Ally is currently subject to enhanced prudential standards that were established by the FRB under the Dodd-Frank Act. Targeted amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act and other financial-services laws were enacted through the EGRRCP Act, including amendments that affect whether and, if so, how the FRB applies enhanced prudential standards to BHCs like us with $100 billion or more but less than $250 billion in total consolidated assets. Through final rules implementing these amendments—which are commonly known as the tailoring framework—the FRB and other U.S. banking agencies established four risk-based categories of prudential standards and capital and liquidity requirements for banking organizations with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets. The most stringent standards and requirements apply to U.S. global systemically important BHCs, which are assigned to Category I. The assignment of other banking organizations to the remaining three categories is based on measures of size and four other risk-based indicators: cross-jurisdictional activity, wSTWF, nonbank assets, and off-balance-sheet exposure.

Under the tailoring framework, Ally is a Category IV firm and, as such, is (1) subject to supervisory stress testing on a two-year cycle, (2) required to submit an annual capital plan to the FRB, (3) allowed to exclude accumulated other comprehensive income from regulatory capital, (4) required to maintain a buffer of unencumbered highly liquid assets to meet projected net stressed cash outflows over a 30-day planning horizon, (5) required to conduct liquidity stress tests on a quarterly basis, (6) allowed to engage in more tailored liquidity risk management, including monthly rather than weekly calculations of collateral positions, the elimination of limits for activities that are not relevant to the firm, and fewer required elements of monitoring of intraday liquidity exposures, (7) exempted from company-run capital stress testing requirements, (8) exempted from the requirements of the LCR and the net stable funding ratio provided that our average wSTWF continues to remain under $50 billion, and (9) exempted from the requirements of the supplementary leverage ratio, the countercyclical capital buffer, and single-counterparty credit limits.

We continue to be subject to rules enabling the FRB to conduct supervisory stress testing on a more or less frequent basis based on our financial condition, size, complexity, risk profile, scope of operations, or activities, or risks to the U.S. economy. Further, we remain subject to rules requiring the resubmission of our capital plan if we determine that there has been or will be a material change in our risk profile, financial condition, or corporate structure since we last submitted the capital plan or if the FRB determines that (a) our capital plan is incomplete or our capital plan or internal capital adequacy process contains material weaknesses, (b) there has been, or will likely be, a material change in our risk profile (including a material change in our business strategy or any risk exposure), financial condition, or corporate structure, or (c) the BHC stress scenario(s) are not appropriate for our business model and portfolios, or changes in the financial markets or the macroeconomic outlook that could have a material impact on our risk profile and financial condition require the use of updated scenarios.

The FRB and other U.S. banking agencies have adopted risk-based and leverage capital standards that establish minimum capital-to-asset ratios for BHCs, like Ally, and depository institutions, like Ally Bank. Ally and Ally Bank are subject to capital requirements issued by U.S. banking regulators that require us to maintain risk-based and leverage capital ratios above minimum levels. The risk-based capital ratios are based on a banking organization’s RWAs, which are generally determined under the standardized approach applicable to Ally and Ally Bank by (1) assigning on-balance-sheet exposures to broad risk-weight categories according to the counterparty or, if relevant, the guarantor or collateral (with higher risk weights assigned to categories of exposures perceived as representing greater risk), and (2) multiplying off-balance-sheet exposures by specified credit conversion factors to calculate credit equivalent amounts and assigning those credit equivalent amounts to the relevant risk-weight categories. The leverage ratio, in contrast, is based on an institution’s average unweighted on-balance-sheet exposures.

Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary action by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on the Consolidated Financial Statements or the results of operations and financial condition of Ally and Ally Bank. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for PCA, Ally and Ally Bank must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of capital, assets, and certain off-balance-sheet items. These measures and related classifications, which are used in the calculation of our risk-based and leverage capital ratios and those of Ally Bank, are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about the components of capital, the risk weightings of assets and other exposures, and other factors. The FRB also uses these ratios and guidelines as part of the capital planning and stress testing processes. In addition, in order for Ally to maintain its status as an FHC, Ally and its bank subsidiary, Ally Bank, must remain well capitalized and well managed, as defined under applicable laws. The well-capitalized standard for insured depository institutions, such as Ally Bank, reflects the capital requirements under U.S. Basel III.

