CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	CONTINGENCIES The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosures in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. For purposes of this Note, Citigroup, its affiliates and subsidiaries, and current and former officers, directors and employees, are sometimes collectively referred to as Citigroup and Related Parties. In accordance with ASC 450, Citigroup establishes accruals for contingencies, including the litigation and regulatory matters disclosed herein, when Citigroup believes it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Once established, accruals are adjusted from time to time, as appropriate, in light of additional information. The amount of loss ultimately incurred in relation to those matters may be substantially higher or lower than the amounts accrued for those matters. If Citigroup has not accrued for a matter because the matter does not meet the criteria for accrual (as set forth above), or Citigroup believes an exposure to loss exists in excess of the amount accrued for a particular matter, in each case assuming a material loss is reasonably possible, Citigroup discloses the matter. In addition, for such matters, Citigroup discloses an estimate of the aggregate reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of the amounts accrued for those matters as to which an estimate can be made. As of March 31, 2016, Citigroup estimates that the reasonably possible unaccrued loss for these matters ranges up to approximately $3.0 billion in the aggregate. As available information changes, the matters for which Citigroup is able to estimate will change, and the estimates themselves will change. In addition, while many estimates presented in financial statements and other financial disclosure involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty, estimates of the range of reasonably possible loss arising from litigation and regulatory proceedings are subject to particular uncertainties. For example, at the time of making an estimate, Citigroup may have only preliminary, incomplete or inaccurate information about the facts underlying the claim; its assumptions about the future rulings of the court or other tribunal on significant issues, or the behavior and incentives of adverse parties or regulators, may prove to be wrong; and the outcomes it is attempting to predict are often not amenable to the use of statistical or other quantitative analytical tools. In addition, from time to time an outcome may occur that Citigroup had not accounted for in its estimates because it had deemed such an outcome to be remote. For all these reasons, the amount of loss in excess of accruals ultimately incurred for the matters as to which an estimate has been made could be substantially higher or lower than the range of loss included in the estimate. Subject to the foregoing, it is the opinion of Citigroup's management, based on current knowledge and after taking into account its current legal accruals, that the eventual outcome of all matters described in this Note would not be likely to have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition of Citigroup. Nonetheless, given the substantial or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters, and the inherent unpredictability of such matters, an adverse outcome in certain of these matters could, from time to time, have a material adverse effect on Citigroup’s consolidated results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods. For further information on ASC 450 and Citigroup's accounting and disclosure framework for contingencies, including for litigation and regulatory matters disclosed herein, see Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters Mortgage-Backed Securities and CDO Investor Actions: On April 6, 2016, the court in TENNESSEE CONSOLIDATED RETIREMENT SYSTEM v. J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC, ET AL. denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 13-1729-II (Tenn. Ch. Ct.) (McCoy, Ch.). Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: On April 18, 2016, a derivative action captioned IRA FOR THE BENEFIT OF VICTORIA SHAEV v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in New York state court on behalf of Citigroup (as nominal defendant) against certain of Citigroup’s present and former directors and officers, seeking damages arising out of defendants’ alleged mismanagement with respect to residential MBS. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 652066/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.). Tribune Company Bankruptcy On March 29, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of state-law constructive fraudulent conveyance claims asserted by Tribune noteholders against various defendants, including certain Citigroup affiliates. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 13-3992, 13-3875, 13-4178, and 13-4196 (2d Cir.). Foreign Exchange Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: On January 22, 2016, plaintiffs in NYPL v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL. filed a second amended class action complaint naming Citibank and Citicorp as defendants, in addition to Citigroup and numerous other foreign exchange dealers. The defendants moved to stay or consolidate the case with the consolidated proceeding captioned IN RE FOREIGN EXCHANGE BENCHMARK RATES ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 13 Civ. 7789 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.) and 15 Civ. 9300 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). On April 6, 2016, the plaintiff in ALLEN v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. filed a second amended class action complaint against numerous foreign exchange dealers, including Citigroup and Citibank. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 Civ. 4285 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). On December 22, 2015, plaintiffs in NEGRETE v. CITIBANK, N.A. opposed Citibank’s motion to dismiss and filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment on one of their breach of contract claims. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 Civ. 7250 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sweet, J.). Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: On March 30, 2016, a derivative action captioned OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION & RETIREMENT SYSTEM, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in the Delaware Chancery Court on behalf of Citigroup (as nominal defendant) against certain of Citigroup’s present and former directors and officers. Plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty and waste of corporate assets in connection with defendants’ alleged failure to exercise appropriate oversight and management of Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering laws and regulations and related consent decrees concerning Citigroup subsidiaries, Banco Nacional de Mexico, or Banamex, and Banamex USA (BUSA), as well as defendants’ alleged failures to implement adequate internal controls and exercise adequate oversight with respect to Citigroup subsidiaries’ participation in foreign exchange markets and credit card practices. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number C.A. No. 12151-VCG (Del. Ch.) (Glasscock, Ch.). ISDAFIX-Related Litigation and Other Matters Antitrust and Other Litigations: On March 28, 2016, the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the antitrust, breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims in plaintiffs’ amended consolidated complaint, while granting the motion as to plaintiffs’ claims of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and tortious interference with contract. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 14 Civ. 7126 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.). Money Laundering Inquiries Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: As described above in Foreign Exchange Matters, on March 30, 2016, a derivative action captioned OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION & RETIREMENT SYSTEM, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in the Delaware Chancery Court (the Delaware Action). Due to the similarity of issues, plaintiffs in a separate derivative action captioned FIREMAN’S RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ST. LOUIS, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. voluntarily dismissed the action in favor of proceeding together with plaintiffs in the Delaware Action. Plaintiffs’ derivative claims were dismissed without prejudice, except their claim for violation of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which was dismissed with prejudice. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers C.A. No. 12151-VCG (Del. Ch.) (Glasscock, Ch.) and 15 Civ. 7501 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.). Oceanografia Fraud and Related Matters Other Litigation: On February 26, 2016, a complaint was filed against Citigroup in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida alleging that it conspired with Oceanografía, S.A. de C.V. (OSA) and others with respect to receivable financings and other financing arrangements related to OSA in a manner that injured bondholders and other creditors of OSA. The complaint asserts claims on behalf of 39 plaintiffs that are characterized in the complaint variously as trade creditors of, investors in, or lenders to OSA. Plaintiffs collectively claim to have lost $1.1 billion as a result of OSA’s bankruptcy. The complaint asserts claims under the federal civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and seeks treble damages and other relief pursuant to that statute. The complaint also asserts claims for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16-20725 (S.D. Fla.) (Gayles, J.). Settlement Payments Payments required in settlement agreements described above have been made or are covered by existing litigation accruals.

