Description Of Business, Basis Of Presentation, And Changes In Significant Accounting Policies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2013
Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]
Organization, Consolidation, Basis of Presentation, Business Description and Accounting Policies [Text Block]	Description of Business, Basis of Presentation, and Changes in Significant Accounting Policies Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC Inc. and referred to herein as Ally, we, our, or us) is a leading, independent, diversified, financial services firm. Founded in 1919, we are a leading automotive financial services company with over 90 years experience providing a broad array of financial products and services to automotive dealers and their customers. We became a bank holding company on December 24, 2008, under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. Our banking subsidiary, Ally Bank, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Ally Financial Inc. and a leading franchise in the growing direct (internet, telephone, mobile, and mail) banking market. Our accounting and reporting policies conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). Additionally, where applicable, the policies conform to the accounting and reporting guidelines prescribed by bank regulatory authorities. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and that affect income and expenses during the reporting period. In developing the estimates and assumptions, management uses all available evidence; however, actual results could differ because of uncertainties associated with estimating the amounts, timing, and likelihood of possible outcomes. The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements at June 30, 2013, and for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2013, and 2012, are unaudited but reflect all adjustments that are, in management’s opinion, necessary for the fair presentation of the results for the interim periods presented. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. These unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements (and the related notes) included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed on March 1, 2013, with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as revised by the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 9, 2013 (referred to herein as 2012 Annual Report). Residential Capital, LLC Our mortgage operations were historically a significant portion of our operations and were conducted primarily through our Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap) subsidiary. On May 14, 2012, ResCap and certain of its wholly owned direct and indirect subsidiaries (collectively, the Debtors) filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the Bankruptcy Court). As a result of the bankruptcy filing, effective May 14, 2012, we deconsolidated ResCap from our financial statements and recorded a charge of $442 million for the impairment of Ally's investment in ResCap. During the first quarter of 2013, we discontinued performing certain mortgage activities, which were required as part of the bankruptcy process until the sale of certain assets occurred. As a result of us discontinuing these activities, the operations of ResCap were classified as discontinued, refer to Note 2. On May 14, 2013, Ally Financial Inc., on behalf of itself and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, AFI) entered into a Plan Support Agreement (the PSA) with the Debtors, the official committee of unsecured creditors appointed in the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases (the Creditors' Committee), and certain creditors, including AIG Asset Management (U.S.), LLC; Allstate Insurance Company; Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (FGIC), which has executed the agreement pending regulatory approval; counsel to the putative class of persons represented in the consolidated class action entitled In re: Community Bank of Northern Virginia Second Mortgage Lending Practice Litigation, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, MDL No. 1674, Case Nos. 03-0425, 02-01201, 05-0688, 05-1386; Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company; MBIA Insurance Corporation; Paulson & Co. Inc., a holder of ResCap's senior unsecured notes issued by ResCap; Prudential Insurance Company of America; certain investors in residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) backed by mortgage loans held by securitization trusts associated with securitizations sponsored by the Debtors between 2004 and 2007 represented by Kathy Patrick of Gibbs & Bruns LLP and Keith H. Wofford of Ropes & Gray LLP; Talcott Franklin of Talcott Franklin, P.C. as counsel for certain RMBS investors; Wilmington Trust, National Association in its capacity as Indenture Trustee for ResCap's senior unsecured notes; and certain trustees or indenture trustee for certain mortgage-backed securities trusts (collectively, the Consenting Claimants). On June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving the PSA. The PSA provides for the parties to support a Chapter 11 plan in the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases (the Plan) that will, among other things, settle and provide AFI full releases for all existing and potential claims between AFI and the Debtors, including all representation and warranty claims that reside with the Debtors, and all pending and potential claims held by third parties related to the Debtors that could be brought against AFI, except for securities claims by the Federal Housing Finance Agency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as receiver for certain failed banks. AFI believes it has strong defenses against these claims and will vigorously defend its position, as necessary. The PSA also provides, among other things, that, on the effective date of the Plan, AFI will contribute to the Debtors' estates $1.95 billion in cash or cash equivalents, and will further contribute $150 million received by AFI for claims it pursues against its insurance carriers related to the claims released in connection with the Plan, with such amount guaranteed by AFI to be paid no later than September 30, 2014 (collectively, the Ally Contribution) in exchange for the releases of AFI to be included in the Plan. These amounts have been reflected within our accrued expenses and other liabilities, refer to Note 15. The Ally Contribution and other assets of the Debtors' estates will be distributed to creditors under the Plan. In addition, the PSA contemplated the payoff of Ally secured debt on or before the effective date of the Plan. On June 13, 2013, the Debtors paid AFI approximately $1.127 billion in full satisfaction of the AFI revolving credit facility and line of credit. The payment to AFI was approved by the Bankruptcy Court with an express reservation of rights, claims and remedies against AFI and