Under U.S. Basel III, Ally and Ally Bank must maintain a minimum Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.5%, a minimum Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6%, and a minimum total risk-based capital ratio of 8%. In addition to these minimum risk-based capital ratios, Ally and Ally Bank are subject to a capital conservation buffer requirement, which for Ally was 3.5% and for Ally Bank was 2.5% as of December 31, 2021, as further described in the next paragraph. Failure to maintain more than the full amount of the capital conservation buffer requirement would result in automatic restrictions on the ability of Ally and Ally Bank to make capital distributions, including dividend payments and stock repurchases and redemptions, and to pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers. U.S. Basel III also subjects Ally and Ally Bank to a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.

In March 2020, the FRB issued a final rule to more closely align forward-looking stress testing results with the FRB’s non-stress regulatory capital requirements for BHCs with $100 billion or more in total consolidated assets and other specified companies. The final rule introduced a stress capital buffer requirement based on firm-specific stress test performance and planned dividends, which for Ally replaced the fixed 2.5% component of the capital conservation buffer requirement. The final rule also made several changes to the CCAR process, such as eliminating the CCAR quantitative objection, narrowing the set of planned capital actions assumed to occur in the stress scenario, assuming that a firm maintains a constant level of assets over the planning horizon, eliminating the 30% dividend payout ratio as a criterion for heightened scrutiny of a firm’s capital plan, and allowing a firm to make capital distributions in excess of those included in its capital plan if the firm is otherwise in compliance with the automatic distribution limits of the capital framework. Under the final rule, Ally’s stress capital buffer requirement is the greater of 2.5% and the result of the following calculation: (1) the difference between Ally’s starting and minimum projected Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratios under the severely adverse scenario in the supervisory stress test, plus (2) the sum of the dollar amount of Ally’s planned common stock dividends for each of the fourth through seventh quarters of its nine-quarter capital planning horizon, as a percentage of RWAs. For a Category IV firm like Ally, the capital conservation buffer requirement comprises the stress capital buffer requirement. The capital conservation buffer requirement applicable to Ally’s depository-institution subsidiary, Ally Bank, continues to be a fixed 2.5%. Ally received its first preliminary stress capital buffer requirement from the FRB in June 2020, which was determined under this new methodology to be 3.5%, was finalized in August 2020, and became effective in October 2020. In June 2020, the FRB also announced its determination that changes in financial markets or the macroeconomic outlook could have a material effect on the risk profiles and financial conditions of firms subject to the capital-plan rule and that, as a result, the firms (including Ally) would be required to resubmit capital plans to the FRB within 45 days after receiving updated stress scenarios from the FRB. On June 24, 2021, we received notification from the FRB that our stress capital buffer requirement would not be recalculated in connection with the second round of 2020 supervisory stress testing. Refer to the later section titled Capital Planning and Stress Tests for more information.

Under applicable capital rules, the maximum amount of capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments that can be made by a banking organization, such as Ally or Ally Bank, is a function of its eligible retained income. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the FRB and other U.S. banking agencies expressed a concern that the definition of eligible retained income would not limit distributions in the gradual manner intended but instead could do so in a sudden and severe manner even if a banking organization were to experience only a modest reduction in its capital ratios. As a result, to better allow a banking organization to use its capital buffer as intended and continue lending in adverse conditions, the U.S. banking agencies issued an interim final rule that became effective in March 2020, and revised the definition of eligible retained income to the greater of (1) a banking organization’s net income for the four preceding calendar quarters, net of any distributions and associated tax effects not already reflected in net income, and (2) the average of a banking organization’s net income over the preceding four quarters. This interim final rule was adopted as final with no changes effective January 1, 2021.

