XML 41 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Commitments, Guarantees, Contingent Liabilities, and Related Parties
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Guarantees, Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]  
Commitments Contingencies and Guarantees [Text Block]
COMMITMENTS, GUARANTEES, CONTINGENT LIABILITIES, AND RELATED PARTIES
Commitments and Guarantees
We use certain financial instruments, including derivative instruments, in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of our customers, to reduce our own exposure to fluctuations in interest rates, and to make a market in U.S. Government, agency, corporate, and municipal securities. These financial instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit, liquidity, and interest rate risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the balance sheet. Derivative instruments are discussed in Notes 7 and 3.
Contractual amounts of the off-balance sheet financial instruments used to meet the financing needs of our customers are as follows:
 
December 31,
(In millions)
2017
 
2016
 
 
 
 
Net unfunded commitments to extend credit 1
$
19,583

 
$
18,274

Standby letters of credit:
 
 
 
Financial
721

 
771

Performance
196

 
196

Commercial letters of credit
31

 
60

Total unfunded lending commitments
$
20,531

 
$
19,301


1 
Net of participations.
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require the payment of a fee. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by us upon extension of credit, is based on our initial credit evaluation of the counterparty. Types of collateral vary, but may include accounts receivable, inventory, property, plant and equipment, and income-producing properties.
While establishing commitments to extend credit creates credit risk, a significant portion of such commitments is expected to expire without being drawn upon. As of December 31, 2017, $6.2 billion of commitments expire in 2018. We use the same credit policies and procedures in making commitments to extend credit and conditional obligations as we do for on-balance sheet instruments. These policies and procedures include credit approvals, limits, and monitoring.
We issue standby and commercial letters of credit as conditional commitments generally to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. The guarantees are primarily issued to support public and private borrowing arrangements, including commercial paper, bond financing, and similar transactions. Standby letters of credit include remaining commitments of $610 million expiring in 2018 and $307 million expiring thereafter through 2027. The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loan facilities to customers. We generally hold marketable securities and cash equivalents as collateral when necessary. At December 31, 2017, the Company recorded $5 million as a liability for these guarantees, which consisted of $1 million attributable to the RULC and $4 million of deferred commitment fees.
Certain mortgage loans sold have limited recourse provisions for periods ranging from three months to one year. The amount of losses resulting from the exercise of these provisions has not been significant.
At December 31, 2017, we had unfunded commitments for PEIs of $31 million. These obligations have no stated maturity. PEIs related to these commitments prohibited by the Volcker Rule were $4 million. See the related discussion about these investments in Note 5.
The contractual or notional amount of financial instruments indicates a level of activity associated with a particular financial instrument class and is not a reflection of the actual level of risk. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the regulatory risk-weighted values assigned to all off-balance sheet financial instruments and derivative instruments described herein were $6.8 billion and $6.5 billion, respectively.
At December 31, 2017, we were required to maintain cash balances of $366 million with the Federal Reserve Banks to meet minimum balance requirements in accordance with FRB regulations.
Leases
We have commitments for leasing premises and equipment under the terms of noncancelable capital and operating leases expiring from 2018 and 2052. Premises leased under capital leases at December 31, 2017, were $1 million, and were essentially amortized with accumulated amortization totaling approximately $1 million. Amortization applicable to premises leased under capital leases is included in depreciation expense.
Future aggregate minimum rental payments under existing noncancelable operating leases at December 31, 2017, are as follows:
(in millions)
 