a reciprocal reservation of rights, claims and remedies for AFI's benefit in the event the Plan does not become effective. The PSA also provides that the Debtors will remain responsible for all costs and obligations imposed on the Debtors under (i) the consent judgment among the United States Department of Justice, the Attorneys General of certain states, ResCap, GMAC Mortgage, LLC (GMACM) and Ally Financial Inc. entered by the District Court for the District of Columbia on February 9, 2012, (ii) the consent order among ResCap, GMACM, Ally Financial Inc., Ally Bank, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) and the FDIC, dated April 13, 2011 (the Consent Order) and (iii) the order of assessment among ResCap, GMACM, Ally Financial Inc. and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, excluding certain obligations that are being performed by Ocwen Financial Corporation (Ocwen). Notably, on June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court approved a term sheet (the FRB Term Sheet) encompassing the terms of an amendment to the Consent Order (the Consent Order Amendment). The FRB Term Sheet, among other things, required the Debtors to escrow approximately $230 million (the FRB Settlement Amount) in exchange for the FRB suspending the foreclosure review mandated under the Consent Order (the FRB Foreclosure Review) for 30 days. The FRB Term Sheet was fully executed on June 27, 2013 and the FRB Foreclosure Review was suspended on June 28, 2013. On July 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court approved the Consent Order Amendment and, as a result, the Debtors are no longer responsible for the FRB Foreclosure Review, and the FRB Settlement Amount will be distributed to individual borrowers in full satisfaction of the Debtors' foreclosure review obligations. Further, the PSA requires that the Plan include a settlement of insurance disputes between AFI and the Debtors under which the Debtors will relinquish in favor of AFI all of their rights to coverage under certain insurance policies. The PSA also requires that all litigation against AFI by the Debtors, the Creditors' Committee and the Consenting Claimants be stayed so long as the PSA has not been terminated. The PSA requires, among other things, that the following milestones be satisfied: (i) the FGIC rehabilitation court must approve the PSA and a separate settlement agreement entered into among the Debtors, FGIC, trustees of residential mortgage-backed trusts and certain institutional investors (the FGIC Settlement) on or before August 19, 2013; (ii) the Bankruptcy Court must approve the Disclosure Statement on or before August 30, 2013; and (iii) the effective date of the Plan must occur on or before December 15, 2013. In the event any of the above milestones are not satisfied, the PSA could be terminated. The PSA also includes a number of additional events that could result in the PSA being terminated, including the following: (i) the Bankruptcy Court enters an order appointing a Chapter 11 trustee; (ii) any of the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases are dismissed or converted to a case under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code; (iii) any court has entered a final, non-appealable judgment or order declaring any material portion of the PSA unenforceable; (iv) the releases set forth in the PSA are modified, amended, changed, severed or otherwise altered in the Plan or any other definitive document; and (v) the PSA ceases to be binding on AFI or the Creditors' Committee. Additionally, the PSA requires that several conditions be satisfied or waived before the Plan can be effective, including, the following: (i) the Bankruptcy Court approves the Plan and Disclosure Statement on terms reasonably acceptable to the parties; (ii) the order confirming the Plan (the Confirmation Order) must have been entered by the Bankruptcy Court and provide for, among other things, the releases specified in the PSA; (iii) the Confirmation Order must not have been stayed, modified, or vacated on appeal, and the time to appeal shall have passed; (iv) the FGIC rehabilitation court must have approved the PSA and FGIC Settlement Agreement, including the release of all present and future claims against FGIC relating to FGIC policies; (v) AFI must have funded the Ally Contribution; and (vi) AFI's secured claims against the Debtors must have been fully satisfied. On July 3, 2013, the Debtors filed the Plan, which incorporates the terms of the PSA described herein, and related disclosure statement (the Disclosure Statement), with the Bankruptcy Court. The Bankruptcy Court has scheduled a hearing to consider approval of the Disclosure Statement on August 21, 2013, and the Plan confirmation hearing is currently targeted for late October 2013. On June 4, 2012, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. filed a motion in the Bankruptcy Court for the appointment of an independent examiner to investigate, among other things, certain of the Debtors' transactions with AFI occurring prior to the Petition Date, any claims the Debtors may hold against AFI's officers and directors, and any claims the Debtors proposed to release under the Plan. On June 20, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court approved the appointment of an examiner and, subsequently, the United States Trustee for the Southern District of New York appointed former bankruptcy judge Arthur J. Gonzalez, Esq. as the examiner (the Examiner). Upon approving the PSA on June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court unsealed the Examiner's investigative report. Under the terms of the PSA, the contents of the report may not be used by any party as a basis for terminating or modifying the PSA. There can be no assurance that any of the required milestones will be satisfied, that the conditions to effectiveness will be satisfied or waived or that none of the specified termination events will occur. The termination of the PSA or the failure of the PSA to become effective could result in modifications to the Plan, or the pursuit of an alternative form of reorganization or liquidation. This would result in delay and significant expense, and any modifications to the Plan or other alternative may well be less favorable to AFI. Significant Accounting Policies Income Taxes In calculating the provision for interim income taxes, in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 740, Income Taxes, we apply an estimated annual effective tax rate to year-to-date ordinary income. At the end of each interim period, we estimate the effective tax rate expected to be applicable for the full fiscal year. We exclude and record discretely the tax effect of unusual or infrequently occurring items, including, for example, changes in judgment about valuation allowances and effects of changes in tax law or rates. The provision for income taxes in tax jurisdictions with a projected