The risk-based capital ratios and the Tier 1 leverage ratio play a central role in PCA, which is an enforcement framework used by the U.S. banking agencies to constrain the activities of depository institutions based on their levels of regulatory capital. Five categories have been established using thresholds for the Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, the Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, the total risk-based capital ratio, and the Tier 1 leverage ratio: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, and critically undercapitalized. FDICIA generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distribution, including any payment of a cash dividend or a management fee to its BHC, if the depository institution would become undercapitalized after the distribution. An undercapitalized institution is also subject to growth limitations and must submit and fulfill a capital restoration plan. While BHCs are not subject to the PCA framework, the FRB is empowered to compel a BHC to take measures—such as the execution of financial or performance guarantees—when PCA is required in connection with one of its depository-institution subsidiaries. In addition, under FDICIA, only well-capitalized and, with a waiver from the FDIC, adequately capitalized institutions may accept brokered deposits, and even adequately capitalized institutions are subject to some restrictions on the rates they may offer for brokered deposits. At December 31, 2021, Ally Bank was well capitalized under the PCA framework.


	December 31, 2021				December 31, 2020				Required minimum (a)		Well-capitalized minimum
($ in millions)	Amount		Ratio		Amount		Ratio
Capital ratios
Common Equity Tier 1 (to risk-weighted assets)
Ally Financial Inc.	$	15,143	10.34	%	$	14,878	10.64	%	4.50	%	(b)
Ally Bank	17,253		12.39		17,567		13.38		4.50		6.50	%
Tier 1 (to risk-weighted assets)
Ally Financial Inc.	$	17,403	11.89	%	$	17,289	12.37	%	6.00	%	6.00	%
Ally Bank	17,253		12.39		17,567		13.38		6.00		8.00
Total (to risk-weighted assets)
Ally Financial Inc.	$	19,724	13.47	%	$	19,778	14.15	%	8.00	%	10.00	%
Ally Bank	18,995		13.64		19,210		14.63		8.00		10.00
Tier 1 leverage (to adjusted quarterly average assets) (c)
Ally Financial Inc.	$	17,403	9.67	%	$	17,289	9.41	%	4.00	%	(b)
Ally Bank	17,253		10.12		17,567		10.12		4.00		5.00	%

In December 2018, the FRB and other U.S. banking agencies approved a final rule to address the impact of CECL on regulatory capital by allowing BHCs and banks, including Ally, the option to phase in the day-one impact of CECL over a three-year period. In March 2020, the FRB and other U.S. banking agencies issued an interim final rule that became effective for the first quarter of 2020 and that provided BHCs and banks with an alternative option to temporarily delay an estimate of the impact of CECL, relative to the incurred loss methodology for estimating the allowance for loan losses, on regulatory capital. The interim final rule was clarified and adjusted in a final rule that became effective in September 2020. We elected this alternative option instead of the one described in the December 2018 rule. As a result, under the final rule, we delayed recognizing the estimated impact of CECL on regulatory capital until after a two-year deferral period, which for us extended through December 31, 2021. Beginning on January 1, 2022, we are required to phase in 25% of the previously deferred estimated capital impact of CECL, with an additional 25% to be phased in at the beginning of each subsequent year until fully phased in by the first quarter of 2025. The estimated impact of CECL on regulatory capital that we deferred and began phasing in on January 1, 2022, is generally calculated as the entire day-one impact at adoption plus 25% of the subsequent change in allowance during the two-year deferral period. As of December 31, 2021, the total deferred impact on Common Equity Tier 1 capital related to our adoption of CECL was $1.2 billion.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee approved revisions to the global Basel III capital framework (commonly known as the Basel III endgame or as Basel IV), many of which—if adopted in the United States—could heighten regulatory capital standards. In March 2020, to better allow banking organizations to focus their resources on navigating the COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation date of these revisions was delayed by the Basel Committee from January 1, 2022, to January 1, 2023. At this time, how the revisions will be harmonized and finalized in the United States is not clear or predictable, and we continue to evaluate the impacts that these revisions may have on us.