2018
$
40

2019
39

2020
36

2021
29

2022
25

Thereafter
76

Total
$
245


Future aggregate minimum rental payments have been reduced by noncancelable subleases as follows: $2 million in 2018, $2 million in 2019, and $1 million in 2020. Aggregate rental expense on operating leases amounted to $61 million in 2017, $65 million in 2016, and $63 million in 2015.
Legal Matters
We are subject to litigation in court and arbitral proceedings, as well as proceedings, investigations, examinations and other actions brought or considered by governmental and self-regulatory agencies. Litigation may relate to lending, deposit and other customer relationships, vendor and contractual issues, employee matters, intellectual property matters, personal injuries and torts, regulatory and legal compliance, and other matters. While most matters relate to individual claims, we are also subject to putative class action claims and similar broader claims. Proceedings, investigations, examinations and other actions brought or considered by governmental and self-regulatory agencies may relate to our banking, investment advisory, trust, securities, and other products and services; our customers’ involvement in money laundering, fraud, securities violations and other illicit activities or our policies and practices relating to such customer activities; and our compliance with the broad range of banking, securities and other laws and regulations applicable to us. At any given time, we may be in the process of responding to subpoenas, requests for documents, data and testimony relating to such matters and engaging in discussions to resolve the matters.
As of December 31, 2017, we were subject to the following material litigation and governmental inquiries:
a civil suit, Shou-En Wang v. CB&T, brought against us in the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, Central District in April 2016. The case relates to our depositor relationships with customers who were promoters of an investment program that allegedly misappropriated investors’ funds. This case is in an early phase, with initial motion practice having been completed and discovery being underway.
a civil suit, McFarland as Trustee for International Manufacturing Group v. CB&T, et. al., brought against us in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California in May 2016. The Trustee seeks to recover loan payments previously repaid to us by our customer, International Manufacturing Group (“IMG”), alleging that IMG, along with its principal, obtained loans and made loan repayments in furtherance of an alleged Ponzi scheme. This case is in an early phase with initial motion practice having been completed and discovery being underway.
a civil suit, JTS Communities, Inc. et. al v. CB&T, Jun Enkoji and Dawn Satow, brought against us in the Superior Court for Sacramento County, California in June 2017. In this case four investors in IMG seek to hold us liable for losses arising from their investments in that company, alleging that we conspired with and knowingly assisted IMG and its principal in furtherance of an alleged Ponzi Scheme. This case is in an early phase with motion practice having been completed but discovery not having been commenced.
a civil class action lawsuit, Evans v. CB&T, brought against us in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California in May 2017. This case was filed on behalf of a class of up to 50 investors in IMG and seeks to hold us liable for losses of class members arising from their investments in IMG, alleging that we conspired with and knowingly assisted IMG and its principal in furtherance of an alleged Ponzi Scheme. In the fourth quarter of 2017, the District Court dismissed all claims against the Company. On January 17, 2018, the plaintiff filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
a Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) claim under California law, Lawson v. CB&T, brought against us in the Superior Court for the County of San Diego, California, in February 2016. In this case, the plaintiff alleges, on behalf of herself and other current or former employees of the Company who worked in California on a non-exempt basis, violations by the Company of California wage and hour laws. The case is in the early stages of motion practice, to date mainly involving questions of venue and scope of employees covered by the PAGA claims.
a civil case, Lifescan Inc. and Johnson & Johnson Health Care Services v. Jeffrey Smith, et al., brought against us in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in the fourth quarter of 2017. In this case, certain manufacturers and distributors of medical products seek to hold us liable for allegedly fraudulent practices of a borrower of the Company which filed for bankruptcy protection in 2017.
At least quarterly, we review outstanding and new legal matters, utilizing then available information. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, if we determine that a loss from a matter is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, we establish an accrual for the loss. In the absence of such a determination, no accrual is made. Once established, accruals are adjusted to reflect developments relating to the matters.
In our review, we also assess whether we can determine the range of reasonably possible losses for significant matters in which we are unable to determine that the likelihood of a loss is remote. Because of the difficulty of predicting the outcome of legal matters, discussed subsequently, we are able to meaningfully estimate such a range only for a limited number of matters. Based on information available as of December 31, 2017, we estimated that the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses for those matters to be from $0 million to roughly $20 million in excess of amounts accrued. The matters underlying the estimated range will change from time to time, and actual results may vary significantly from this estimate. Those matters for which a meaningful estimate is not possible are not included within this estimated range and, therefore, this estimated range does not represent our maximum loss exposure.
Based on our current knowledge, we believe that our current estimated liability for litigation and other legal actions and claims, reflected in our accruals and determined in accordance with applicable accounting guidance, is adequate and that liabilities in excess of the amounts currently accrued, if any, arising from litigation and other legal actions and claims for which an estimate as previously described is possible, will not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. However, in light of the significant uncertainties involved in these matters, and the very large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows for any given reporting period.
Any estimate or determination relating to the future resolution of litigation, arbitration, governmental or self-regulatory examinations, investigations or actions or similar matters is inherently uncertain and involves significant judgment. This is particularly true in the early stages of a legal matter, when legal issues and facts have not been well articulated, reviewed, analyzed, and vetted through discovery, preparation for trial or hearings, substantive and productive mediation or settlement discussions, or other actions. It is also particularly true with respect to class action and similar claims involving multiple defendants, matters with complex procedural requirements or substantive issues or novel legal theories, and examinations, investigations and other actions conducted or brought by governmental and self-regulatory agencies, in which the normal adjudicative process is not applicable. Accordingly, we usually are unable to determine whether a favorable or unfavorable outcome is remote, reasonably likely, or probable, or to estimate the amount or range of a probable or reasonably likely loss, until relatively late in the course of a legal matter, sometimes not until a number of years have elapsed. Accordingly, our judgments and estimates relating to claims will change from time to time in light of developments and actual outcomes will differ from our estimates. These differences may be material.
Related Party Transactions
We have no material related party transactions requiring disclosure. In the ordinary course of business, the Company and its subsidiary bank extend credit to related parties, including executive officers, directors, principal shareholders, and their associates and related interests. These related party loans are made in compliance with applicable banking regulations.