XML 272 R154.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.20.4
Litigation, regulatory and similar matters (Narrative) (Detail 1)
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2020
Disclosure Of Litigation Regulatory And Similar Matters [Line Items]  
Indication of uncertainties of amount or timing of outflows Such matters are subject to many uncertainties, and the outcome and the timing of resolution are often difficult to predict, particularly in the earlier stages of a case. There are also situations where the Group may enter into a settlement agreement. This may occur in order to avoid the expense, management distraction or reputational implications of continuing to contest liability, even for those matters for which the Group believes it should be exonerated. The uncertainties inherent in all such matters affect the amount and timing of any potential outflows for both matters with respect to which provisions have been established and other contingent liabilities. The Group makes provisions for such matters brought against it when, in the opinion of management after seeking legal advice, it is more likely than not that the Group has a present legal or constructive obligation as a result of past events, it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required, and the amount can be reliably estimated. Where these factors are otherwise satisfied, a provision may be established for claims that have not yet been asserted against the Group, but are nevertheless expected to be, based on the Group’s experience with similar asserted claims. If any of those conditions is not met, such matters result in contingent liabilities. If the amount of an obligation cannot be reliably estimated, a liability exists that is not recognized even if an outflow of resources is probable. Accordingly, no provision is established even if the potential outflow of resources with respect to such matters could be significant. Developments relating to a matter that occur after the relevant reporting period, but prior to the issuance of financial statements, which affect management’s assessment of the provision for such matter (because, for example, the developments provide evidence of conditions that existed at the end of the reporting period), are adjusting events after the reporting period under IAS 10 and must be recognized in the financial statements for the reporting period.
Explanation of reason for non-disclosure of information regarding provision In the case of certain matters below, we state that we have established a provision, and for the other matters, we make no such statement. When we make this statement and we expect disclosure of the amount of a provision to prejudice seriously our position with other parties in the matter because it would reveal what UBS believes to be the probable and reliably estimable outflow, we do not disclose that amount. In some cases we are subject to confidentiality obligations that preclude such disclosure. With respect to the matters for which we do not state whether we have established a provision, either: (a) we have not established a provision, in which case the matter is treated as a contingent liability under the applicable accounting standard; or (b) we have established a provision but expect disclosure of that fact to prejudice seriously our position with other parties in the matter because it would reveal the fact that UBS believes an outflow of resources to be probable and reliably estimable.
Explanation of reason for non-disclosure of information regarding contingent liability It is not practicable to provide an aggregate estimate of liability for our litigation, regulatory and similar matters as a class of contingent liabilities. Doing so would require UBS to provide speculative legal assessments as to claims and proceedings that involve unique fact patterns or novel legal theories, that have not yet been initiated or are at early stages of adjudication, or as to which alleged damages have not been quantified by the claimants. Although UBS therefore cannot provide a numerical estimate of the future losses that could arise from litigation, regulatory and similar matters, UBS believes that the aggregate amount of possible future losses from this class that are more than remote substantially exceeds the level of current provisions. Litigation, regulatory and similar matters may also result in non-monetary penalties and consequences. For example, the non-prosecution agreement UBS entered into with the US Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division, Fraud Section in connection with submissions of benchmark interest rates, including, among others, the British Bankers’ Association London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), was terminated by the DOJ based on its determination that UBS had committed a US crime in relation to foreign exchange matters. As a consequence, UBS AG pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud for conduct in the LIBOR matter, paid a fine and was subject to probation, which ended in January 2020. A guilty plea to, or conviction of, a crime could have material consequences for UBS. Resolution of regulatory proceedings may require UBS to obtain waivers of regulatory disqualifications to maintain certain operations, may entitle regulatory authorities to limit, suspend or terminate licenses and regulatory authorizations, and may permit financial market utilities to limit, suspend or terminate UBS’s participation in such utilities. Failure to obtain such waivers, or any limitation, suspension or termination of licenses, authorizations or participations, could have material consequences for UBS.