full year or year-to-date loss for which a tax benefit cannot be realized is estimated using tax rates specific to that jurisdiction. Refer to Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in our 2012 Annual Report regarding additional significant accounting policies. Recently Adopted Accounting Standards Balance Sheet - Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities (ASU 2011-11 and ASU 2013-01) As of January 1, 2013, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-11, which amends ASC 210, Balance Sheet. This ASU contains new disclosure requirements regarding the nature of an entity's rights of offset and related arrangements associated with its financial instruments and derivative instruments. In addition, we adopted ASU 2013-01, which simply clarified the scope of ASU 2011-11. The new disclosures will give financial statement users information about both gross and net exposures. ASU 2011-11 and ASU 2013-01 were required to be applied retrospectively. Since the guidance relates only to disclosure of information, the adoption did not have an impact to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Comprehensive Income - Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (ASU 2013-02) As of January 1, 2013, we adopted ASU 2013-02, which amends ASC 220, Comprehensive Income. The ASU contains new requirements related to the presentation and disclosure of items that are reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The new requirements provide financial statement users a more comprehensive view of items that are reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. ASU 2013-02 was required to be applied prospectively. Since the guidance relates only to presentation and disclosure of information, the adoption did not have an impact to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Recently Issued Accounting Standards Liabilities - Obligations Resulting from Joint and Several Liability Arrangements for Which the Total Amount of the Obligation Is Fixed at the Reporting Date (ASU 2013-04) In February 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-04. This ASU requires an entity to measure obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation within the scope of this guidance is fixed at the reporting date, as the sum of the following: (a) The amount the reporting entity agreed to pay on the basis of its arrangement among its co-obligors and (b) any additional amount the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligors. It further requires an entity to disclose the nature and amount of the obligation as well as other information about those obligations. ASU 2013-04 will be effective for us on January 1, 2014, with retrospective application required. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Foreign Currency Matters - Parent's Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity (ASU 2013-05) In March 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-05. This ASU requires a reporting entity that ceases to have a controlling financial interest, in a subsidiary or group of assets or a business, within a foreign entity to release any related Cumulative Translation Adjustment (CTA) into net income. The CTA should be released into net income only if the sale or transfer results in the complete or substantially complete liquidation of the foreign entity. For an equity method investment that is a foreign entity, a pro rata portion of the CTA should be released into net income upon a partial sale of such an investment. This ASU clarifies that the sale of an investment in a foreign entity includes both events that result in the loss of a controlling financial interest in a foreign entity, irrespective of any retained investment, and events that result in step acquisition under which an acquirer obtains control of an acquiree in which it held an equity interest immediately before the acquisition date. Under these circumstances, the CTA should be released into net income upon their occurrence. ASU 2013-04 will be effective for us prospectively on January 1, 2014. Management is currently assessing the potential impact of the application of this guidance. However, since the guidance is prospective and we are in the process of exiting most of our international businesses, it is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Derivatives and Hedging - Inclusion of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (or Overnight Index Swap Rate) as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes (ASU 2013-10) In July 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-10. This ASU establishes the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (OIS) as an additional U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge accounting purposes. Prior to this ASU's addition of the OIS as a benchmark rate, only interest rates on direct Treasury obligations and the LIBOR swap rate were considered to be such benchmarks. Amendments of the update also remove the restriction on using different benchmark rates for similar hedges. The amendments are effective prospectively when entering into new or redesignating existing hedging relationships on or after July 17, 2013. Since the new guidance simply allows for an additional hedge index to be utilized for hedge accounting purposes, the implementation of this guidance is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Income Taxes - Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists (ASU 2013-11) In July 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-11. This ASU requires an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, to be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward. The guidance further includes an exception that if a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available to settle any additional income taxes that would result from the disallowance of a tax position at the reporting date or the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction does not require the entity to use them and the entity does not intend to use them, the deferred tax asset for such purpose should be presented in the financial statements as a liability and should not be combined with deferred tax assets. The assessment of whether a deferred tax asset is available is based on the unrecognized tax benefit and deferred tax asset that exist at the reporting date and should be made presuming disallowance of the tax position at the reporting date. The amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2013. The amendments should be applied prospectively to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist at the effective date. Early adoption and retrospective application are permitted. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material affect to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Description of Business, Basis of Presentation, and Changes in Significant Accounting Policies

Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC Inc. and referred to herein as Ally, we, our, or us) is a leading, independent, diversified, financial services firm. Founded in 1919, we are a leading automotive financial services company with over 90 years experience providing a broad array of financial products and services to automotive dealers and their customers. We became a bank holding company on December 24, 2008, under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. Our banking subsidiary, Ally Bank, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Ally Financial Inc. and a leading franchise in the growing direct (internet, telephone, mobile, and mail) banking market.

Our accounting and reporting policies conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). Additionally, where applicable, the policies conform to the accounting and reporting guidelines prescribed by bank regulatory authorities. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and that affect income and expenses during the reporting period. In developing the estimates and assumptions, management uses all available evidence; however, actual results could differ because of uncertainties associated with estimating the amounts, timing, and likelihood of possible outcomes.

The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements at June 30, 2013, and for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2013, and 2012, are unaudited but reflect all adjustments that are, in management’s opinion, necessary for the fair presentation of the results for the interim periods presented. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature. These unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements (and the related notes) included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed on March 1, 2013, with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as revised by the Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on July 9, 2013 (referred to herein as 2012 Annual Report).

Residential Capital, LLC

Our mortgage operations were historically a significant portion of our operations and were conducted primarily through our Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap) subsidiary. On May 14, 2012, ResCap and certain of its wholly owned direct and indirect subsidiaries (collectively, the Debtors) filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the Bankruptcy Court). As a result of the bankruptcy filing, effective May 14, 2012, we deconsolidated ResCap from our financial statements and recorded a charge of $442 million for the impairment of Ally's investment in ResCap. During the first quarter of 2013, we discontinued performing certain mortgage activities, which were required as part of the bankruptcy process until the sale of certain assets occurred. As a result of us discontinuing these activities, the operations of ResCap were classified as discontinued, refer to Note 2.

