CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
CONTINGENCIES	Mar. 31, 2021
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	CONTINGENCIES The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosure in Note 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Citi’s 2020 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 any litigation, regulatory, or tax 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 but not probable, 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 March 31, 2021, Citigroup estimates that the reasonably possible unaccrued loss for these matters ranges up to approximately $1.4 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 disclosures involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty, estimates of the range of reasonably possible loss arising from litigation, regulatory, tax, or other matters 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, regulators, or tax authorities 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 any litigation, regulatory, and tax matters disclosed herein, see Note 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Citi’s 2020 Annual Report on Form 10-K. ANZ Underwriting Matter In March 2021, the investigation of Citigroup Global Markets Australia Pty Limited commenced by the Australia Securities and Investments Commission in 2016 concluded with no enforcement action. Foreign Exchange Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: In 2020, a London-based investment manager issued a claim against Citibank and Citigroup Global Markets Limited (CGML), captioned THE ECU GROUP PLC v. CITIBANK N.A. AND OTHERS, in the High Court of Justice in London. The claimant alleges that it suffered losses from the handling and execution of certain foreign exchange stop loss orders and market orders. The claimant asserts common law and statutory claims and seeks compensatory damages. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number FL-2020-000046. On January 29, 2021, in J WISBEY & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD v. UBS AG & ORS, the court refused an application by plaintiffs to amend their pleadings. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number VID567/2019. Interbank Offered Rates–Related Litigation and Other Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: On March 17, 2021, in FUND LIQUIDATION HOLDINGS LLC, AS ASSIGNOR AND SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO FRONTPOINT ASIAN EVENT DRIVEN FUND L.P., ET AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A., ET AL., the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court regarding the court’s lack of jurisdiction and remanded the case for further proceedings. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 16 Civ. 5263 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.) and 19-2719 (2d Cir.). On April 8, 2021, in SCS BANQUE DELUBAC & CIE v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL., the Cour de cassation of France affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal of Nîmes, which had held that no court of France has territorial jurisdiction over Banque Delubac’s claims, and dismissed the plaintiff’s appeal. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket numbers RG no. 2018F02750 in the Commercial Court of Marseille and 19-16.931 in the Cour de cassation. Revlon-related Wire Transfer Litigation On February 26, 2021, Citibank filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals of the district court’s judgment in favor of the defendants. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket numbers 20-CV-6539 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.) and 21-487 (2d Cir.). Shareholder Derivative and Securities Litigation On February 4, 2021, three putative class action complaints were consolidated under the case name IN RE CITIGROUP SECURITIES LITIGATION, and a consolidated amended complaint was filed on April 20, 2021. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 1:20-CV-9132 (S.D.N.Y.) (Nathan, J.). On February 8, 2021, in IN RE CITIGROUP INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted defendants’ motion for a stay pending resolution of defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss in IN RE CITIGROUP SECURITIES LITIGATION. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 1:20-CV-09438 (S.D.N.Y.) (Nathan, J.). On February 25, 2021, the Supreme Court of the State of New York stayed two derivative actions, which have been consolidated under the case name IN RE CITIGROUP INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION, pending resolution of defendants’ anticipated motion to dismiss in IN RE CITIGROUP SECURITIES LITIGATION. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 656759/2020 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Schecter, J.). Sovereign Securities Matters Antitrust and Other Litigation: On February 9, 2021, purchasers of Euro-denominated sovereign debt issued by European central governments added Citigroup Global Markets Inc., CGML and others as defendants to a putative class action, captioned IN RE EUROPEAN GOVERNMENT BONDS ANTITRUST LITIGATION, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Plaintiffs allege that defendants engaged in a conspiracy to inflate prices of European government bonds in primary market auctions and to fix the prices of European government bonds in secondary markets. Plaintiffs assert a claim under the Sherman Act and seek treble damages and attorneys’ fees. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 19 Civ. 02601 (S.D.N.Y.) (Marrero, J.). On March 31, 2021, in IN RE TREASURY SECURITIES AUCTION ANTITRUST LITIGATION, the court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss all claims, without prejudice to plaintiffs filing an amended complaint. 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 March 8, 2021, CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. was transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 21 Civ. 147 (M.D. La.) (Dick, C.J.). Tribune Company Bankruptcy On April 19, 2021, the United States Supreme Court denied the Tribune noteholders’ petition for certiorari. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 12 MC 2296 (S.D.N.Y.) (Cote, J.), 13-3992 (2d Cir.), and 20-8 (U.S.). Wind Farm Litigation Beginning in March 2021, six wind farms in Texas have commenced actions in New York and Texas state courts for declaratory judgments and breach of contract, asserting that the February 2021 winter storm in Texas excused their performance to deliver energy to Citi Energy Inc. (CEI) under the force majeure provisions of their contracts with CEI. In addition to seeking a declaration that damages are not owed to CEI, the wind farms also seek temporary restraining orders and/or preliminary injunctions, preventing CEI from exercising remedies under the contracts. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under docket numbers 652078/2021 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty.) (Reed, J.), 2021-01387 (1st Dep’t), 652312/2021 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty.) (Reed, J.), 2021-23588 (District Court Harris County TX) (Schaffer, J.), and 2021-26150 (District Court Harris County TX) (Engelhart, J.). Settlement Payments Payments required in settlement agreements described above have been made or are covered by existing litigation or other accruals.