Under the tailoring framework described earlier in the section titled Basel Capital Framework, we are generally subject to supervisory stress testing on a two-year cycle and exempted from mandated company-run capital stress testing requirements. We are also required to submit an annual capital plan to the FRB. Our annual capital plan must include an assessment of our expected uses and sources of capital and a description of all planned capital actions over a nine-quarter planning horizon, including any issuance of a debt or equity capital instrument, any dividend or other capital distribution, and any similar action that the FRB determines could have an impact on our capital. The plan must also include a detailed description of our process for assessing capital adequacy, including a discussion of how we, under expected and stressful conditions, will maintain capital commensurate with our risks and above the minimum regulatory capital ratios, will serve as a source of strength to Ally Bank, and will maintain sufficient capital to continue our operations by maintaining ready access to funding, meeting our obligations to creditors and other counterparties, and continuing to serve as a credit intermediary.

We submitted our 2020 capital plan in April 2020, which included planned capital distributions to common stockholders through share repurchases and cash dividends over the nine-quarter planning horizon. In June 2020, the FRB provided us with the results of the supervisory stress test, additional industry-wide sensitivity analyses conducted in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and our preliminary stress capital buffer requirement. As described earlier in the section titled Basel Capital Framework, we updated our capital plan in light of revised stress scenarios from the FRB and submitted our updated plan to the FRB in November 2020. In December 2020, the FRB publicly disclosed summary results of its second round of supervisory stress testing and extended its deadline for notifying firms about whether their stress capital buffer requirements will be recalculated to March 31, 2021. On March 25, 2021, the FRB further extended this deadline to June 30, 2021. On June 24, 2021, we received notification from the FRB that our stress capital buffer requirement would not be recalculated in connection with the second round of 2020 supervisory stress testing.

In June 2020, the FRB announced several actions to ensure that large firms, such as Ally, would remain resilient despite the economic uncertainty from the COVID-19 pandemic, including for the third quarter of 2020 (1) the suspension of repurchases by any firm of its common stock, except repurchases relating to issuances of common stock related to employee stock ownership plans, and (2) the disallowance of any increase by a firm in the amount of its common-stock dividends and the imposition of a common-stock dividend limit equal to the average of the firm’s net income for the four preceding calendar quarters. These restrictions were extended by the FRB for the fourth quarter of 2020. In December 2020, the FRB extended and modified these restrictions for the first quarter of 2021 to limit aggregate common-stock dividends and share repurchases to an amount equal to the average of the firm’s net income for the four preceding calendar quarters subject to specified exceptions. On March 25, 2021, the FRB extended these modified restrictions for the second quarter of 2021 and announced that, for a firm such as Ally that is not subject to the 2021 supervisory stress test and on a two-year cycle, the additional restrictions will end after June 30, 2021, and the firm’s stress capital buffer requirement based on the June 2020 supervisory stress test results will remain in place. On January 11, 2021, our Board authorized a stock-repurchase program, permitting us to repurchase up to $1.6 billion of our common stock from time to time from the first quarter of 2021 through the fourth quarter of 2021 subject to restrictions imposed by the FRB. On July 12, 2021, our Board authorized an increase in the maximum amount of this stock-repurchase program, from $1.6 billion to $2.0 billion. On January 10, 2022, our Board authorized a stock-repurchase program, permitting us to repurchase up to $2.0 billion of our common stock from time to time from the first quarter of 2022 through the fourth quarter of 2022, and an increase in our cash dividend on common stock from $0.25 per share for the fourth quarter of 2021 to $0.30 per share for the first quarter of 2022.

In January 2021, the FRB issued a final rule effective April 5, 2021, to align its capital planning and stress capital buffer requirements with the tailoring framework. Under the final rule, unless otherwise directed by the FRB in specified circumstances, Ally and other Category IV firms are generally no longer required to calculate forward-looking projections of revenues, losses, reserves, and pro forma capital levels under scenarios provided by the FRB. Each firm continues to be required, however, to provide a forward-looking analysis of income and capital levels under expected and stressful conditions that are designed by the firm. In addition, for Category IV firms, the final rule updated the frequency of calculating the portion of the stress capital buffer derived from the supervisory stress test to every other year. These firms have the ability to elect to participate in the supervisory stress test—and receive a correspondingly updated stress capital buffer requirement—in a year in which they would not generally be subject to the supervisory stress test. During a year in which a Category IV firm does not undergo a supervisory stress test, the firm would receive an updated stress capital buffer requirement that reflects its updated planned common-stock dividends. The final rule also includes reporting and other changes consistent with the tailoring framework. Ally did not opt into the 2021 supervisory stress test but will be subject to the 2022 supervisory stress test, with submissions due by April 5, 2022.

