Variable Interest Entities	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Variable Interest Entities
Variable Interest Entities	15. Variable Interest Entities Investment Securities As discussed in Note 2, we evaluate all of our investments and other interests in entities for consolidation, including our investments in CMBS and our retained interests in securitization transactions we initiated, all of which are generally considered to be variable interests in VIEs. Securitization VIEs consolidated in accordance with ASC 810 are structured as pass through entities that receive principal and interest on the underlying collateral and distribute those payments to the certificate holders. The assets and other instruments held by these securitization entities are restricted and can only be used to fulfill the obligations of the entity. Additionally, the obligations of the securitization entities do not have any recourse to the general credit of any other consolidated entities, nor to us as the primary beneficiary. The VIE liabilities initially represent investment securities on our balance sheet (pre‑consolidation). Upon consolidation of these VIEs, our associated investment securities are eliminated, as is the interest income related to those securities. Similarly, the fees we earn in our roles as special servicer of the bonds issued by the consolidated VIEs or as collateral administrator of the consolidated VIEs are also eliminated. Finally, an allocable portion of the identified servicing intangible associated with the eliminated fee streams is eliminated in consolidation. VIEs in which we are the Primary Beneficiary As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the consolidation of certain CMBS trusts where the right to remove the Company as special servicer was not exercisable without cause. These 14 trusts had $15.1 billion of VIE assets and $15.1 billion of VIE liabilities as of March 31, 2016. The carrying value of our CMBS investments in these 14 trusts, totaling $120.9 million, was eliminated in consolidation against VIE liabilities as of March 31, 2016. The inclusion of the assets and liabilities of securitization VIEs in which we are deemed the primary beneficiary has no economic effect on us. Our exposure to the obligations of securitization VIEs is generally limited to our investment in these entities. We are not obligated to provide, nor have we provided, any financial support for any of these consolidated structures. As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the determination that certain entities in which we hold controlling interests, which were already consolidated prior to the implementation of ASU 2015-02, are now considered VIEs. We are the primary beneficiaries of these VIEs, which were established to facilitate the purchase of certain properties acquired with third party minority interest partners, as we possess both the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact their economic performance and hold significant economic interests. These VIEs had assets of $184.5 million and liabilities of $110.1 million as of December 31, 2016. VIEs in which we are not the Primary Beneficiary In certain instances, we hold a variable interest in a VIE in the form of CMBS, but either (i) we are not appointed, or do not serve as, special servicer or (ii) an unrelated third party has the rights to unilaterally remove us as special servicer without cause. In these instances, we do not have the power to direct activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance. In other cases, the variable interest we hold does not obligate us to absorb losses or provide us with the right to receive benefits from the VIE which could potentially be significant. For these structures, we are not deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE, and we do not consolidate these VIEs. As of December 31, 2016, one of our CDO structures was in default, which pursuant to the underlying indentures, changes the rights of the variable interest holders. Upon default of a CDO, the trustee or senior note holders are allowed to exercise certain rights, including liquidation of the collateral, which at that time, is the activity which would most significantly impact the CDO’s economic performance. Further, when the CDO is in default, the collateral administrator no longer has the option to purchase securities from the CDO. In cases where the CDO is in default and we do not have the ability to exercise rights which would most significantly impact the CDO’s economic performance, we do not consolidate the VIE. As of December 31, 2016, this CDO structure was not consolidated. As noted above, we are not obligated to provide, nor have we provided, any financial support for any of our securitization VIEs, whether or not we are deemed to be the primary beneficiary. As such, the risk associated with our involvement in these VIEs is limited to the carrying value of our investment in the entity. As of December 31, 2016, our maximum risk of loss related to securitization VIEs in which we were not the primary beneficiary was $31.5 million on a fair value basis. As of December 31, 2016, the securitization VIEs which we do not consolidate had debt obligations to beneficial interest holders with unpaid principal balances of $13.1 billion. The corresponding assets are comprised primarily of commercial mortgage loans with unpaid principal balances corresponding to the amounts of the outstanding debt obligations. As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the determination that certain unconsolidated entities in which we hold passive non-controlling interests are now considered VIEs. We are not the primary beneficiaries of these VIEs as we do not possess the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact their economic performance and therefore continue to report our interests, which totaled $134.2 million as of December 31, 2016, within investment in unconsolidated entities on our consolidated balance sheet. Our maximum risk of loss is limited to our carrying value of the investments of $134.2 million plus $25.7 million of unfunded commitments related to one of these VIEs.

