CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2013
CONTINGENCIES
CONTINGENCIES	24. CONTINGENCIES The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosures in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K and Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013. 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 (formerly SFAS 5), Citigroup establishes accruals for litigation and regulatory matters, including 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 matters for which an accrual has been established 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 June 30, 2013, Citigroup's estimate was materially unchanged from its estimate of approximately $5 billion at December 31, 2012, as more fully described in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K. As available information changes, the matters for which Citigroup is able to estimate, 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 litigation and regulatory matters, see Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K. Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters *Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters* Securities Actions: On August 1, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order finally approving the class action settlement in IN RE CITIGROUP INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 07 Civ. 9901 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.). On July 23, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York held a fairness hearing in IN RE CITIGROUP INC. BOND LITIGATION. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 07 Civ. 9522 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.). On May 31, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order dismissing with prejudice the consolidated action INTERNATIONAL FUND MANAGEMENT S.A., ET AL. v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL. and the individual action SWISSCANTO ASSET MANAGEMENT AG, ET AL. v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL., pursuant to settlement agreements reached by the parties. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 09 Civ. 8755 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.) and 12 Civ. 9050 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.). Mortgage-Backed Securities and CDO Investor Actions and Repurchase Claims: On May 29, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York so-ordered the parties' stipulation of voluntary dismissal with prejudice in FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL. On June 24, 2013, the court entered orders of voluntary dismissal with prejudice and bar orders in FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL. and FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. ALLY FINANCIAL INC., ET AL., dismissing with prejudice all claims against Citigroup in those actions. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 11 Civ. 6196, 6188 and 7010 (S.D.N.Y.) (Cote, J.). On April 30, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an order reinstating certain RMBS claims on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of mortgage-backed securities issued by Residential Accredit Loans, Inc. in NEW JERSEY CARPENTERS HEALTH FUND v. RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL LLC, ET AL. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. is named as an underwriter defendant, along with several other underwriter defendants, in plaintiffs' consolidated third amended complaint, served on May 10, 2013. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 08 Civ. 8781 (S.D.N.Y.) (Baer, J.). As a result of these developments, among others, the aggregate original purchase amount of the purchases at issue in the pending RMBS and CDO investor suits, including claims that have been dismissed but are still subject to appeal or otherwise not fully resolved, is approximately $8 billion, and the aggregate original purchase amount of the purchases covered by tolling agreements with RMBS and CDO investors threatening litigation is approximately $6 billion. *KIKOs* Prior to the devaluation of the Korean won in 2008, several local banks in Korea, including a Citigroup subsidiary (CKI), entered into foreign exchange derivative transactions with small and medium-size export businesses (SMEs) to enable the SMEs to hedge their currency risk. The derivatives had "knock-in, knock-out" features. Following the devaluation of the won, many of these SMEs incurred significant losses on the derivative transactions and filed civil lawsuits against the banks, including CKI. The claims generally allege that the products were not suitable and that the risk disclosure was inadequate. As of June 30, 2013, there were 94 civil lawsuits filed by SMEs against CKI. To date, 84 decisions have been rendered at the district court level, and CKI has prevailed in 64 of those decisions. In the other 20 decisions, plaintiffs were awarded only a portion of the damages sought. The damage awards total in the aggregate approximately $28.0 million. CKI is appealing the 20 adverse decisions. A significant number of plaintiffs that had decisions rendered against them are also filing appeals, including plaintiffs that were awarded less than all of the damages they sought. Of the 84 cases decided at the district court level, 62 have been appealed to the high court, including the 20 in which an adverse decision was rendered against CKI in the district court. Of the 22 appeals decided at high court level, CKI prevailed in 13 cases, and in the other nine plaintiffs were awarded partial damages, which increased the aggregate damages awarded against CKI by a further $9.8 million. CKI is appealing seven of the adverse decisions to the Korean Supreme Court. *Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings* On May 6, 2013, Citibank, N.A. filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Barclays Bank, PLC, seeking payment under a contractual indemnity for losses suffered as a result of foreign exchange trading by Lehman Brothers Inc. in September 2008. Citi is carrying a receivable in Other assets related to the expected recovery under the indemnity based on external counsel's assessment that Citi should prevail in litigation to enforce the indemnity. