Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies	NOTE 14 – CONTINGENCIES In the normal course of its business, the Partnership is involved, from time to time, in various legal and regulatory matters, including arbitrations, class actions, other litigation, and examinations, investigations and proceedings by governmental authorities, self-regulatory organizations and other regulators, which may result in losses. These matters include: Securities Class Action. On March 30, 2018, Edward Jones and its affiliated entities and individuals were named as defendants in a putative class action (Anderson, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al.) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The lawsuit originally was brought under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and the Exchange Act, as well as Missouri and California law and alleges that the defendants inappropriately transitioned client assets from commission-based accounts to fee-based programs. The plaintiffs requested declaratory, equitable, and exemplary relief, and compensatory damages. On July 9, 2019, the district court entered an order dismissing the lawsuit in its entirety without prejudice. On July 29, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, which eliminated certain defendants, withdrew the Securities Act claims, added claims under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the "Investment Advisers Act"), and certain additional state law claims, and reasserted the remaining claims with modified allegations. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their Investment Advisers Act claims, and on November 12, 2019, the district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss all other claims. The plaintiffs appealed the district court's dismissal of certain of their state law claims on jurisdictional grounds but did not appeal the dismissal of the remaining claims. On March 4, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of those state law claims. After further appellate proceedings in the Ninth Circuit, defendants filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, which was denied on January 18, 2022. On February 2, 2022, the defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' remaining state law claims. On May 9, 2022, the court dismissed the second amended complaint without prejudice. On May 31, 2022, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint alleging a single claim of breach of fiduciary duty under Missouri and California law against a single defendant, Edward Jones, which Edward Jones moved to dismiss on June 21, 2022. The district court denied the motion to dismiss in an order filed on October 26, 2022. Edward Jones filed its answer to the third amended complaint on November 14, 2022. On September 22, 2023, the plaintiffs moved for class certification. On the same date, Edward Jones moved for summary judgment on the plaintiffs' individual claims and to dismiss the third amended complaint on jurisdictional grounds. On January 8, 2024, the district court entered an order denying the motion to dismiss; the other motions remain pending before the court. Edward Jones denies the plaintiffs' allegations and intends to continue to vigorously defend this lawsuit. Gender and Race Discrimination Class Action. On March 9, 2022, Edward Jones and JFC were named as defendants in a lawsuit (Dixon, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al.) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The lawsuit was brought by a current financial advisor as a putative collective action alleging gender discrimination under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and by a former financial advisor as a putative class action alleging race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. On April 25, 2022, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint reasserting the original claims with modified allegations and adding claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging race/national origin, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination on behalf of putative classes of financial advisors. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on May 23, 2022, and on September 15, 2022, the court stayed further proceedings in the case pending a decision on the motion to dismiss. On March 31, 2023, the district court denied the motion to dismiss and lifted the stay of proceedings. Edward Jones and JFC filed an answer to the amended complaint on April 17, 2023. Edward Jones and JFC deny the allegations and intend to vigorously defend this lawsuit. Home Office Gender Discrimination Class Action. Edward Jones and JFC were named as defendants in a lawsuit brought by a former employee (Zigler v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. et al.) in the Northern District of Illinois. The initial complaint filed on September 1, 2022 alleged putative class and collective claims under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 ("EPA"), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Illinois state laws of gender-based wage discrimination against a subset of female home office associates whom the plaintiff described as “home office financial advisor[s]." The plaintiff amended the complaint on November 29, 2022, seeking to expand the putative collective and class definitions to include all female home office associates in any role. Edward Jones and JFC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on January 6, 2023. On June 9, 2023, the district court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to dismiss, narrowing the plaintiff's EPA claim and related state-law claim to one of her roles at the company, limiting the plaintiff's Title VII claim and related state-law claim to a disparate treatment theory of liability as opposed to a disparate impact theory, and accepting the plaintiff's agreement to dismiss JFC from the case without prejudice. Edward Jones filed its answer to the amended complaint on June 23, 2023. Edward Jones denies the allegations and intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit. SEC Off-Channel Communications Platforms Investigation. Edward Jones has responded to requests from the SEC in connection with its publicly reported investigation of compliance by broker-dealers, investment advisers and other financial institutions with recordkeeping requirements. The investigation relates to retention of electronic communications stored on personal devices or messaging platforms that have not been approved by Edward Jones for business use by its employees. Edward Jones has fully cooperated with the SEC’s investigation and is in discussions with the SEC staff in an effort to resolve the matter. In addition to these matters, the Partnership provides for potential losses that may arise related to other contingencies. The Partnership assesses its liabilities and contingencies utilizing available information. The Partnership accrues for potential losses for those matters where it is probable that the Partnership will incur a potential loss to the extent that the amount of such potential loss can be reasonably estimated, in accordance with FASB ASC No. 450, Contingencies. This liability represents the Partnership’s estimate of the probable loss as of December 31, 2023, after considering, among other factors, the progress of each case, the Partnership's experience with other legal and regulatory matters and discussion with legal counsel, and is believed to be sufficient. The aggregate accrued liability is recorded within the accounts payable, accrued expenses and other line of the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and may be adjusted from time to time to reflect any relevant developments. For such matters where an accrued liability has not been established and the Partnership believes a loss is both reasonably possible and estimable, as well as for matters where an accrued liability has been recorded but for which an exposure to loss in excess of the amount accrued is both reasonably possible and estimable, the current estimated aggregated range of additional possible loss is up to $11 as of December 31, 2023. This range of reasonably possible loss does not necessarily represent the Partnership's maximum loss exposure as the Partnership was not able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss for all matters. Further, the matters underlying any disclosed estimated range will change from time to time, and actual results may vary significantly. While the outcome of these matters is inherently uncertain, based on information currently available, the Partnership believes that its established liabilities as of December 31, 2023 are adequate and the liabilities arising from such matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Partnership. However, based on future developments and the potential unfavorable resolution of these matters, the outcome could be material to the Partnership’s future consolidated operating results for a particular period or periods.

Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2023

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

NOTE 14 – CONTINGENCIES

In the normal course of its business, the Partnership is involved, from time to time, in various legal and regulatory matters, including arbitrations, class actions, other litigation, and examinations, investigations and proceedings by governmental authorities, self-regulatory organizations and other regulators, which may result in losses. These matters include:

Securities Class Action. On March 30, 2018, Edward Jones and its affiliated entities and individuals were named as defendants in a putative class action (Anderson, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al.) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California. The lawsuit originally was brought under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and the Exchange Act, as well as Missouri and California law and alleges that the defendants inappropriately transitioned client assets from commission-based accounts to fee-based programs. The plaintiffs requested declaratory, equitable, and exemplary relief, and compensatory damages. On July 9, 2019, the district court entered an order dismissing the lawsuit in its entirety without prejudice. On July 29, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, which eliminated certain defendants, withdrew the Securities Act claims, added claims under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (the "Investment Advisers Act"), and certain additional state law claims, and reasserted the remaining claims with modified allegations. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs subsequently withdrew

their Investment Advisers Act claims, and on November 12, 2019, the district court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss all other claims. The plaintiffs appealed the district court's dismissal of certain of their state law claims on jurisdictional grounds but did not appeal the dismissal of the remaining claims. On March 4, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's dismissal of those state law claims. After further appellate proceedings in the Ninth Circuit, defendants filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, which was denied on January 18, 2022. On February 2, 2022, the defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' remaining state law claims. On May 9, 2022, the court dismissed the second amended complaint without prejudice. On May 31, 2022, the plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint alleging a single claim of breach of fiduciary duty under Missouri and California law against a single defendant, Edward Jones, which Edward Jones moved to dismiss on June 21, 2022. The district court denied the motion to dismiss in an order filed on October 26, 2022. Edward Jones filed its answer to the third amended complaint on November 14, 2022. On September 22, 2023, the plaintiffs moved for class certification. On the same date, Edward Jones moved for summary judgment on the plaintiffs' individual claims and to dismiss the third amended complaint on jurisdictional grounds. On January 8, 2024, the district court entered an order denying the motion to dismiss; the other motions remain pending before the court. Edward Jones denies the plaintiffs' allegations and intends to continue to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

