CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	CONTINGENCIES The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosures in Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of each of Citigroup’s First Quarter of 2017 Form 10-Q and Second Quarter of 2017 Form 10-Q and Note 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2016 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. At September 30, 2017, Citigroup’s estimate of the reasonably possible unaccrued loss for these matters was materially unchanged from the estimate of approximately $1.5 billion in the aggregate as of June 30, 2017. 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 disclosures 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 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters Mortgage-Backed Securities Trustee Actions: On July 28, 2017, Citibank filed an appeal with the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department, appealing the portions of the June 27, 2017 New York State Supreme Court decision in FIXED INCOME SHARES: SERIES M, ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. denying its motion to dismiss. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 653891/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Ramos, J.). Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings On September 29, 2017, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LBHI) filed a motion for approval of a global settlement in LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC. ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. ET AL. As part of the global settlement, Citibank will retain $350 million from LBHI’s deposit at Citibank and return to LBHI and its affiliates all of the remaining deposited funds. In addition, LBHI will withdraw its remaining objections to the bankruptcy claims filed by Citibank and its affiliates. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 12-01044 and 08-13555 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) (Chapman, J.). Foreign Exchange Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: On August 3, 2017, in NYPL v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL., the court ruled that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged in their proposed amended complaint that they suffered antitrust injury and are appropriate plaintiffs to bring the suit. On August 10, 2017, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On August 24, 2017, defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss or to certify the court’s ruling for interlocutory appeal. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 15 Civ. 2290 (N.D. Cal.) (Chhabria, J.) and 15 Civ. 9300 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). On August 11, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ consolidated amended complaints in CONTANT ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION ET AL. and LAVENDER ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION ET AL. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 16 Civ. 7512 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.), 17 Civ. 4392 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.), and 17 Civ. 3139 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). On August 18, 2017, in NEGRETE v. CITIBANK, N.A., the parties stipulated to voluntary dismissal of plaintiffs’ sole remaining claim that was not dismissed in the court’s February 27, 2017 order. On September 7, 2017, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 15 Civ. 7250 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sweet, J.) and 17-2783 (2d Cir.). On September 11, 2017, in ALPARI (US), LLC v. CITIGROUP INC. AND CITIBANK, N.A., plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal, dismissing its case against Citigroup and Citibank in its entirety without prejudice. The court approved the dismissal on September 12, 2017 and ordered the case closed. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 17 Civ. 5269 (S.D.N.Y.). Interbank Offered Rates-Related Litigation and Other Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: On August 31, 2017, the court granted preliminary approval to a $130 million settlement with Citigroup and Citibank and the largest plaintiffs’ class in IN RE LIBOR-BASED FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION, which consists of investors who purchased over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives from USD LIBOR panel banks. On October 11, 2017, the second largest plaintiffs’ class, made up of investors who traded Eurodollar futures and options on exchanges, filed a motion for preliminary approval of settlements with certain defendants, including Citigroup and Citibank. Additional information concerning these actions and related actions and appeals is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 11 MD 2262 (S.D.N.Y.) (Buchwald, J.) and 17-1569 (2d Cir.). On August 18, 2017, in FRONTPOINT ASIAN EVENT DRIVEN FUND, LTD ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. ET AL., the court granted in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed all claims against foreign bank defendants, antitrust claims asserted by one of the two named plaintiffs, and all RICO, implied covenant, and unjust enrichment claims. The court allowed one antitrust claim to proceed against the U.S. bank defendants, including Citigroup and Citibank. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 18, 2017. On October 18, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16 Civ. 5263 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.). Sovereign Securities Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: In IN RE TREASURY SECURITIES AUCTION ANTITRUST LITIGATION, pursuant to a court-ordered stipulation, plaintiffs will file a consolidated amended complaint by November 15, 2017. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 MD 2673 (S.D.N.Y.) (Gardephe, J.). On October 6, 2017, plaintiffs in IN RE SSA BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION filed a motion for leave to amend their complaint, along with a proposed second amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16 Civ. 03711 (S.D.N.Y.) (Ramos, 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 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of each of Citigroup’s First Quarter of 2017 Form 10-Q and Second Quarter of 2017 Form 10-Q and Note 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2016 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. At September 30, 2017, Citigroup’s estimate of the reasonably possible unaccrued loss for these matters was materially unchanged from the estimate of approximately $1.5 billion in the aggregate as of June 30, 2017.