On May 14, 2013, Ally Financial Inc., on behalf of itself and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, AFI) entered into a Plan Support Agreement (the PSA) with the Debtors, the official committee of unsecured creditors appointed in the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases (the Creditors' Committee), and certain creditors, including AIG Asset Management (U.S.), LLC; Allstate Insurance Company; Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (FGIC), which has executed the agreement pending regulatory approval; counsel to the putative class of persons represented in the consolidated class action entitled In re: Community Bank of Northern Virginia Second Mortgage Lending Practice Litigation, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, MDL No. 1674, Case Nos. 03-0425, 02-01201, 05-0688, 05-1386; Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company; MBIA Insurance Corporation; Paulson & Co. Inc., a holder of ResCap's senior unsecured notes issued by ResCap; Prudential Insurance Company of America; certain investors in residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) backed by mortgage loans held by securitization trusts associated with securitizations sponsored by the Debtors between 2004 and 2007 represented by Kathy Patrick of Gibbs & Bruns LLP and Keith H. Wofford of Ropes & Gray LLP; Talcott Franklin of Talcott Franklin, P.C. as counsel for certain RMBS investors; Wilmington Trust, National Association in its capacity as Indenture Trustee for ResCap's senior unsecured notes; and certain trustees or indenture trustee for certain mortgage-backed securities trusts (collectively, the Consenting Claimants).

On June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order approving the PSA. The PSA provides for the parties to support a Chapter 11 plan in the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases (the Plan) that will, among other things, settle and provide AFI full releases for all existing and potential claims between AFI and the Debtors, including all representation and warranty claims that reside with the Debtors, and all pending and potential claims held by third parties related to the Debtors that could be brought against AFI, except for securities claims by the Federal Housing Finance Agency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), as receiver for certain failed banks. AFI believes it has strong defenses against these claims and will vigorously defend its position, as necessary.

The PSA also provides, among other things, that, on the effective date of the Plan, AFI will contribute to the Debtors' estates $1.95 billion in cash or cash equivalents, and will further contribute $150 million received by AFI for claims it pursues against its insurance carriers related to the claims released in connection with the Plan, with such amount guaranteed by AFI to be paid no later than September 30, 2014 (collectively, the Ally Contribution) in exchange for the releases of AFI to be included in the Plan. These amounts have been reflected within our accrued expenses and other liabilities, refer to Note 15. The Ally Contribution and other assets of the Debtors' estates will be distributed to creditors under the Plan. In addition, the PSA contemplated the payoff of Ally secured debt on or before the effective date of the Plan. On June 13, 2013, the Debtors paid AFI approximately $1.127 billion in full satisfaction of the AFI revolving credit facility and line of credit. The payment to AFI was approved by the Bankruptcy Court with an express reservation of rights, claims and remedies against AFI and a reciprocal reservation of rights, claims and remedies for AFI's benefit in the event the Plan does not become effective.

The PSA also provides that the Debtors will remain responsible for all costs and obligations imposed on the Debtors under (i) the consent judgment among the United States Department of Justice, the Attorneys General of certain states, ResCap, GMAC Mortgage, LLC (GMACM) and Ally Financial Inc. entered by the District Court for the District of Columbia on February 9, 2012, (ii) the consent order among ResCap, GMACM, Ally Financial Inc., Ally Bank, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) and the FDIC, dated April 13, 2011 (the Consent Order) and (iii) the order of assessment among ResCap, GMACM, Ally Financial Inc. and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, excluding certain obligations that are being performed by Ocwen Financial Corporation (Ocwen). Notably, on June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court approved a term sheet (the FRB Term Sheet) encompassing the terms of an amendment to the Consent Order (the Consent Order Amendment). The FRB Term Sheet, among other things, required the Debtors to escrow approximately $230 million (the FRB Settlement Amount) in exchange for the FRB suspending the foreclosure review mandated under the Consent Order (the FRB Foreclosure Review) for 30 days. The FRB Term Sheet was fully executed on June 27, 2013 and the FRB Foreclosure Review was suspended on June 28, 2013. On July 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court approved the Consent Order Amendment and, as a result, the Debtors are no longer responsible for the FRB Foreclosure Review, and the FRB Settlement Amount will be distributed to individual borrowers in full satisfaction of the Debtors' foreclosure review obligations.