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 13 Civ. 3063 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). *Lehman Structured Notes* On June 19, 2013, the Belgian Supreme Court upheld the May 2012 decision of the Brussels Court of Appeal dismissing all criminal charges against Citibank Belgium and its former employees. *Terra Firma Litigation* On May 31, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the November 2010 jury verdict in favor of Citigroup and ordered that the case be retried. The action was remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and retrial is scheduled to begin on October 7, 2013. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 09 Civ. 10459 (S.D.N.Y.) (Rakoff, J.) and 11-0126-cv (2d Cir.). Credit Default Swaps Matters In April 2011, the European Commission (DG Competition) (the EC) opened an investigation (Case No COMP/39.745) concerning the market for pricing information concerning credit default swaps (CDS). On July 2, 2013, the EC served on Citigroup and Related Parties, as well as a dozen other CDS dealers, a Statement of Objections alleging that Citigroup and the other dealers colluded to prevent exchanges from entering the credit derivatives business. The Statement of Objections sets forth the EC case team's preliminary conclusions prior to hearing the dealers' defenses. In July 2009 and September 2011, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice served Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) on Citigroup concerning potential anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry. Citigroup has responded to the CIDs and is cooperating with the investigation. In addition, putative class action complaints have been filed by various entities against Citigroup, Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Citibank, N.A., among other defendants, alleging anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry and asserting various claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act as well as a state law claim for unjust enrichment. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 1:13-cv-03357 (N.D. Ill.), 1:13-cv-04979 (N.D. Ill.), 1:13-cv-04928 (S.D.N.Y.), 1:13-cv-05413 (N.D. Ill.), and 1:13-cv-05417 (N.D. Ill.). Interbank Offered Rates—Related Litigation and Other Matters Regulatory Actions: On June 14, 2013, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced the results of its review of the submissions processes from 2007 to 2011 of twenty banks, including Citibank, N.A. Singapore Branch, for benchmarks set in Singapore, including the Singapore Interbank Offered Rates (SIBOR), Swap Offered Rates, and foreign exchange benchmarks used to settle non-deliverable forward FX contracts. All of the banks, including Citibank, N.A. Singapore Branch, were found to have deficiencies in governance, risk management, internal controls, and surveillance systems relating to benchmark submissions, and all were required, among other things, to adopt certain corrective measures, to make quarterly reports to the MAS, and (with one exception) to deposit additional statutory reserves with the MAS for a period of one year. Antitrust and Other Litigation: On May 20, 2013, an individual action was brought against Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., as well as other USD LIBOR panel banks on behalf of certain hedge funds that were parties to interest rate swap transactions. Based on allegations that the panel bank defendants manipulated USD LIBOR, plaintiffs assert claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, tortious interference with contract, civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment, and seek compensatory damages. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket number 1:13-cv-4018 (S.D.N.Y.) (Buchwald, J.). Six individual actions were filed in federal courts in California, Texas, and Pennsylvania in June and July 2013 against Citigroup and related entities by municipal and state government entities claiming to have suffered losses as a result of purported LIBOR manipulation. These actions generally assert antitrust claims as well as claims under state law theories, and seek compensatory damages, various forms of enhanced damages, attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under docket numbers 3:13-cv-1466 (S.D. Cal.) (Lorenz, J.), 3:13-cv-2921 (N.D. Cal.) (Chesney, J.), 3:13-cv-2979 (N.D. Cal.) (Tigar, J.), 2:13-cv-1476 (E.D. Cal.) (Mueller, J.), 4:13-cv-2149 (S.D. Tex.) (Hoyt, J.), and 2:13-cv-4352 (E.D. Pa.) (Restrepo. J.). Interchange Fees Litigation Numerous merchants, including large national merchants, have objected to or requested exclusion (opted out) from the class settlements, and some of those opting out have filed complaints against Visa, MasterCard, and in some instances one or more issuing banks. One of these suits, 7-ELEVEN, INC., ET AL. V. VISA INC., ET AL., names Citigroup as a defendant. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket number 1:13-CV-04442 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.). Settlement Payments Payments required in settlement agreements described above have been made or are covered by existing litigation accruals. * * * Additional matters asserting claims similar to those described above may be filed in the future.

