credit card loan portfolio increased $2.2 billion to $17.1 billion at
December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 primarily due to a lower level of securitizations partially offset by the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain foreign currencies, particularly the British Pound. Net charge-offs
for the held foreign portfolio increased $172 million to $551 million for 2008, or 3.34 percent of total average held credit card foreign loans compared to 3.06 percent in 2007. The increase was driven primarily by lower levels of
securitizations in 2008 as well as deterioration which primarily impacted the latter half of 2008.
Managed foreign credit card
outstandings decreased $3.7 billion to $28.1 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 due primarily to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain foreign currencies, particularly the British Pound. Net losses
for the managed foreign portfolio increased $74 million to $1.3 billion for 2008, or 4.17 percent of total average managed credit card foreign loans compared to 4.24 percent in 2007.
Direct/Indirect Consumer
At December 31, 2008, approximately 49 percent of the direct/indirect portfolio was included in Global Banking (automotive, marine,
motorcycle and recreational vehicle loans), 36 percent was included in Global Card Services (consumer personal loans and other non-real estate secured), 10
percent was included in Deposits (students loans) and the remainder was included in GWIM (principally other non-real estate secured and unsecured personal loans).
Outstanding loans and leases increased $6.9 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007 due to purchases of automobile
loan portfolios, student loan disbursements and growth in the Global Card Services consumer lending product partially offset by the securitization of automobile loans and the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain foreign
currencies. Loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest increased $625 million. Net charge-offs increased $1.7 billion to $3.1 billion for 2008, or 3.77 percent of total average direct/indirect loans compared to 1.96 percent for 2007.
The increase was concentrated in the Global Card Services consumer lending portfolio, driven by portfolio deterioration reflecting the effects of a slowing economy particularly in states most impacted by the slowdown in housing, notably
California and Florida as well as seasoning of vintages originated in periods of higher growth. Additionally, the slowing economy and declining collateral values resulted in higher charge-offs in the dealer financial services portfolio.
Direct/Indirect consumer loans to borrowers in the state of California represented 13 percent of total direct/indirect consumer loans
at December 31, 2008. In addition, direct/indirect consumer loans to borrowers in the state of Florida represented nine percent of the total direct/ indirect consumer portfolio at December 31, 2008. In aggregate, California and
Florida represented 30 percent of the net charge-offs for 2008. The table below presents asset quality indicators by certain state concentrations for the direct/indirect consumer loan portfolio.
Table 23 Direct/Indirect State Concentrations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
|
Accruing Past Due 90 Days or
More |
|
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
California |
|
$ |
10,555 |
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
247 |
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
601 |
|
19.3 |
% |
Texas |
|
|
7,738 |
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
88 |
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
222 |
|
7.1 |
|
Florida |
|
|
7,376 |
|
8.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
145 |
|
10.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
334 |
|
10.7 |
|
New York |
|
|
4,938 |
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
69 |
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
162 |
|
5.2 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
3,212 |
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
115 |
|
3.7 |
|
Other U.S./Foreign |
|
|
49,617 |
|
59.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
773 |
|
56.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
54.0 |
|
Total direct/indirect loans |
|
$ |
83,436 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,370 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
3,114 |
|
100.0 |
% |
Other Consumer
At December 31, 2008, approximately 76 percent of the other consumer portfolio was associated with portfolios from certain consumer finance businesses that we have previously exited and is included in
All Other. The remainder consisted of the foreign consumer loan portfolio which is mostly included in Global Card Services and deposit overdrafts. Net charge-offs increased $121 million for 2008 from 2007 driven by deposit overdraft
net charge-offs reflecting higher average balances per account and account growth.
Nonperforming
Consumer Assets Activity
Table 24 presents nonperforming consumer assets activity during 2008 and 2007.
Total net additions to nonperforming loans and leases in 2008 were $6.5 billion compared to $2.4 billion in 2007. The increase in 2008 was driven by the residential mortgage and home equity portfolios reflective of the weakening housing markets, the
slowing economy and seasoning of vintages originated in periods of higher growth. In addition for 2008 the increase was impacted by the CRA portfolio, which represented approximately 19 percent of the net increase in nonperforming loans and the non
SOP 03-3 Countrywide portfolio which added 15 percent. The increase in foreclosed properties of $1.2 billion was driven primarily by the addition of Countrywide. Nonperforming loans do not include acquired loans that were considered impaired and
written down to fair value at the acquisition date in accordance with SOP 03-3 as these loans accrete interest.
Nonperforming loans also include loans that have been modified in troubled debt restructurings (TDRs) where concessions to borrowers who
experienced financial difficulties have been granted. TDRs typically result from the Corporations loss mitigation activities and could include rate reductions, payment extensions and principal forgiveness. TDRs generally exclude
loans that were written down to fair value at acquisition within the scope of SOP 03-3. At December 31, 2008 we had $529 million of residential mortgages, $303 million of home equity and $71 million of discontinued real estate loans that were
restructured in TDRs. These loans were also classified as impaired loans at December 31, 2008 and are disclosed as such in Note 6 Outstanding Loans and Leases to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Certain TDRs are classified
as nonperforming at the time of restructure and are not returned to performing status until six consecutive, on-time payments have been made by the customer. Included in the TDR balances are loans that were classified as performing and are therefore
excluded from the table below. At December 31, 2008, the balances of performing TDRs were $320 million of residential mortgages, $1 million of home equity, and $66 million of discontinued real estate.
In addition, we work with customers that are experiencing financial difficulty through renegotiating credit card and direct/indirect consumer
loans, while ensuring that we remain within FFIEC guidelines. These renegotiated loans are excluded from the table below as we do not classify non-real estate unsecured loans as nonperforming. For more information refer to Note 6
Outstanding Loans and Leases to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Table 24 Nonperforming Consumer Assets Activity (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Nonperforming loans and leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, January 1 |
|
$ |
3,442 |
|
|
$ |
1,030 |
|
Additions to nonperforming loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
13,625 |
|
|
|
4,093 |
|
Reductions in nonperforming loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paydowns and payoffs |
|
|
(704 |
) |
|
|
(366 |
) |
Returns to performing status (2) |
|
|
(1,522 |
) |
|
|
(855 |
) |
Charge-offs (3) |
|
|
(4,032 |
) |
|
|
(300 |
) |
Transfers to foreclosed properties |
|
|
(895 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
Transfers to loans held-for-sale |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Total net additions to nonperforming loans and leases |
|
|
6,466 |
|
|
|
2,412 |
|
Total nonperforming loans and leases, December 31 (4) |
|
|
9,908 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
Foreclosed properties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, January 1 |
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
Additions to foreclosed properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LaSalle balance, October 1, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
Countrywide balance, July 1, 2008 |
|
|
952 |
|
|
|
|
|
New foreclosed properties (5) |
|
|
1,578 |
|
|
|
246 |
|
Reductions in foreclosed properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
(1,077 |
) |
|
|
(82 |
) |
Writedowns |
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Total net additions to foreclosed properties |
|
|
1,230 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
Total foreclosed properties, December 31 |
|
|
1,506 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
Nonperforming consumer assets, December 31 |
|
$ |
11,414 |
|
|
$ |
3,718 |
|
Nonperforming consumer loans and leases as a percentage of outstanding consumer loans and leases |
|
|
1.68 |
% |
|
|
0.62 |
% |
Nonperforming consumer assets as a percentage of outstanding consumer loans, leases and foreclosed properties
|
|
|
1.93 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
(1) |
Balances do not include nonperforming LHFS of $436 million and $95 million in 2008 and 2007. |
(2) |
Consumer loans and leases 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. |
(3) |
Our policy is not to classify consumer credit card and consumer non-real estate loans and leases as nonperforming; therefore,
the charge-offs on these loans have no impact on nonperforming activity. |
(4) |
Approximately half of the 2008 nonperforming loans and leases are greater than 180 days past due and have been written down
through charge-offs to approximately 71 percent of original cost. |
(5) |
Our policy is to record any losses in the value of foreclosed properties as a reduction in the allowance for credit losses
during the first 90 days after transfer of a loan into foreclosed properties. Thereafter, all losses in value are recorded as noninterest expense. New foreclosed properties in the table above are net of $436 million and $75 million of charge-offs in
2008 and 2007 taken during the first 90 days after transfer. |
Commercial Portfolio Credit Risk Management
Credit risk management for the commercial portfolio begins with an assessment of the credit risk profile of the borrower or counterparty based on an analysis of their financial position. As part of the
overall credit risk assessment of a borrower or counterparty, most of our commercial credit exposures are assigned a risk rating and are subject to approval based on defined credit approval standards. Subsequent to loan origination, risk ratings are
monitored on an ongoing basis. If necessary, risk ratings are adjusted to reflect changes in the financial condition, cash flow or financial situation of a borrower or counterparty. We use risk rating aggregations to measure and evaluate
concentrations within portfolios. Risk ratings are a factor in determining the level of assigned economic capital and the allowance for credit losses. In making credit decisions, we consider risk rating, collateral, country, industry and single name
concentration limits while also balancing the total borrower or counterparty relationship. Our lines of business and risk management personnel use a variety of tools to continuously monitor the ability of a borrower or counterparty to perform under
its obligations.
For information on our accounting policies regarding delinquencies, nonperforming status and charge-offs for the
commercial portfolio, see Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Management of
Commercial Credit Risk Concentrations
Commercial credit risk is evaluated and managed with a goal that concentrations of credit exposure do not
result in undesirable levels of risk. We review, measure, and manage concentrations of credit exposure by industry, product, geography and customer relationship. Distribution of loans and leases by loan size is an additional measure of portfolio
risk diversification. We also review, measure, and manage commercial real estate loans by geographic location and property type. In addition, within our international portfolio, we evaluate borrowings by region and by country. Tables 28, 30, 34, 35
and 36 summarize our concentrations. Additionally, we utilize syndication of exposure to third parties, loan sales, hedging and other risk mitigation techniques to manage the size and risk profile of the loan portfolio.
From the perspective of portfolio risk management, customer concentration management is most relevant in Global Banking and Global
Markets. Within those segments, we facilitate bridge financing (high grade debt, high yield debt, CMBS and equity) to fund acquisitions, recapitalizations and other short-term needs as well as provide syndicated financing for our
clients. These concentrations are managed in part
through our established originate to distribute strategy. These client transactions are sometimes large and leveraged. They can also have a higher degree
of risk as we are providing offers or commitments for various components of the clients capital structures, including lower rated unsecured and subordinated debt tranches and/or equity. In normal markets, many of these offers to finance will
not be accepted, and if accepted, these conditional commitments are often retired prior to or shortly following funding via the placement of securities, syndication or the clients decision to terminate. However, as we began to experience in
the latter half of 2007, where we have a binding commitment and there is a market disruption or other unexpected event, these commitments are more likely to be funded and are more difficult to distribute. As a consequence there is heightened
exposure in the portfolios and a higher potential for writedown or loss. For more information regarding the Corporations leveraged finance and CMBS exposures, see the Global Markets discussion beginning on page 23.
We account for certain large corporate loans and loan commitments (including issued but unfunded letters of credit which are considered utilized for
credit risk management purposes), which exceed our single name credit risk concentration guidelines at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. Any fair value adjustment upon origination and subsequent changes in the fair value of these loans and
unfunded commitments are recorded in other income. By including the credit risk of the borrower in the fair value adjustments, any credit deterioration or improvement is recorded immediately as part of the fair value adjustment. As a result, the
allowance for loan and lease losses and the reserve for unfunded lending commitments are not used to capture credit losses inherent in these nonperforming or impaired loans and unfunded commitments. The Commercial Credit Portfolio tables exclude
loans and unfunded commitments that are carried at fair value to adjust related ratios. See the Commercial Loans Measured at Fair Value section on page 57 for more information on the performance of these loans and loan commitments and see Note 19
Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our SFAS 159 elections.
The
merger with Merrill Lynch will increase our concentrations to certain industries, countries and customers. These increases are primarily with diversified financial institutions active in the capital markets. There are also increased concentrations
within the high-grade commercial portfolio, monoline insurers, certain leveraged finance exposures, and several large CMBS positions.
Commercial Credit Portfolio
Housing value
declines, a slowdown in consumer spending and the turmoil in the global financial markets impacted our commercial portfolios where we experienced higher levels of losses, particularly in the homebuilder sector of our commercial real estate
portfolio. Broader-based economic pressures have also impacted other commercial credit quality indicators. The nonperforming loan and commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure ratios were 1.93 percent and 8.90 percent at December 31,
2008 compared to 0.67 percent and 4.46 percent at December 31, 2007. Nonperforming loan increases were largely driven by deterioration in the homebuilder portfolio. Utilized reservable criticized increases were broad based across lines of
business, products and industries. The loans and leases net charge-off ratio increased to 1.07
percent in 2008 from 0.40 percent a year ago. Higher net charge-offs in our small business portfolios within Global Card Services reflected deterioration from
the impacts of a slowing economy particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant home price declines. Excluding small business commercial domestic the total net charge-off ratio was 0.52 percent compared to 0.07
percent in 2007. The increase was mainly driven by higher net charge-offs in commercial real estate, principally the homebuilder loan portfolio, as well as commercial domestic and foreign net charge-offs which were diverse in terms of both borrowers
and industries. The deterioration in the market accelerated during the later stages of the fourth quarter.
Table 25 presents our
commercial loans and leases and related credit quality information for 2008 and 2007.
Table 25 Commercial Loans and Leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstandings |
|
|
|
Nonperforming (1) |
|
|
|
Accruing Past Due 90 Days or More (2) |
|
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
|
|
Net Charge-off Ratios
(3) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Commercial loans and leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial domestic (4) |
|
$ |
200,088 |
|
$ |
189,011 |
|
|
|
$ |
2,040 |
|
$ |
852 |
|
|
|
$ |
381 |
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
|
$ |
519 |
|
$ |
127 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
% |
|
0.08 |
% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
64,701 |
|
|
61,298 |
|
|
|
|
3,906 |
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
1.41 |
|
|
0.11 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
22,400 |
|
|
22,582 |
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
0.01 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
31,020 |
|
|
28,376 |
|
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,209 |
|
|
301,267 |
|
|
|
|
6,292 |
|
|
2,003 |
|
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
|
1,639 |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
0.52 |
|
|
0.07 |
|
Small business commercial domestic (5) |
|
|
19,145 |
|
|
19,286 |
|
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
|
1,930 |
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
9.80 |
|
|
5.13 |
|
Total commercial loans and leases excluding loans measured at fair value |
|
|
337,354 |
|
|
320,553 |
|
|
|
|
6,497 |
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
|
|
1,103 |
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
|
3,569 |
|
|
1,057 |
|
|
|
1.07 |
|
|
0.40 |
|
Total measured at fair value (6) |
|
|
5,413 |
|
|
4,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
Total commercial loans and leases |
|
$ |
342,767 |
|
$ |
325,143 |
|
|
|
$ |
6,497 |
|
$ |
2,155 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,103 |
|
$ |
623 |
|
|
|
$ |
3,569 |
|
$ |
1,057 |
|
|
|
1.07 |
|
|
0.40 |
|
(1) |
Nonperforming commercial loans and leases as a percentage of outstanding commercial loans and leases excluding loans measured
at fair value were 1.93 percent and 0.67 percent at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(2) |
Accruing commercial loans and leases past due 90 days or more as a percentage of outstanding commercial loans and leases
excluding loans measured at fair value were 0.33 percent and 0.19 percent at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(3) |
Net charge-off ratios are calculated as net charge-offs divided by average outstanding loans and leases excluding loans
measured at fair value during the year for each loan and lease category. |
(4) |
Excludes small business commercial domestic loans. |
(5) |
Small business commercial domestic is primarily card related. |
(6) |
Certain commercial loans are measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 and include commercial domestic loans of
$3.5 billion at both December 31, 2008 and 2007, commercial foreign loans of $1.7 billion and $790 million and commercial real estate loans of $203 million and $304 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
|
n/a = not applicable
Table 26 Commercial Credit Exposure by Type
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
Commercial Utilized (1, 2) |
|
|
|
Commercial Unfunded (3, 4) |
|
|
|
Total
Commercial Committed |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Loans and leases |
|
$ |
342,767 |
|
$ |
325,143 |
|
|
|
$ |
300,856 |
|
$ |
329,396 |
|
|
|
$ |
643,623 |
|
$ |
654,539 |
Standby letters of credit and financial guarantees |
|
|
72,840 |
|
|
58,747 |
|
|
|
|
4,740 |
|
|
4,049 |
|
|
|
|
77,580 |
|
|
62,796 |
Derivative assets (5) |
|
|
62,252 |
|
|
34,662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,252 |
|
|
34,662 |
Assets held-for-sale (6) |
|
|
14,206 |
|
|
26,475 |
|
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
1,489 |
|
|
|
|
14,389 |
|
|
27,964 |
Commercial letters of credit |
|
|
2,974 |
|
|
4,413 |
|
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
3,765 |
|
|
4,553 |
Bankers acceptances |
|
|
3,389 |
|
|
2,411 |
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
2,413 |
Foreclosed properties |
|
|
321 |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
75 |
Total commercial credit exposure |
|
$ |
498,749 |
|
$ |
451,926 |
|
|
|
$ |
306,583 |
|
$ |
335,076 |
|
|
|
$ |
805,332 |
|
$ |
787,002 |
(1) |
Exposure includes standby letters of credit, financial guarantees, commercial letters of credit and bankers acceptances
for which the bank is legally bound to advance funds under prescribed conditions, during a specified period. Although funds have not been advanced, these exposure types are considered utilized for credit risk management purposes.
|
(2) |
Total commercial utilized exposure at December 31, 2008 and 2007 includes loans and issued letters of credit
measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 and is comprised of loans outstanding of $5.4 billion and $4.6 billion and letters of credit at notional value of $1.4 billion and $1.1 billion. |
(3) |
Total commercial unfunded exposure at December 31, 2008 and 2007 includes loan commitments measured at fair
value in accordance with SFAS 159 with a notional value of $15.5 billion and $19.8 billion. |
(4) |
Excludes unused business card lines which are not legally binding. |
(5) |
Derivative assets are reported on a mark-to-market basis, reflect the effects of legally enforceable master netting
agreements, and have been reduced by cash collateral of $34.8 billion and $12.8 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. In addition to cash collateral, derivative assets are also collateralized by $7.7 billion and $8.5 billion of primarily other
marketable securities at December 31, 2008 and 2007 for which credit risk has not been reduced. |
(6) |
Total commercial committed asset held-for-sale exposure consists of $12.1 billion and $23.9 billion of commercial
LHFS exposure (e.g., commercial mortgage and leveraged finance) and $2.3 billion and $4.1 billion of investments held-for-sale exposure at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
Table 26 presents commercial credit exposure by type for utilized, unfunded and total binding committed credit exposure. The increase in standby
letters of credit and financial guarantees of $14.8 billion was concentrated in the government, healthcare providers and education sectors. The increase in derivative assets of $27.6 billion was centered in interest rate swaps, foreign exchange
contracts and credit derivatives, and was driven by interest rate shifts, especially during the latter part of the year, the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain foreign currencies, and widening credit spreads. The decrease of $13.6
billion in assets held-for-sale was driven primarily by distributions and sales, completed securitizations, reduced underwriting activity, and mark-to-market writedowns. For more information on our credit derivatives, see Industry Concentrations
beginning on page 59 and for more information on our funded leveraged finance and CMBS exposures refer to Management of Commercial Credit Risk Concentrations on page 53.
Table 27 presents commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure by product type. Total commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure increased $19.8 billion from December 31, 2007, primarily
due to increases in commercial domestic reflecting deterioration across various lines of business and industries, and commercial real estate impacted by the housing markets weakness on the homebuilder sector of
the portfolio and the effect of the slowing economy on other property types. The table below excludes utilized criticized exposure related to assets held-for-sale of
$4.2 billion and $2.9 billion, other utilized criticized exposure measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 of $1.3 billion and $1.1 billion, and other utilized non-reservable criticized exposure of $4.8 billion and $368 million at
December 31, 2008 and 2007. See Commercial Loans Measured at Fair Value on page 57 for a discussion of the fair value portfolio. Criticized assets in the held-for-sale portfolio, are carried at fair value or the lower of cost or market,
including bridge exposure of $1.5 billion and $2.3 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007 which are funded in the normal course of our Global Banking and Global Markets segments and are managed in part through our
originate to distribute strategy (see Management of Commercial Credit Risk Concentrations on page 53 for more information on bridge financing). The increase in other utilized non-reservable criticized exposure was driven by a combination
of an increase in the positive mark-to-market on certain credit derivative assets, primarily related to monoline wraps, and downgrades on such positions. For more information regarding counterparty credit risk on our derivative positions, see the
Industry Concentrations discussion beginning on page 59.
Table 27 Commercial Utilized Reservable Criticized Exposure (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent (2) |
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent (2) |
|
Commercial domestic (3) |
|
$ |
18,963 |
|
7.20 |
% |
|
$ |
8,537 |
|
3.55 |
% |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
13,830 |
|
19.73 |
|
|
|
6,750 |
|
10.25 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
1,352 |
|
6.03 |
|
|
|
594 |
|
2.63 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
1,459 |
|
3.65 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
1.23 |
|
|
|
|
35,604 |
|
8.99 |
|
|
|
16,330 |
|
4.47 |
|
Small business commercial domestic |
|
|
1,333 |
|
6.94 |
|
|
|
846 |
|
4.37 |
|
Total commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure (4) |
|
$ |
36,937 |
|
8.90 |
|
|
$ |
17,176 |
|
4.46 |
|
(1) |
Criticized exposure corresponds to the Special Mention, Substandard and Doubtful asset categories defined by regulatory
authorities. |
(2) |
Percentages are calculated as commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure divided by total commercial utilized
reservable exposure for each exposure category. |
(3) |
Excludes small business commercial domestic exposure. |
(4) |
In addition to reservable loans and leases, exposure includes standby letters of credit, financial guarantees, commercial
letters of credit and bankers acceptances for which the bank is legally bound to advance funds under prescribed conditions, during a specified period. Although funds have not been advanced, these exposure types are considered utilized for
credit risk management purposes. |
Commercial Domestic
At December 31, 2008, approximately 88 percent of the commercial domestic portfolio, excluding small business, was included in Global Banking
(business banking, middle-market and large multinational corporate loans and leases) and Global Markets (acquisition, bridge financing and institutional investor services). The remaining 12 percent was mostly in GWIM (business-purpose
loans for wealthy individuals). Outstanding commercial domestic loans increased $11.1 billion to $200.1 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007 driven primarily by Global Banking and GWIM partially offset by Global
Markets due to the sale of the equity prime brokerage business. Nonperforming commercial domestic loans increased by $1.2 billion to $2.0 billion. Net charge-offs were up $392 million from 2007. These increases were broad-based in terms
of borrowers and industries and were up from very low loss levels in 2007. Utilized reservable criticized commercial domestic exposure, increased $10.4 billion to $19.0 billion primarily driven by deterioration across various portfolios
within Global Banking. Additionally, commercial domestic drove the increase in other utilized non-reservable criticized exposure, primarily mark-to-market derivative assets.
Commercial Real Estate
The commercial real estate portfolio is mostly managed in Global Banking and consists of loans issued primarily to public and private developers, homebuilders and commercial real estate
firms. Outstanding loans and leases increased $3.4 billion to $64.7 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007. The increase was primarily driven by growth in the California, Southwest and Southeast regions. The portfolio remains diversified
across property types with the largest increases in multiple use, office buildings, hotels/motels and shopping centers/retail. At
December 31, 2008, we had committed homebuilder-related exposure of $15.7 billion of which $11.0 billion were funded loans, primarily construction and land
development, most of which was collateralized. Non-homebuilder construction and land development comprised $22.1 billion or 34 percent of the commercial real estate loans outstanding at December 31, 2008.
Nonperforming commercial real estate loans increased $2.8 billion to $3.9 billion and utilized reservable criticized exposure increased $7.1
billion to $13.8 billion attributable to the continuing impact of the housing slowdown on the homebuilder sector, most of which is included in residential in Table 28, and on other property types, particularly shopping centers/retail and land and
land development. Nonperforming assets and utilized reservable criticized exposure in the homebuilder sector were $3.0 billion and $7.6 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2008 compared to $829 million and $5.4 billion at December 31,
2007. Nonperforming assets and utilized reservable criticized exposure for the non-homebuilder construction and land development sector increased to $786 million and $3.2 billion. The nonperforming assets ratio and the utilized criticized ratio for
the homebuilder sector was 27.07 percent and 66.33 percent at December 31, 2008 compared to 6.11 percent and 39.31 percent at December 31, 2007. Net charge-offs were up $840 million from 2007 principally related to the homebuilder sector
of the portfolio. Assets held-for-sale associated with commercial real estate decreased approximately $7.0 billion to $6.9 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007, driven by distributions and sales, completed securitizations and
writedowns.
Table 28 presents outstanding commercial real estate loans by geographic region and property type.
Table 28 Outstanding Commercial Real Estate
Loans (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
By Geographic Region (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
California |
|
$ |
11,270 |
|
$ |
9,683 |
Northeast |
|
|
9,747 |
|
|
8,978 |
Midwest |
|
|
7,447 |
|
|
8,005 |
Southeast |
|
|
7,365 |
|
|
6,490 |
Southwest |
|
|
6,698 |
|
|
5,610 |
Illinois |
|
|
5,451 |
|
|
6,835 |
Florida |
|
|
5,146 |
|
|
4,908 |
Midsouth |
|
|
3,475 |
|
|
2,912 |
Northwest |
|
|
3,022 |
|
|
2,644 |
Other (3) |
|
|
1,741 |
|
|
2,190 |
Geographically diversified (4) |
|
|
2,563 |
|
|
2,282 |
Non-U.S. |
|
|
979 |
|
|
1,065 |
Total outstanding commercial real estate loans (5) |
|
$ |
64,904 |
|
$ |
61,602 |
By Property Type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Office buildings |
|
$ |
10,388 |
|
$ |
8,745 |
Shopping centers/retail |
|
|
9,293 |
|
|
8,440 |
Residential |
|
|
8,534 |
|
|
10,478 |
Apartments |
|
|
8,177 |
|
|
7,615 |
Land and land development |
|
|
6,309 |
|
|
6,286 |
Industrial/warehouse |
|
|
6,070 |
|
|
5,419 |
Multiple use |
|
|
3,444 |
|
|
1,689 |
Hotels/motels |
|
|
2,513 |
|
|
1,535 |
Other (6) |
|
|
10,176 |
|
|
11,395 |
Total outstanding commercial real estate loans (5) |
|
$ |
64,904 |
|
$ |
61,602 |
(1) |
Primarily includes commercial loans and leases secured by non owner-occupied real estate which are dependent on the sale or
lease of the real estate as the primary source of repayment. |
(2) |
Distribution is based on geographic location of collateral. Geographic regions are in the U.S. unless otherwise noted.
|
(3) |
Primarily includes properties in the states of Colorado, Utah, Hawaii, Wyoming and Montana which are not defined by other
property regions presented. |
(4) |
The geographically diversified category is comprised primarily of unsecured outstandings to real estate investment trusts and
national home builders whose portfolios of properties span multiple geographic regions. |
(5) |
Includes commercial real estate loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 of $203 million and $304 million at
December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(6) |
Represents loans to borrowers whose primary business is commercial real estate, but the exposure is not secured by
the listed property types or is unsecured. |
Commercial Foreign
The commercial foreign portfolio is managed primarily in Global Banking. Outstanding loans increased $2.6 billion to $31.0 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to
2007 driven by organic growth partially offset by strengthening of the U.S. dollar against foreign currencies. Utilized reservable criticized exposure increased $1.0 billion to $1.5 billion. Net charge-offs increased $172 million from $1 million
largely concentrated in a few financial services borrowers, the majority of which were Icelandic banks. The remaining net charge-offs were diverse in terms of industries and countries. For additional information on the commercial foreign
portfolio, refer to the Foreign Portfolio discussion beginning on page 62.