CONTINGENCIES

The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosures in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K. For purposes of this Note, Citigroup, its affiliates and subsidiaries, and current and former officers, directors and employees, are sometimes collectively referred to as Citigroup and Related Parties.

In accordance with ASC 450, Citigroup establishes accruals for contingencies, including the litigation and regulatory matters disclosed herein, when Citigroup believes it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Once established, accruals are adjusted from time to time, as appropriate, in light of additional information. The amount of loss ultimately incurred in relation to those matters may be substantially higher or lower than the amounts accrued for those matters.

If Citigroup has not accrued for a matter because the matter does not meet the criteria for accrual (as set forth above), or Citigroup believes an exposure to loss exists in excess of the amount accrued for a particular matter, in each case assuming a material loss is reasonably possible, Citigroup discloses the matter. In addition, for such matters, Citigroup discloses an estimate of the aggregate reasonably possible loss or range of loss in excess of the amounts accrued for those matters as to which an estimate can be made. As of March 31, 2016, Citigroup estimates that the reasonably possible unaccrued loss for these matters ranges up to approximately $3.0 billion in the aggregate.

As available information changes, the matters for which Citigroup is able to estimate will change, and the estimates themselves will change. In addition, while many estimates presented in financial statements and other financial disclosure involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty, estimates of the range of reasonably possible loss arising from litigation and regulatory proceedings are subject to particular uncertainties. For example, at the time of making an estimate, Citigroup may have only preliminary, incomplete or inaccurate information about the facts underlying the claim; its assumptions about the future rulings of the court or other tribunal on significant issues, or the behavior and incentives of adverse parties or regulators, may prove to be wrong; and the outcomes it is attempting to predict are often not amenable to the use of statistical or other quantitative analytical tools. In addition, from time to time an outcome may occur that Citigroup had not accounted for in its estimates because it had deemed such an outcome to be remote. For all these reasons, the amount of loss in excess of accruals ultimately incurred for the matters as to which an estimate has been made could be substantially higher or lower than the range of loss included in the estimate.

Subject to the foregoing, it is the opinion of Citigroup's management, based on current knowledge and after taking into account its current legal accruals, that the eventual outcome of all matters described in this Note would not be likely to have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition of Citigroup. Nonetheless, given the substantial or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters, and the inherent unpredictability of such matters, an adverse outcome in certain of these matters could, from time to time, have a material adverse effect on Citigroup’s consolidated results of operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.