15. Variable Interest Entities

Investment Securities

As discussed in Note 2, we evaluate all of our investments and other interests in entities for consolidation, including our investments in CMBS and our retained interests in securitization transactions we initiated, all of which are generally considered to be variable interests in VIEs.

Securitization VIEs consolidated in accordance with ASC 810 are structured as pass through entities that receive principal and interest on the underlying collateral and distribute those payments to the certificate holders. The assets and other instruments held by these securitization entities are restricted and can only be used to fulfill the obligations of the entity. Additionally, the obligations of the securitization entities do not have any recourse to the general credit of any other consolidated entities, nor to us as the primary beneficiary. The VIE liabilities initially represent investment securities on our balance sheet (pre‑consolidation). Upon consolidation of these VIEs, our associated investment securities are eliminated, as is the interest income related to those securities. Similarly, the fees we earn in our roles as special servicer of the bonds issued by the consolidated VIEs or as collateral administrator of the consolidated VIEs are also eliminated. Finally, an allocable portion of the identified servicing intangible associated with the eliminated fee streams is eliminated in consolidation.

VIEs in which we are the Primary Beneficiary

As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the consolidation of certain CMBS trusts where the right to remove the Company as special servicer was not exercisable without cause. These 14 trusts had $15.1 billion of VIE assets and $15.1 billion of VIE liabilities as of March 31, 2016. The carrying value of our CMBS investments in these 14 trusts, totaling $120.9 million, was eliminated in consolidation against VIE liabilities as of March 31, 2016.

The inclusion of the assets and liabilities of securitization VIEs in which we are deemed the primary beneficiary has no economic effect on us. Our exposure to the obligations of securitization VIEs is generally limited to our investment in these entities. We are not obligated to provide, nor have we provided, any financial support for any of these consolidated structures.

As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the determination that certain entities in which we hold controlling interests, which were already consolidated prior to the implementation of ASU 2015-02, are now considered VIEs. We are the primary beneficiaries of these VIEs, which were established to facilitate the purchase of certain properties acquired with third party minority interest partners, as we possess both the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact their economic performance and hold significant economic interests. These VIEs had assets of $184.5 million and liabilities of $110.1 million as of December 31, 2016.

VIEs in which we are not the Primary Beneficiary

In certain instances, we hold a variable interest in a VIE in the form of CMBS, but either (i) we are not appointed, or do not serve as, special servicer or (ii) an unrelated third party has the rights to unilaterally remove us as special servicer without cause. In these instances, we do not have the power to direct activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance. In other cases, the variable interest we hold does not obligate us to absorb losses or provide us with the right to receive benefits from the VIE which could potentially be significant. For these structures, we are not deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the VIE, and we do not consolidate these VIEs.

As of December 31, 2016, one of our CDO structures was in default, which pursuant to the underlying indentures, changes the rights of the variable interest holders. Upon default of a CDO, the trustee or senior note holders are allowed to exercise certain rights, including liquidation of the collateral, which at that time, is the activity which would most significantly impact the CDO’s economic performance. Further, when the CDO is in default, the collateral administrator no longer has the option to purchase securities from the CDO. In cases where the CDO is in default and we do not have the ability to exercise rights which would most significantly impact the CDO’s economic performance, we do not consolidate the VIE. As of December 31, 2016, this CDO structure was not consolidated.

As noted above, we are not obligated to provide, nor have we provided, any financial support for any of our securitization VIEs, whether or not we are deemed to be the primary beneficiary. As such, the risk associated with our involvement in these VIEs is limited to the carrying value of our investment in the entity. As of December 31, 2016, our maximum risk of loss related to securitization VIEs in which we were not the primary beneficiary was $31.5 million on a fair value basis.

As of December 31, 2016, the securitization VIEs which we do not consolidate had debt obligations to beneficial interest holders with unpaid principal balances of $13.1 billion. The corresponding assets are comprised primarily of commercial mortgage loans with unpaid principal balances corresponding to the amounts of the outstanding debt obligations.

As discussed in Note 2, our implementation of ASU 2015-02 resulted in the determination that certain unconsolidated entities in which we hold passive non-controlling interests are now considered VIEs. We are not the primary beneficiaries of these VIEs as we do not possess the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact their economic performance and therefore continue to report our interests, which totaled $134.2 million as of December 31, 2016, within investment in unconsolidated entities on our consolidated balance sheet. Our maximum risk of loss is limited to our carrying value of the investments of $134.2 million plus $25.7 million of unfunded commitments related to one of these VIEs.