Small Business Commercial
Domestic
The small business commercial domestic portfolio (business card and small
business loans) is managed in Global Card Services. Outstanding small business commercial domestic loans decreased $141 million to $19.1 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007. Approximately 60 percent of the
small business commercial domestic outstanding loans at December 31, 2008 were credit card related products. Nonperforming small business commercial domestic loans increased $53 million to $205 million, loans past due 90
days or more and still accruing interest increased $213 million to $640 million and utilized reservable criticized exposure increased $487 million, to $1.3 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007. Net charge-offs were up $1.1 billion, to
$1.9 billion, or 9.80 percent of total average small business commercial domestic loans. Approximately 75 percent of the small business commercial domestic net charge-offs in 2008 were credit card related products compared to 70
percent in 2007. The increases were primarily driven by the impacts of a slowing economy, particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant home price declines and seasoning of vintages originated in periods of higher
growth.
Commercial Loans Measured at Fair Value
The portfolio of commercial loans measured at fair value is managed in Global Markets. Outstanding commercial loans measured at fair value increased $823 million
to an aggregate fair value of $5.4 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007 and were comprised of commercial domestic loans, excluding small business, of $3.5 billion, commercial foreign loans of $1.7 billion and commercial
real estate loans of $203 million. The aggregate increase of $823 million was driven primarily by increased draws on existing and new lines of credit. We recorded net losses in other income of $775 million resulting from changes in the fair value of
the loan portfolio during 2008 compared to losses of $139 million for 2007. These losses were primarily attributable to changes in instrument-specific credit risk and were predominately offset by gains from hedging activities. At December 31,
2008 none of these loans were 90 days or more past due and still accruing interest or had been placed on nonaccrual status. Utilized criticized exposure in the fair value portfolio was $1.3 billion and $1.1 billion at December 31, 2008 and
2007.
In addition, unfunded lending commitments and letters of credit had an aggregate fair value of $1.1 billion and $660 million
at December 31, 2008 and 2007 and were recorded in accrued expenses and other liabilities. The associated aggregate notional amount of unfunded lending commitments and letters of credit subject to fair value treatment was $16.9 billion and
$20.9 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Net losses resulting from changes in fair value of commitments and letters of credit of $473 million were recorded in other income during the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to losses of
$274 million in 2007. These losses were primarily attributable to changes in instrument-specific credit risk and were predominately offset by gains from hedging activities.
Nonperforming Commercial Assets Activity
Table 29 presents the additions and reductions to nonperforming assets in the commercial portfolio during 2008 and 2007. The
increase in nonaccrual loans and leases for 2008 was primarily attributable to continued
weakness in the homebuilder sector but also included smaller increases in other property types including commercial land development, retail and apartments.
Table 29 Nonperforming Commercial Assets
Activity (1, 2, 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Nonperforming loans and leases Balance, January 1 |
|
$ |
2,155 |
|
|
$ |
757 |
|
Additions to nonperforming loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New nonaccrual loans and leases |
|
|
8,110 |
|
|
|
2,880 |
|
Advances |
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
Reductions in nonperforming loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paydowns and payoffs |
|
|
(1,467 |
) |
|
|
(781 |
) |
Sales |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(82 |
) |
Returns to performing status (4) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
Charge-offs (5) |
|
|
(1,900 |
) |
|
|
(370 |
) |
Transfers to foreclosed properties |
|
|
(372 |
) |
|
|
(75 |
) |
Transfers to loans held-for-sale |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Total net additions to nonperforming loans and leases |
|
|
4,342 |
|
|
|
1,398 |
|
Total nonperforming loans and leases, December 31 |
|
|
6,497 |
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
Foreclosed properties Balance, January 1 |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Additions to foreclosed properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New foreclosed properties |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Reductions in foreclosed properties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Writedowns |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Total net additions to foreclosed properties |
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Total foreclosed properties, December 31 |
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Nonperforming commercial assets, December 31 |
|
$ |
6,818 |
|
|
$ |
2,230 |
|
Nonperforming commercial loans and leases as a percentage of outstanding commercial loans and leases (6) |
|
|
1.93 |
% |
|
|
0.67 |
% |
Nonperforming commercial assets as a percentage of outstanding commercial loans and leases and foreclosed
properties (6) |
|
|
2.02 |
|
|
|
0.70 |
|
(1) |
Balances do not include nonperforming LHFS of $852 million and $93 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Balances do not
include nonperforming AFS debt securities of $291 million and $180 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(2) |
Balances do not include nonperforming derivative assets of $512 million at December 31, 2008.
|
(3) |
Includes small business commercial domestic activity. |
(4) |
Commercial loans and leases 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. |
(5) |
Certain loan and lease products, including business card, are not classified as nonperforming; therefore, the charge-offs on
these loans have no impact on nonperforming activity. |
(6) |
Outstanding commercial loans and leases exclude loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159.
|
Industry Concentrations
Table 30 presents
commercial committed and commercial utilized credit exposure by industry and the total net credit default protection purchased to cover the funded and the unfunded portion of certain credit exposure. Our commercial credit exposure is diversified
across a broad range of industries.
Industry limits are used internally to manage industry concentrations and are based on
committed exposure and capital usage that are allocated on an industry-by-industry basis. A risk management framework is in place to set and approve industry limits, as well as to provide ongoing monitoring. The CRC oversees industry limits
governance.
Total commercial committed credit exposure increased by $18.3 billion, or two percent, at December 31, 2008
compared to 2007 largely driven by diversified financials partially offset by a decline in commercial real estate. Total commercial utilized credit exposure increased by $46.8 billion, or 10 percent, at December 31, 2008 compared to 2007. The
overall commercial credit utilization rate increased year over year, increasing from 57 percent to 62 percent due to increases in diversified financials, government and public education, and healthcare and equipment services.
Real estate remains our largest industry concentration, accounting for 13 percent of total commercial committed exposure, of which 15 percent is
homebuilder exposure. A decrease of $7.9 billion, or seven percent, was driven primarily by a decline in CMBS assets held-for-sale as a result of sales and distributions, completed securitizations and writedowns.
Diversified financials grew by $17.2 billion, or 20 percent reflecting increases in capital markets exposure and consumer finance commitments.
Part of the increase was driven by a $3.7 billion fully committed secured credit facility as well as a $4.0 billion FDIC guaranteed facility, both of which were with Merrill Lynch. These facilities were terminated following the completion
of the acquisition. The increase in consumer finance commitments was driven primarily by liquidity support associated with the financing of credit card and auto finance related assets within the Corporations multi-seller unconsolidated
asset backed commercial paper conduits.
Healthcare equipment and services increased $5.8 billion or 14 percent due to loan growth
primarily to not-for-profit healthcare providers. This was driven primarily by increased demand for liquidity and credit instruments to support variable rate demand notes (VRDNs) caused by dislocations in the ARS markets. Consumer services increased
$5.3 billion, or 14 percent driven primarily by growth in the education (private colleges and universities) sector also resulting from the ARS dislocation. Food, beverage and tobacco increased $2.8 billion, or 11 percent due to growth in food
products and a large underwritten transaction. Banks decreased by $8.8 billion or 25 percent, reflecting the termination of a $5.0 billion commitment to Countrywide.
Government and public education utilizations increased $7.6 billion due to new refinancings of ARS into letter-of-credit backed VRDNs and the restructuring of monoline insured VRDNs into uninsured VRDNs.
Total committed exposure increased by $1.2 billion, as the increases in the utilized balance were partially offset by a reduction in certain unutilized credit lines.
Monoline exposure is reported in the insurance industry and managed under insurance portfolio industry limits. Direct loan exposure to monolines consisted of revolvers in the amount of $126 million at
December 31, 2008 and $203 million at December 31, 2007. Mark-to-market counterparty derivative credit exposure was $2.6 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to $420 million at December 31, 2007. The increase in the
mark-to-market exposure was due to credit deterioration related to underlying counterparties and spread widening in both wrapped CDO and structured finance related exposures. At December 31,
2008, the counterparty credit valuation adjustment related to monoline derivative exposure was $1.0 billion, which reduced our net mark-to-market exposure to $1.6
billion. We do not hold collateral against these derivative exposures. During the first quarter of 2009, one monoline counterparty restructured its business and had its credit rating downgraded. We are currently evaluating the impact this
restructuring and downgrade will have on Merrill Lynch as well as our related counterparty credit valuation adjustment and the combined companys 2009 financial results.
We have indirect exposure to monolines primarily in the form of guarantees supporting our loans, investment portfolios, securitizations, credit enhanced securities as part of our public finance business
and other selected products. Such indirect exposure exists when we purchase credit protection from monolines to hedge all or a portion of the credit risk on certain credit exposures including loans and CDOs. We underwrite our public finance exposure
by evaluating the underlying securities. In the case of default we first look to the underlying securities and then to recovery on the purchased insurance. See page 24 for discussion on our CDO exposure and related credit protection.
We also have indirect exposure as we invest in securities where the issuers have purchased wraps (i.e., insurance). For example, municipalities
and corporations purchase protection in order to enhance their pricing power which has the effect of reducing their cost of borrowings. If the rating agencies downgrade the monolines, the credit rating of the bond may fall and may have an adverse
impact on the market value of the security.
We have further monoline related exposure in our public finance business where we are
the lead manager or remarketing agent for transactions that are wrapped including ARS (healthcare providers and consumer services), tender option municipal bonds (TOBs), and VRDNs. Continuing concerns about monoline downgrades or insolvency have
caused disruptions in each of these markets as investor concerns have impacted overall market liquidity and bond prices. For more information on ARS, see Recent Events beginning on page 5. We no longer serve as the lead manager on municipal or
student loan ARS where a high percentage of the programs are wrapped by either monolines or other financial guarantors. We are the remarketing agent on TOBs and VRDN transactions and also provide commitments on approximately $13.6 billion of VRDNs,
which increased approximately $2.2 billion during the year, driven by the conversion by clients of ARS to VRDN structures, including those issued by municipalities and other organizations. These commitments obligate us to purchase the VRDNs in the
event that they can not be remarketed or otherwise provide funding to the issuer, and are primarily held and reported in government and education related industry portfolios and managed under respective industry limits.
In addition, at December 31, 2008, we also held approximately $1.3 billion in ARS, $1.5 billion in VRDNs and $3.0 billion in TOBs acquired in
connection with these activities which are included in trading account assets. During 2008, we recorded losses of $1.1 billion on the ARS, primarily related to student loan-backed securities, including our commitment to repurchase ARS from certain
clients as part of a settlement agreement with regulatory agencies. We did not record any losses on the VRDNs and only minimal losses on the TOBs during the year. We continue to have liquidity exposure to these markets and instruments. As market
conditions continue to evolve, these conditions may impact our results. For additional information on our liquidity exposure to TOBs, see the Municipal Bond Trusts discussion within the Off- and On-Balance Sheet Arrangements discussion beginning on
page 32 and Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Table 30 Commercial Credit Exposure by Industry (1, 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
Commercial Utilized |
|
|
|
Total Commercial Committed |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Real estate (3) |
|
$ |
79,766 |
|
$ |
81,260 |
|
|
|
$ |
103,889 |
|
|
$ |
111,742 |
|
Diversified financials |
|
|
50,327 |
|
|
37,872 |
|
|
|
|
103,306 |
|
|
|
86,118 |
|
Government and public education |
|
|
39,386 |
|
|
31,743 |
|
|
|
|
58,608 |
|
|
|
57,437 |
|
Capital goods |
|
|
27,588 |
|
|
25,908 |
|
|
|
|
52,522 |
|
|
|
52,356 |
|
Retailing |
|
|
30,736 |
|
|
32,401 |
|
|
|
|
50,102 |
|
|
|
54,037 |
|
Healthcare equipment and services |
|
|
31,280 |
|
|
24,337 |
|
|
|
|
46,785 |
|
|
|
40,962 |
|
Consumer services |
|
|
28,715 |
|
|
23,382 |
|
|
|
|
43,948 |
|
|
|
38,650 |
|
Materials |
|
|
22,825 |
|
|
22,176 |
|
|
|
|
38,105 |
|
|
|
38,717 |
|
Commercial services and supplies |
|
|
24,095 |
|
|
21,175 |
|
|
|
|
34,867 |
|
|
|
31,858 |
|
Individuals and trusts |
|
|
22,752 |
|
|
22,323 |
|
|
|
|
33,045 |
|
|
|
32,425 |
|
Food, beverage and tobacco |
|
|
17,257 |
|
|
13,919 |
|
|
|
|
28,521 |
|
|
|
25,701 |
|
Banks |
|
|
22,134 |
|
|
21,261 |
|
|
|
|
26,493 |
|
|
|
35,323 |
|
Energy |
|
|
11,885 |
|
|
12,772 |
|
|
|
|
22,732 |
|
|
|
23,510 |
|
Media |
|
|
8,939 |
|
|
7,901 |
|
|
|
|
19,301 |
|
|
|
19,343 |
|
Utilities |
|
|
8,230 |
|
|
6,438 |
|
|
|
|
19,272 |
|
|
|
19,281 |
|
Transportation |
|
|
13,050 |
|
|
12,803 |
|
|
|
|
18,561 |
|
|
|
18,824 |
|
Insurance |
|
|
11,223 |
|
|
7,162 |
|
|
|
|
17,855 |
|
|
|
16,014 |
|
Religious and social organizations |
|
|
9,539 |
|
|
8,208 |
|
|
|
|
12,576 |
|
|
|
10,982 |
|
Consumer durables and apparel |
|
|
6,219 |
|
|
5,802 |
|
|
|
|
10,862 |
|
|
|
10,907 |
|
Technology hardware and equipment |
|
|
3,971 |
|
|
4,615 |
|
|
|
|
10,371 |
|
|
|
10,239 |
|
Pharmaceuticals and biotechnology |
|
|
3,721 |
|
|
4,349 |
|
|
|
|
10,111 |
|
|
|
8,563 |
|
Software and services |
|
|
4,093 |
|
|
4,739 |
|
|
|
|
9,590 |
|
|
|
10,128 |
|
Telecommunication services |
|
|
3,681 |
|
|
3,475 |
|
|
|
|
8,036 |
|
|
|
8,235 |
|
Food and staples retailing |
|
|
4,282 |
|
|
3,611 |
|
|
|
|
7,012 |
|
|
|
6,465 |
|
Automobiles and components |
|
|
3,093 |
|
|
2,648 |
|
|
|
|
6,081 |
|
|
|
6,960 |
|
Household and personal products |
|
|
1,137 |
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
|
2,817 |
|
|
|
2,776 |
|
Semiconductors and semiconductor equipment |
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
|
|
1,822 |
|
|
|
1,734 |
|
Other |
|
|
7,720 |
|
|
7,617 |
|
|
|
|
8,142 |
|
|
|
7,715 |
|
Total commercial credit exposure by industry |
|
$ |
498,749 |
|
$ |
451,926 |
|
|
|
$ |
805,332 |
|
|
$ |
787,002 |
|
Net credit default protection purchased on total commitments (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(9,654 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,146 |
) |
(1) |
Total commercial utilized and total commercial committed exposure includes loans and letters of credit measured at
fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 and are comprised of loans outstanding of $5.4 billion and $4.6 billion and issued letters of credit at notional value of $1.4 billion and $1.1 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. In addition, total
commercial committed exposure includes unfunded loan commitments at notional value of $15.5 billion and $19.8 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(2) |
Includes small business commercial domestic exposure. |
(3) |
Industries are viewed from a variety of perspectives to best isolate the perceived risks. For purposes of this table, the real
estate industry is defined based upon the borrowers or counterparties primary business activity using operating cash flow and primary source of repayment as key factors. |
(4) |
Represents net notional credit protection purchased. |
Credit protection is purchased to cover the funded portion as well as the unfunded portion of certain credit exposure. To lessen the cost of
obtaining our desired credit protection levels, credit exposure may be added within an industry, borrower or counterparty group by selling protection.
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, we had net notional credit default protection purchased in our credit derivatives portfolio to cover the funded and unfunded portion of certain credit exposures of $9.7 billion and $7.1
billion. The mark-to-market impacts, including the cost of net credit default protection, hedging our exposure, resulted in net gains of $993 million in 2008 compared to net gains of $160 million in 2007. The
average VAR for these credit derivative hedges was $24 million and $18 million for 2008 and 2007. The increase in VAR was driven by an increase in the average amount
of credit protection outstanding during the year. There is a diversification effect between the net credit default protection hedging our credit exposure and the related credit exposure such that their combined average VAR was $22 million for 2008.
Refer to the Trading Risk Management discussion beginning on page 68 for a description of our VAR calculation for the market-based trading portfolio.
Tables 31 and 32 present the maturity profiles and the credit exposure debt ratings of the net credit default protection portfolio at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Table 31 Net Credit Default Protection by
Maturity Profile (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Less than or equal to one year |
|
1 |
% |
|
2 |
% |
Greater than one year and less than or equal to five years |
|
92 |
|
|
67 |
|
Greater than five years |
|
7 |
|
|
31 |
|
Total net credit default protection |
|
100 |
% |
|
100 |
% |
(1) |
In order to mitigate the cost of purchasing credit protection, credit exposure can be added by selling credit
protection. The distribution of maturities for net credit default protection purchased is shown as positive percentages and the distribution of maturities for net credit protection sold as negative percentages. |
Table 32 Net Credit Default Protection by
Credit Exposure Debt Rating (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Ratings (2) |
|
Net Notional |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
Net Notional |
|
|
Percent |
|
AAA |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
(0.3 |
)% |
|
|
|
$ |
(13 |
) |
|
0.2 |
% |
AA |
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
1.3 |
|
A |
|
|
(2,800 |
) |
|
29.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(2,408 |
) |
|
33.7 |
|
BBB |
|
|
(4,856 |
) |
|
50.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
(3,328 |
) |
|
46.6 |
|
BB |
|
|
(1,948 |
) |
|
20.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1,524 |
) |
|
21.3 |
|
B |
|
|
(579 |
) |
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
2.5 |
|
CCC and below |
|
|
(278 |
) |
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
1.0 |
|
NR (3) |
|
|
880 |
|
|
(9.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
(6.6 |
) |
Total net credit default protection |
|
$ |
(9,654 |
) |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
(7,146 |
) |
|
100.0 |
% |
(1) |
In order to mitigate the cost of purchasing credit protection, credit exposure can be added by selling credit protection. The
distribution of debt rating for net notional credit default protection purchased is shown as a negative and the net notional credit protection sold is shown as a positive amount. |
(2) |
The Corporation considers ratings of BBB- or higher to meet the definition of investment grade. |
(3) |
In addition to names which have not been rated, NR includes $948 million and $550 million in net credit default
swaps index positions at December 31, 2008 and 2007. While index positions are principally investment grade, credit default swaps indices include names in and across each of the ratings categories. |
In addition to our net notional credit default protection purchased to cover the funded and unfunded portion of certain credit exposures, credit
derivatives are used for market-making activities for clients and establishing proprietary positions intended to profit from directional or relative value changes. We execute the majority of our credit derivative positions in the over-the-counter
market with large, international financial institutions, including broker/dealers and to a lesser degree with a variety of other investors. Because these transactions are executed in the over-the-counter market, we are subject to settlement risk. We
are also subject to credit risk in the event that these counterparties fail to perform under the terms of these contracts. In most cases, credit derivative transactions are executed on a daily margin basis. Therefore, events such as a credit
downgrade (depending on the ultimate rating level) or a breach of credit covenants would typically require an increase in the amount of collateral required of the counterparty (where applicable), and/or allow us to take additional protective
measures such as early termination of all trades. Further, we enter into legally enforceable master netting agreements which reduce risk by permitting the closeout and netting of transactions with the same counterparty upon the occurrence of certain
events.
The
notional amounts presented in Table 33 represent the total contract/notional amount of credit derivatives outstanding and includes both purchased and written protection. The credit risk amounts are measured as the net replacement cost in the
event the counterparties with contracts in a gain position to us fail to perform under the terms of those contracts. We use the current mark-to-market value to represent credit exposure without giving consideration to future mark-to-market
changes. The credit risk amounts take into consideration the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements, and on an aggregate basis have been reduced by cash collateral applied against derivative assets. The significant
increase in credit spreads across nearly all major credit indices during 2008 drove the increase in counterparty credit risk for purchased protection. The $1.0 trillion decrease in the contract/notional value of credit derivatives was driven by
our continued efforts to reduce aggregate positions to minimize market and operational risk. For information on the performance risk of our written protection credit derivatives, see Note 4 Derivatives to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Table 33 Credit Derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Contract/Notional |
|
Credit Risk(1) |
|
|
|
Contract/Notional |
|
Credit Risk(1) |
Credit derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased protection: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps |
|
$ |
1,025,876 |
|
$ |
11,772 |
|
|
|
$ |
1,490,641 |
|
$ |
6,822 |
Total return swaps |
|
|
6,575 |
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
|
13,551 |
|
|
671 |
Total purchased protection |
|
|
1,032,451 |
|
|
13,450 |
|
|
|
|
1,504,192 |
|
|
7,493 |
Written protection: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit default swaps |
|
|
1,000,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,517,305 |
|
|
|
Total return swaps |
|
|
6,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,884 |
|
|
|
Total written protection |
|
|
1,006,237 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,542,189 |
|
|
|
Total credit derivatives |
|
$ |
2,038,688 |
|
$ |
13,450 |
|
|
|
$ |
3,046,381 |
|
$ |
7,493 |
(1) |
Does not reflect any potential benefit from offsetting exposure to non-credit derivative products with the same counterparties
that may be netted upon the occurrence of certain events, thereby reducing the Corporations overall exposure. |
Counterparty Credit Risk Valuation Adjustments
We record a
counterparty credit risk valuation adjustment on our expected exposure related to derivative assets and liabilities, including our credit default protection purchased, in order to properly reflect the credit quality of the counterparty in accordance
with SFAS 157. In determining the expected exposure, we consider collateral held and legally enforceable master netting agreements that mitigate our credit exposure to each counterparty. The amount of counterparty credit risk valuation adjustments
at any point of time is dependent on the value of the derivative contract, collateral, and credit worthiness of the counterparty.
During 2008, valuation adjustments related to derivative assets of $3.2 billion were recognized as trading account losses for counterparty credit risk, including $1.1 billion of losses related to insured super senior CDOs and $537 million
of losses related to our structured credit trading business. The losses were driven by increases in the value of the derivative contracts resulting primarily from spread widening, market volatility and credit deterioration related to the underlying
counterparties. At December 31, 2008, the cumulative counterparty credit risk valuation adjustment that was netted against the derivative asset balance was $4.0 billion. For information on our monoline counterparty credit risk see the
discussion on page 70, CDO-related counterparty credit risk see the Global Markets discussion on page 34 and for more information on the VAR related to our counterparty credit risk see the Trading Risk Management discussion on page 68.
In addition, the fair value of our derivative liabilities is adjusted to reflect the impact of the Corporations credit
quality. During 2008, valuation adjustments of $364 million were recognized as trading account profits for changes in the Corporations credit risk driven by credit spread widening. At December 31, 2008, the Corporations cumulative
credit risk valuation adjustment that was netted against the derivative liabilities balance was $573 million.
In light of recent
market events, banking regulators have been working with the industry to organize a central clearinghouse for credit derivative trading, similar to existing clearinghouses for interest rate derivatives. It is expected that a central
clearinghouse for credit derivatives would reduce the risk of counterparty default, similar to the reduction achieved through the interest rate derivative clearinghouse, primarily through the guaranteeing of trades in the event that a member fails.
We continue to participate in these industry initiatives.
Foreign Portfolio
Our foreign credit and trading portfolio is subject to country risk. We define country risk as the risk of loss from unfavorable economic and
political conditions, currency fluctuations, social instability and changes in government policies. A risk management framework is in place to measure, monitor and manage foreign risk and exposures. Management oversight of country risk including
cross-border risk is provided by the Country Risk Committee, a subcommittee of the CRC.
Table 34 sets forth total foreign exposure
broken out by region at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Foreign exposure includes credit exposure net of local liabilities, securities, and other investments domiciled in countries other than the U.S. Total foreign exposure can be adjusted for
externally guaranteed outstandings and certain collateral types. Exposures which are assigned external guarantees are reported under the country of the guarantor. Exposures with tangible collateral are reflected in the country where the collateral
is held. For securities received, other than cross-border resale agreements, outstandings are assigned to the domicile of the issuer of the securities. Resale agreements are generally presented based on the domicile of the counterparty consistent
with FFIEC reporting requirements.
Our total foreign exposure was $131.1 billion at December 31, 2008, a decrease of $7.0
billion from December 31, 2007. Our foreign exposure remained concentrated in Europe, which accounted for $66.5 billion, or 51 percent, of total foreign exposure. The European exposure was mostly in Western Europe and was distributed across a
variety of industries with approximately 58 percent concentrated in the commercial sector and approximately 17 percent in the banking sector. The decline of $8.3 billion in Europe was driven by lower cross-border derivatives assets, and securities
and other investment exposures.
Asia Pacific was our second largest foreign exposure at $39.8 billion, or 30 percent. The decline
in Asia Pacific was primarily driven by lower cross-border exposures in Japan and Australia offset in part by the net $3.3 billion increased equity investment in CCB and higher exposure in India. Latin America accounted for $11.4 billion, or nine
percent, of total foreign exposure. For more information on our Asia Pacific and Latin America exposures, see the discussion on the foreign exposure to selected countries defined as emerging markets on page 63.