Further, the PSA requires that the Plan include a settlement of insurance disputes between AFI and the Debtors under which the Debtors will relinquish in favor of AFI all of their rights to coverage under certain insurance policies. The PSA also requires that all litigation against AFI by the Debtors, the Creditors' Committee and the Consenting Claimants be stayed so long as the PSA has not been terminated.

The PSA requires, among other things, that the following milestones be satisfied: (i) the FGIC rehabilitation court must approve the PSA and a separate settlement agreement entered into among the Debtors, FGIC, trustees of residential mortgage-backed trusts and certain institutional investors (the FGIC Settlement) on or before August 19, 2013; (ii) the Bankruptcy Court must approve the Disclosure Statement on or before August 30, 2013; and (iii) the effective date of the Plan must occur on or before December 15, 2013. In the event any of the above milestones are not satisfied, the PSA could be terminated.

The PSA also includes a number of additional events that could result in the PSA being terminated, including the following: (i) the Bankruptcy Court enters an order appointing a Chapter 11 trustee; (ii) any of the Debtors' Chapter 11 cases are dismissed or converted to a case under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code; (iii) any court has entered a final, non-appealable judgment or order declaring any material portion of the PSA unenforceable; (iv) the releases set forth in the PSA are modified, amended, changed, severed or otherwise altered in the Plan or any other definitive document; and (v) the PSA ceases to be binding on AFI or the Creditors' Committee.

Additionally, the PSA requires that several conditions be satisfied or waived before the Plan can be effective, including, the following: (i) the Bankruptcy Court approves the Plan and Disclosure Statement on terms reasonably acceptable to the parties; (ii) the order confirming the Plan (the Confirmation Order) must have been entered by the Bankruptcy Court and provide for, among other things, the releases specified in the PSA; (iii) the Confirmation Order must not have been stayed, modified, or vacated on appeal, and the time to appeal shall have passed; (iv) the FGIC rehabilitation court must have approved the PSA and FGIC Settlement Agreement, including the release of all present and future claims against FGIC relating to FGIC policies; (v) AFI must have funded the Ally Contribution; and (vi) AFI's secured claims against the Debtors must have been fully satisfied.

On July 3, 2013, the Debtors filed the Plan, which incorporates the terms of the PSA described herein, and related disclosure statement (the Disclosure Statement), with the Bankruptcy Court. The Bankruptcy Court has scheduled a hearing to consider approval of the Disclosure Statement on August 21, 2013, and the Plan confirmation hearing is currently targeted for late October 2013.

On June 4, 2012, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. filed a motion in the Bankruptcy Court for the appointment of an independent examiner to investigate, among other things, certain of the Debtors' transactions with AFI occurring prior to the Petition Date, any claims the Debtors may hold against AFI's officers and directors, and any claims the Debtors proposed to release under the Plan. On June 20, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court approved the appointment of an examiner and, subsequently, the United States Trustee for the Southern District of New York appointed former bankruptcy judge Arthur J. Gonzalez, Esq. as the examiner (the Examiner). Upon approving the PSA on June 26, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court unsealed the Examiner's investigative report. Under the terms of the PSA, the contents of the report may not be used by any party as a basis for terminating or modifying the PSA.

There can be no assurance that any of the required milestones will be satisfied, that the conditions to effectiveness will be satisfied or waived or that none of the specified termination events will occur. The termination of the PSA or the failure of the PSA to become effective could result in modifications to the Plan, or the pursuit of an alternative form of reorganization or liquidation. This would result in delay and significant expense, and any modifications to the Plan or other alternative may well be less favorable to AFI.

Significant Accounting Policies

Income Taxes

In calculating the provision for interim income taxes, in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 740, Income Taxes, we apply an estimated annual effective tax rate to year-to-date ordinary income. At the end of each interim period, we estimate the effective tax rate expected to be applicable for the full fiscal year. We exclude and record discretely the tax effect of unusual or infrequently occurring items, including, for example, changes in judgment about valuation allowances and effects of changes in tax law or rates. The provision for income taxes in tax jurisdictions with a projected full year or year-to-date loss for which a tax benefit cannot be realized is estimated using tax rates specific to that jurisdiction.

Refer to Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in our 2012 Annual Report regarding additional significant accounting policies.