We submitted our 2021 capital plan on April 5, 2021, which includes planned capital distributions to common stockholders through share repurchases and cash dividends over the nine-quarter planning horizon and other capital actions. During the second quarter of 2021, we issued $1.35 billion of Series B Preferred Stock and $1.0 billion of Series C Preferred Stock, both of which qualify as additional Tier 1 capital under U.S. Basel III. The proceeds from these issuances were used to redeem a portion of the Series 2 TRUPS then outstanding. Refer to Note 15 and Note 17 for additional details about these instruments and capital actions. In June 2021, we submitted an updated capital plan to the FRB reflecting these capital actions and the increases in our stock-repurchase program and common-stock dividend described above. This updated capital plan was used by the FRB to recalculate Ally’s final stress capital buffer requirement, which was announced in August 2021 and remained unchanged at 3.5%. Our ability to make capital distributions, including our ability to pay dividends or repurchase shares of our common stock, will continue to be subject to the FRB’s review and our internal governance requirements, including approval by our Board. The amount and size of any future dividends and share repurchases also will be subject to various factors, including Ally’s capital and


	Common stock repurchased during period (a) (b)			Number of common shares outstanding		Cash dividends declared per common share (c)
($ in millions, except per share data; shares in thousands)	Approximate dollar value		Number of shares	Beginning of period	End of period
2020
First quarter	$	104	3,838	374,332	373,155	$	0.19
Second quarter	—		53	373,155	373,837	0.19
Third quarter	1		9	373,837	373,857	0.19
Fourth quarter	1		37	373,857	374,674	0.19
2021
First quarter	$	219	5,276	374,674	371,805	$	0.19
Second quarter	502		9,641	371,805	362,639	0.19
Third quarter	679		13,055	362,639	349,599	0.25
Fourth quarter	594		12,046	349,599	337,941	0.25

Ally Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System and is subject to regulation, supervision, and examination by the FRB and the UDFI. Ally Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC, and Ally Bank is required to file periodic reports with the FDIC concerning its financial condition. Total assets of Ally Bank were $172.8 billion and $172.0 billion at December 31, 2021, and 2020, respectively. Federal and Utah law place a number of conditions, restrictions, and limitations on dividends and other capital distributions that may be paid by Ally Bank to Ally. Dividends or other distributions made by Ally Bank to Ally were $3.5 billion and $1.2 billion in 2021 and 2020, respectively.

In January 2021 the FDIC announced that, given the passage of time since the last submission of resolution plans and the uncertain economic outlook, the FDIC will resume requiring resolution plan submissions for insured depository institutions with $100 billion or more in assets, including Ally Bank. In June 2021 the FDIC outlined a modified approach to implementing its rule requiring these insured depository institutions to submit resolution plans. The modified approach extends the submission frequency to a three-year cycle, streamlines content requirements, and places enhanced emphasis on engagement with firms. Under the modified approach, resolution plans will be submitted in two groups, with the first group consisting of insured depository institutions, like Ally Bank, whose top-tier parent company is not a U.S. global systemically important bank or a Category II firm and the second group consisting of all other insured depository institutions with $100 billion or more in total assets. In August 2021, the FDIC notified Ally Bank that its next resolution plan submission is due on or before December 1, 2022.

Certain of our Insurance operations are subject to minimum aggregate capital requirements, net asset and dividend restrictions under applicable state and foreign insurance laws, and the rules and regulations promulgated by various U.S. and foreign regulatory agencies. Under various state and foreign insurance regulations, dividend distributions may be made only from statutory unassigned surplus, with approvals required from the regulatory authorities for dividends in excess of certain statutory limitations. At December 31, 2021, the maximum dividend that could be paid by the U.S. insurance subsidiaries over the next 12 months without prior statutory approval was $111 million.