Table 34 Regional Foreign Exposure
(1, 2, 3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
Europe |
|
$ |
66,472 |
|
$ |
74,725 |
Asia Pacific |
|
|
39,774 |
|
|
42,081 |
Latin America |
|
|
11,378 |
|
|
10,944 |
Middle East and Africa |
|
|
2,456 |
|
|
1,951 |
Other |
|
|
10,988 |
|
|
8,361 |
Total regional foreign exposure |
|
$ |
131,068 |
|
$ |
138,062 |
(1) |
The balances above exclude local funding or liabilities which are subtracted from local exposures as allowed by the FFIEC.
|
(2) |
Exposures have been reduced by $19.6 billion and $6.3 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Such amounts represent the
cash applied as collateral to derivative assets. |
(3) |
Generally, resale agreements are presented based on the domicile of the counterparty consistent with FFIEC reporting
requirements. Cross-border resale agreements where the underlying securities are U.S. Treasury securities, in which case the domicile is the U.S., are excluded from this presentation. |
As shown in Table 35, at December 31, 2008 and 2007, China had total cross-border exposure of $20.7 billion and $17.0 billion, representing 1.14 percent and 0.99
percent of total assets. China was the only country where the total cross-border exceeded one percent of our total
assets at December 31, 2008 and 0.75 percent of total assets at December 31, 2007. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the largest concentration of the
cross-border exposure to China was in the banking sector, primarily our equity investment in CCB.
Table 35 Total Cross-border Exposure Exceeding One Percent of Total Assets (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
December 31 |
|
Public Sector |
|
Banks |
|
Private Sector |
|
Cross-border Exposure |
|
Exposure as a Percentage of Total Assets |
|
China |
|
2008 |
|
$ |
44 |
|
$ |
20,091 |
|
$ |
524 |
|
$ |
20,659 |
|
1.14 |
% |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
58 |
|
|
16,558 |
|
|
424 |
|
|
17,040 |
|
0.99 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
127 |
|
|
3,174 |
|
|
264 |
|
|
3,565 |
|
0.24 |
|
(1) |
Exposure includes cross-border claims by our foreign offices as follows: loans, acceptances, time deposits placed, trading
account assets, securities, derivative assets, other interest-earning investments and other monetary assets. Amounts also include unused commitments, SBLCs, commercial letters of credit and formal guarantees. Sector definitions are consistent with
FFIEC reporting requirements for preparing the Country Exposure Report. |
As presented in Table
36, foreign exposure to borrowers or counterparties in emerging markets increased $5.4 billion to $45.8 billion at December 31, 2008, compared to $40.4 billion at December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily due to our increased equity
investment in CCB
as well as higher exposures in India and Bahrain. Foreign exposure to borrowers or counterparties in emerging markets represented 35 percent and 29 percent of total
foreign exposure at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Table 36 Selected Emerging Markets (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Loans and Leases, and Loan Commitments |
|
Other Financing (2) |
|
Derivative Assets (3) |
|
Securities/ Other Investments (4) |
|
Total Cross- border Exposure (5) |
|
Local Country Exposure Net of Local Liabilities (6) |
|
Total Emerging Market Exposure at December 31, 2008 |
|
Increase (Decrease) From December 31, 2007 |
|
Region/Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
China |
|
$ |
285 |
|
$ |
48 |
|
$ |
499 |
|
$ |
19,827 |
|
$ |
20,659 |
|
$ |
46 |
|
$ |
20,705 |
|
$ |
3,665 |
|
South Korea |
|
|
665 |
|
|
871 |
|
|
1,635 |
|
|
1,505 |
|
|
4,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,676 |
|
|
274 |
|
India |
|
|
1,521 |
|
|
689 |
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
1,179 |
|
|
4,434 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,434 |
|
|
1,142 |
|
Singapore |
|
|
347 |
|
|
73 |
|
|
813 |
|
|
336 |
|
|
1,569 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,569 |
|
|
277 |
|
Taiwan |
|
|
304 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
29 |
|
|
419 |
|
|
423 |
|
|
842 |
|
|
(225 |
) |
Hong Kong |
|
|
429 |
|
|
28 |
|
|
143 |
|
|
81 |
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
(114 |
) |
Other Asia Pacific (7) |
|
|
187 |
|
|
97 |
|
|
40 |
|
|
281 |
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
(82 |
) |
Total Asia Pacific |
|
|
3,738 |
|
|
1,832 |
|
|
4,235 |
|
|
23,238 |
|
|
33,043 |
|
|
469 |
|
|
33,512 |
|
|
4,937 |
|
Latin America |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mexico |
|
|
1,335 |
|
|
301 |
|
|
132 |
|
|
2,264 |
|
|
4,032 |
|
|
125 |
|
|
4,157 |
|
|
(281 |
) |
Brazil |
|
|
350 |
|
|
407 |
|
|
50 |
|
|
2,544 |
|
|
3,351 |
|
|
518 |
|
|
3,869 |
|
|
182 |
|
Chile |
|
|
294 |
|
|
241 |
|
|
30 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
576 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
579 |
|
|
(140 |
) |
Other Latin America (7) |
|
|
150 |
|
|
273 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
67 |
|
|
492 |
|
|
155 |
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
|
Total Latin America |
|
|
2,129 |
|
|
1,222 |
|
|
214 |
|
|
4,886 |
|
|
8,451 |
|
|
801 |
|
|
9,252 |
|
|
(239 |
) |
Middle East and Africa |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bahrain |
|
|
269 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
59 |
|
|
854 |
|
|
1,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,189 |
|
|
1,042 |
|
Other Middle East and Africa (7) |
|
|
661 |
|
|
131 |
|
|
367 |
|
|
107 |
|
|
1,266 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,266 |
|
|
(528 |
) |
Total Middle East and Africa |
|
|
930 |
|
|
138 |
|
|
426 |
|
|
961 |
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
514 |
|
Central and Eastern Europe (7) |
|
|
65 |
|
|
114 |
|
|
262 |
|
|
188 |
|
|
629 |
|
|
|
|
|
629 |
|
|
205 |
|
Total emerging market exposure |
|
$ |
6,862 |
|
$ |
3,306 |
|
$ |
5,137 |
|
$ |
29,273 |
|
$ |
44,578 |
|
$ |
1,270 |
|
$ |
45,848 |
|
$ |
5,417 |
|
(1) |
There is no generally accepted definition of emerging markets. The definition that we use includes all countries in Asia
Pacific excluding Japan, Australia and New Zealand; all countries in Latin America excluding Cayman Islands and Bermuda; all countries in Middle East and Africa; and all countries in Central and Eastern Europe excluding Greece. There was no emerging
market exposure included in the portfolio measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(2) |
Includes acceptances, standby letters of credit, commercial letters of credit and formal guarantees.
|
(3) |
Derivative assets are reported on a mark-to-market basis and have been reduced by the amount of cash collateral applied of $152
million and $57 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007. At December 31, 2008 and 2007 there were $531 million and $2 million of other marketable securities collateralizing derivative assets for which credit risk has not been reduced.
|
(4) |
Generally, cross-border resale agreements are presented based on the domicile of the counterparty, consistent with FFIEC
reporting requirements. Cross-border resale agreements where the underlying securities are U.S. Treasury securities, in which case the domicile is the U.S., are excluded from this presentation. |
(5) |
Cross-border exposure includes amounts payable to the Corporation by borrowers or counterparties with a country of residence
other than the one in which the credit is booked, regardless of the currency in which the claim is denominated, consistent with FFIEC reporting requirements. |
(6) |
Local country exposure includes amounts payable to the Corporation by borrowers with a country of residence in which the credit
is booked, regardless of the currency in which the claim is denominated. Local funding or liabilities are subtracted from local exposures consistent with FFIEC reporting requirements. Total amount of available local liabilities funding local country
exposure at December 31, 2008 was $12.6 billion compared to $21.6 billion at December 31, 2007. Local liabilities at December 31, 2008 in Asia Pacific and Latin America were $12.1 billion and $538 million, of which $4.9 billion were
in Singapore, $2.2 billion were in Hong Kong, $1.7 billion were in South Korea, $1.0 billion were in India, and $882 million were in China. There were no other countries with available local liabilities funding local country exposure greater than
$500 million. |
(7) |
No country included in Other Asia Pacific, Other Latin America, Other Middle East and Africa, and Central and Eastern Europe
had total foreign exposure of more than $500 million. |
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, 73 percent and 71 percent of the emerging markets exposure was in Asia Pacific. Emerging markets exposure in Asia Pacific increased
by $4.9 billion driven by higher cross-border exposure in China and India. Our exposure in China was primarily related to our equity investment in CCB which accounted for $19.7 billion and $16.4 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. In 2008,
under the terms of our purchase option we increased our ownership in CCB by purchasing 25.6 billion common shares for approximately $9.2 billion. These recently purchased shares are accounted for at cost in other assets and are non-transferable
until August 2011. In addition in January 2009, we sold 5.6 billion common shares of our initial investment in CCB for $2.8 billion, reducing our ownership to 16.7 percent and resulting in a pre-tax gain of approximately $1.9 billion. The remaining
initial investment of 13.5 billion common shares is accounted for at fair value and recorded as AFS marketable equity securities in other assets with an offset, net-of-tax, to accumulated OCI. These shares became transferable in October 2008.
At December 31, 2008, 20 percent of the emerging markets exposure was in Latin America compared to 23 percent at
December 31, 2007. Latin America emerging markets exposure decreased by $239 million driven by lower cross-border exposures in Mexico and Chile. The decline in Mexico is primarily driven by the decline in value of our equity investment in
Santander due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar. Our 24.9 percent investment in Santander, which is classified as securities and other investments in the preceding table, accounted for $2.1 billion and $2.6 billion of exposure in Mexico at
December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007. Our exposure in Brazil was primarily related to the carrying value of our investment in Banco Itaú, which accounted for $2.5 billion and $2.6 billion of exposure in Brazil at
December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007. Our equity investment in Banco Itaú represents eight percent and seven percent of its outstanding voting and non-voting shares at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
At both December 31, 2008 and 2007, five percent of the emerging markets exposure was in Middle East and Africa. Middle East and Africa
emerging markets exposure increased by $514 million, driven by increased cross-border securities and other investments exposures in Bahrain which were primarily collateralized by mortgage-backed securities issued by U.S. government sponsored
entities.
Provision for Credit Losses
The provision for credit losses increased $18.4 billion to $26.8 billion in 2008 compared to 2007.
The consumer portion of the provision for credit losses increased $15.2 billion to $21.8 billion compared to 2007. The higher provision expense was largely driven by higher net charge-offs and reserve increases in our home equity and
residential mortgage portfolios reflective of deterioration in the housing markets particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant declines in home prices as well as deterioration in our Countrywide SOP 03-3 portfolio
subsequent to the July 1, 2008 acquisition. Furthermore, the slowing economy and portfolio deterioration resulted in higher credit costs in the consumer lending and domestic credit card portfolios.
The commercial portion of the provision for credit losses increased $3.2 billion to $5.0 billion compared to 2007. The increase was driven by higher
net charge-offs in our small business portfolios within Global Card Services reflecting deterioration from the impacts of a slowing economy particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant home price declines.
Higher net charge-offs were also experienced in commercial real estate, primarily the homebuilder loan portfolio, as well as commercial domestic and foreign net charge-offs, which were broad-based in terms of both borrowers and industries and up
from very
low levels in 2007. Reserves were increased for deterioration in the homebuilder and non real estate commercial portfolios within Global Banking as well as in
the small business portfolio within Global Card Services. In addition, the absence of 2007 reserve reductions in All Other also contributed to the increase in provision.
Allowance for Credit Losses
The allowance for loan and lease
losses excludes loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 as subsequent mark-to-market adjustments related to loans measured at fair value include a credit risk component. The allowance for loan and lease losses is allocated based on
two components. We evaluate the adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses based on the combined total of these two components.
The first component of the allowance for loan and lease losses covers those commercial loans excluding loans measured at fair value that are either nonperforming or impaired. An allowance is allocated when the discounted cash flows (or
collateral value or observable market price) are lower than the carrying value of that loan. For purposes of computing the specific loss component of the allowance, larger impaired loans are evaluated individually and smaller impaired loans are
evaluated as a pool using historical loss experience for the respective product type and risk rating of the loans.
The second
component of the allowance for loan and lease losses covers performing consumer and commercial loans and leases excluding loans measured at fair value. The allowance for commercial loan and lease losses is established by product type after analyzing
historical loss experience by internal risk rating, current economic conditions, industry performance trends, geographic or obligor concentrations within each portfolio segment, and any other pertinent information. The commercial historical loss
experience is updated quarterly to incorporate the most recent data reflective of the current economic environment. As of December 31, 2008 quarterly updating of historical loss experience did not have a material impact on the allowance for
loan and lease losses. The allowance for consumer and certain homogeneous commercial loan and lease products is based on aggregated portfolio segment evaluations, generally by product type. Loss forecast models are utilized that consider a variety
of factors including, but not limited to, historical loss experience, estimated defaults or foreclosures based on portfolio trends, delinquencies, economic trends and credit scores. These loss forecast models are updated on a quarterly basis in
order to incorporate information reflective of the current economic environment. As of December 31, 2008 quarterly updating of the loss forecast models resulted in increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses driven by higher losses
primarily in the home equity portfolio, reflective of deterioration in the housing markets, portfolio deterioration on the consumer card and consumer lending portfolios and deterioration and reduced collateral values in the retail dealer-related
loan portfolios.
We monitor differences between estimated and actual incurred loan and lease losses. This monitoring process includes
periodic assessments by senior management of loan and lease portfolios and the models used to estimate incurred losses in those portfolios.
Additions to the allowance for loan and lease losses are made by charges to the provision for credit losses. Credit exposures deemed to be uncollectible are charged against the allowance for loan and lease losses. Recoveries of previously
charged off amounts are credited to the allowance for loan and lease losses.
The allowance for loan and lease losses for the consumer
portfolio as presented in Table 38 was $16.7 billion at December 31, 2008, an increase of $9.9 billion from December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily driven by reserve increases related to higher losses in our home equity, unsecured
lending, consumer card, and residential mortgage portfolios, and the addition
of the Countrywide portfolio. In addition, reserves were increased by $750 million associated with a reduction in the principal cash flows expected to be collected on
the Countrywide SOP 03-3 portfolio, mainly the discontinued real estate portfolio.
The allowance for commercial loan and lease losses
was $6.4 billion at December 31, 2008, a $1.6 billion increase from December 31, 2007. The increase in allowance levels was driven by higher losses in the small business portfolio within Global Card Services and reserve increases on
the homebuilder loan portfolio within Global Banking. For further discussion, see Provision for Credit Losses on page 64.
The
allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding was 2.49 percent at December 31, 2008, compared to 1.33 percent at December 31, 2007. The increase in the ratio was primarily driven by reserve
increases for higher losses in the home equity and residential mortgage portfolios, reflective of continued weakness in the housing markets and a slowing economy. The higher ratio was also due to reserve increases in the Global Card
Services consumer lending, domestic credit card, and small business portfolios. These reserve increases were a result of the slowing economy, particularly in geographic areas that have experienced the most significant housing declines, and
with respect to several portfolios, seasoning of vintages originated in periods of higher growth. In addition, the 2008 ratio also includes the impact of SOP 03-3 portfolio. As this portfolio was initially recorded at fair value upon acquisition,
the reserve related to these loans is significantly lower than other portfolios.
Reserve for Unfunded Lending Commitments
In addition to the allowance for loan and lease losses, we also estimate probable losses related to unfunded lending commitments excluding commitments measured at
fair value, such as letters of credit and financial guarantees, and binding unfunded loan commitments. Unfunded lending commitments are subject to the same assessment as funded loans, except utilization assumptions are considered. The reserve for
unfunded lending commitments is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet with changes to the reserve generally made through the provision for credit losses.
The reserve for unfunded lending commitments at December 31, 2008 was $421 million compared to $518 million at December 31, 2007. Our
reserve for unfunded commitments decreased as a result of lower exposures.
Table 37 presents a
rollforward of the allowance for credit losses for 2008 and 2007.
Table 37 Allowance for Credit Losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, January 1 |
|
$ |
11,588 |
|
|
$ |
9,016 |
|
Adjustment due to the adoption of SFAS 159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Loans and leases charged off |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
(964 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
(3,597 |
) |
|
|
(286 |
) |
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
(4,469 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
|
(453 |
) |
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
(3,777 |
) |
|
|
(1,885 |
) |
Other consumer |
|
|
(461 |
) |
|
|
(346 |
) |
Total consumer charge-offs |
|
|
(13,926 |
) |
|
|
(6,458 |
) |
Commercial domestic (1) |
|
|
(2,567 |
) |
|
|
(1,135 |
) |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
(895 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
Commercial foreign |
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
Total commercial charge-offs |
|
|
(3,740 |
) |
|
|
(1,272 |
) |
Total loans and leases charged off |
|
|
(17,666 |
) |
|
|
(7,730 |
) |
Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
512 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
Total consumer recoveries |
|
|
1,264 |
|
|
|
1,035 |
|
Commercial domestic (2) |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Total commercial recoveries |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
Total recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off |
|
|
1,435 |
|
|
|
1,250 |
|
Net charge-offs |
|
|
(16,231 |
) |
|
|
(6,480 |
) |
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
26,922 |
|
|
|
8,357 |
|
Other (3) |
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, December 31 |
|
|
23,071 |
|
|
|
11,588 |
|
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, January 1 |
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
Adjustment due to the adoption of SFAS 159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
Provision for unfunded lending commitments |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
28 |
|
Other (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
121 |
|
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, December 31 |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
Allowance for credit losses, December 31 |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
Loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5) |
|
$ |
926,033 |
|
|
$ |
871,754 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
1.33 |
% |
Consumer allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total consumer loans and leases outstanding at December 31
(6) |
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
1.23 |
|
Commercial allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total commercial loans and leases outstanding at December 31
(5) |
|
|
1.90 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
Average loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
$ |
905,944 |
|
|
$ |
773,142 |
|
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
1.79 |
% |
|
|
0.84 |
% |
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total nonperforming loans and leases at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
Ratio of the allowance for loan and lease losses at December 31 to net charge-offs
(6) |
|
|
1.42 |
|
|
|
1.79 |
|
(1) |
Includes small business commercial domestic charge-offs of $2.0 billion and $931 million in 2008 and 2007.
|
(2) |
Includes small business commercial domestic recoveries of $39 million and $51 million in 2008 and 2007.
|
(3) |
The 2008 amount includes the $1.2 billion addition of the Countrywide allowance for loan losses as of July 1,
2008. The 2007 amount includes the $725 million and $25 million additions of the LaSalle and U.S. Trust Corporation allowance for loan losses as of October 1, 2007 and July 1, 2007. |
(4) |
The 2007 amount includes the $124 million addition of the LaSalle reserve for unfunded lending commitments as of
October 1, 2007. |
(5) |
Outstanding loan and lease balances and ratios do not include loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS
159 at and for the year ended December 31, 2008 and 2007. Loans measured at fair value were $5.4 billion and $4.6 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Average loans measured at fair value were $4.9 billion and $3.0 billion for 2008 and
2007. |
(6) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3
on asset quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45. |
n/a = not applicable
For reporting purposes, we allocate the allowance for credit losses across products. However, the allowance is available to absorb any credit losses without
restriction. Table 38 presents our allocation by product type.
Table 38 Allocation of the Allowance for
Credit Losses by Product Type (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
Percent of Loans and Leases Outstanding (2) |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
Percent of Loans and Leases Outstanding (2) |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage (3) |
|
$ |
1,382 |
|
5.99 |
% |
|
0.56 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
1.79 |
% |
|
0.08 |
% |
Home equity |
|
|
5,385 |
|
23.34 |
|
|
3.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
963 |
|
8.31 |
|
|
0.84 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
658 |
|
2.85 |
|
|
3.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
3,947 |
|
17.11 |
|
|
6.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,919 |
|
25.19 |
|
|
4.44 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
742 |
|
3.22 |
|
|
4.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
441 |
|
3.81 |
|
|
2.95 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
4,341 |
|
18.81 |
|
|
5.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,077 |
|
17.92 |
|
|
2.71 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
203 |
|
0.88 |
|
|
5.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
151 |
|
1.30 |
|
|
3.61 |
|
Total consumer |
|
|
16,658 |
|
72.20 |
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,758 |
|
58.32 |
|
|
1.23 |
|
Commercial domestic (4) |
|
|
4,339 |
|
18.81 |
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,194 |
|
27.56 |
|
|
1.53 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
1,465 |
|
6.35 |
|
|
2.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,083 |
|
9.35 |
|
|
1.77 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
223 |
|
0.97 |
|
|
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
218 |
|
1.88 |
|
|
0.97 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
386 |
|
1.67 |
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
335 |
|
2.89 |
|
|
1.18 |
|
Total commercial (5) |
|
|
6,413 |
|
27.80 |
|
|
1.90 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,830 |
|
41.68 |
|
|
1.51 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
23,071 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
|
|
11,588 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
1.33 |
% |
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for credit losses |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3
on asset quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk beginning on page 45. |
(2) |
Ratios are calculated as allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of loans and leases outstanding excluding loans
measured in accordance with SFAS 159 for each loan and lease category. Loans measured at fair value include commercial domestic loans of $3.5 billion and $3.5 billion, commercial-foreign loans of $1.7 billion and $790 million, and commercial
real estate loans of $203 million and $304 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
(3) |
Allowance for loan and leases losses at December 31, 2008 includes the benefit of amounts expected to be reimbursable
under cash collateralized synthetic securitizations. Excluding these benefits the allowance to ending loans would be 0.69 percent. See Residential Mortgage beginning on page 46 for more information. |
(4) |
Includes allowance for small business commercial domestic loans of $2.4 billion and $1.4 billion at December 31,
2008 and 2007. |
(5) |
Includes allowance for loan and lease losses for impaired commercial loans of $691 million and $123 million at
December 31, 2008 and 2007. |
n/a = not applicable
Market Risk Management
Market risk is the risk that values of assets and liabilities or revenues will be adversely affected by changes in market conditions such as market movements. This risk is inherent in the financial instruments associated with our operations
and/or activities including loans, deposits, securities, short-term borrowings, long-term debt, trading account assets and liabilities, and derivatives. Market-sensitive assets and liabilities are generated through loans and deposits associated with
our traditional banking business, customer and proprietary trading operations, ALM process, credit risk mitigation activities and mortgage banking activities. In the event of market volatility, factors such as underlying market movements and
liquidity have an impact on the results of the Corporation.
Our traditional banking loan and deposit products are nontrading
positions and are reported at amortized cost for assets or the amount owed for liabilities (historical cost). GAAP requires a historical cost view of traditional banking assets and liabilities. However, these positions are still subject to changes
in economic value based on varying market conditions, primarily changes in the levels of interest rates. The risk of adverse changes in the economic value of our nontrading positions is managed through our ALM activities. We have elected to fair
value certain loan and deposit products in accordance with SFAS 159. For further information on fair value of certain financial assets and liabilities, see Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Our trading positions are reported at fair value with changes currently reflected in income. Trading positions are subject to
various risk factors,
which include exposures to interest rates and foreign exchange rates, as well as mortgage, equity, commodity, issuer and market liquidity risk factors. We seek to
mitigate these risk exposures by using techniques that encompass a variety of financial instruments in both the cash and derivatives markets. The following discusses the key risk components along with respective risk mitigation techniques.
Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk
represents exposures to instruments whose values vary with the level or volatility of interest rates. These instruments include, but are not limited to, loans, debt securities, certain trading-related assets and liabilities, deposits, borrowings and
derivative instruments. Hedging instruments used to mitigate these risks include related derivatives such as options, futures, forwards and swaps.
Foreign Exchange Risk
Foreign exchange risk represents exposures to changes in the values of current holdings and future cash flows
denominated in other currencies. The types of instruments exposed to this risk include investments in foreign subsidiaries, foreign currency-denominated loans and securities, future cash flows in foreign currencies arising from foreign exchange
transactions, foreign currency-denominated debt and various foreign exchange derivative instruments whose values fluctuate with changes in the level or volatility of currency exchange rates or foreign interest rates. Hedging instruments used to
mitigate this risk include foreign exchange options, currency swaps, futures, forwards, foreign currency denominated debt and deposits.
Mortgage Risk
Mortgage risk represents exposures to changes in
the value of mortgage-related instruments. The values of these instruments are sensitive to prepayment rates, mortgage rates, agency debt ratings, default, market liquidity, other interest rates and interest rate volatility. Our exposure to these
instruments takes several forms. First, we trade and engage in market-making activities in a variety of mortgage securities including whole loans, pass-through certificates, commercial mortgages, and collateralized mortgage obligations including
CDOs using mortgages as underlying collateral. Second, we originate a variety of mortgage-backed securities which involves the accumulation of mortgage-related loans in anticipation of eventual securitization. Third, we may hold positions in
mortgage securities and residential mortgage loans as part of the ALM portfolio. Fourth, we create MSRs as part of our mortgage origination activities. See Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles and Note 21
Mortgage Servicing Rights to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on MSRs. Hedging instruments used to mitigate this risk include options, futures, forwards, swaps, swaptions and securities.
Equity Market Risk
Equity market risk represents exposures to
securities that represent an ownership interest in a corporation in the form of domestic and foreign common stock or other equity-linked instruments. Instruments that would lead to this exposure include, but are not limited to, the following: common
stock, exchange traded funds, American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), convertible bonds, listed equity options (puts and calls), over-the-counter equity options, equity total return swaps, equity index futures and other equity derivative products.
Hedging instruments used to mitigate this risk include options, futures, swaps, convertible bonds and cash positions.
Commodity Risk
Commodity risk represents exposures to instruments traded in the petroleum, natural gas, power, and metals markets. These instruments consist primarily of futures,
forwards, swaps and options. Hedging instruments used to mitigate this risk include options, futures and swaps in the same or similar commodity product, as well as cash positions.
Issuer Credit Risk
Issuer credit risk represents exposures to changes in the creditworthiness of individual
issuers or groups of issuers. Our portfolio is exposed to issuer credit risk where the value of an asset may be adversely impacted by changes in the levels of credit spreads, by credit migration, or by defaults. Hedging instruments used to mitigate
this risk include bonds, CDS and other credit fixed income instruments.
Market Liquidity Risk
Market liquidity risk represents the risk that expected market activity changes dramatically and in certain cases may even cease to exist. This exposes us to the
risk that we will not be able to transact in an orderly manner and may impact our results. This impact could further be exacerbated if expected hedging or pricing correlations are impacted by the disproportionate demand or lack of demand for certain
instruments. We utilize various risk mitigating techniques as discussed in more detail in Trading Risk Management.
Trading Risk
Management
Trading-related revenues represent the amount earned from trading positions, including market-based net interest income, which are
taken in a diverse range of financial instruments and markets. Trading account assets and liabilities and derivative positions are reported at fair value. For more information on fair value, see Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the
Consolidated Financial Statements and Complex Accounting Estimates beginning on page 76. Trading-related revenues can be volatile and are largely driven by general market conditions and customer demand. Trading-related revenues are dependent on the
volume and type of transactions, the level of risk assumed, and the volatility of price and rate movements at any given time within the ever-changing market environment.