For further information on ASC 450 and Citigroup's accounting and disclosure framework for contingencies, including for litigation and regulatory matters disclosed herein, see Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Mortgage-Backed Securities and CDO Investor Actions: On April 6, 2016, the court in TENNESSEE CONSOLIDATED RETIREMENT SYSTEM v. J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC, ET AL. denied defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 13-1729-II (Tenn. Ch. Ct.) (McCoy, Ch.).

Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: On April 18, 2016, a derivative action captioned IRA FOR THE BENEFIT OF VICTORIA SHAEV v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in New York state court on behalf of Citigroup (as nominal defendant) against certain of Citigroup’s present and former directors and officers, seeking damages arising out of defendants’ alleged mismanagement with respect to residential MBS. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 652066/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.).

Tribune Company Bankruptcy

On March 29, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of state-law constructive fraudulent conveyance claims asserted by Tribune noteholders against various defendants, including certain Citigroup affiliates. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 13-3992, 13-3875, 13-4178, and 13-4196 (2d Cir.).

Foreign Exchange Matters

Antitrust and Other Litigation: On January 22, 2016, plaintiffs in NYPL v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL. filed a second amended class action complaint naming Citibank and Citicorp as defendants, in addition to Citigroup and numerous other foreign exchange dealers. The defendants moved to stay or consolidate the case with the consolidated proceeding captioned IN RE FOREIGN EXCHANGE BENCHMARK RATES ANTITRUST LITIGATION. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 13 Civ. 7789 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.) and 15 Civ. 9300 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.).

On April 6, 2016, the plaintiff in ALLEN v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. filed a second amended class action complaint against numerous foreign exchange dealers, including Citigroup and Citibank. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 Civ. 4285 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.).

On December 22, 2015, plaintiffs in NEGRETE v. CITIBANK, N.A. opposed Citibank’s motion to dismiss and filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment on one of their breach of contract claims. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 Civ. 7250 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sweet, J.).

Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: On March 30, 2016, a derivative action captioned OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION & RETIREMENT SYSTEM, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in the Delaware Chancery Court on behalf of Citigroup (as nominal defendant) against certain of Citigroup’s present and former directors and officers. Plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty and waste of corporate assets in connection with defendants’ alleged failure to exercise appropriate oversight and management of Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering laws and regulations and related consent decrees concerning Citigroup subsidiaries, Banco Nacional de Mexico, or Banamex, and Banamex USA (BUSA), as well as defendants’ alleged failures to implement adequate internal controls and exercise adequate oversight with respect to Citigroup subsidiaries’ participation in foreign exchange markets and credit card practices. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number C.A. No. 12151-VCG (Del. Ch.) (Glasscock, Ch.).

ISDAFIX-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Antitrust and Other Litigations: On March 28, 2016, the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the antitrust, breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims in plaintiffs’ amended consolidated complaint, while granting the motion as to plaintiffs’ claims of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and tortious interference with contract. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 14 Civ. 7126 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.).

Money Laundering Inquiries

Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: As described above in Foreign Exchange Matters, on March 30, 2016, a derivative action captioned OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION & RETIREMENT SYSTEM, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. was filed in the Delaware Chancery Court (the Delaware Action). Due to the similarity of issues, plaintiffs in a separate derivative action captioned FIREMAN’S RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF ST. LOUIS, ET AL. v. CORBAT, ET AL. voluntarily dismissed the action in favor of proceeding together with plaintiffs in the Delaware Action. Plaintiffs’ derivative claims were dismissed without prejudice, except their claim for violation of Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which was dismissed with prejudice. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers C.A. No. 12151-VCG (Del. Ch.) (Glasscock, Ch.) and 15 Civ. 7501 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.).

Oceanografia Fraud and Related Matters

Other Litigation: On February 26, 2016, a complaint was filed against Citigroup in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida alleging that it conspired with Oceanografía, S.A. de C.V. (OSA) and others with respect to receivable financings and other financing arrangements related to OSA in a manner that injured bondholders and other creditors of OSA. The complaint asserts claims on behalf of 39 plaintiffs that are characterized in the complaint variously as trade creditors of, investors in, or lenders to OSA. Plaintiffs collectively claim to have lost $1.1 billion as a result of OSA’s bankruptcy. The complaint asserts claims under the federal civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and seeks treble damages and other relief pursuant to that statute. The complaint also asserts claims for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16-20725 (S.D. Fla.) (Gayles, J.).

Settlement Payments

Payments required in settlement agreements described above have been made or are covered by existing litigation accruals.