Gender and Race Discrimination Class Action. On March 9, 2022, Edward Jones and JFC were named as defendants in a lawsuit (Dixon, et al. v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., et al.) filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The lawsuit was brought by a current financial advisor as a putative collective action alleging gender discrimination under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and by a former financial advisor as a putative class action alleging race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. On April 25, 2022, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint reasserting the original claims with modified allegations and adding claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 alleging race/national origin, gender, and sexual orientation discrimination on behalf of putative classes of financial advisors. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on May 23, 2022, and on September 15, 2022, the court stayed further proceedings in the case pending a decision on the motion to dismiss. On March 31, 2023, the district court denied the motion to dismiss and lifted the stay of proceedings. Edward Jones and JFC filed an answer to the amended complaint on April 17, 2023. Edward Jones and JFC deny the allegations and intend to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

Home Office Gender Discrimination Class Action. Edward Jones and JFC were named as defendants in a lawsuit brought by a former employee (Zigler v. Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. et al.) in the Northern District of Illinois. The initial complaint filed on September 1, 2022 alleged putative class and collective claims under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 ("EPA"), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Illinois state laws of gender-based wage discrimination against a subset of female home office associates whom the plaintiff described as “home office financial advisor[s]." The plaintiff amended the complaint on November 29, 2022, seeking to expand the putative collective and class definitions to include all female home office associates in any role. Edward Jones and JFC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on January 6, 2023. On June 9, 2023, the district court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to dismiss, narrowing the plaintiff's EPA claim and related state-law claim to one of her roles at the company, limiting the plaintiff's Title VII claim and related state-law claim to a disparate treatment theory of liability as opposed to a disparate impact theory, and accepting the plaintiff's agreement to dismiss JFC from the case without prejudice. Edward Jones filed its answer to the amended complaint on June 23, 2023. Edward Jones denies the allegations and intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit.

SEC Off-Channel Communications Platforms Investigation. Edward Jones has responded to requests from the SEC in connection with its publicly reported investigation of compliance by broker-dealers, investment advisers and other financial institutions with recordkeeping requirements. The investigation relates to retention of electronic communications stored on personal devices or messaging platforms that have not been approved by Edward Jones for business use by its employees. Edward Jones has fully cooperated with the SEC’s investigation and is in discussions with the SEC staff in an effort to resolve the matter.

In addition to these matters, the Partnership provides for potential losses that may arise related to other contingencies. The Partnership assesses its liabilities and contingencies utilizing available information. The Partnership accrues for potential losses for those matters where it is probable that the Partnership will incur a potential loss to the extent that the amount of such potential loss can be reasonably estimated, in accordance with FASB ASC No. 450, Contingencies. This liability represents the Partnership’s estimate of the probable loss as of December 31, 2023, after considering, among other factors, the progress of each case, the Partnership's experience with other legal and regulatory matters and discussion with legal counsel, and is believed to be sufficient. The aggregate accrued liability is recorded within the accounts payable, accrued expenses and other line of the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and may be adjusted from time to time to reflect any relevant developments.

For such matters where an accrued liability has not been established and the Partnership believes a loss is both reasonably possible and estimable, as well as for matters where an accrued liability has been recorded but for which an exposure to loss in excess of the amount accrued is both reasonably possible and estimable, the current estimated aggregated range of additional possible loss is up to $11 as of December 31, 2023. This range of reasonably possible loss does not necessarily represent the Partnership's maximum loss exposure as the Partnership was not able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss for all matters.

Further, the matters underlying any disclosed estimated range will change from time to time, and actual results may vary significantly. While the outcome of these matters is inherently uncertain, based on information currently available, the Partnership believes that its established liabilities as of December 31, 2023 are adequate and the liabilities arising from such matters will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows of the Partnership. However, based on future developments and the potential unfavorable resolution of these matters, the outcome could be material to the Partnership’s future consolidated operating results for a particular period or periods.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for loss and gain contingencies. Describes any existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as of the balance sheet date (or prior to issuance of the financial statements) as to a probable or reasonably possible loss incurred by an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to occur, and typically discloses the amount of loss recorded or a range of possible loss, or an assertion that no reasonable estimate can be made.

+ References + Details