The GRC, chaired by the Global Markets Risk Executive, has been designated by ALCO as the primary governance authority for Global Markets Risk Management including trading risk management. The GRCs
focus is to take a forward-looking view of the primary credit and market risks impacting Global Markets and prioritize those that need a proactive risk mitigation strategy.
At the GRC meetings, the committee considers significant daily revenues and losses by business along with an explanation of the primary driver of
the revenue or loss. Thresholds are established for each of our businesses in order to determine if the revenue or loss is considered to be significant for that business. If any of the thresholds are exceeded, an explanation of the variance is made
to the GRC. The thresholds are developed in coordination with the respective risk managers to highlight those revenues or losses which exceed what is considered to be normal daily income statement volatility.
The following histogram is a graphic depiction of trading volatility and illustrates the daily level of trading-related revenue for the 12 months
ended December 31, 2008 as compared with the 12 months ended December 31, 2007. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2008, positive trading-related revenue was recorded for 66 percent of the trading days of which 17 percent were
daily trading gains of over $50 million, 25 percent of the trading days had losses greater than $10 million, and the largest loss was $173 million. This can be compared to the 12 months ended December 31, 2007, where excluding any discrete
writedowns on CDOs positive trading-related revenue was recorded for 71 percent of the trading days of which five percent were daily trading gains of over $50 million, 21 percent of the trading days had losses greater than $10 million, and the
largest loss was $159 million. The increase in daily trading gains of over $50 million and losses of over $10 million in 2008 compared to 2007 was driven by the increased volatility that was experienced in the markets during the full year of 2008
while 2007 experienced increased volatility only during the second half of the year.
To evaluate risk in our trading activities, we focus on the actual and potential volatility of individual positions as well as portfolios. VAR is
a key statistic used to measure market risk. In order to manage day-to-day risks, VAR is subject to trading limits both for our overall trading portfolio and within individual businesses. All limit excesses are communicated to management for review.
A VAR model simulates the value of a portfolio under a range of hypothetical scenarios in order to generate a distribution of
potential gains and losses. The VAR represents the worst loss the portfolio is expected to experience based on historical trends with a given level of confidence. VAR depends on the volatility of the positions in the portfolio and on how strongly
their risks are correlated. Within any VAR model, there are significant and numerous assumptions that will differ from company to company. In addition, the accuracy of a VAR model depends on the availability and quality of historical data for each
of the positions in the portfolio. A VAR model may require additional modeling assumptions for new products which do not have extensive historical price data, or for illiquid positions for which accurate daily prices are not consistently available.
Our VAR model uses a historical simulation approach based on three years of historical data and assumes a 99 percent confidence level. Statistically, this means that losses will exceed VAR, on average, one out of 100 trading days, or two to three
times each year.
A VAR model is an effective tool in estimating ranges of potential gains and losses on our trading portfolios.
There are however many limitations inherent in a VAR model as it utilizes historical results over a defined time period to estimate future performance. Historical results may not always be indicative of future results and changes in market
conditions or in the composition of the underlying portfolio could have a material impact on the accuracy of the VAR model. This became particularly relevant during the second half of 2007 and continued throughout 2008, when markets experienced
periods of extreme illiquidity resulting in losses that were far outside of the normal loss forecasts by VAR models. As such, from time to time, we update the assumptions and historical data underlying our VAR model. During the first quarter of
2008, we
increased the frequency with which we update the historical data to a weekly basis. Previously, this was updated on a quarterly basis.
Due to the limitations previously mentioned, we have historically used the VAR model as only one of the components in managing our trading risk
and also use other techniques such as stress testing and desk level limits. Periods of extreme market stress influence the reliability of these techniques to various degrees. See discussion on stress testing below.
On a quarterly basis, the accuracy of the VAR methodology is reviewed by backtesting (i.e., comparing actual results against expectations derived
from historical data) the VAR results against the daily profit and loss. Graphic representation of the backtesting results with additional explanation of backtesting excesses are reported to the GRC. Backtesting excesses occur when trading
losses exceed the VAR. Senior management reviews and evaluates the results of these tests.
The following graph shows daily
trading-related revenue and VAR for the 12 months ended December 31, 2008. Actual losses exceeded daily trading VAR two times in the 12 months ended December 31, 2008 and excluding any discrete writedowns on CDOs losses exceeded daily
trading VAR 14 times in the 12 months ended December 31, 2007. During the 12 months ended December 31, 2008, we continued to take writedowns on our CDO exposure, but revalued these positions on a more regular basis, and therefore no
CDO-related losses were excluded from the following graph. Our increase in total trading VAR during the fourth quarter resulted from sharply increased volatility in the markets and widening credit spreads across all rating categories, despite
establishing a lower risk profile, as discussed in stress testing below. Our VAR methodology for credit products produces VAR measures that increase in proportion to the level of credit spreads. The large widening in credit spreads during the
fourth quarter produced commensurately large increases and fluctuations in VAR. As a result, the majority of the highs for VAR in 2008 occurred during the fourth quarter. In periods of market stress, the GRC members communicate daily to discuss
losses and VAR limit excesses. As a result of this process, the lines of business may selectively reduce risk. Where economically feasible, positions are sold or macro economic hedges are executed to reduce the exposure.
Table 39 Trading Activities Market Risk VAR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 Months Ended December 31 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
VAR |
|
|
VAR (1) |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Average |
|
|
High (2) |
|
Low (2) |
|
|
Average |
|
|
High (2) |
|
Low (2) |
Foreign exchange |
|
$ |
7.7 |
|
|
$ |
11.7 |
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
|
|
$ |
7.2 |
|
|
$ |
25.3 |
|
$ |
3.8 |
Interest rate |
|
|
28.9 |
|
|
|
68.3 |
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
|
13.9 |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
6.6 |
Credit |
|
|
84.6 |
|
|
|
185.2 |
|
|
44.1 |
|
|
|
|
39.5 |
|
|
|
69.9 |
|
|
23.4 |
Real estate/mortgage |
|
|
22.7 |
|
|
|
43.1 |
|
|
12.8 |
|
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
|
23.5 |
|
|
5.7 |
Equities |
|
|
28.0 |
|
|
|
63.9 |
|
|
15.5 |
|
|
|
|
24.6 |
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
|
9.6 |
Commodities |
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
3.7 |
Portfolio diversification |
|
|
(69.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total market-based trading portfolio (3) |
|
$ |
110.7 |
|
|
$ |
255.7 |
|
$ |
64.1 |
|
|
|
$ |
52.6 |
|
|
$ |
91.5 |
|
$ |
32.9 |
(1) |
Excludes our discrete writedowns on super senior CDO exposure. |
(2) |
The high and low for the total portfolio may not equal the sum of the individual components as the highs or lows of
the individual portfolios may have occurred on different trading days. |
(3) |
The table above does not include credit protection purchased to manage our counterparty credit risk.
|
Table 39 presents average, high and low daily trading VAR for the 12 months ended December 31, 2008 and 2007.
The increases in average VAR during 2008 as compared to 2007 were due to the rise in market volatility that started during the second half of
2007 and accelerated into the fourth quarter of 2008. As previously discussed, we updated our VAR model during the first quarter of 2008 and as the increased market volatility was incorporated into the historical price data, the level of VAR
increased substantially.
Counterparty credit risk is an adjustment to the mark-to-market value of our derivative exposures
reflecting the impact of the credit quality of counterparties on our derivative assets. Since counterparty credit exposure is not included in the VAR component of the regulatory capital allocation, we do not include it in our trading VAR, and it is
therefore not included in the daily trading-related revenue illustrated in our histogram and used for backtesting. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the VAR for counterparty credit risk, together with associated hedges that are marked to market,
was $86 million and $13 million.
Stress Testing
Because the very nature of a VAR model suggests results can exceed our estimates, we also stress test our portfolio. Stress testing estimates
the value change in our trading portfolio that may result from abnormal market movements. Various types of stress tests are run regularly against the overall trading
portfolio and individual businesses. Historical scenarios simulate the impact of price changes which occurred during a set of extended historical market events. The results of these scenarios are reported daily to management. During the 12 months
ended December 31, 2008, the largest daily losses among the historical scenarios ranged from $21 million to $999 million. This can be compared with losses from $9 million to $529 million for the historical scenarios during the 12 months ended
December 31, 2007. The increase in historical stress values are primarily associated with the introduction of a new scenario to reflect the ongoing credit crisis related to the credit market disruptions that occurred during the past 12-15
months. Hypothetical scenarios simulate the anticipated shocks from predefined market stress events. These stress events include shocks to underlying market risk variables which may be well beyond the shocks found in the historical data used to
calculate the VAR. In addition to the value afforded by the results themselves this information provides senior management with a clear picture of the trend of risk being taken given the relatively static nature of the shocks applied. During the 12
months ended December 31, 2008, the largest losses among the hypothetical scenarios ranged from
$47 million to $1.1 billion. This is down from $459 million to $1.5 billion for the hypothetical scenarios for the 12 months ended December 31, 2007. The results
of these stress tests point to a decrease in risk taken during the 12 months ended December 31, 2008.
The acquisition of
Merrill Lynch on January 1, 2009 increased our trading-related activities and exposure. As such, during 2009 we will continue to refine the VAR calculations and develop a set of stress scenarios that will be regularly produced across the
combined company for purposes of managing our overall risk profile. As of January 1, 2009, we estimate that the VAR of the combined organizations would have been $274 million as compared to $138 million for the Corporation. The combination of
VAR measurements is not additive as there are both correlation and diversification effects that impact the results. For stress testing, Merrill Lynch used similar shocks for hypothetical scenarios and as of January 1, 2009, we estimate that the
combined largest loss among the hypothetical scenarios would have been $774 million. Among the historical scenarios, comparable shocks were used to reflect the ongoing credit crisis related to the credit market disruptions, which
had previously exhibited the largest loss among all historical scenarios at the Corporation. As of January 1, 2009, we estimate that the combined loss from the historical credit crisis scenario would have been $1.1 billion. For the
Corporation, the loss from the historical credit crisis scenario would have been $579 million.
Interest
Rate Risk Management for Nontrading Activities
Interest rate risk represents the most significant market risk exposure to our nontrading
exposures. Our overall goal is to manage interest rate risk so that movements in interest rates do not adversely affect core net interest income managed basis. Interest rate risk is measured as the potential volatility in our core net
interest income managed basis caused by changes in market interest rates. Client facing activities, primarily lending and deposit-taking, create interest rate sensitive positions on our balance sheet. Interest rate risk from these activities,
as well as the impact of changing market conditions, is managed through our ALM activities.
Simulations are used to estimate the impact on core net interest income managed basis using numerous interest rate scenarios, balance sheet
trends and strategies. These simulations evaluate how these scenarios impact core net interest income managed basis on short-term financial instruments, debt securities, loans, deposits, borrowings, and derivative instruments. In addition,
these simulations incorporate assumptions about balance sheet dynamics such as loan and deposit growth and pricing, changes in funding mix, and asset and liability repricing and maturity characteristics. These simulations do not include the impact
of hedge ineffectiveness.
Management analyzes core net interest income managed basis forecasts utilizing different rate
scenarios, with the base case utilizing the forward interest rates. Management frequently updates the core net interest income managed basis forecast for changing assumptions and differing outlooks based on economic trends and market
conditions. Thus, we continually monitor our balance sheet position in an effort to maintain an acceptable level of exposure to interest rate changes.
We prepare forward-looking forecasts of core net interest income managed basis. These baseline forecasts take into consideration expected future business growth, ALM positioning, and the direction of interest rate
movements as implied by forward interest rates. We then measure and evaluate the impact that alternative interest rate scenarios have to these static baseline forecasts in order to assess interest rate sensitivity under varied conditions. The spot
and 12-month forward monthly rates used in our respective baseline forecasts at December 31, 2008 and 2007 are shown in Table 40.
At December 31, 2008, the spread between the three-month LIBOR rate and the Federal Funds target rate had significantly widened since December 31, 2007. We are typically asset sensitive to Federal Funds and Prime rates, and
liability sensitive to LIBOR. As the Federal Funds and LIBOR dislocation widens, the benefit to net interest income from lower rates is limited. Subsequent to December 31, 2008, the spread between the three-month LIBOR rate and the Federal
Funds target rate has narrowed.
Table 40 Forward Rates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
Federal Funds |
|
|
Three-Month LIBOR |
|
|
10-Year Swap |
|
|
|
|
Federal Funds |
|
|
Three-Month LIBOR |
|
|
10-Year Swap |
|
Spot rates |
|
0.25 |
% |
|
1.43 |
% |
|
2.56 |
% |
|
|
|
4.25 |
% |
|
4.70 |
% |
|
4.67 |
% |
12-month forward rates |
|
0.75 |
|
|
1.41 |
|
|
2.80 |
|
|
|
|
3.13 |
|
|
3.36 |
|
|
4.79 |
|
Table 41 Estimated Core Net Interest Income Managed Basis at Risk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
Curve Change |
|
Short Rate (bps) |
|
Long Rate (bps) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
+100 bps Parallel shift |
|
+100 |
|
+100 |
|
$ |
144 |
|
|
$ |
(952 |
) |
-100 bps Parallel shift |
|
-100 |
|
-100 |
|
|
(186 |
) |
|
|
865 |
|
Flatteners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short end |
|
+100 |
|
|
|
|
(545 |
) |
|
|
(1,127 |
) |
Long end |
|
|
|
-100 |
|
|
(638 |
) |
|
|
(386 |
) |
Steepeners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short end |
|
-100 |
|
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
1,255 |
|
Long end |
|
|
|
+100 |
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
The table above reflects the pre-tax dollar impact to forecasted core net interest income managed basis over the next 12 months from
December 31, 2008 and 2007, resulting from a 100 bp gradual parallel increase, a 100 bp gradual parallel decrease, a 100 bp gradual curve flattening (increase in short-term rates or decrease in long-term rates) and a 100 bp gradual curve
steepening (decrease in short-term rates or increase in long-term rates) from the forward market curve. For further discussion of core net interest income managed basis see page 14.
The sensitivity analysis above assumes that we take no action in response to these rate shifts over the indicated years. The estimated exposure is
reported on a managed basis and reflects impacts that may be realized primarily in net interest income and card income on the Consolidated Statement of Income. This sensitivity analysis excludes any impact that could occur in the valuation of
retained interests in the Corporations securitizations due to changes in interest rate levels. For additional information on securitizations, see Note 8 Securitizations to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Our core net interest income managed basis was asset sensitive at December 31, 2008 and liability sensitive at December 31, 2007,
with the shift being driven by the lower level of rates. Over a 12-month horizon, we would benefit from rising rates or a steepening of the yield curve beyond what is already implied in the forward market curve.
As part of our ALM activities, we use securities, residential mortgages, and interest rate and foreign exchange derivatives in managing interest
rate sensitivity.
The acquisition of Merrill Lynch on January 1, 2009 made our core net interest income managed basis
more asset sensitive to a parallel move in interest rates. In addition, at January 1, 2009 we estimate that we would continue to benefit from rising rates or a steepening of the yield curve over a 12-month horizon, beyond what is already
implied in the forward market curve.
Securities
The securities portfolio is an integral part of our ALM position and is primarily comprised of debt securities and includes mortgage-backed securities and to a lesser extent corporate, municipal and other investment grade debt securities.
At December 31, 2008, AFS debt securities were $276.9 billion compared to $213.3 billion at December 31, 2007. This increase was due to the repositioning of our ALM portfolio due to market liquidity and funding conditions as we increased
the level of mortgage-backed securities relative to loans and the acquisition of Countrywide. During 2008 and 2007, we purchased AFS debt securities of $184.2 billion and $28.0 billion, sold $119.8 billion and $27.9 billion, and had maturities and
received paydowns of $26.1 billion and $19.2 billion. We realized $1.1 billion and $180 million in gains on sales of debt securities during 2008 and 2007. In addition, we securitized $26.1 billion and $5.5 billion of residential mortgage loans into
mortgage-
backed securities which we retained during 2008 and 2007. We also converted $4.9 billion of automobile loans into ABS which we retained during 2008.
The amount of pre-tax accumulated OCI loss related to AFS debt securities increased by $6.4 billion during 2008 to $9.3 billion, driven by a
decrease in value of certain mortgage-backed securities attributable to changes in market yields. For those securities that are in an unrealized loss position, we have the intent and ability to hold these securities to recovery.
Accumulated OCI includes $2.0 billion in after-tax losses at December 31, 2008, including $5.9 billion of net unrealized losses related to
AFS debt securities and $3.9 billion of net unrealized gains related to AFS marketable equity securities. Total market value of the AFS debt securities was $276.9 billion at December 31, 2008 with a weighted average duration of 2.7 years and
primarily relates to our mortgage-backed securities portfolio.
Prospective changes to the accumulated OCI amounts for the AFS
securities portfolio will be driven by further interest rate, credit or price fluctuations (including market value fluctuations associated with our CCB and Banco Itaú investments), the collection of cash flows including prepayment and
maturity activity, and the passage of time. A portion of the Corporations strategic investment in CCB and all of its investment in Banco Itaú are carried at fair value. The carrying values of CCB and Banco Itaú were $19.7 billion
and $2.5 billion at December 31, 2008. Unrealized gains (losses) on these investments of $4.8 billion and $(77) million, net-of-tax, are subject to currency and price fluctuations, and are recorded in accumulated OCI. During 2008, under the
terms of our purchase option, we increased our ownership to approximately 19 percent by purchasing approximately $9.2 billion of the common shares of CCB. These shares are restricted through August 2011 and are carried at cost. In January 2009, we
sold 5.6 billion common shares of our initial investment in CCB for approximately $2.8 billion resulting in a pre-tax gain of approximately $1.9 billion and our ownership was reduced to 16.7 percent.
We recognized $3.5 billion of other-than-temporary impairment losses on AFS debt securities during 2008. These losses were primarily comprised of
$3.2 billion of CDO-related writedowns. We also recognized $661 million of other-than-temporary impairment losses on AFS marketable equity securities during 2008. No such losses were recognized on AFS marketable equity securities during 2007.
The impairment of AFS debt and marketable equity securities is based on a variety of factors, including the length of time and
extent to which the market value has been less than cost; the financial condition of the issuer of the security and its ability to recover market value; and the Corporations intent and ability to hold the security to recovery. Based on the
Corporations evaluation of the above and other relevant factors, and after consideration of the losses described in the paragraph above, we do
not believe that the AFS debt and marketable equity securities that are in an unrealized loss position at December 31, 2008 are other-than-temporarily impaired.
Residential Mortgage Portfolio
At
December 31, 2008, residential mortgages were $248.0 billion compared to $274.9 billion at December 31, 2007. This decrease was attributable to the repositioning of our ALM portfolio, driven by market liquidity, as we increased the level
of mortgage-backed securities relative to loans, partially offset by the acquisition of Countrywide which added $26.8 billion of residential mortgages. We securitized $26.1 billion and $5.5 billion of residential mortgage loans into mortgage-backed
securities which we retained during 2008 and 2007. During 2008, we purchased $405 million of residential mortgages related to ALM activities compared to purchases of $22.5 billion during 2007. We also added $27.3 billion and $66.3 billion of
originated residential mortgages and we sold $30.7 billion and $34.0 billion of residential mortgages during 2008 and 2007. Of these sales, $22.9 billion and $23.7 billion were originated residential mortgages, resulting in gains of $392 million and
$187 million. The remaining $7.8 billion and $10.4 billion were related to service by others loan sales, resulting in gains of $104 million and $84 million. We received paydowns of $26.3 billion and $28.2 billion in 2008 and 2007.
In addition to the residential mortgage portfolio we incorporated the discontinued real estate portfolio that was acquired in connection with the
Countrywide acquisition into our ALM activities. This portfolios balance was $20.0 billion at December 31, 2008.
Interest Rate and Foreign
Exchange Derivative Contracts
Interest rate and foreign exchange derivative contracts are utilized in our ALM activities and serve as an
efficient tool to mitigate our interest rate and foreign exchange risk. We use derivatives to hedge the variability in cash flows or changes in fair value on our balance sheet due to interest
rate and foreign exchange components. For additional information on our hedging activities, see Note 4 Derivatives to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Our interest rate contracts are generally non-leveraged generic interest rate and foreign exchange basis swaps, options,
futures and forwards. In addition, we use foreign exchange contracts, including cross-currency interest rate swaps and foreign currency forward contracts, to mitigate the foreign exchange risk associated with foreign currency-denominated assets and
liabilities. Table 42 reflects the notional amounts, fair value, weighted average receive fixed and pay fixed rates, expected maturity, and estimated duration of our open ALM derivatives at December 31, 2008 and 2007. These amounts do not
include our derivative hedges on our net investments in consolidated foreign operations.
Changes to the composition of our
derivatives portfolio during 2008 reflect actions taken for interest rate and foreign exchange rate risk management. The decisions to reposition our derivative portfolio are based upon the current assessment of economic and financial conditions
including the interest rate environment, balance sheet composition and trends, and the relative mix of our cash and derivative positions. The notional amount of our option positions decreased from $140.1 billion at December 31, 2007 to $5.0
billion at December 31, 2008. Changes in the levels of the option positions was driven by maturities of $115.1 billion in purchased caps along with the termination of $20.0 billion in sold floors. Our interest rate swap positions (including
foreign exchange contracts) were a net receive fixed position of $50.3 billion at December 31, 2008 compared to a net receive fixed position of $101.9 billion on December 31, 2007. Changes in the notional levels of our interest rate swap
position were driven by the net termination and maturity of $54.8 billion in U.S. dollar-denominated receive fixed swaps, the termination of $11.3 billion in pay fixed swaps, and the net termination of $8.1 billion in foreign denominated receive
fixed swaps. The notional amount of our foreign exchange basis swaps was $54.6 billion and $54.5 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007.
Table 42 Asset and Liability Management Interest Rate and Foreign Exchange Contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Expected Maturity |
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, average estimated duration in years) |
|
|
Total |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
Average Estimated Duration |
Receive fixed interest rate swaps (1, 2) |
|
$ |
2,103 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.93 |
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
27,166 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
4,002 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
9,258 |
|
|
$ |
773 |
|
|
$ |
13,116 |
|
|
|
Weighted average fixed rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.08 |
% |
|
|
7.35 |
% |
|
|
1.89 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
3.31 |
% |
|
|
4.53 |
% |
|
|
5.27 |
% |
|
|
Pay fixed interest rate swaps (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
Weighted average fixed rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
Foreign exchange basis swaps (2, 3, 4) |
|
|
3,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
54,569 |
|
|
$ |
4,578 |
|
|
$ |
6,192 |
|
|
$ |
3,986 |
|
|
$ |
8,916 |
|
|
$ |
4,819 |
|
|
$ |
26,078 |
|
|
|
Option products (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,025 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
Foreign exchange contracts (2, 4, 6) |
|
|
1,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,063 |
|
|
|
2,313 |
|
|
|
4,021 |
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
|
1,535 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
13,592 |
|
|
|
Futures and forward rate contracts |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,793 |
) |
|
|
(8,793 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net ALM contracts |
|
$ |
6,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007 |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Expected Maturity |
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, average estimated duration in years) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
Average Estimated Duration |
Receive fixed interest rate swaps (1, 2) |
|
$ |
992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.70 |
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
81,965 |
|
|
$ |
4,869 |
|
|
$ |
48,908 |
|
|
$ |
3,252 |
|
|
$ |
1,630 |
|
|
$ |
2,508 |
|
|
$ |
20,798 |
|
|
|
Weighted average fixed rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.34 |
% |
|
|
4.03 |
% |
|
|
3.91 |
% |
|
|
4.35 |
% |
|
|
4.50 |
% |
|
|
4.88 |
% |
|
|
5.34 |
% |
|
|
Pay fixed interest rate swaps (1) |
|
|
(429 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.37 |
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
11,340 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
$ |
10,340 |
|
|
|
Weighted average fixed rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.04 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
5.45 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
Foreign exchange basis swaps (2, 3, 4) |
|
|
6,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
54,531 |
|
|
$ |
2,537 |
|
|
$ |
4,463 |
|
|
$ |
5,839 |
|
|
$ |
4,294 |
|
|
$ |
8,695 |
|
|
$ |
28,703 |
|
|
|
Option products (5) |
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,114 |
|
|
|
130,000 |
|
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
Foreign exchange contracts (2, 4, 6) |
|
|
(499 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,054 |
|
|
|
1,438 |
|
|
|
2,047 |
|
|
|
4,171 |
|
|
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
3,150 |
|
|
|
19,013 |
|
|
|
Futures and forward rate contracts |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
752 |
|
|
|
752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net ALM contracts |
|
$ |
6,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
At December 31, 2008 there were no forward starting pay or receive fixed swap positions. At December 31, 2007, the
receive fixed interest rate swap notional that represented forward starting swaps and will not be effective until their respective contractual start dates was $45.0 billion. There were no forward starting pay fixed swap positions at
December 31, 2007. |
(2) |
Does not include basis adjustments on fixed rate debt issued by the Corporation and hedged under fair value hedge relationships
pursuant to SFAS 133 that substantially offset the fair values of these derivatives. |
(3) |
Foreign exchange basis swaps consist of cross-currency variable interest rate swaps used separately or in conjunction with
receive fixed interest rate swaps. |
(4) |
Does not include foreign currency translation adjustments on certain foreign debt issued by the Corporation which substantially
offset the fair values of these derivatives. |
(5) |
Option products of $5.0 billion at December 31, 2008 are comprised completely of purchased caps. Option
products of $140.1 billion at December 31, 2007 were comprised of $120.1 billion in purchased caps and $20.0 billion in sold floors. |
(6) |
Foreign exchange contracts include foreign-denominated and cross-currency receive fixed interest rate swaps as well as foreign
currency forward rate contracts. Total notional was comprised of $23.1 billion in foreign-denominated and cross-currency receive fixed swaps and $78 million in foreign currency forward rate contracts at December 31, 2008, and $31.3 billion in
foreign-denominated and cross-currency receive fixed swaps and $211 million in foreign currency forward rate contracts at December 31, 2007. |
(7) |
Reflects the net of long and short positions. |
The table above includes derivatives utilized in our ALM activities, including those designated as SFAS 133 accounting hedges and economic hedges.
The fair value of net ALM contracts increased $357 million from a gain of $6.1 billion at December 31, 2007 to a gain of $6.4 billion at December 31, 2008. The increase was primarily attributable to changes in the value of foreign exchange
contracts of $1.6 billion and U.S. dollar-denominated receive fixed interest rate swaps of $1.1 billion, as well as changes related to the termination of pay fixed interest rate swaps of $429 million and the termination of option products of $155
million. The increase was partially offset by losses from changes in the value of foreign exchange basis swaps of $3.0 billion. The decrease in the value of foreign exchange basis swaps was mostly attributable to the strengthening of the U.S.
dollar against most foreign currencies during 2008.