UBS AG  
Disclosure Of Litigation Regulatory And Similar Matters [Line Items]  
Indication of uncertainties of amount or timing of outflows Such matters are subject to many uncertainties, and the outcome and the timing of resolution are often difficult to predict, particularly in the earlier stages of a case. There are also situations where UBS may enter into a settlement agreement. This may occur in order to avoid the expense, management distraction or reputational implications of continuing to contest liability, even for those matters for which UBS believes it should be exonerated. The uncertainties inherent in all such matters affect the amount and timing of any potential outflows for both matters with respect to which provisions have been established and other contingent liabilities. UBS makes provisions for such matters brought against it when, in the opinion of management after seeking legal advice, it is more likely than not that UBS has a present legal or constructive obligation as a result of past events, it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required, and the amount can be reliably estimated. Where these factors are otherwise satisfied, a provision may be established for claims that have not yet been asserted against UBS, but are nevertheless expected to be, based on UBS’s experience with similar asserted claims. If any of those conditions is not met, such matters result in contingent liabilities. If the amount of an obligation cannot be reliably estimated, a liability exists that is not recognized even if an outflow of resources is probable. Accordingly, no provision is established even if the potential outflow of resources with respect to such matters could be significant. Developments relating to a matter that occur after the relevant reporting period, but prior to the issuance of financial statements, which affect management’s assessment of the provision for such matter (because, for example, the developments provide evidence of conditions that existed at the end of the reporting period), are adjusting events after the reporting period under IAS 10 and must be recognized in the financial statements for the reporting period.
Explanation of reason for non-disclosure of information regarding provision In the case of certain matters below, we state that we have established a provision, and for the other matters, we make no such statement. When we make this statement and we expect disclosure of the amount of a provision to prejudice seriously our position with other parties in the matter because it would reveal what UBS believes to be the probable and reliably estimable outflow, we do not disclose that amount. In some cases we are subject to confidentiality obligations that preclude such disclosure. With respect to the matters for which we do not state whether we have established a provision, either: (a) we have not established a provision, in which case the matter is treated as a contingent liability under the applicable accounting standard; or (b) we have established a provision but expect disclosure of that fact to prejudice seriously our position with other parties in the matter because it would reveal the fact that UBS believes an outflow of resources to be probable and reliably estimable.
Explanation of reason for non-disclosure of information regarding contingent liability It is not practicable to provide an aggregate estimate of liability for our litigation, regulatory and similar matters as a class of contingent liabilities. Doing so would require UBS to provide speculative legal assessments as to claims and proceedings that involve unique fact patterns or novel legal theories, that have not yet been initiated or are at early stages of adjudication, or as to which alleged damages have not been quantified by the claimants. Although UBS therefore cannot provide a numerical estimate of the future losses that could arise from litigation, regulatory and similar matters, UBS believes that the aggregate amount of possible future losses from this class that are more than remote substantially exceeds the level of current provisions. Litigation, regulatory and similar matters may also result in non-monetary penalties and consequences. For example, the non-prosecution agreement UBS entered into with the US Department of Justice (DOJ), Criminal Division, Fraud Section in connection with submissions of benchmark interest rates, including, among others, the British Bankers’ Association London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), was terminated by the DOJ based on its determination that UBS had committed a US crime in relation to foreign exchange matters. As a consequence, UBS AG pleaded guilty to one count of wire fraud for conduct in the LIBOR matter, paid a fine and was subject to probation, which ended in January 2020. A guilty plea to, or conviction of, a crime could have material consequences for UBS. Resolution of regulatory proceedings may require UBS to obtain waivers of regulatory disqualifications to maintain certain operations, may entitle regulatory authorities to limit, suspend or terminate licenses and regulatory authorizations, and may permit financial market utilities to limit, suspend or terminate UBS’s participation in such utilities. Failure to obtain such waivers, or any limitation, suspension or termination of licenses, authorizations or participations, could have material consequences for UBS.