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 disclosures 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 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup’s 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Mortgage-Backed Securities Trustee Actions: On July 28, 2017, Citibank filed an appeal with the New York State Supreme Court Appellate Division, First Department, appealing the portions of the June 27, 2017 New York State Supreme Court decision in FIXED INCOME SHARES: SERIES M, ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. denying its motion to dismiss. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 653891/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Ramos, J.).

Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings

On September 29, 2017, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LBHI) filed a motion for approval of a global settlement in LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC. ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. ET AL. As part of the global settlement, Citibank will retain $350 million from LBHI’s deposit at Citibank and return to LBHI and its affiliates all of the remaining deposited funds. In addition, LBHI will withdraw its remaining objections to the bankruptcy claims filed by Citibank and its affiliates. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 12-01044 and 08-13555 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) (Chapman, J.).

Foreign Exchange Matters

Antitrust and Other Litigation: On August 3, 2017, in NYPL v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL., the court ruled that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged in their proposed amended complaint that they suffered antitrust injury and are appropriate plaintiffs to bring the suit. On August 10, 2017, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On August 24, 2017, defendants filed a renewed motion to dismiss or to certify the court’s ruling for interlocutory appeal. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 15 Civ. 2290 (N.D. Cal.) (Chhabria, J.) and 15 Civ. 9300 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.).

On August 11, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ consolidated amended complaints in CONTANT ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION ET AL. and LAVENDER ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION ET AL. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 16 Civ. 7512 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.), 17 Civ. 4392 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.), and 17 Civ. 3139 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.).

On August 18, 2017, in NEGRETE v. CITIBANK, N.A., the parties stipulated to voluntary dismissal of plaintiffs’ sole remaining claim that was not dismissed in the court’s February 27, 2017 order. On September 7, 2017, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 15 Civ. 7250 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sweet, J.) and 17-2783 (2d Cir.).

On September 11, 2017, in ALPARI (US), LLC v. CITIGROUP INC. AND CITIBANK, N.A., plaintiff filed a notice of dismissal, dismissing its case against Citigroup and Citibank in its entirety without prejudice. The court approved the dismissal on September 12, 2017 and ordered the case closed. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 17 Civ. 5269 (S.D.N.Y.).

Interbank Offered Rates-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Antitrust and Other Litigation: On August 31, 2017, the court granted preliminary approval to a $130 million settlement with Citigroup and Citibank and the largest plaintiffs’ class in IN RE LIBOR-BASED FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION, which consists of investors who purchased over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives from USD LIBOR panel banks. On October 11, 2017, the second largest plaintiffs’ class, made up of investors who traded Eurodollar futures and options on exchanges, filed a motion for preliminary approval of settlements with certain defendants, including Citigroup and Citibank. Additional information concerning these actions and related actions and appeals is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 11 MD 2262 (S.D.N.Y.) (Buchwald, J.) and 17-1569 (2d Cir.).

On August 18, 2017, in FRONTPOINT ASIAN EVENT DRIVEN FUND, LTD ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. ET AL., the court granted in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed all claims against foreign bank defendants, antitrust claims asserted by one of the two named plaintiffs, and all RICO, implied covenant, and unjust enrichment claims. The court allowed one antitrust claim to proceed against the U.S. bank defendants, including Citigroup and Citibank. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 18, 2017. On October 18, 2017, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16 Civ. 5263 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.).

Sovereign Securities Matters

Antitrust and Other Litigation: In IN RE TREASURY SECURITIES AUCTION ANTITRUST LITIGATION, pursuant to a court-ordered stipulation, plaintiffs will file a consolidated amended complaint by November 15, 2017. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 15 MD 2673 (S.D.N.Y.) (Gardephe, J.).

On October 6, 2017, plaintiffs in IN RE SSA BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION filed a motion for leave to amend their complaint, along with a proposed second amended complaint. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 16 Civ. 03711 (S.D.N.Y.) (Ramos, J.).

Settlement Payments

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