The Corporation uses interest rate derivative instruments to hedge the
variability in the cash flows of its assets and liabilities, and other forecasted transactions (cash flow hedges). From time to time, the Corpo-
ration also utilizes equity-indexed derivatives accounted for as SFAS 133 cash flow hedges to minimize exposure to price fluctuations on the forecasted purchase or
sale of certain equity investments. The net losses on both open and terminated derivative instruments recorded in accumulated OCI, net-of-tax, was $3.5 billion at December 31, 2008. These net losses are expected to be
reclassified into earnings in the same period when the hedged cash flows affect earnings and will decrease income or increase expense on the respective hedged cash flows. Assuming no change in open cash flow derivative hedge positions and no changes
to prices or interest rates beyond what is implied in forward yield curves at December 31, 2008, the pre-tax net losses are expected to be reclassified into earnings as follows: $1.2 billion, or 23 percent within the next year, 66
percent within five years, and 89 percent within 10 years, with the remaining 11 percent thereafter. For more information on derivatives designated as cash flow hedges, see Note 4 Derivatives to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
The amounts included in accumulated OCI for terminated derivative contracts were losses of $3.4 billion and $3.8 billion, net-of-tax, at December 31, 2008 and
2007. Losses on these terminated derivative contracts are reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings.
In addition to the derivatives disclosed in Table 42, we hedge our net investment in consolidated foreign operations determined to have functional
currencies other than the U.S. dollar using forward foreign exchange contracts that typically settle in 90 days as well as by issuing foreign-denominated debt. The Corporation recorded net derivative gains of $2.8 billion in accumulated OCI
associated with net investment hedges for 2008 as compared to net derivative losses of $516 million for 2007. The gains for 2008 were driven by the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain foreign currencies including the British Pound,
Canadian Dollar and the Euro. These gains were more than offset by losses from the changes in the value of our net investments in consolidated foreign entities resulting in $1.0 billion in unrealized losses, net-of-tax, that were recorded in
accumulated OCI for 2008.
Mortgage Banking Risk Management
We originate, fund and service mortgage loans, which subject us to credit, liquidity and interest rate risks, among others. We determine whether loans will be held
for investment or held for sale at the time of commitment and manage credit and liquidity risks by selling or securitizing a portion of the loans we originate.
Interest rate and market risk can be substantial in the mortgage business. Fluctuations in interest rates drive consumer demand for new mortgages and the level of refinancing activity, which in turn
affects total origination and service fee income. Typically, a decline in mortgage interest rates will lead to an increase in mortgage originations and fees and a decrease in the value of the MSRs driven by higher prepayment expectations. Hedging
the various sources of interest rate risk in mortgage banking is a complex process that requires complex modeling and ongoing monitoring. IRLCs and the related residential first mortgage LHFS are subject to interest rate risk between the date of the
IRLC and the date the loans are sold to the secondary market. To hedge interest rate risk, we utilize forward loan sale commitments and other derivative instruments including purchased options. These instruments are used as economic hedges of IRLCs
and residential first mortgage LHFS. At December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the notional amount of derivatives economically hedging the IRLCs and residential first mortgage LHFS was $97.2 billion and $18.6 billion. On January 1,
2008, we adopted SAB 109 which generally has resulted in higher fair values being recorded upon initial recognition of derivative IRLCs. For more information on the adoption of SAB 109, see Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting
Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
MSRs are a nonfinancial asset created when the underlying mortgage loan is
sold to investors and we retain the right to service the loan. We use certain derivatives such as interest rate options, interest rate swaps, forward settlement contracts, euro dollar futures, mortgage-backed and U.S. Treasury securities as economic
hedges of MSRs. The notional amounts of the derivative contracts and other securities designated as economic hedges of MSRs at December 31, 2008 were $1.0 trillion and $87.5 billion, for a total notional amount of $1.1 trillion. At
December 31, 2007 the notional amount of economic hedges of MSRs was $69.0 billion, all of which were derivatives. At December 31, 2008, we recorded gains in mortgage banking income of $8.6 billion related to the change in fair value
of these economic hedges as compared to gains of $303 million for the same period in 2007. For additional information on MSRs, see Note 21 Mortgage Servicing Rights to the Consolidated Financial
Statements and for more information on mortgage banking income, see the Home Loans & Insurance discussion on page 19.
Compliance and Operational Risk Management
Compliance risk is the risk posed by the failure to manage regulatory, legal and ethical issues that could
result in monetary damages, losses or harm to the banks reputation or image. The Seven Elements of a Compliance Program® provides the framework for the compliance programs that are consistently applied across the enterprise to
manage compliance risk.
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, systems
or external events. Operational risk also encompasses the failure to implement strategic objectives and initiatives in a successful, timely, and cost-effective manner. Successful operational risk management is particularly important to diversified
financial services companies because of the nature, volume and complexity of the financial services business.
We approach compliance
and operational risk management from two perspectives: corporate-wide and line of business-specific. The Compliance and Operational Risk Committee provides oversight of significant corporate-wide compliance and operational risk issues. Within Global
Risk Management, Global Compliance and Operational Risk Management develops and guides the strategies, policies, practices, controls and monitoring tools for assessing and managing compliance and operational risks across the Corporation. Through
training and communication efforts, compliance and operational risk awareness is driven across the Corporation.
We also mitigate
compliance and operational risk through a broad-based approach to process management and process improvement. For selected risks, we use specialized support groups, such as Enterprise Information Management and Supply Chain Management, to develop
corporate-wide risk management practices, such as an information security program and a supplier program to ensure that suppliers adopt appropriate policies and procedures when performing work on behalf of the Corporation. These specialized groups
also assist the lines of business in the development and implementation of risk management practices specific to the needs of the individual businesses. These groups also work with line of business executives and risk executives to develop and guide
appropriate strategies, policies, practices, controls and monitoring tools for each line of business.
The lines of business are
responsible for all the risks within the business line, including compliance and operational risks. Compliance and Operational Risk executives, working in conjunction with senior line of business executives, have developed key tools to help
identify, measure, mitigate and monitor risk in each business line. Examples of these include processes to ensure compliance with laws and regulations, personnel management practices, data reconciliation processes, fraud management units,
transaction processing monitoring and analysis, business recovery planning and new product introduction processes. In addition, the lines of business are responsible for monitoring adherence to corporate practices. Line of business management uses a
self-assessment process, which helps to identify and evaluate the status of risk and control issues, including mitigation plans, as appropriate. The goal of the self-assessment process is to periodically assess changing market and business
conditions, to evaluate key risks impacting each line of business and assess the controls in place to mitigate the risks. In addition to information gathered from the self-assessment process, key compliance and operational risk indicators have been
developed and are used to help identify trends and issues on both a corporate and a line of business level.
ASF Framework
In
December 2007, the American Securitization Forum (ASF) issued the Streamlined Foreclosure and Loss Avoidance Framework for Securitized Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loans (the ASF Framework). The ASF Framework was developed to address large numbers of
subprime loans that are at risk of default when the loans reset from their initial fixed interest rates to variable rates. The objective of the framework is to provide uniform guidelines for evaluating large numbers of loans for refinancing in an
efficient manner while complying with the relevant tax regulations and off-balance sheet accounting standards for loan securitizations. The ASF Framework targets loans that were originated between January 1, 2005 and July 31, 2007 and have
an initial fixed interest rate period of 36 months or less, which are scheduled for their first interest rate reset between January 1, 2008 and July 31, 2010.
The ASF Framework categorizes the targeted loans into three segments. Segment 1 includes loans where the borrower is likely to be able to refinance into any available mortgage product. Segment 2 includes
loans where the borrower is current but is unlikely to be able to refinance into any readily available mortgage product. Segment 3 includes loans where the borrower is not current. If certain criteria are met, ASF Framework loans in Segment 2 are
eligible for fast-track modification under which the interest rate will be kept at the existing initial rate, generally for five years following the interest rate reset date. Upon evaluation, if targeted loans do not meet specific criteria to
be eligible for one of the three segments, they are categorized as other loans, as shown in the table below. These criteria include the occupancy status of the borrower, structure and other terms of the loan. In January 2008, the SECs Office
of the Chief Accountant issued a letter addressing the accounting issues relating to the ASF Framework. The letter concluded that the SEC would not object to continuing off-balance sheet accounting treatment for Segment 2 loans modified pursuant to
the ASF Framework.
For those current loans that are accounted for off-balance sheet that are modified, but not as part of the ASF
Framework, the servicer must perform on an individual basis, an analysis of the borrower and the loan to demonstrate it is probable that the borrower will not meet the repayment obligation in the near term. Such analysis shall provide sufficient
evidence to demonstrate that the loan is in imminent or reasonably foreseeable default. The SECs Office of the Chief Accountant issued a letter in July 2007 stating that it would not object to continuing off-balance sheet accounting treatment
for these loans.
Prior to the acquisition of Countrywide on July 1, 2008, Countrywide began making fast-track loan
modifications under Segment 2 of the ASF Framework in June 2008 and the off-balance sheet accounting treatment
of QSPEs that hold those loans was not affected. In addition, other workout activities relating to subprime ARMs including modifications (e.g., interest rate
reductions and capitalization of interest) and repayment plans were also made. These initiatives have continued subsequent to the acquisition in an effort to work with all of our customers that are eligible and affected by loans that meet the
requisite criteria. These foreclosure prevention efforts will reduce foreclosures and the related losses providing a solution for customers and protecting investors.
As of December 31, 2008, the principal balance of beneficial interests issued by the QSPEs that hold subprime ARMs totaled $56.5 billion and the fair value of beneficial interests related to those
QSPEs held by the Corporation totaled $14 million. The table below presents a summary of loans in QSPEs that hold subprime ARMs as of December 31, 2008 as well as workout and payoff activity for the subprime loans by ASF categorization for the
six months ended December 31, 2008. Prior to the acquisition of Countrywide on July 1, 2008, we did not originate or service significant subprime residential mortgage loans, nor did we hold a significant amount of beneficial interest in
QSPEs of subprime residential mortgage loans.
In October 2008 in agreement with several state attorneys general, we announced the
Countrywide National Homeownership Retention Program. Under the program, we will systematically identify and seek to offer loan modifications for eligible Countrywide subprime and pay option ARM borrowers whose loans are in delinquency or scheduled
for an interest rate or payment change. For more information on our loan modification programs, see Recent Events on page 5.
Complex Accounting Estimates
Our significant accounting principles, as described in Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements, are essential in understanding the MD&A. Many of our significant
accounting principles require complex judgments to estimate values of assets and liabilities. We have procedures and processes to facilitate making these judgments.
The more judgmental estimates are summarized below. We have identified and described the development of the variables most important in the estimation process that, with the exception of accrued taxes,
involve mathematical models to derive the estimates. In many cases, there are numerous alternative judgments that could be used in the process of determining the inputs to the model. Where alternatives exist, we have used the factors that we believe
represent the most reasonable value in developing the inputs. Actual performance that differs from our estimates
Table 43 QSPE Loans Subject to ASF Framework Evaluation (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Activity During the Six Months Ended December 31, 2008 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Balance |
|
Percent |
|
|
|
|
Payoffs |
|
Fast-track Modifications |
|
Other Workout Activities |
|
Foreclosures |
Segment 1 |
|
$ |
2,568 |
|
4.5 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
807 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
1,396 |
|
$ |
|
Segment 2 |
|
|
9,135 |
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
267 |
|
|
1,428 |
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
108 |
Segment 3 |
|
|
11,176 |
|
19.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,802 |
|
|
929 |
Total Subprime ARMs |
|
|
22,879 |
|
40.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,136 |
|
|
1,428 |
|
|
4,834 |
|
|
1,037 |
Other loans |
|
|
30,781 |
|
54.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
Foreclosed properties |
|
|
2,794 |
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
Total |
|
$ |
56,454 |
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
1,136 |
|
$ |
1,428 |
|
$ |
4,834 |
|
$ |
1,037 |
(1) |
Represents loans that were acquired with the acquisition of Countrywide on July 1, 2008 that meet the requirements of the
ASF Framework. |
n/a = not applicable
of the key variables could impact net income. Separate from the possible future impact to net income from input and model variables, the value of our lending portfolio
and market sensitive assets and liabilities may change subsequent to the balance sheet measurement, often significantly, due to the nature and magnitude of future credit and market conditions. Such credit and market conditions may change quickly and
in unforeseen ways and the resulting volatility could have a significant, negative effect on future operating results. These fluctuations would not be indicative of deficiencies in our models or inputs.
Allowance for Credit Losses
The allowance for credit losses,
which includes the allowance for loan and lease losses and the reserve for unfunded lending commitments, represents managements estimate of probable losses inherent in the Corporations lending activities excluding those measured at fair
value in accordance with SFAS 159. Changes to the allowance for credit losses are reported in the Consolidated Statement of Income in the provision for credit losses. Our process for determining the allowance for credit losses is discussed in the
Credit Risk Management section beginning on page 44 and Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Due to the variability in the drivers of the assumptions made in this process,
estimates of the portfolios inherent risks and overall collectability change with changes in the economy, individual industries, countries and individual borrowers or counterparties ability and willingness to repay their
obligations. The degree to which any particular assumption affects the allowance for credit losses depends on the severity of the change and its relationship to the other assumptions.
Key judgments used in determining the allowance for credit losses include: (i) risk ratings for pools of commercial loans and leases,
(ii) market and collateral values and discount rates for individually evaluated loans, (iii) product type classifications for consumer and commercial loans and leases, (iv) loss rates used for consumer and commercial loans and leases,
(v) adjustments made to assess current events and conditions, (vi) considerations regarding domestic and global economic uncertainty, and (vii) overall credit conditions.
Our allowance for loan and lease losses is sensitive to the risk rating assigned to commercial loans and leases. Assuming a downgrade of one level
in the internal risk rating for commercial loans and leases and rated under the internal risk rating scale, except loans and leases already risk rated Doubtful as defined by regulatory authorities, the allowance for loan and lease losses would
increase by approximately $2.7 billion at December 31, 2008. The allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases at December 31, 2008 was 2.49 percent and this hypothetical increase in the allowance would
raise the ratio to approximately 2.78 percent. Our allowance for loan and lease losses is also sensitive to the loss rates used for the consumer and commercial portfolios. A 10 percent increase in the loss rates used on the consumer and commercial
loan and lease portfolios covered by the allowance would increase the allowance for loan and lease losses at December 31, 2008 by approximately $2.0 billion, of which $1.6 billion would relate to consumer and $440 million to commercial.
SOP 03-3 requires acquired impaired loans to be recorded at fair value and prohibits carrying over or the creation of
valuation allowances in the initial accounting of loans acquired in a transfer that are within the scope of this SOP. However, subsequent decreases to the expected principal cash flows from the date of acquisition will result in a charge to
provision for credit losses and a corresponding increase to allowance for loan and lease losses. Our SOP 03-3 portfolio is also subjected to stress scenarios to evaluate the potential impact given certain events. A one percent decrease in the
expected principal cash flows could result in an
impairment of the portfolio of approximately $400 million, of which approximately $250 million would be related to our discontinued real estate portfolio.
These sensitivity analyses do not represent managements expectations of the deterioration in risk ratings or the increases in loss rates
but are provided as hypothetical scenarios to assess the sensitivity of the allowance for loan and lease losses to changes in key inputs. We believe the risk ratings and loss severities currently in use are appropriate and that the probability of a
downgrade of one level of the internal risk ratings for commercial loans and leases within a short period of time is remote.
The
process of determining the level of the allowance for credit losses requires a high degree of judgment. It is possible that others, given the same information, may at any point in time reach different reasonable conclusions.
Mortgage Servicing Rights
MSRs are nonfinancial assets that
are created when the underlying mortgage loan is sold and we retain the right to service the loan. We account for consumer MSRs at fair value with changes in fair value recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Income in mortgage banking income.
Commercial-related and residential reverse mortgage MSRs are accounted for using the amortization method (i.e., lower of cost or market) with impairment recognized as a reduction to mortgage banking income. At December 31, 2008, our total MSR
balance was $13.1 billion.
We determine the fair value of our consumer MSRs using a valuation model that calculates the present value
of estimated future net servicing income. The model incorporates key economic assumptions including estimates of prepayment rates and resultant weighted average lives of the MSRs and the option adjusted spread (OAS) levels. These variables can, and
generally do, change from quarter to quarter as market conditions and projected interest rates change. These assumptions are subjective in nature and changes in these assumptions could materially impact our net income. For example, decreasing the
prepayment rate assumption used in the valuation of our consumer MSR by 10 percent while keeping all other assumptions unchanged could have resulted in an estimated increase of $786 million in mortgage banking income at December 31, 2008.
We manage potential changes in the fair value of MSRs through a comprehensive risk management program. The intent is to mitigate the
effects of changes in MSRs fair value through the use of risk management instruments. To reduce the sensitivity of earnings to interest rate and market value fluctuations, certain derivatives such as options, securities and interest rate swaps may
be used as economic hedges of the MSRs, but are not designated as hedges under SFAS 133. These derivatives are marked to market and recognized through mortgage banking income. The impact provided above does not reflect any hedge strategies that may
be undertaken to mitigate such risk.
For additional information on MSRs, including the sensitivity of weighted average lives and the
fair value of MSRs to changes in modeled assumptions, see Note 21 Mortgage Servicing Rights to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We determine the fair market values of financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy
established in SFAS 157 which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. We
carry certain corporate loans and loan commitments, LHFS, structured reverse repurchase agreements, and long-term deposits at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. We also carry trading account assets and liabilities,
derivative assets and liabilities, AFS debt and marketable equity securities, MSRs, and certain other assets at fair value. For more information, see Note 19
Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The values of assets and liabilities recorded at fair value
include adjustments for market liquidity, credit quality and other deal specific factors, where appropriate. To ensure the prudent application of estimates and management judgment in determining the fair value of these assets and liabilities,
various processes and controls have been adopted, which include: a model validation policy that requires a review and approval of quantitative models used for deal pricing, financial statement fair value determination and risk quantification; a
trading product valuation policy that requires verification of all traded product valuations; and a periodic review and substantiation of daily profit and loss reporting for all traded products. Primarily through validation controls, we utilize both
broker and pricing service inputs, which can and do include both market observable and internally modeled values and/or value inputs. Our reliance on the receipt of this information is tempered by the knowledge of how the broker and/or pricing
service develops its data, with a higher reliance being applied to those that are more directly observable and lesser reliance being applied on those developed through their own internal modeling. Similarly, broker quotes that
are executable are given a higher level of reliance than indicative broker quotes, which are not executable. These processes and controls are performed independently of the business.
Trading account assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value, which is primarily based on actively traded markets where prices are based on
either direct market quotes or observed transactions. Liquidity is a significant factor in the determination of the fair value of trading account assets or liabilities. Market price quotes may not be readily available for some positions, or
positions within a market sector where trading activity has slowed significantly or ceased. Situations of illiquidity generally are triggered by the markets perception of credit uncertainty regarding a single company or a specific market
sector. In these instances, fair value is determined based on limited available market information and other factors, principally from reviewing the issuers financial statements and changes in credit ratings made by one or more rating
agencies. At December 31, 2008, $7.3 billion, or five percent, of trading account assets were classified as Level 3 fair value assets. No trading account liabilities were classified as Level 3 liabilities at December 31, 2008.
The fair values of derivative assets and liabilities traded in the over-the-counter market are determined using quantitative models that require
the use of multiple market inputs including interest rates, prices, and indices to generate continuous yield or pricing curves and volatility factors, which are used to value the position. The majority of market inputs are actively quoted and can be
validated through external sources, including brokers, market transactions and third-party pricing services. Estimation risk is greater for derivative asset and liability positions that are either option-based or have longer maturity dates where
observable market inputs are less readily available or are unobservable, in which case, quantitative-based extrapolations of rate, price or index scenarios are used in determining fair values. The Corporation does incorporate, consistent with the
requirements of SFAS 157, within its fair value measurements of over-the-counter derivatives the net credit differential between the counterparty credit risk and our own credit risk. The value of the credit differential is determined by
reference to existing direct market reference costs of credit, or where direct references are not available, a proxy is applied consistent with direct references for other counterparties that are similar in credit risk. An estimate of severity
of loss is also used within the determination of fair value, primarily based on historical experience, adjusted for any more recent name specific expectations.
At December 31, 2008, the Level 3
fair values of derivative assets and liabilities determined by these quantitative models were $8.3 billion and $6.0 billion. These amounts reflect the full fair value of the derivatives and do not isolate the discrete value associated with the
subjective valuation variable. Further, they both represented less than one percent of derivative assets and liabilities, before the impact of legally enforceable master netting agreements. In 2008, there were no changes to the quantitative models,
or uses of such models, that resulted in a material adjustment to the Consolidated Statement of Income.
Trading account profits
(losses), which represent the net amount earned from our trading positions, can be volatile and are largely driven by general market conditions and customer demand. Trading account profits (losses) are dependent on the volume and type of
transactions, the level of risk assumed, and the volatility of price and rate movements at any given time within the ever-changing market environment. To evaluate risk in our trading activities, we focus on the actual and potential volatility of
individual positions as well as portfolios. At a portfolio and corporate level, we use trading limits, stress testing and tools such as VAR modeling, which estimates a potential daily loss which is not expected to be exceeded with a specified
confidence level, to measure and manage market risk. At December 31, 2008, the amount of our VAR was $138 million based on a 99 percent confidence level. For more information on VAR, see Trading Risk Management beginning on page 68.
AFS debt and marketable equity securities are recorded at fair value, which is generally based on quoted market prices, market prices for similar
assets, cash flow analysis or pricing services.
Global Principal Investments
Global Principal Investments is included within Equity Investments in All Other and is discussed in more detail beginning on page 31. Global Principal Investments is comprised of a
diversified portfolio of investments in privately-held and publicly-traded companies at all stages of their life cycle, from start-up to buyout. These investments are made either directly in a company or held through a fund. Some of these companies
may need access to additional cash to support their long-term business models. Market conditions and company performance may impact whether funding is available from private investors or the capital markets. For more information, see Note 1
Summary of Significant Accounting Principles and Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Investments with active market quotes are carried at estimated fair value; however, the majority of our investments do not have publicly available price quotations and, therefore, the fair value is unobservable. At
December 31, 2008, we had nonpublic investments of $3.5 billion, or approximately 91 percent of the total portfolio. Valuation of these investments requires significant management judgment. We value such investments initially at transaction
price and adjust valuations when evidence is available to support such adjustments. Such evidence includes transactions in similar instruments, market comparables, completed or pending third-party transactions in the underlying investment or
comparable entities, subsequent rounds of financing, recapitalizations and other transactions across the capital structure, and changes in financial ratios or cash flows. Investments are adjusted to estimated fair values at the balance sheet date
with changes being recorded in equity investment income in the Consolidated Statement of Income.
Accrued Income Taxes
As more fully described in Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Principles and Note 18 Income Taxes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements, we account for income taxes in accordance with SFAS 109 as interpreted by FIN 48. Accrued income taxes, reported as a component
of accrued expenses and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheet, represents the net amount of current income taxes we expect to pay to or receive from
various taxing jurisdictions attributable to our operations to date. We currently file income tax returns in more than 100 jurisdictions and consider many factors including statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance in estimating the
appropriate accrued income taxes for each jurisdiction.
In applying the principles of SFAS 109, we monitor relevant tax authorities
and change our estimate of accrued income taxes due to changes in income tax laws and their interpretation by the courts and regulatory authorities. These revisions of our estimate of accrued income taxes, which also may result from our own income
tax planning and from the resolution of income tax controversies, may be material to our operating results for any given period.
Goodwill and
Intangible Assets
The nature of and accounting for goodwill and intangible assets is discussed in detail in Note 1 Summary of
Significant Accounting Principles and Note 10 Goodwill and Intangible Assets to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Goodwill is reviewed for potential impairment at the reporting unit level on an annual basis, which for the
Corporation is performed at June 30 or in interim periods if events or circumstances indicate a potential impairment. As reporting units are determined after an acquisition or evolve with changes in business strategy, goodwill is assigned and
it no longer retains its association with a particular acquisition. All of the revenue streams and related activities of a reporting unit, whether acquired or organic, are available to support the value of the goodwill. The reporting units utilized
for this test were the business segment or, where appropriate, one level below the business segment.
Under applicable accounting
standards, goodwill impairment analysis is a two-step test. The first step of the goodwill impairment test compares the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds
its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is considered not impaired; however, if the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step must be performed. The second step involves calculating an implied fair
value of goodwill for each reporting unit for which the first step indicated possible impairment. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill recognized in a business combination, which is the excess
of the fair value of the reporting unit, as determined in the first step, over the aggregate fair values of the individual assets, liabilities and identifiable intangibles as if the reporting unit was being acquired in a business combination. The
adjustments to measure the assets, liabilities and intangibles at fair value are for the purpose of measuring the implied fair value of goodwill and such adjustments are not reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. If the implied fair value of
goodwill exceeds the goodwill assigned to the reporting unit, there is no impairment. If the goodwill assigned to a reporting unit exceeds the implied fair value of the goodwill, an impairment charge is recorded for the excess. An impairment loss
recognized cannot exceed the amount of goodwill assigned to a reporting unit, and the loss establishes a new basis in the goodwill. Subsequent reversal of goodwill impairment losses is not permitted under applicable accounting standards.
For intangible assets subject to amortization, impairment exists when the carrying amount of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value. An
impairment loss will be recognized only if the carrying amount of the intangible asset is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value. The carrying amount of the intangible asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows
expected to result from it. An intangible asset subject to amortization shall be tested for recoverability whenever
events or changes in circumstances, such as a significant or adverse change in the business climate that could affect the value of the intangible asset, indicate that
its carrying amount may not be recoverable. An impairment loss is recorded to the extent the carrying amount of the intangible asset exceeds its fair value.
Estimating the fair value of reporting units is a subjective process that involves the use of estimates and judgments, particularly related to cash flows, the appropriate discount rates and an applicable
control premium. The fair values of the reporting units were determined using a combination of valuation techniques consistent with the income approach and the market approach and included the use of independent valuations. The fair values of the
intangible assets were determined using the income approach. For purposes of the income approach, discounted cash flows were calculated by taking the net present value of estimated cash flows using a combination of historical results, estimated
future cash flows and an appropriate price to earnings multiple. Our discounted cash flow employs a capital asset pricing model in estimating the discount rate (i.e., cost of equity financing) for each reporting unit. The inputs to this model
include: risk-free rate of return; beta, a measure of the level of non-diversifiable risk associated with comparable companies for each specific reporting unit; market equity risk premium; and in certain cases an unsystematic (company-specific) risk
factor. The unsystematic risk factor is the input that specifically addresses uncertainty related to our projections of earnings and growth, including the uncertainty related to loss expectations. We use our internal forecasts to estimate future
cash flows and actual results may differ from forecasted results. Cash flows were discounted using a discount rate based on expected equity return rates, which was 11 percent for 2008. We utilized discount rates that we believe adequately reflected
the risk and uncertainty in the financial markets generally and specifically in our internally developed forecasts. Expected rates of equity returns were estimated based on historical market returns and risk/return rates for similar industries of
the reporting unit. For purposes of the market approach, valuations of reporting units were based on actual comparable market transactions and market earnings multiples for similar industries of the reporting unit.