Recently Adopted Accounting Standards

Balance Sheet - Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities (ASU 2011-11 and ASU 2013-01)

As of January 1, 2013, we adopted Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-11, which amends ASC 210, Balance Sheet. This ASU contains new disclosure requirements regarding the nature of an entity's rights of offset and related arrangements associated with its financial instruments and derivative instruments. In addition, we adopted ASU 2013-01, which simply clarified the scope of ASU 2011-11. The new disclosures will give financial statement users information about both gross and net exposures. ASU 2011-11 and ASU 2013-01 were required to be applied retrospectively. Since the guidance relates only to disclosure of information, the adoption did not have an impact to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Comprehensive Income - Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (ASU 2013-02)

As of January 1, 2013, we adopted ASU 2013-02, which amends ASC 220, Comprehensive Income. The ASU contains new requirements related to the presentation and disclosure of items that are reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. The new requirements provide financial statement users a more comprehensive view of items that are reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income. ASU 2013-02 was required to be applied prospectively. Since the guidance relates only to presentation and disclosure of information, the adoption did not have an impact to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

Liabilities - Obligations Resulting from Joint and Several Liability Arrangements for Which the Total Amount of the Obligation Is Fixed at the Reporting Date (ASU 2013-04)

In February 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-04. This ASU requires an entity to measure obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation within the scope of this guidance is fixed at the reporting date, as the sum of the following: (a) The amount the reporting entity agreed to pay on the basis of its arrangement among its co-obligors and (b) any additional amount the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligors. It further requires an entity to disclose the nature and amount of the obligation as well as other information about those obligations. ASU 2013-04 will be effective for us on January 1, 2014, with retrospective application required. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Foreign Currency Matters - Parent's Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity (ASU 2013-05)

In March 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-05. This ASU requires a reporting entity that ceases to have a controlling financial interest, in a subsidiary or group of assets or a business, within a foreign entity to release any related Cumulative Translation Adjustment (CTA) into net income. The CTA should be released into net income only if the sale or transfer results in the complete or substantially complete liquidation of the foreign entity. For an equity method investment that is a foreign entity, a pro rata portion of the CTA should be released into net income upon a partial sale of such an investment. This ASU clarifies that the sale of an investment in a foreign entity includes both events that result in the loss of a controlling financial interest in a foreign entity, irrespective of any retained investment, and events that result in step acquisition under which an acquirer obtains control of an acquiree in which it held an equity interest immediately before the acquisition date. Under these circumstances, the CTA should be released into net income upon their occurrence. ASU 2013-04 will be effective for us prospectively on January 1, 2014. Management is currently assessing the potential impact of the application of this guidance. However, since the guidance is prospective and we are in the process of exiting most of our international businesses, it is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Derivatives and Hedging - Inclusion of the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (or Overnight Index Swap Rate) as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes (ASU 2013-10)

In July 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-10. This ASU establishes the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (OIS) as an additional U.S. benchmark interest rate for hedge accounting purposes. Prior to this ASU's addition of the OIS as a benchmark rate, only interest rates on direct Treasury obligations and the LIBOR swap rate were considered to be such benchmarks. Amendments of the update also remove the restriction on using different benchmark rates for similar hedges. The amendments are effective prospectively when entering into new or redesignating existing hedging relationships on or after July 17, 2013. Since the new guidance simply allows for an additional hedge index to be utilized for hedge accounting purposes, the implementation of this guidance is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

Income Taxes - Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists (ASU 2013-11)

In July 2013, The Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU 2013-11. This ASU requires an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, to be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward. The guidance further includes an exception that if a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available to settle any additional income taxes that would result from the disallowance of a tax position at the reporting date or the tax law of the applicable jurisdiction does not require the entity to use them and the entity does not intend to use them, the deferred tax asset for such purpose should be presented in the financial statements as a liability and should not be combined with deferred tax assets. The assessment of whether a deferred tax asset is available is based on the unrecognized tax benefit and deferred tax asset that exist at the reporting date and should be made presuming disallowance of the tax position at the reporting date. The amendments are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2013. The amendments should be applied prospectively to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist at the effective date. Early adoption and retrospective application are permitted. The adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material affect to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.