The annual impairment test as of June 30, 2008 indicated some stress in certain reporting units. Given the significant decline in our stock
price and current market conditions in the financial services industry, we concluded that circumstances warranted an additional impairment analysis in the fourth quarter of 2008. We evaluated the fair value of our reporting units using a combination
of the market and income approach. Due to the volatility and uncertainties in the current market environment we used a range of valuations to determine the fair value of each reporting unit. In performing our updated goodwill impairment analysis,
which excludes the current increase in mortgage refinancings that we have benefited from, our Home Loans & Insurance business failed the first step analysis (i.e., carrying value exceeded its fair value) and therefore we performed the
second step analysis. In addition, given the rise in the implied control premium and the range in valuations, we believe the assumptions used in our analysis were tied to an overall inefficient market driven by uncertainty. As such, although not
required, to further substantiate the value of our goodwill balance we also performed the second step analysis described above for our Global Card Services business as this reporting unit has experienced stress due to the current
economic environment. As a result of our tests, no goodwill impairment losses were recognized for 2008. If current economic conditions continue to deteriorate or other events adversely impact the business models and the related assumptions used to
value these reporting units, there could be a change in the valuation of our goodwill and intangible assets when we conduct impairment tests in future periods and may possibly result in the recognition of impairment losses.
Consolidation and Accounting for Variable Interest Entities
Under the provisions of FIN 46R, a VIE is consolidated by the entity that will absorb a majority of the variability created by the assets of the VIE. The calculation of variability is based on an analysis of projected probability-weighted
cash flows based on the design of the particular VIE. Scenarios in which expected cash flows are less than or greater than the expected outcomes create expected losses or expected residual returns. The entity that will absorb a majority of expected
variability (the sum of the absolute values of the expected losses and expected residual returns) consolidates the VIE and is referred to as the primary beneficiary.
A variety of qualitative and quantitative assumptions are used to estimate projected cash flows and the relative probability of each potential outcome, and to determine which parties will absorb expected
losses and expected residual returns. Critical assumptions, which may include projected credit losses and interest rates, are independently verified against market observable data where possible. Where market observable data is not available, the
results of the analysis become more subjective.
As certain events occur, we reevaluate which parties will absorb variability and
whether we have become or are no longer the primary beneficiary. Reconsideration events may occur when VIEs acquire additional assets, issue new variable interests or enter into new or modified contractual arrangements. A reconsideration event may
also occur when we acquire new or additional interests in a VIE.
In the unlikely event we were required to consolidate our
unconsolidated VIEs, their consolidation would increase our assets and liabilities and could have an adverse impact on our Tier 1 Capital, Total Capital and Tier 1 Leverage Capital ratios under current GAAP. On September 15, 2008 the FASB
released exposure drafts which would amend SFAS 140 and FIN 46R. For additional information on this proposed amendment, see Recent Accounting Developments on page 6.
For more information, see Note 9 Variable Interest Entities to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
2007 Compared to 2006
The following discussion and analysis provides a comparison of our
results of operations for 2007 and 2006. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes. Tables 5 and 6 contain financial data to supplement this discussion.
Overview
Net
Income
Net income totaled $15.0 billion, or $3.30 per diluted common share in 2007 compared to $21.1 billion or $4.59 per diluted common share in
2006. The return on average common shareholders equity was 11.08 percent in 2007 compared to 16.27 percent in 2006. These earnings provided sufficient cash flow to allow us to return $13.6 billion and $21.2 billion in 2007 and 2006, in capital
to shareholders in the form of dividends and share repurchases, net of employee stock options exercised.
Net Interest Income
Net interest income on a FTE basis increased $372 million to $36.2 billion in 2007 compared to 2006. The increase was driven by the contribution from market-based
net interest income related to Global Markets, higher levels of consumer and commercial loans, the impact of the LaSalle acquisition, and a one-time tax benefit from restructuring our existing non-U.S. based commercial aircraft leasing
business. These
increases were partially offset by spread compression, increased hedge costs and the impact of divestitures of certain foreign operations in late 2006 and the
beginning of 2007. The net interest yield on a FTE basis decreased 22 bps to 2.60 percent for 2007 compared to 2006, and was driven by spread compression and the impact of the funding of the LaSalle merger, partially offset by an improvement in
market-based yield related to Global Markets.
Noninterest Income
Noninterest income decreased $5.8 billion to $32.4 billion in 2007 compared to 2006 due primarily to decreases in trading account profits (losses) of $8.2 billion and other income of $916 million. These
decreases were partially offset by increases in equity investment income of $875 million, investment and brokerage services of $691 million, service charges of $684 million, an increase in gains (losses) on sales of debt securities of $623 million
and mortgage banking income of $361 million. Trading account profits (losses) were driven by losses of $4.9 billion associated with CDO exposure and the impact of the market disruptions on various parts of Global Markets in the second half of
the year. The decrease in other income was driven by losses of $752 million associated with CDO exposure, losses of $776 million associated with the support provided to certain cash funds managed within GWIM and writedowns related to certain
SIV investments that were purchased from the funds, and the absence of a $720 million gain on the sale of our Brazilian operations recognized in 2006. These losses were partially offset by a $1.5 billion gain from the sale of Marsico that was
recorded in other income. The increase in equity investment income was driven by the $600 million gain on the sale of private equity funds to Conversus Capital. Investment and brokerage services increased due primarily to organic growth in AUM,
brokerage activity and the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition. Service charges grew resulting from new account growth in deposit accounts and the beneficial impact of the LaSalle merger. The increase in gains (losses) on sales of debt securities was
driven largely by losses in the prior year. Mortgage banking income increased due to the favorable performance of the MSRs partially offset by the impact of widening credit spreads on income from mortgage production.
Provision for Credit Losses
The provision for credit losses
increased $3.4 billion to $8.4 billion in 2007 compared to 2006 due to higher net charge-offs, reserve additions and the absence of 2006 commercial reserve releases. Higher net charge-offs of $1.9 billion were primarily driven by seasoning of the
consumer portfolios, seasoning and deterioration in the small business and home equity portfolios as well as lower commercial recoveries. Reserves were increased in the home equity and homebuilder loan portfolios on continued weakness in the housing
market. Reserves were also added for small business portfolio seasoning and deterioration as well as growth in the consumer portfolios. These increases were partially offset by reductions in reserves from the sale of the Argentina portfolio in the
first quarter of 2007.
Noninterest Expense
Noninterest expense increased $1.7 billion to $37.5 billion in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due to increases in other general operating expense of $975 million and personnel expense of $542 million, partially offset by a decrease in
merger and restructuring charges of $395 million. The increase in other general operating expense was impacted by our acquisitions and various other items including litigation related costs. Personnel expense increased due to the acquisitions of
LaSalle and U.S. Trust Corporation partially offset by a reduction in performance-based
incentive compensation within Global Markets. Merger and restructuring charges decreased mainly due to the declining integration costs associated with the MBNA
acquisition partially offset by costs associated with the integration of U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle.
Income Tax Expense
Income tax expense was $5.9 billion in 2007 compared to $10.8 billion in 2006, resulting in effective tax rates of 28.4 percent in 2007 and 33.9 percent in 2006.
The decrease in the effective tax rate was primarily due to lower pre-tax income, a one-time tax benefit from restructuring our existing non-U.S. based commercial aircraft leasing business and an increase in the relative percentage of our earnings
taxed solely outside of the U.S.
Business Segment Operations
Deposits
Net income increased $201 million, or four percent,
compared to 2006 as an increase in noninterest income was partially offset by higher noninterest expense. Net interest income remained relatively flat as the addition of LaSalle and higher deposit spreads were offset by the impact of lower balances.
Noninterest income increased $703 million, or 13 percent, to $6.2 billion compared to 2006, mainly due to higher service charges primarily as a result of new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle. Noninterest expense increased
$496 million, or six percent, to $8.5 billion primarily due to the addition of LaSalle, and to higher account and transaction volumes.
Global Card
Services
Net income decreased $1.9 billion, or 30 percent, to $4.3 billion compared to 2006 as increases in noninterest income and net interest
income were more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $212 million, or one percent, to $16.4 billion as growth in managed average loans and leases was partially offset by spread
compression. Noninterest income increased $1.0 billion, or 10 percent, to $11.1 billion compared to 2006, mainly due to higher cash advance fees related to organic loan growth in domestic credit card and consumer lending. Provision for credit losses
increased $3.2 billion, or 40 percent, to $11.3 billion compared to 2006 driven by higher managed net losses from portfolio seasoning and increases from unusually low loss levels experienced in 2006 post bankruptcy reform. Noninterest expense
increased $970 million, or 12 percent, to $9.4 billion largely due to increases in personnel-related expenses, certain Visa-related costs, equally allocated to Global Card Services and Global Banking on a management accounting basis,
and technology-related costs.
Home Loans & Insurance
Net income decreased $377 million, or 79 percent, to $102 million compared to 2006 as increases in noninterest income and net interest income were more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and noninterest expense. Net interest
income increased $372 million, or 24 percent, to $1.9 billion driven by growth in our home equity loan portfolio partially offset by spread compression. Noninterest income increased $668 million, or 59 percent, to $1.8 billion compared to 2006,
mainly attributable to higher mortgage banking income due to the election to account for certain LHFS at fair value, favorable performance of the MSRs and increased production income. Provision for credit losses increased $956 million to $1.0
billion compared to 2006 primarily driven by higher losses inherent in the home equity portfolio reflective of portfolio season-
ing and the impacts of the weak housing market, particularly in geographic areas which have experienced the most significant home price declines driving a reduction in
collateral value. Noninterest expense increased $683 million, or 37 percent, to $2.5 billion, driven by costs associated with increased volume and the increase in cost related to the adoption of SFAS 159.
Global Banking
Net income decreased $481 million, or 10
percent, to $4.2 billion as increases in net interest income and noninterest income were more than offset by higher provision for credit losses and noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $164 million, or two percent, to $8.7 billion due
to the FTE impact of a one-time tax benefit from restructuring our existing non-U.S. based commercial aircraft leasing business combined with average loans and leases and deposit growth. These increases were partially offset by spread compression.
Noninterest income increased $118 million, or two percent, to $6.0 billion compared to 2006, driven by higher service charges, improved economic hedging results of our exposures to certain large corporate clients and higher tax credits from
community development activities. Provision for credit losses was $658 million in 2007 compared to negative $7 million in 2006. The increase was driven by the absence of 2006 releases of reserves, higher net charge-offs and an increase in reserves
during 2007 reflecting the impact of the weak housing market particularly on the homebuilder loan portfolio. Noninterest expense increased $393 million, or six percent, to $7.4 billion compared to 2006 primarily due to the LaSalle merger and certain
Visa-related costs equally allocated to Global Banking and Global Card Services on a management accounting basis.
Global Markets
Net income decreased $5.1 billion to a loss of $3.8 billion as CDO and other trading losses were partially offset by an increase in net interest
income and a decrease in noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $1.0 billion, or 77 percent, to $2.3 billion due to a higher yield and growth in average market-based earning assets. Noninterest income decreased $9.1 billion to a loss of
$3.6 billion driven by $5.6 billion in losses resulting from our CDO exposure. In addition, we recorded additional trading losses in structured and credit products while rates and currencies and equity products sales and trading revenue compared
reasonably well with 2006 given the market conditions. Noninterest expense decreased $36 million, or one percent, to $4.7 billion compared to 2006.
Global Wealth & Investment Management
Net income decreased $191 million, or nine percent, to $2.0 billion compared to 2006, due
mainly to losses associated with the support provided to certain cash funds managed within Columbia and an increase in noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $163 million, or four percent, to $3.9 billion driven by the impact of
the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition and organic growth in average deposit and loan balances. Noninterest income increased $307 million, or nine percent, to $3.6 billion driven by an increase in investment and brokerage services primarily due to
higher AUM attributable to the impact of the U.S. Trust Corporation acquisition, net client inflows and favorable market conditions combined with an increase in brokerage activity. Partially offsetting this increase was a decrease in all other
income due to losses associated with support provided to certain cash funds. Noninterest expense increased $771 million, or 21 percent, to $4.5 billion driven by the addition of U.S. Trust Corporation, higher revenue related expenses and increased
marketing costs.
All Other
Net income increased $1.7 billion to
$3.3 billion compared to 2006. Excluding the securitization offset this increase was due to higher noninterest income combined with decreases in all other noninterest expense, merger and restructuring charges and provision for credit losses
partially offset by a decrease in net interest income. Net interest income decreased $1.2 billion, or 68 percent, to $580 million compared to 2006 resulting largely from the absence of net interest income due to the sale of the Latin American
operations and Hong Kong-based retail and commercial banking business which were included in our 2006 results. Noninterest income increased $1.7 billion, or 70 percent, to $4.1 billion driven by the $1.5 billion gain from the sale of Marsico. In
addition, noninterest income increased due to higher equity investment income and
the absence of a loss on the sale of mortgage backed debt securities which occurred in the prior year. The provision for credit losses decreased $136 million to
negative $249 million mainly due to reserve reductions from the sale of our Argentina portfolio during the first quarter of 2007. Merger and restructuring charges decreased $395 million, or 49 percent, to $410 million due to declining integration
costs associated with the integration of the MBNA acquisition partially offset by costs associated with U.S. Trust Corporation and LaSalle. The decrease in other noninterest expense of $1.2 billion was driven by the absence of operating costs after
the sale of the Latin American operations and Hong Kong-based retail and commercial banking business which were included in our 2006 results.
Statistical Tables
Table I Year-to-date Average Balances and Interest Rates FTE Basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
2006 (1) |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
Earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits placed and other short-term investments |
|
$ |
10,696 |
|
$ |
440 |
|
4.11 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
13,152 |
|
$ |
627 |
|
4.77 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
15,611 |
|
$ |
646 |
|
4.14 |
% |
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
128,053 |
|
|
3,313 |
|
2.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
155,828 |
|
|
7,722 |
|
4.96 |
|
|
|
|
|
175,334 |
|
|
7,823 |
|
4.46 |
|
Trading account assets |
|
|
193,631 |
|
|
9,259 |
|
4.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
187,287 |
|
|
9,747 |
|
5.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
145,321 |
|
|
7,552 |
|
5.20 |
|
Debt securities (2) |
|
|
250,551 |
|
|
13,383 |
|
5.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
186,466 |
|
|
10,020 |
|
5.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
225,219 |
|
|
11,845 |
|
5.26 |
|
Loans and leases (3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
260,213 |
|
|
14,671 |
|
5.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
264,650 |
|
|
15,112 |
|
5.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
207,879 |
|
|
11,608 |
|
5.58 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
135,091 |
|
|
7,592 |
|
5.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
98,765 |
|
|
7,385 |
|
7.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
78,318 |
|
|
5,772 |
|
7.37 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
10,898 |
|
|
858 |
|
7.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
63,318 |
|
|
6,843 |
|
10.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
57,883 |
|
|
7,225 |
|
12.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
63,838 |
|
|
8,638 |
|
13.53 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
16,527 |
|
|
2,042 |
|
12.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,359 |
|
|
1,502 |
|
12.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
9,141 |
|
|
1,147 |
|
12.55 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer (4) |
|
|
82,516 |
|
|
6,934 |
|
8.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
70,009 |
|
|
6,002 |
|
8.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
53,172 |
|
|
4,185 |
|
7.87 |
|
Other consumer (5) |
|
|
3,816 |
|
|
321 |
|
8.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,510 |
|
|
389 |
|
8.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,516 |
|
|
789 |
|
10.50 |
|
Total consumer |
|
|
572,379 |
|
|
39,261 |
|
6.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
508,176 |
|
|
37,615 |
|
7.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
419,864 |
|
|
32,139 |
|
7.65 |
|
Commercial domestic |
|
|
220,561 |
|
|
11,702 |
|
5.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
180,102 |
|
|
12,884 |
|
7.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
151,231 |
|
|
10,897 |
|
7.21 |
|
Commercial real estate (6) |
|
|
63,208 |
|
|
3,057 |
|
4.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
42,950 |
|
|
3,145 |
|
7.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
36,939 |
|
|
2,740 |
|
7.42 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
22,290 |
|
|
799 |
|
3.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,435 |
|
|
1,212 |
|
5.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,862 |
|
|
995 |
|
4.77 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
32,440 |
|
|
1,503 |
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
24,491 |
|
|
1,452 |
|
5.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
23,521 |
|
|
1,674 |
|
7.12 |
|
Total commercial |
|
|
338,499 |
|
|
17,061 |
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
267,978 |
|
|
18,693 |
|
6.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
232,553 |
|
|
16,306 |
|
7.01 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
910,878 |
|
|
56,322 |
|
6.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
776,154 |
|
|
56,308 |
|
7.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
652,417 |
|
|
48,445 |
|
7.43 |
|
Other earning assets |
|
|
68,920 |
|
|
4,161 |
|
6.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
71,305 |
|
|
4,629 |
|
6.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
55,242 |
|
|
3,498 |
|
6.33 |
|
Total earning assets (7) |
|
|
1,562,729 |
|
|
86,878 |
|
5.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,390,192 |
|
|
89,053 |
|
6.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,269,144 |
|
|
79,809 |
|
6.29 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
45,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,091 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, less allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
235,896 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178,790 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,485 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,843,979 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,602,073 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,466,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings |
|
$ |
32,204 |
|
$ |
230 |
|
0.71 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
32,316 |
|
$ |
188 |
|
0.58 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
34,608 |
|
$ |
269 |
|
0.78 |
% |
NOW and money market deposit accounts |
|
|
267,818 |
|
|
3,781 |
|
1.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
220,207 |
|
|
4,361 |
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
218,077 |
|
|
3,923 |
|
1.80 |
|
Consumer CDs and IRAs |
|
|
203,887 |
|
|
7,404 |
|
3.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
167,801 |
|
|
7,817 |
|
4.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
144,738 |
|
|
6,022 |
|
4.16 |
|
Negotiable CDs, public funds and other time deposits |
|
|
32,264 |
|
|
1,076 |
|
3.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,557 |
|
|
974 |
|
4.74 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,195 |
|
|
483 |
|
3.97 |
|
Total domestic interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
536,173 |
|
|
12,491 |
|
2.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
440,881 |
|
|
13,340 |
|
3.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
409,618 |
|
|
10,697 |
|
2.61 |
|
Foreign interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banks located in foreign countries |
|
|
37,657 |
|
|
1,063 |
|
2.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
42,788 |
|
|
2,174 |
|
5.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
34,985 |
|
|
1,982 |
|
5.67 |
|
Governments and official institutions |
|
|
13,004 |
|
|
311 |
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,523 |
|
|
812 |
|
4.91 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,674 |
|
|
586 |
|
4.63 |
|
Time, savings and other |
|
|
51,363 |
|
|
1,385 |
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
43,443 |
|
|
1,767 |
|
4.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
38,544 |
|
|
1,215 |
|
3.15 |
|
Total foreign interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
102,024 |
|
|
2,759 |
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
102,754 |
|
|
4,753 |
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
86,203 |
|
|
3,783 |
|
4.39 |
|
Total interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
638,197 |
|
|
15,250 |
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
543,635 |
|
|
18,093 |
|
3.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
495,821 |
|
|
14,480 |
|
2.92 |
|
Federal funds purchased, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings |
|
|
455,710 |
|
|
12,362 |
|
2.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
424,814 |
|
|
21,967 |
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
411,132 |
|
|
19,837 |
|
4.83 |
|
Trading account liabilities |
|
|
75,270 |
|
|
2,774 |
|
3.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
82,721 |
|
|
3,444 |
|
4.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
64,689 |
|
|
2,640 |
|
4.08 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
231,235 |
|
|
9,938 |
|
4.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
169,855 |
|
|
9,359 |
|
5.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
130,124 |
|
|
7,034 |
|
5.41 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities (7) |
|
|
1,400,412 |
|
|
40,324 |
|
2.88 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,221,025 |
|
|
52,863 |
|
4.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,101,766 |
|
|
43,991 |
|
3.99 |
|
Noninterest-bearing sources: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing deposits |
|
|
192,947 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
173,547 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177,174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
85,789 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
164,831 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,463 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,843,979 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,602,073 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,466,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.68 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.08 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.30 |
% |
Impact of noninterest-bearing sources |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.52 |
|
Net interest income/yield on earning assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
46,554 |
|
2.98 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
36,190 |
|
2.60 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
35,818 |
|
2.82 |
% |
(1) |
Interest income (FTE basis) in 2006 does not include the cumulative tax charge resulting from a change in tax
legislation relating to extraterritorial tax income and foreign sales corporation regimes. The FTE impact to net interest income and net interest yield on earning assets of this retroactive tax adjustment was a reduction of $270 million and two
bps in 2006. Management has excluded this one-time impact to provide a more comparative basis of presentation for net interest income and net interest yield on earning assets on a FTE basis. The impact on any given future period is not expected to
be material. |
(2) |
Yields on AFS debt securities are calculated based on fair value rather than historical cost balances. The use of fair value
does not have a material impact on net interest yield. |
(3) |
Nonperforming loans are included in the respective average loan balances. Income on these nonperforming loans is recognized on
a cash basis. We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. Loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 were written down to fair value upon acquisition and accrete interest income over the remaining life of the loan.
|
(4) |
Includes foreign consumer loans of $2.7 billion, $3.8 billion and $3.4 billion in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
|
(5) |
Includes consumer finance loans of $2.8 billion, $3.2 billion and $2.9 billion in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively; and other
foreign consumer loans of $774 million, $1.1 billion and $4.4 billion in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. |
(6) |
Includes domestic commercial real estate loans of $62.1 billion, $42.1 billion and $36.2 billion in 2008, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. |
(7) |
Interest income includes the impact of interest rate risk management contracts, which decreased interest income on the
underlying assets $260 million, $542 million and $372 million in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Interest expense includes the impact of interest rate risk management contracts, which increased interest expense on the underlying liabilities $409
million, $813 million and $106 million in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. For further information on interest rate contracts, see Interest Rate Risk Management for Nontrading Activities beginning on page 71. |
n/a = not applicable
Table II Analysis of Changes in Net Interest Income FTE Basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From 2007 to 2008 |
|
|
|
|
From 2006 to 2007 |
|
|
|
Due to Change in (1) |
|
|
Net Change |
|
|
|
|
Due to Change in (1) |
|
|
Net Change |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Volume |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
Volume |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Increase (decrease) in interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits placed and other short-term investments |
|
$ |
(117 |
) |
|
$ |
(70 |
) |
|
$ |
(187 |
) |
|
|
|
$ |
(102 |
) |
|
$ |
83 |
|
|
$ |
(19 |
) |
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
(1,371 |
) |
|
|
(3,038 |
) |
|
|
(4,409 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(873 |
) |
|
|
772 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
Trading account assets |
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
(810 |
) |
|
|
(488 |
) |
|
|
|
|
2,187 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,195 |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
3,435 |
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
3,363 |
|
|
|
|
|
(2,037 |
) |
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
(1,825 |
) |
Loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
(254 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
(441 |
) |
|
|
|
|
3,159 |
|
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
3,504 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
2,720 |
|
|
|
(2,513 |
) |
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,507 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
1,613 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
858 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
(1,059 |
) |
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(806 |
) |
|
|
(607 |
) |
|
|
(1,413 |
) |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
506 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
355 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
1,070 |
|
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
932 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,325 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
1,817 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(315 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(400 |
) |
Total consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,476 |
|
Commercial domestic |
|
|
2,886 |
|
|
|
(4,068 |
) |
|
|
(1,182 |
) |
|
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
1,987 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
(1,570 |
) |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
405 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
(523 |
) |
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
237 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
(421 |
) |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
Total commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,632 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,387 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,863 |
|
Other earning assets |
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
(312 |
) |
|
|
(468 |
) |
|
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
1,131 |
|
Total interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2,175 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,244 |
|
Increase (decrease) in interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
43 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
|
$ |
(64 |
) |
|
$ |
(81 |
) |
NOW and money market deposit accounts |
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
(1,522 |
) |
|
|
(580 |
) |
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
Consumer CDs and IRAs |
|
|
1,684 |
|
|
|
(2,097 |
) |
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
|
|
|
959 |
|
|
|
836 |
|
|
|
1,795 |
|
Negotiable CDs, public funds and other time deposits |
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
(453 |
) |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
Total domestic interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(849 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,643 |
|
Foreign interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banks located in foreign countries |
|
|
(261 |
) |
|
|
(850 |
) |
|
|
(1,111 |
) |
|
|
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
(252 |
) |
|
|
192 |
|
Governments and official institutions |
|
|
(174 |
) |
|
|
(327 |
) |
|
|
(501 |
) |
|
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Time, savings and other |
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
(705 |
) |
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
552 |
|
Total foreign interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,994 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
970 |
|
Total interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,843 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,613 |
|
Federal funds purchased, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings |
|
|
1,593 |
|
|
|
(11,198 |
) |
|
|
(9,605 |
) |
|
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,448 |
|
|
|
2,130 |
|
Trading account liabilities |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
(357 |
) |
|
|
(670 |
) |
|
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
3,382 |
|
|
|
(2,803 |
) |
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
2,325 |
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,539 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,872 |
|
Net increase in net interest income (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,364 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
372 |
|
(1) |
The changes for each category of interest income and expense are divided between the portion of change attributable to the
variance in volume and the portion of change attributable to the variance in rate for that category. The unallocated change in rate or volume variance has been allocated between the rate and volume variances. |
(2) |
Interest income (FTE basis) in 2006 does not include the cumulative tax charge resulting from a change in tax legislation
relating to extraterritorial tax income and foreign sales corporation regimes. The FTE impact to net interest income of this retroactive tax adjustment is a reduction of $270 million from 2006 to 2007. Management has excluded this one-time
impact to provide a more comparative basis of presentation for net interest income and net interest yield on earning assets on a FTE basis. The impact on any given future period is not expected to be material. |
n/a = not applicable
Table III Outstanding Loans and Leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
December 31 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
247,999 |
|
$ |
274,949 |
|
$ |
241,181 |
|
$ |
182,596 |
|
$ |
178,079 |
Home equity |
|
|
152,547 |
|
|
114,820 |
|
|
87,893 |
|
|
70,229 |
|
|
57,439 |
Discontinued real estate (1) |
|
|
19,981 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
Credit card domestic |
|
|
64,128 |
|
|
65,774 |
|
|
61,195 |
|
|
58,548 |
|
|
51,726 |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
17,146 |
|
|
14,950 |
|
|
10,999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct/Indirect consumer (2) |
|
|
83,436 |
|
|
76,538 |
|
|
59,206 |
|
|
37,265 |
|
|
33,113 |
Other consumer (3) |
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
4,170 |
|
|
5,231 |
|
|
6,819 |
|
|
7,526 |
Total consumer |
|
|
588,679 |
|
|
551,201 |
|
|
465,705 |
|
|
355,457 |
|
|
327,883 |
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial domestic (4) |
|
|
219,233 |
|
|
208,297 |
|
|
161,982 |
|
|
140,533 |
|
|
122,095 |
Commercial real estate (5) |
|
|
64,701 |
|
|
61,298 |
|
|
36,258 |
|
|
35,766 |
|
|
32,319 |
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
22,400 |
|
|
22,582 |
|
|
21,864 |
|
|
20,705 |
|
|
21,115 |
Commercial foreign |
|
|
31,020 |
|
|
28,376 |
|
|
20,681 |
|
|
21,330 |
|
|
18,401 |
Total commercial loans |
|
|
337,354 |
|
|
320,553 |
|
|
240,785 |
|
|
218,334 |
|
|
193,930 |
Commercial loans measured at fair value (6) |
|
|
5,413 |
|
|
4,590 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
Total commercial |
|
|
342,767 |
|
|
325,143 |
|
|
240,785 |
|
|
218,334 |
|
|
193,930 |
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
931,446 |
|
$ |
876,344 |
|
$ |
706,490 |
|
$ |
573,791 |
|
$ |
521,813 |
(1) |
At December 31, 2008, includes $18.2 billion of pay option loans and $1.8 billion of subprime loans obtained as
part of the acquisition of Countrywide. The Corporation no longer originates these products. |
(2) |
Includes foreign consumer loans of $1.8 billion, $3.4 billion, $3.9 billion, $48 million, and $57 million at December 31,
2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. |
(3) |
Includes consumer finance loans of $2.6 billion, $3.0 billion, $2.8 billion, $2.8 billion, and $3.4 billion at
December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively; other foreign consumer loans of $618 million, $829 million, $2.3 billion, $3.8 billion, and $3.5 billion at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively; and
consumer lease financing of $481 million at December 31, 2004. |
(4) |
Includes small business commercial domestic loans, primarily card related, of $19.1 billion, $19.3 billion,
$15.2 billion, $7.2 billion and $5.4 billion at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. |
(5) |
Includes domestic commercial real estate loans of $63.7 billion, $60.2 billion, $35.7 billion, $35.2 billion, and $31.9 billion
at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively; and foreign commercial real estate loans of $979 million, $1.1 billion, $578 million, $585 million, and $440 million at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004,
respectively. |
(6) |
Certain commercial loans are measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159 and include commercial domestic loans of
$3.5 billion and $3.5 billion, commercial foreign loans of $1.7 billion and $790 million, and commercial real estate loans of $203 million and $304 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007. See Note 19 Fair Value Disclosures
to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion of fair value for certain financial instruments. |
n/a = not
applicable
Table IV Nonperforming Assets (1, 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
7,044 |
|
$ |
1,999 |
|
$ |
660 |
|
$ |
570 |
|
$ |
554 |
Home equity |
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
1,340 |
|
|
289 |
|
|
151 |
|
|
94 |
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
77 |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
26 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
3 |
|
|
5 |
Other consumer |
|
|
91 |
|
|
95 |
|
|
77 |
|
|
61 |
|
|
85 |
Total consumer (3) |
|
|
9,908 |
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
785 |
|
|
738 |
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial domestic (4) |
|
|
2,040 |
|
|
852 |
|
|
494 |
|
|
550 |
|
|
847 |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
3,906 |
|
|
1,099 |
|
|
118 |
|
|
49 |
|
|
87 |
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
56 |
|
|
33 |
|
|
42 |
|
|
62 |
|
|
266 |
Commercial foreign |
|
|
290 |
|
|
19 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
34 |
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
6,292 |
|
|
2,003 |
|
|
667 |
|
|
695 |
|
|
1,467 |
Small business commercial domestic |
|
|
205 |
|
|
152 |
|
|
90 |
|
|
31 |
|
|
8 |
Total commercial (5) |
|
|
6,497 |
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
757 |
|
|
726 |
|
|
1,475 |
Total nonperforming loans and leases |
|
|
16,405 |
|
|
5,597 |
|
|
1,787 |
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
2,213 |
Foreclosed properties |
|
|
1,827 |
|
|
351 |
|
|
69 |
|
|
92 |
|
|
102 |
Total nonperforming assets |
|
$ |
18,232 |
|
$ |
5,948 |
|
$ |
1,856 |
|
$ |
1,603 |
|
$ |
2,315 |
(1) |
At December 31, 2008, balances did not include nonperforming derivatives of $512 million. At December 31, 2008 and
2007 balances did not include nonperforming AFS debt securities of $291 million and $180 million. At December 31, 2004, balances did not include $140 million of nonperforming securities primarily associated with the Fleet acquisition. In addition,
balances did not include nonperforming LHFS of $1.3 billion, $188 million, $80 million, $69 million, and $151 million at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. |
(2) |
Balances do not include loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 even though the customer may be
contractually past due. Loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 were written down to fair value upon acquisition and accrete interest income over the remaining life of the loan. |
(3) |
In 2008, $512 million in interest income was estimated to be contractually due on nonperforming consumer loans and leases
classified as nonperforming at December 31, 2008 provided that these loans and leases had been paid according to their terms and conditions, including troubled debt restructured loans of which $387 million were performing at December 31,
2008 and not included in the table above. Approximately $124 million of the estimated $512 million in contractual interest was received and included in net income for 2008. |
(4) |
Excludes small business commercial domestic loans. |
(5) |
In 2008, $260 million in interest income was estimated to be contractually due on nonperforming commercial loans and leases
classified as nonperforming at December 31, 2008, including troubled debt restructured loans of which $13 million were performing at December 31, 2008 and not included in the table above. Approximately $84 million of the estimated $260
million in contractual interest was received and included in net income for 2008. |
n/a = not applicable
Table V Accruing Loans and Leases Past
Due 90 Days or More (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Consumer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage (2) |
|
$ |
372 |
|
$ |
237 |
|
$ |
118 |
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
2,197 |
|
|
1,855 |
|
|
1,991 |
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
1,075 |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
368 |
|
|
272 |
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
1,370 |
|
|
745 |
|
|
378 |
|
|
75 |
|
|
58 |
Other consumer |
|
|
4 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
7 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
23 |
Total consumer |
|
|
4,311 |
|
|
3,113 |
|
|
2,678 |
|
|
1,287 |
|
|
1,156 |
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial domestic (3) |
|
|
381 |
|
|
119 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
79 |
|
|
82 |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
52 |
|
|
36 |
|
|
78 |
|
|
4 |
|
|
1 |
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
23 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
26 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
14 |
Commercial foreign |
|
|
7 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
32 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
196 |
|
|
179 |
|
|
130 |
|
|
99 |
Small business commercial domestic |
|
|
640 |
|
|
427 |
|
|
199 |
|
|
38 |
|
|
39 |
Total commercial |
|
|
1,103 |
|
|
623 |
|
|
378 |
|
|
168 |
|
|
138 |
Total accruing loans and leases past due 90 days or more (4) |
|
$ |
5,414 |
|
$ |
3,736 |
|
$ |
3,056 |
|
$ |
1,455 |
|
$ |
1,294 |
(1) |
Accruing loans past due 90 days or more do not include acquired loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 that were
considered impaired and written down to fair value upon acquisition and accrete interest income over the remaining life of the loan. |
(2) |
Balances are related to repurchases pursuant to our servicing agreements with GNMA mortgage pools where repayments are insured
by the Federal Housing Administration or guaranteed by the Department of Veteran Affairs. |
(3) |
Excludes small business commercial domestic loans. |
(4) |
Balances do not include loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, there
were no accruing loans or leases past due 90 days or more measured under fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. |
Table VI Allowance for Credit Losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, January 1 |
|
$ |
11,588 |
|
|
$ |
9,016 |
|
|
$ |
8,045 |
|
|
$ |
8,626 |
|
|
$ |
6,163 |
|
Adjustment due to the adoption of SFAS 159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases charged off |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
(964 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
(3,597 |
) |
|
|
(286 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
(4,469 |
) |
|
|
(3,410 |
) |
|
|
(3,546 |
) |
|
|
(4,018 |
) |
|
|
(2,536 |
) |
Credit card foreign |
|
|
(639 |
) |
|
|
(453 |
) |
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
(3,777 |
) |
|
|
(1,885 |
) |
|
|
(857 |
) |
|
|
(380 |
) |
|
|
(344 |
) |
Other consumer |
|
|
(461 |
) |
|
|
(346 |
) |
|
|
(327 |
) |
|
|
(376 |
) |
|
|
(295 |
) |
Total consumer charge-offs |
|
|
(13,926 |
) |
|
|
(6,458 |
) |
|
|
(5,163 |
) |
|
|
(4,878 |
) |
|
|
(3,275 |
) |
Commercial domestic (1) |
|
|
(2,567 |
) |
|
|
(1,135 |
) |
|
|
(597 |
) |
|
|
(535 |
) |
|
|
(504 |
) |
Commercial real estate |
|
|
(895 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(315 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
Commercial foreign |
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(262 |
) |
Total commercial charge-offs |
|
|
(3,740 |
) |
|
|
(1,272 |
) |
|
|
(718 |
) |
|
|
(916 |
) |
|
|
(817 |
) |
Total loans and leases charged off |
|
|
(17,666 |
) |
|
|
(7,730 |
) |
|
|
(5,881 |
) |
|
|
(5,794 |
) |
|
|
(4,092 |
) |
Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
231 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
512 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Total consumer recoveries |
|
|
1,264 |
|
|
|
1,035 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
645 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
Commercial domestic (2) |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
Total commercial recoveries |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
461 |
|
Total recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off |
|
|
1,435 |
|
|
|
1,250 |
|
|
|
1,342 |
|
|
|
1,232 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
Net charge-offs |
|
|
(16,231 |
) |
|
|
(6,480 |
) |
|
|
(4,539 |
) |
|
|
(4,562 |
) |
|
|
(3,113 |
) |
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
26,922 |
|
|
|
8,357 |
|
|
|
5,001 |
|
|
|
4,021 |
|
|
|
2,868 |
|
Other (3) |
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
|
509 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
2,708 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, December 31 |
|
|
23,071 |
|
|
|
11,588 |
|
|
|
9,016 |
|
|
|
8,045 |
|
|
|
8,626 |
|
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, January 1 |
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
402 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
Adjustment due to the adoption of SFAS 159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for unfunded lending commitments |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
Other (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
85 |
|
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, December 31 |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
402 |
|
Allowance for credit losses, December 31 |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
|
$ |
9,413 |
|
|
$ |
8,440 |
|
|
$ |
9,028 |
|
Loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5) |
|
$ |
926,033 |
|
|
$ |
871,754 |
|
|
$ |
706,490 |
|
|
$ |
573,791 |
|
|
$ |
521,813 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
1.33 |
% |
|
|
1.28 |
% |
|
|
1.40 |
% |
|
|
1.65 |
% |
Consumer allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total consumer loans and leases outstanding at December 31(6) |
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
1.23 |
|
|
|
1.19 |
|
|
|
1.27 |
|
|
|
1.34 |
|
Commercial allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total commercial loans and leases outstanding at December 31
(5) |
|
|
1.90 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
1.44 |
|
|
|
1.62 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
Average loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
$ |
905,944 |
|
|
$ |
773,142 |
|
|
$ |
652,417 |
|
|
$ |
537,218 |
|
|
$ |
472,617 |
|
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans and leases outstanding at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
1.79 |
% |
|
|
0.84 |
% |
|
|
0.70 |
% |
|
|
0.85 |
% |
|
|
0.66 |
% |
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total nonperforming loans and leases at December 31 (5, 6) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
Ratio of the allowance for loan and lease losses at December 31 to net charge-offs
(6) |
|
|
1.42 |
|
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
|
1.99 |
|
|
|
1.76 |
|
|
|
2.77 |
|
(1) |
Includes small business commercial domestic charge-offs of $2.0 billion, $931 million and $424 million in
2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Small business commercial domestic charge offs were not material in 2005 and 2004. |
(2) |
Includes small business commercial domestic recoveries of $39 million, $51 million and $54 million in 2008,
2007 and 2006, respectively. Small business commercial domestic recoveries were not material in 2005 and 2004. |
(3) |
The 2008 amount includes the $1.2 billion addition of the Countrywide allowance for loan losses as of July 1,
2008. The 2007 amount includes the $725 million and $25 million additions of the LaSalle and U.S. Trust Corporation allowance for loan losses as of October 1, 2007 and July 1, 2007. The 2006 amount includes the $577 billion addition of the
MBNA allowance for loan losses as of January 1, 2006. The 2004 amount includes the $2.8 billion addition of the FleetBoston allowance for loan losses as of April 1, 2004. |
(4) |
The 2007 amount includes the $124 million addition of the LaSalle reserve for unfunded lending commitments as of
October 1, 2007. The 2004 amount includes the $85 million addition of the FleetBoston reserve for unfunded lending commitments as of April 1, 2004. |
(5) |
Outstanding loan and lease balances and ratios do not include loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS
159 at and for the year ended December 31, 2008 and 2007. Loans measured at fair value were $5.4 billion and $4.6 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007. Average loans measured at fair value were $4.9 billion and $3.0 billion for 2008 and
2007. |
(6) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3
on asset quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45. |
n/a = not applicable
Table VII Allocation of the Allowance for
Credit Losses by Product Type (1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Percent of Total |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
1,382 |
|
5.99 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
1.79 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
248 |
|
2.75 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
277 |
|
3.44 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
240 |
|
2.78 |
% |
Home equity |
|
|
5,385 |
|
23.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
963 |
|
8.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
133 |
|
1.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
1.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
115 |
|
1.33 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
658 |
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
3,947 |
|
17.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,919 |
|
25.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,176 |
|
35.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,301 |
|
41.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,148 |
|
36.49 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
742 |
|
3.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
441 |
|
3.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
336 |
|
3.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct/Indirect consumer |
|
|
4,341 |
|
18.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,077 |
|
17.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,378 |
|
15.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
421 |
|
5.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
375 |
|
4.35 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
203 |
|
0.88 |
|
|
|
|
|
151 |
|
1.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
289 |
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
380 |
|
4.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
500 |
|
5.80 |
|
Total consumer |
|
|
16,658 |
|
72.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,758 |
|
58.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,560 |
|
61.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,515 |
|
56.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,378 |
|
50.75 |
|
Commercial domestic (2) |
|
|
4,339 |
|
18.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,194 |
|
27.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,162 |
|
23.98 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,100 |
|
26.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,101 |
|
24.36 |
|
Commercial real estate |
|
|
1,465 |
|
6.35 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,083 |
|
9.35 |
|
|
|
|
|
588 |
|
6.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
609 |
|
7.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
7.47 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
223 |
|
0.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
218 |
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
|
|
217 |
|
2.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
232 |
|
2.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
442 |
|
5.12 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
386 |
|
1.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
335 |
|
2.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
489 |
|
5.42 |
|
|
|
|
|
589 |
|
7.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
12.30 |
|
Total commercial (3) |
|
|
6,413 |
|
27.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,830 |
|
41.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,456 |
|
38.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,530 |
|
43.88 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,248 |
|
49.25 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
23,071 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
11,588 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
9,016 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
8,045 |
|
100.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
8,626 |
|
100.00 |
% |
Reserve for unfunded lending commitments |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
402 |
|
|
|
Allowance for credit losses |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,028 |
|
|
|
(1) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3
on asset quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45. |
(2) |
Includes allowance for small business commercial domestic loans of $2.4 billion, $1.4 billion and $578 million at
December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The allowance for small business commercial domestic loans was not material in 2005 and 2004. |
(3) |
Includes allowance for loan and lease losses for impaired commercial loans of $691 million, $123 million, $43 million, $55
million and $202 million at December 31, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. |
n/a = not applicable
Table VIII Selected Loan Maturity Data
(1, 2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Due in One Year or Less |
|
|
Due After One Year Through Five Years |
|
|
Due After Five Years |
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial domestic |
|
$ |
79,299 |
|
|
$ |
101,998 |
|
|
$ |
41,431 |
|
|
$ |
222,728 |
|
Commercial real estate domestic |
|
|
29,100 |
|
|
|
30,298 |
|
|
|
4,527 |
|
|
|
63,925 |
|
Foreign and other (3) |
|
|
25,268 |
|
|
|
10,581 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
36,122 |
|
Total selected loans |
|
$ |
133,667 |
|
|
$ |
142,877 |
|
|
$ |
46,231 |
|
|
$ |
322,775 |
|
Percent of total |
|
|
41.4 |
% |
|
|
44.3 |
% |
|
|
14.3 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Sensitivity of selected loans to changes in interest rates for loans due after one year: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed interest rates |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
11,978 |
|
|
$ |
23,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
Floating or adjustable interest rates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,899 |
|
|
|
22,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
142,877 |
|
|
$ |
46,231 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Loan maturities are based on the remaining maturities under contractual terms. |
(2) |
Includes loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. |
(3) |
Loan maturities include direct/indirect consumer, other consumer, commercial real estate and commercial
foreign loans. |
Table IX Short-term Borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Rate |
|
|
|
|
Amount |
|
Rate |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31 |
|
$ |
14,432 |
|
0.11 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
14,187 |
|
4.15 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
12,232 |
|
5.35 |
% |
Average during year |
|
|
8,969 |
|
1.67 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,595 |
|
4.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,292 |
|
5.11 |
|
Maximum month-end balance during year |
|
|
18,788 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,232 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31 |
|
|
192,166 |
|
0.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
207,248 |
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
205,295 |
|
4.94 |
|
Average during year |
|
|
264,012 |
|
2.54 |
|
|
|
|
|
245,886 |
|
5.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
281,611 |
|
4.66 |
|
Maximum month-end balance during year |
|
|
295,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
277,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
312,955 |
|
|
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31 |
|
|
37,986 |
|
1.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
55,596 |
|
4.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
41,223 |
|
5.34 |
|
Average during year |
|
|
57,337 |
|
3.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
57,712 |
|
5.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
33,942 |
|
5.15 |
|
Maximum month-end balance during year |
|
|
65,399 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,367 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,511 |
|
|
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31 |
|
|
120,070 |
|
2.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
135,493 |
|
4.95 |
|
|
|
|
|
100,077 |
|
5.43 |
|
Average during year |
|
|
125,392 |
|
2.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
113,621 |
|
5.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
90,287 |
|
5.21 |
|
Maximum month-end balance during year |
|
|
160,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104,555 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table X Non-exchange Traded Commodity Contracts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Asset Positions |
|
|
Liability Positions |
|
Net fair value of contracts outstanding, January 1, 2008 |
|
$ |
1,148 |
|
|
$ |
1,226 |
|
Effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements |
|
|
3,573 |
|
|
|
3,573 |
|
Gross fair value of contracts outstanding, January 1, 2008 |
|
|
4,721 |
|
|
|
4,799 |
|
Contracts realized or otherwise settled |
|
|
(1,674 |
) |
|
|
(1,605 |
) |
Fair value of new contracts |
|
|
2,435 |
|
|
|
2,413 |
|
Other changes in fair value |
|
|
(1,442 |
) |
|
|
(1,484 |
) |
Gross fair value of contracts outstanding, December 31, 2008 |
|
|
4,040 |
|
|
|
4,123 |
|
Effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements |
|
|
(2,869 |
) |
|
|
(2,869 |
) |
Net fair value of contracts outstanding, December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
1,171 |
|
|
$ |
1,254 |
|
Table XI Non-exchange Traded Commodity Contract Maturities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Asset Positions |
|
|
Liability Positions |
|
Maturity of less than 1 year |
|
$ |
1,623 |
|
|
$ |
1,503 |
|
Maturity of 1-3 years |
|
|
2,134 |
|
|
|
2,331 |
|
Maturity of 4-5 years |
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
Maturity in excess of 5 years |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Gross fair value of contracts outstanding |
|
|
4,040 |
|
|
|
4,123 |
|
Effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements |
|
|
(2,869 |
) |
|
|
(2,869 |
) |
Net fair value of contracts outstanding |
|
$ |
1,171 |
|
|
$ |
1,254 |
|
Table XII Selected Quarterly Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 Quarters |
|
|
|
|
2007 Quarters |
|
(Dollars in millions, except per share information) |
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Second |
|
|
First |
|
Income statement |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
13,106 |
|
|
$ |
11,642 |
|
|
$ |
10,621 |
|
|
$ |
9,991 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,165 |
|
|
$ |
8,617 |
|
|
$ |
8,389 |
|
|
$ |
8,270 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
2,574 |
|
|
|
7,979 |
|
|
|
9,789 |
|
|
|
7,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
7,480 |
|
|
|
11,281 |
|
|
|
9,992 |
|
Total revenue, net of interest expense |
|
|
15,680 |
|
|
|
19,621 |
|
|
|
20,410 |
|
|
|
17,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
12,804 |
|
|
|
16,097 |
|
|
|
19,670 |
|
|
|
18,262 |
|
Provision for credit losses |
|
|
8,535 |
|
|
|
6,450 |
|
|
|
5,830 |
|
|
|
6,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,310 |
|
|
|
2,030 |
|
|
|
1,810 |
|
|
|
1,235 |
|
Noninterest expense, before merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
10,641 |
|
|
|
11,413 |
|
|
|
9,447 |
|
|
|
9,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
10,269 |
|
|
|
8,627 |
|
|
|
9,125 |
|
|
|
9,093 |
|
Merger and restructuring charges |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
(3,802 |
) |
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
|
4,921 |
|
|
|
1,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
(915 |
) |
|
|
5,356 |
|
|
|
8,660 |
|
|
|
7,823 |
|
Income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
(2,013 |
) |
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
|
588 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1,183 |
) |
|
|
1,658 |
|
|
|
2,899 |
|
|
|
2,568 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(1,789 |
) |
|
$ |
1,177 |
|
|
$ |
3,410 |
|
|
$ |
1,210 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
268 |
|
|
$ |
3,698 |
|
|
$ |
5,761 |
|
|
$ |
5,255 |
|
Average common shares issued and outstanding (in thousands) |
|
|
4,957,049 |
|
|
|
4,543,963 |
|
|
|
4,435,719 |
|
|
|
4,427,823 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,421,554 |
|
|
|
4,420,616 |
|
|
|
4,419,246 |
|
|
|
4,432,664 |
|
Average diluted common shares issued and outstanding (in thousands) |
|
|
4,957,049 |
|
|
|
4,563,508 |
|
|
|
4,457,193 |
|
|
|
4,461,201 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,470,108 |
|
|
|
4,475,917 |
|
|
|
4,476,799 |
|
|
|
4,497,028 |
|
Performance ratios |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on average assets |
|
|
(0.37 |
)% |
|
|
0.25 |
% |
|
|
0.78 |
% |
|
|
0.28 |
% |
|
|
|
|
0.06 |
% |
|
|
0.93 |
% |
|
|
1.48 |
% |
|
|
1.40 |
% |
Return on average common shareholders equity |
|
|
(6.68 |
) |
|
|
1.97 |
|
|
|
9.25 |
|
|
|
2.90 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.60 |
|
|
|
11.02 |
|
|
|
17.55 |
|
|
|
16.16 |
|
Return on average tangible shareholders equity (1) |
|
|
(8.28 |
) |
|
|
6.24 |
|
|
|
18.54 |
|
|
|
7.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.90 |
|
|
|
25.58 |
|
|
|
39.22 |
|
|
|
36.29 |
|
Total ending equity to total ending assets |
|
|
9.74 |
|
|
|
8.79 |
|
|
|
9.48 |
|
|
|
9.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
8.56 |
|
|
|
8.77 |
|
|
|
8.85 |
|
|
|
8.98 |
|
Total average equity to total average assets |
|
|
9.06 |
|
|
|
8.73 |
|
|
|
9.20 |
|
|
|
8.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
8.32 |
|
|
|
8.51 |
|
|
|
8.55 |
|
|
|
8.78 |
|
Dividend payout |
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
88.67 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
77.97 |
|
|
|
43.60 |
|
|
|
48.02 |
|
Per common share data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) |
|
$ |
(0.48 |
) |
|
$ |
0.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.73 |
|
|
$ |
0.23 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
1.29 |
|
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
Diluted earnings (loss) |
|
|
(0.48 |
) |
|
|
0.15 |
|
|
|
0.72 |
|
|
|
0.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.05 |
|
|
|
0.82 |
|
|
|
1.28 |
|
|
|
1.16 |
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
0.32 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
Book value |
|
|
27.77 |
|
|
|
30.01 |
|
|
|
31.11 |
|
|
|
31.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
32.09 |
|
|
|
30.45 |
|
|
|
29.95 |
|
|
|
29.74 |
|
Market price per share of common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closing |
|
$ |
14.08 |
|
|
$ |
35.00 |
|
|
$ |
23.87 |
|
|
$ |
37.91 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
41.26 |
|
|
$ |
50.27 |
|
|
$ |
48.89 |
|
|
$ |
51.02 |
|
High closing |
|
|
38.13 |
|
|
|
37.48 |
|
|
|
40.86 |
|
|
|
45.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
52.71 |
|
|
|
51.87 |
|
|
|
51.82 |
|
|
|
54.05 |
|
Low closing |
|
|
11.25 |
|
|
|
18.52 |
|
|
|
23.87 |
|
|
|
35.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
41.10 |
|
|
|
47.00 |
|
|
|
48.80 |
|
|
|
49.46 |
|
Market capitalization |
|
$ |
70,645 |
|
|
$ |
159,672 |
|
|
$ |
106,292 |
|
|
$ |
168,806 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
183,107 |
|
|
$ |
223,041 |
|
|
$ |
216,922 |
|
|
$ |
226,481 |
|
Average balance sheet |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
941,563 |
|
|
$ |
946,914 |
|
|
$ |
878,639 |
|
|
$ |
875,661 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
868,119 |
|
|
$ |
780,516 |
|
|
$ |
740,199 |
|
|
$ |
714,042 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
1,948,854 |
|
|
|
1,905,691 |
|
|
|
1,754,613 |
|
|
|
1,764,927 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,742,467 |
|
|
|
1,580,565 |
|
|
|
1,561,649 |
|
|
|
1,521,418 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
892,141 |
|
|
|
857,845 |
|
|
|
786,002 |
|
|
|
787,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
781,625 |
|
|
|
702,481 |
|
|
|
697,035 |
|
|
|
686,704 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
255,709 |
|
|
|
264,934 |
|
|
|
205,194 |
|
|
|
198,463 |
|
|
|
|
|
196,444 |
|
|
|
175,265 |
|
|
|
158,500 |
|
|
|
148,627 |
|
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
142,535 |
|
|
|
142,303 |
|
|
|
140,243 |
|
|
|
141,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
141,085 |
|
|
|
131,606 |
|
|
|
130,700 |
|
|
|
130,737 |
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
176,566 |
|
|
|
166,454 |
|
|
|
161,428 |
|
|
|
154,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
144,924 |
|
|
|
134,487 |
|
|
|
133,551 |
|
|
|
133,588 |
|
Asset quality (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for credit losses (3) |
|
$ |
23,492 |
|
|
$ |
20,773 |
|
|
$ |
17,637 |
|
|
$ |
15,398 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,106 |
|
|
$ |
9,927 |
|
|
$ |
9,436 |
|
|
$ |
9,106 |
|
Nonperforming assets (4) |
|
|
18,232 |
|
|
|
13,576 |
|
|
|
9,749 |
|
|
|
7,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,948 |
|
|
|
3,372 |
|
|
|
2,392 |
|
|
|
2,059 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
2.17 |
% |
|
|
1.98 |
% |
|
|
1.71 |
% |
|
|
|
|
1.33 |
% |
|
|
1.21 |
% |
|
|
1.20 |
% |
|
|
1.21 |
% |
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percentage of total nonperforming loans and leases (5) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
443 |
|
Net charge-offs |
|
$ |
5,541 |
|
|
$ |
4,356 |
|
|
$ |
3,619 |
|
|
$ |
2,715 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,985 |
|
|
$ |
1,573 |
|
|
$ |
1,495 |
|
|
$ |
1,427 |
|
Annualized net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
2.36 |
% |
|
|
1.84 |
% |
|
|
1.67 |
% |
|
|
1.25 |
% |
|
|
|
|
0.91 |
% |
|
|
0.80 |
% |
|
|
0.81 |
% |
|
|
0.81 |
% |
Nonperforming loans and leases as a percentage of total loans and leases outstanding (5) |
|
|
1.77 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
1.06 |
|
|
|
0.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total loans, leases and foreclosed properties (4, 5) |
|
|
1.96 |
|
|
|
1.45 |
|
|
|
1.13 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
|
0.32 |
|
|
|
0.29 |
|
Ratio of the allowance for loan and lease losses at period end to annualized net charge-offs |
|
|
1.05 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
1.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
|
1.53 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
Capital ratios (period end) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-based capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 |
|
|
9.15 |
% |
|
|
7.55 |
% |
|
|
8.25 |
% |
|
|
7.51 |
% |
|
|
|
|
6.87 |
% |
|
|
8.22 |
% |
|
|
8.52 |
% |
|
|
8.57 |
% |
Total |
|
|
13.00 |
|
|
|
11.54 |
|
|
|
12.60 |
|
|
|
11.71 |
|
|
|
|
|
11.02 |
|
|
|
11.86 |
|
|
|
12.11 |
|
|
|
11.94 |
|
Tier 1 Leverage |
|
|
6.44 |
|
|
|
5.51 |
|
|
|
6.07 |
|
|
|
5.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
6.20 |
|
|
|
6.33 |
|
|
|
6.25 |
|
(1) |
Tangible shareholders equity is a non-GAAP measure. For additional information on ROTE and a corresponding reconciliation
of tangible shareholders equity to a GAAP financial measure, see Supplemental Financial Data beginning on page 12. |
(2) |
We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. For more information on the impact of SOP 03-3 on asset
quality, see Consumer Portfolio Credit Risk Management beginning on page 45. |
(3) |
Includes the allowance for loan and lease losses, and the reserve for unfunded lending commitments.
|
(4) |
Balances and ratios do not include nonperforming LHFS and nonperforming AFS debt securities. |
(5) |
Balances and ratios do not include loans measured at fair value in accordance with SFAS 159. |
n/m = not meaningful
Table XIII Quarterly Average Balances and Interest Rates FTE Basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter 2008 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
Earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits placed and other short-term investments |
|
$ |
10,511 |
|
$ |
158 |
|
5.97 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
11,361 |
|
$ |
101 |
|
3.54 |
% |
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
104,843 |
|
|
393 |
|
1.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
136,322 |
|
|
912 |
|
2.67 |
|
Trading account assets |
|
|
205,698 |
|
|
2,170 |
|
4.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
191,757 |
|
|
2,390 |
|
4.98 |
|
Debt securities (1) |
|
|
280,942 |
|
|
3,913 |
|
5.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
266,013 |
|
|
3,672 |
|
5.52 |
|
Loans and leases (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
253,468 |
|
|
3,581 |
|
5.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
260,748 |
|
|
3,712 |
|
5.69 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
152,035 |
|
|
1,969 |
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
151,142 |
|
|
2,124 |
|
5.59 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
21,324 |
|
|
459 |
|
8.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,031 |
|
|
399 |
|
7.25 |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
64,906 |
|
|
1,784 |
|
10.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
63,414 |
|
|
1,682 |
|
10.55 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
17,211 |
|
|
521 |
|
12.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
17,075 |
|
|
535 |
|
12.47 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer (3) |
|
|
83,331 |
|
|
1,714 |
|
8.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
85,392 |
|
|
1,790 |
|
8.34 |
|
Other consumer (4) |
|
|
3,544 |
|
|
70 |
|
7.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,723 |
|
|
80 |
|
8.78 |
|
Total consumer |
|
|
595,819 |
|
|
10,098 |
|
6.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
603,525 |
|
|
10,322 |
|
6.82 |
|
Commercial domestic |
|
|
226,095 |
|
|
2,890 |
|
5.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
224,117 |
|
|
2,852 |
|
5.06 |
|
Commercial real estate (5) |
|
|
64,586 |
|
|
706 |
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
|
|
63,220 |
|
|
727 |
|
4.57 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
22,069 |
|
|
242 |
|
4.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,585 |
|
|
53 |
|
0.93 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
32,994 |
|
|
373 |
|
4.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
33,467 |
|
|
377 |
|
4.48 |
|
Total commercial |
|
|
345,744 |
|
|
4,211 |
|
4.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
343,389 |
|
|
4,009 |
|
4.64 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
941,563 |
|
|
14,309 |
|
6.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
946,914 |
|
|
14,331 |
|
6.03 |
|
Other earning assets |
|
|
73,116 |
|
|
959 |
|
5.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
70,099 |
|
|
1,068 |
|
6.07 |
|
Total earning assets (6) |
|
|
1,616,673 |
|
|
21,902 |
|
5.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,622,466 |
|
|
22,474 |
|
5.52 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
77,388 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, less allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
254,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
247,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,948,854 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,905,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings |
|
$ |
31,561 |
|
$ |
58 |
|
0.73 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
32,297 |
|
$ |
58 |
|
0.72 |
% |
NOW and money market deposit accounts |
|
|
285,390 |
|
|
813 |
|
1.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
278,520 |
|
|
973 |
|
1.39 |
|
Consumer CDs and IRAs |
|
|
229,410 |
|
|
1,835 |
|
3.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
218,862 |
|
|
1,852 |
|
3.37 |
|
Negotiable CDs, public funds and other time deposits |
|
|
36,510 |
|
|
270 |
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
36,039 |
|
|
291 |
|
3.21 |
|
Total domestic interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
582,871 |
|
|
2,976 |
|
2.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
565,718 |
|
|
3,174 |
|
2.23 |
|
Foreign interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banks located in foreign countries |
|
|
41,398 |
|
|
125 |
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
36,230 |
|
|
266 |
|
2.91 |
|
Governments and official institutions |
|
|
13,738 |
|
|
30 |
|
0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
11,847 |
|
|
72 |
|
2.43 |
|
Time, savings and other |
|
|
48,836 |
|
|
165 |
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
48,209 |
|
|
334 |
|
2.76 |
|
Total foreign interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
103,972 |
|
|
320 |
|
1.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
96,286 |
|
|
672 |
|
2.78 |
|
Total interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
686,843 |
|
|
3,296 |
|
1.91 |
|
|
|
|
|
662,004 |
|
|
3,846 |
|
2.31 |
|
Federal funds purchased, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings |
|
|
459,743 |
|
|
1,910 |
|
1.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
465,511 |
|
|
3,223 |
|
2.76 |
|
Trading account liabilities |
|
|
70,859 |
|
|
524 |
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
77,271 |
|
|
661 |
|
3.40 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
255,709 |
|
|
2,766 |
|
4.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
264,934 |
|
|
2,824 |
|
4.26 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities (6) |
|
|
1,473,154 |
|
|
8,496 |
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,469,720 |
|
|
10,554 |
|
2.86 |
|
Noninterest-bearing sources: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing deposits |
|
|
205,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
195,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
93,836 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
176,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166,454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,948,854 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,905,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.66 |
% |
Impact of noninterest-bearing sources |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
Net interest income/yield on earning assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
13,406 |
|
3.31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
11,920 |
|
2.93 |
% |
(1) |
Yields on AFS debt securities are calculated based on fair value rather than historical cost balances. The use of
fair value does not have a material impact on net interest yield. |
(2) |
Nonperforming loans are included in the respective average loan balances. Income on these nonperforming loans is recognized on
a cash basis. We account for acquired impaired loans in accordance with SOP 03-3. Loans accounted for in accordance with SOP 03-3 were written down to fair value upon acquisition and accrete interest income over the remaining life of the loan.
|
(3) |
Includes foreign consumer loans of $2.0 billion, $2.6 billion, $3.0 billion and $3.3 billion in the fourth, third,
second and first quarters of 2008, and $3.6 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively. |
(4) |
Includes consumer finance loans of $2.7 billion, $2.7 billion, $2.8 billion and $3.0 billion in the fourth, third,
second and first quarters of 2008, and $3.1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively; and other foreign consumer loans of $654 million, $725 million, $862 million and $857 million in the fourth, third, second and first quarters of 2008,
and $845 million in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively. |
(5) |
Includes domestic commercial real estate loans of $63.6 billion, $62.2 billion, $61.6 billion and $61.0 billion in
the fourth, third, second and first quarters of 2008, and $58.5 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively. |
(6) |
Interest income includes the impact of interest rate risk management contracts, which decreased interest income on assets $41
million, $12 million, $104 million and $103 million in the fourth, third, second and first quarters of 2008, and $134 million in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively. Interest expense includes the impact of interest rate risk management
contracts, which increased interest expense on liabilities $237 million, $86 million, $37 million and $49 million in the fourth, third, second and first quarters of 2008, and $201 million in the fourth quarter of 2007, respectively. For further
information on interest rate contracts, see Interest Rate Risk Management for Nontrading Activities beginning on page 71. |
Quarterly Average Balances and Interest Rates FTE Basis (continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Second Quarter 2008 |
|
|
|
|
First Quarter 2008 |
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2007 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
Interest Income/ Expense |
|
Yield/ Rate |
|
Earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits placed and other short-term investments |
|
$ |
10,310 |
|
$ |
87 |
|
3.40 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
10,596 |
|
$ |
94 |
|
3.56 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
10,459 |
|
$ |
122 |
|
4.63 |
% |
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
126,169 |
|
|
800 |
|
2.54 |
|
|
|
|
|
145,043 |
|
|
1,208 |
|
3.34 |
|
|
|
|
|
151,938 |
|
|
1,748 |
|
4.59 |
|
Trading account assets |
|
|
184,547 |
|
|
2,282 |
|
4.95 |
|
|
|
|
|
192,410 |
|
|
2,417 |
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
190,700 |
|
|
2,422 |
|
5.06 |
|
Debt securities (1) |
|
|
235,369 |
|
|
2,963 |
|
5.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
219,377 |
|
|
2,835 |
|
5.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
206,873 |
|
|
2,795 |
|
5.40 |
|
Loans and leases (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
256,164 |
|
|
3,541 |
|
5.54 |
|
|
|
|
|
270,541 |
|
|
3,837 |
|
5.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
277,058 |
|
|
3,972 |
|
5.73 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
120,265 |
|
|
1,627 |
|
5.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
116,562 |
|
|
1,872 |
|
6.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
112,369 |
|
|
2,043 |
|
7.21 |
|
Discontinued real estate |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
n/a |
|
n/a |
|
Credit card domestic |
|
|
61,655 |
|
|
1,603 |
|
10.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
63,277 |
|
|
1,774 |
|
11.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
60,063 |
|
|
1,781 |
|
11.76 |
|
Credit card foreign |
|
|
16,566 |
|
|
512 |
|
12.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
15,241 |
|
|
474 |
|
12.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
14,329 |
|
|
464 |
|
12.86 |
|
Direct/Indirect consumer (3) |
|
|
82,593 |
|
|
1,731 |
|
8.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
78,705 |
|
|
1,699 |
|
8.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
75,138 |
|
|
1,658 |
|
8.75 |
|
Other consumer (4) |
|
|
3,953 |
|
|
84 |
|
8.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,049 |
|
|
87 |
|
8.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,206 |
|
|
71 |
|
6.77 |
|
Total consumer |
|
|
541,196 |
|
|
9,098 |
|
6.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
548,375 |
|
|
9,743 |
|
7.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
543,163 |
|
|
9,989 |
|
7.32 |
|
Commercial domestic |
|
|
219,537 |
|
|
2,762 |
|
5.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
212,394 |
|
|
3,198 |
|
6.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
213,200 |
|
|
3,704 |
|
6.89 |
|
Commercial real estate (5) |
|
|
62,810 |
|
|
737 |
|
4.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
62,202 |
|
|
887 |
|
5.74 |
|
|
|
|
|
59,702 |
|
|
1,053 |
|
6.99 |
|
Commercial lease financing |
|
|
22,276 |
|
|
243 |
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,227 |
|
|
261 |
|
4.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,239 |
|
|
574 |
|
10.33 |
|
Commercial foreign |
|
|
32,820 |
|
|
366 |
|
4.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
30,463 |
|
|
387 |
|
5.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
29,815 |
|
|
426 |
|
5.67 |
|
Total commercial |
|
|
337,443 |
|
|
4,108 |
|
4.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
327,286 |
|
|
4,733 |
|
5.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
324,956 |
|
|
5,757 |
|
7.03 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
878,639 |
|
|
13,206 |
|
6.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
875,661 |
|
|
14,476 |
|
6.64 |
|
|
|
|
|
868,119 |
|
|
15,746 |
|
7.21 |
|
Other earning assets |
|
|
65,200 |
|
|
1,005 |
|
6.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
67,208 |
|
|
1,129 |
|
6.75 |
|
|
|
|
|
74,909 |
|
|
1,296 |
|
6.89 |
|
Total earning assets (6) |
|
|
1,500,234 |
|
|
20,343 |
|
5.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,510,295 |
|
|
22,159 |
|
5.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,502,998 |
|
|
24,129 |
|
6.39 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
33,799 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,714 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets, less allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
220,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
220,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
205,755 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,754,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,764,927 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,742,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Savings |
|
$ |
33,164 |
|
$ |
64 |
|
0.77 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
31,798 |
|
$ |
50 |
|
0.63 |
% |
|
|
|
$ |
31,961 |
|
$ |
50 |
|
0.63 |
% |
NOW and money market deposit accounts |
|
|
258,104 |
|
|
856 |
|
1.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
248,949 |
|
|
1,139 |
|
1.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
240,914 |
|
|
1,334 |
|
2.20 |
|
Consumer CDs and IRAs |
|
|
178,828 |
|
|
1,646 |
|
3.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
188,005 |
|
|
2,071 |
|
4.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
183,910 |
|
|
2,179 |
|
4.70 |
|
Negotiable CDs, public funds and other time deposits |
|
|
24,216 |
|
|
195 |
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
32,201 |
|
|
320 |
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
34,997 |
|
|
420 |
|
4.76 |
|
Total domestic interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
494,312 |
|
|
2,761 |
|
2.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
500,953 |
|
|
3,580 |
|
2.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
491,782 |
|
|
3,983 |
|
3.21 |
|
Foreign interest-bearing deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banks located in foreign countries |
|
|
33,777 |
|
|
272 |
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
39,196 |
|
|
400 |
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
45,050 |
|
|
557 |
|
4.91 |
|
Governments and official institutions |
|
|
11,789 |
|
|
77 |
|
2.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
14,650 |
|
|
132 |
|
3.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,506 |
|
|
192 |
|
4.62 |
|
Time, savings and other |
|
|
55,403 |
|
|
410 |
|
2.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
53,064 |
|
|
476 |
|
3.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
51,919 |
|
|
521 |
|
3.98 |
|
Total foreign interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
100,969 |
|
|
759 |
|
3.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
106,910 |
|
|
1,008 |
|
3.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
113,475 |
|
|
1,270 |
|
4.44 |
|
Total interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
595,281 |
|
|
3,520 |
|
2.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
607,863 |
|
|
4,588 |
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
605,257 |
|
|
5,253 |
|
3.44 |
|
Federal funds purchased, securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other short-term borrowings |
|
|
444,578 |
|
|
3,087 |
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
452,854 |
|
|
4,142 |
|
3.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
456,530 |
|
|
5,598 |
|
4.87 |
|
Trading account liabilities |
|
|
70,546 |
|
|
749 |
|
4.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
82,432 |
|
|
840 |
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
81,500 |
|
|
825 |
|
4.02 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
205,194 |
|
|
2,050 |
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
198,463 |
|
|
2,298 |
|
4.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
196,444 |
|
|
2,638 |
|
5.37 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities (6) |
|
|
1,315,599 |
|
|
9,406 |
|
2.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,341,612 |
|
|
11,868 |
|
3.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,339,731 |
|
|
14,314 |
|
4.25 |
|
Noninterest-bearing sources: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noninterest-bearing deposits |
|
|
190,721 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
179,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176,368 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
86,865 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,444 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
161,428 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
154,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,754,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,764,927 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,742,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.57 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.34 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.14 |
% |
Impact of noninterest-bearing sources |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.47 |
|
Net interest income/yield on earning assets |
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,937 |
|
2.92 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
10,291 |
|
2.73 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9,815 |
|
2.61 |
% |
For Footnotes, see page 93.
n/a = not applicable
Glossary
Assets in
Custody Consist largely of custodial and non-discretionary trust assets administered for customers excluding brokerage assets. Trust assets encompass a broad range of asset types including real estate, private company ownership interest,
personal property and investments.
Assets Under Management (AUM) The total market value of assets under the investment advisory and
discretion of Global Wealth & Investment Management which generate asset management fees based on a percentage of the assets market value. AUM reflects assets that are generally managed for institutional, high net-worth and retail
clients and are distributed through various investment products including mutual funds, other commingled vehicles and separate accounts.
Bridge
Loan A loan or security which is expected to be replaced by permanent financing (debt or equity securities, loan syndication or asset sales) prior to the maturity date of the loan. Bridge loans may include an unfunded commitment, as
well as funded amounts, and are generally expected to be retired in one year or less.
CDO-Squared A type
of CDO where the underlying collateralizing securities include tranches of other CDOs.
Client Brokerage Assets Include client
assets which are held in brokerage accounts. This includes non-discretionary brokerage and fee-based assets which generate brokerage income and asset management fee revenue.
Committed Credit Exposure Includes any funded portion of a facility plus the unfunded portion of a facility on which the Corporation is legally bound to advance funds during a specified
period under prescribed conditions.
Core Net Interest Income Managed Basis Net interest income on a fully taxable-equivalent
basis excluding the impact of market-based activities and certain securitizations.
Credit Default Swaps (CDS) A derivative contract
that provides protection against the deterioration of credit quality and would allow one party to receive payment in the event of default by a third party under a borrowing arrangement.
Derivative A contract or agreement whose value is derived from changes in an underlying index such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates or prices of securities. Derivatives utilized by
the Corporation include swaps, financial futures and forward settlement contracts, and option contracts.
Excess Servicing Income For
certain assets that have been securitized, interest income, fee revenue and recoveries in excess of interest paid to the investors, gross credit losses and other trust expenses related to the securitized receivables are all reclassified into excess
servicing income, which is a component of card income. Excess servicing income also includes the changes in fair value of the Corporations card related retained interests.
Home Equity Rapid Amortization Event Certain events defined by the Corporations home equity securitizations documents, including when aggregate draws on monoline insurers policies
(which protect the bondholders in the securitization) exceed a specified threshold. The existence of a rapid amortization event affects the flow of funds and may cause acceleration of payments to the holders of the notes.
Interest-only Strip A residual interest in a securitization trust representing the right to receive future net cash flows from securitized assets
after payments to third party investors and net credit losses. These arise when assets are transferred to a special purpose entity as part of an asset securitization transaction qualifying for sale treatment under GAAP.
Interest Rate Lock Commitments (IRLCs)
Commitment with a loan applicant in which the loan terms, including interest rate, are guaranteed for a designated period of time subject to credit approval.
Letter of Credit A document issued by the Corporation on behalf of a customer to a third party promising to pay that third party upon presentation of specified documents. A letter of credit effectively substitutes the
Corporations credit for that of the Corporations customer.
Managed Basis Managed basis assumes that securitized loans were
not sold and presents earnings on these loans in a manner similar to the way loans that have not been sold (i.e., held loans) are presented. Noninterest income, both on a held and managed basis, also includes the impact of adjustments to the
interest-only strip that are recorded in card income.
Managed Net Losses Represents net charge-offs on held loans combined with
realized credit losses associated with the securitized loan portfolio.
Mortgage Servicing Right (MSR) The right to service a mortgage
loan when the underlying loan is sold or securitized. Servicing includes collections for principal, interest and escrow payments from borrowers and accounting for and remitting principal and interest payments to investors.
Net Interest Yield Net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.
Operating Basis A basis of presentation not defined by GAAP that excludes merger and restructuring charges.
Option-Adjusted Spread (OAS) The spread that is added to the discount rate so that the sum of the discounted cash flows equals the market price, thus, it is a measure of the extra yield over the reference discount
factor (i.e., the forward swap curve) that a company is expected to earn by holding the asset.
Qualified Special Purpose Entity (QSPE)
A special purpose entity whose activities are strictly limited to holding and servicing financial assets and meet the requirements set forth in SFAS 140. A qualified special purpose entity is generally not required to be consolidated by any party.
Return on Average Common Shareholders Equity (ROE) Measures the earnings contribution of a unit as a percentage of the
shareholders equity allocated to that unit.
Return on Average Tangible Shareholders Equity (ROTE) Measures the
earnings contribution of a unit as a percentage of the shareholders equity allocated to that unit reduced by allocated goodwill and intangible assets (excluding MSRs).
Securitize / Securitization A process by which financial assets are sold to a special purpose entity, which then issues securities collateralized by those underlying assets, and the return on
the securities issued is based on the principal and interest cash flow of the underlying assets.
SOP 03-3 Portfolio Loans acquired from
Countrywide which showed signs of deterioration and were considered impaired. These loans were written down to fair value at the acquisition date in accordance with SOP 03-3.
Structured Investment Vehicle (SIV) An entity that issues short duration debt and uses the proceeds from the issuance to purchase longer-term fixed income securities.
Subprime Loans Although a standard definition for subprime loans (including subprime mortgage loans) does not exist, the Corporation defines subprime
loans as specific product offerings for higher risk borrowers, including individuals with one or a combination of high credit risk factors, such as low FICO scores (generally less than 620 for secured products and 660 for unsecured products), high
debt to income ratios and inferior payment history.
Super Senior CDO Exposure Represents the most senior class of commercial paper or notes that are issued by the CDO vehicles. These financial
instruments benefit from the subordination of all other securities, including AAA-rated securities, issued by the CDO vehicles.
Unrecognized Tax
Benefit (UTB) The difference between the benefit recognized for a tax position in accordance with FIN 48, which is measured as the largest dollar amount of that position that is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon settlement, and
the tax benefit claimed on a tax return.
Value-at-Risk (VAR) A VAR model estimates a range of hypothetical scenarios to calculate a
potential loss which is not expected to be exceeded with a specified confidence level. VAR is a key statistic used to measure and manage market risk.
Variable Interest Entities (VIE) A term
defined by FIN 46R for an entity whose equity investors do not have a controlling financial interest. The entity may not have sufficient equity at risk to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from third
parties. The equity investors may lack the ability to make significant decisions about the entitys activities, or they may not absorb the losses or receive the residual returns generated by the assets and other contractual arrangements of
the VIE. The entity that will absorb a majority of expected variability (the sum of the absolute values of the expected losses and expected residual returns) consolidates the VIE and is referred to as the primary beneficiary.
Accounting Pronouncements
|
|
|
SFAS 52 |
|
Foreign Currency Translation |
|
|
SFAS 109 |
|
Accounting for Income Taxes |
|
|
SFAS 133 |
|
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended |
|
|
SFAS 140 |
|
Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities a replacement of FASB Statement No. 125 |
|
|
SFAS 157 |
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
SFAS 159 |
|
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities |
|
|
FIN 46R |
|
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (revised December 2003)an interpretation of ARB No. 51 |
|
|
FIN 48 |
|
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 |
|
|
SAB 109 |
|
Written Loan Commitments Recorded at Fair Value Through Earnings |
|
|
SOP 03-3 |
|
Accounting for Certain Loans or Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer |
Acronyms
|
|
|
ABS |
|
Asset-backed securities |
|
|
AFS |
|
Available-for-sale |
|
|
AICPA |
|
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants |
|
|
ALCO |
|
Asset and Liability Committee |
|
|
ALM |
|
Asset and liability management |
|
|
ARS |
|
Auction rate securities |
|
|
CDO |
|
Collateralized debt obligation |
|
|
CLO |
|
Collateralized loan obligation |
|
|
CMBS |
|
Commercial mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
CRC |
|
Credit Risk Committee |
|
|
EPS |
|
Earnings per common share |
|
|
FASB |
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board |
|
|
FDIC |
|
Federal Deposit and Insurance Corporation |
|
|
FFIEC |
|
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council |
|
|
FIN |
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation |
|
|
FRB/Federal Reserve |
|
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System |
|
|
FSP |
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board Staff Position |
|
|
FTE |
|
Fully taxable-equivalent |
|
|
GAAP |
|
Generally accepted accounting principles in the United States |
|
|
GRC |
|
Global Markets Risk Committee |
|
|
IPO |
|
Initial public offering |
|
|
LHFS |
|
Loans held-for-sale |
|
|
LIBOR |
|
London InterBank Offered Rate |
|
|
MD&A |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
|
|
OCC |
|
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency |
|
|
OCI |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
SBLCs |
|
Standby letters of credit |
|
|
SEC |
|
Securities and Exchange Commission |
|
|
SFAS |
|
Financial Accounting Standards Board Statement of Financial Accounting Standards |
|
|
SOP |
|
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants Statement of Position |
|
|
SPE |
|
Special purpose entity |