24. CONTINGENCIES

The following information supplements and amends, as applicable, the disclosures in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K and Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013. 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 (formerly SFAS 5), Citigroup establishes accruals for litigation and regulatory matters, including 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 matters for which an accrual has been established 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 June 30, 2013, Citigroup's estimate was materially unchanged from its estimate of approximately $5 billion at December 31, 2012, as more fully described in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

As available information changes, the matters for which Citigroup is able to estimate, 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 litigation and regulatory matters, see Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Citigroup's 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters

Securities Actions: On August 1, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order finally approving the class action settlement in IN RE CITIGROUP INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 07 Civ. 9901 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.).

On July 23, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York held a fairness hearing in IN RE CITIGROUP INC. BOND LITIGATION. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 07 Civ. 9522 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.).

On May 31, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entered an order dismissing with prejudice the consolidated action INTERNATIONAL FUND MANAGEMENT S.A., ET AL. v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL. and the individual action SWISSCANTO ASSET MANAGEMENT AG, ET AL. v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL., pursuant to settlement agreements reached by the parties. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 09 Civ. 8755 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.) and 12 Civ. 9050 (S.D.N.Y.) (Stein, J.).

Mortgage-Backed Securities and CDO Investor Actions and Repurchase Claims: On May 29, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York so-ordered the parties' stipulation of voluntary dismissal with prejudice in FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. CITIGROUP INC., ET AL. On June 24, 2013, the court entered orders of voluntary dismissal with prejudice and bar orders in FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., ET AL. and FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY v. ALLY FINANCIAL INC., ET AL., dismissing with prejudice all claims against Citigroup in those actions. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 11 Civ. 6196, 6188 and 7010 (S.D.N.Y.) (Cote, J.).

On April 30, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an order reinstating certain RMBS claims on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of mortgage-backed securities issued by Residential Accredit Loans, Inc. in NEW JERSEY CARPENTERS HEALTH FUND v. RESIDENTIAL CAPITAL LLC, ET AL. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. is named as an underwriter defendant, along with several other underwriter defendants, in plaintiffs' consolidated third amended complaint, served on May 10, 2013. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 08 Civ. 8781 (S.D.N.Y.) (Baer, J.).

As a result of these developments, among others, the aggregate original purchase amount of the purchases at issue in the pending RMBS and CDO investor suits, including claims that have been dismissed but are still subject to appeal or otherwise not fully resolved, is approximately $8 billion, and the aggregate original purchase amount of the purchases covered by tolling agreements with RMBS and CDO investors threatening litigation is approximately $6 billion.

KIKOs

Prior to the devaluation of the Korean won in 2008, several local banks in Korea, including a Citigroup subsidiary (CKI), entered into foreign exchange derivative transactions with small and medium-size export businesses (SMEs) to enable the SMEs to hedge their currency risk. The derivatives had "knock-in, knock-out" features. Following the devaluation of the won, many of these SMEs incurred significant losses on the derivative transactions and filed civil lawsuits against the banks, including CKI. The claims generally allege that the products were not suitable and that the risk disclosure was inadequate.

As of June 30, 2013, there were 94 civil lawsuits filed by SMEs against CKI. To date, 84 decisions have been rendered at the district court level, and CKI has prevailed in 64 of those decisions. In the other 20 decisions, plaintiffs were awarded only a portion of the damages sought. The damage awards total in the aggregate approximately $28.0 million. CKI is appealing the 20 adverse decisions. A significant number of plaintiffs that had decisions rendered against them are also filing appeals, including plaintiffs that were awarded less than all of the damages they sought.

Of the 84 cases decided at the district court level, 62 have been appealed to the high court, including the 20 in which an adverse decision was rendered against CKI in the district court. Of the 22 appeals decided at high court level, CKI prevailed in 13 cases, and in the other nine plaintiffs were awarded partial damages, which increased the aggregate damages awarded against CKI by a further $9.8 million. CKI is appealing seven of the adverse decisions to the Korean Supreme Court.

Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings

On May 6, 2013, Citibank, N.A. filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Barclays Bank, PLC, seeking payment under a contractual indemnity for losses suffered as a result of foreign exchange trading by Lehman Brothers Inc. in September 2008. Citi is carrying a receivable in Other assets related to the expected recovery under the indemnity based on external counsel's assessment that Citi should prevail in litigation to enforce the indemnity. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 13 Civ. 3063 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.).

Lehman Structured Notes

On June 19, 2013, the Belgian Supreme Court upheld the May 2012 decision of the Brussels Court of Appeal dismissing all criminal charges against Citibank Belgium and its former employees.

Terra Firma Litigation

On May 31, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated the November 2010 jury verdict in favor of Citigroup and ordered that the case be retried. The action was remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and retrial is scheduled to begin on October 7, 2013. Additional information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 09 Civ. 10459 (S.D.N.Y.) (Rakoff, J.) and 11-0126-cv (2d Cir.).

Credit Default Swaps Matters

In April 2011, the European Commission (DG Competition) (the EC) opened an investigation (Case No COMP/39.745) concerning the market for pricing information concerning credit default swaps (CDS). On July 2, 2013, the EC served on Citigroup and Related Parties, as well as a dozen other CDS dealers, a Statement of Objections alleging that Citigroup and the other dealers colluded to prevent exchanges from entering the credit derivatives business. The Statement of Objections sets forth the EC case team's preliminary conclusions prior to hearing the dealers' defenses.

In July 2009 and September 2011, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice served Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) on Citigroup concerning potential anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry. Citigroup has responded to the CIDs and is cooperating with the investigation.

In addition, putative class action complaints have been filed by various entities against Citigroup, Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Citibank, N.A., among other defendants, alleging anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry and asserting various claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act as well as a state law claim for unjust enrichment. Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 1:13-cv-03357 (N.D. Ill.), 1:13-cv-04979 (N.D. Ill.), 1:13-cv-04928 (S.D.N.Y.), 1:13-cv-05413 (N.D. Ill.), and 1:13-cv-05417 (N.D. Ill.).

Interbank Offered Rates—Related Litigation and Other Matters

Regulatory Actions: On June 14, 2013, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced the results of its review of the submissions processes from 2007 to 2011 of twenty banks, including Citibank, N.A. Singapore Branch, for benchmarks set in Singapore, including the Singapore Interbank Offered Rates (SIBOR), Swap Offered Rates, and foreign exchange benchmarks used to settle non-deliverable forward FX contracts. All of the banks, including Citibank, N.A. Singapore Branch, were found to have deficiencies in governance, risk management, internal controls, and surveillance systems relating to benchmark submissions, and all were required, among other things, to adopt certain corrective measures, to make quarterly reports to the MAS, and (with one exception) to deposit additional statutory reserves with the MAS for a period of one year.

Antitrust and Other Litigation: On May 20, 2013, an individual action was brought against Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., as well as other USD LIBOR panel banks on behalf of certain hedge funds that were parties to interest rate swap transactions. Based on allegations that the panel bank defendants manipulated USD LIBOR, plaintiffs assert claims for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, tortious interference with contract, civil conspiracy, and unjust enrichment, and seek compensatory damages. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket number 1:13-cv-4018 (S.D.N.Y.) (Buchwald, J.).

Six individual actions were filed in federal courts in California, Texas, and Pennsylvania in June and July 2013 against Citigroup and related entities by municipal and state government entities claiming to have suffered losses as a result of purported LIBOR manipulation. These actions generally assert antitrust claims as well as claims under state law theories,

and seek compensatory damages, various forms of enhanced damages, attorneys' fees, and injunctive relief. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in court filings under docket numbers 3:13-cv-1466 (S.D. Cal.) (Lorenz, J.), 3:13-cv-2921 (N.D. Cal.) (Chesney, J.), 3:13-cv-2979 (N.D. Cal.) (Tigar, J.), 2:13-cv-1476 (E.D. Cal.) (Mueller, J.), 4:13-cv-2149 (S.D. Tex.) (Hoyt, J.), and 2:13-cv-4352 (E.D. Pa.) (Restrepo. J.).

Interchange Fees Litigation

Numerous merchants, including large national merchants, have objected to or requested exclusion (opted out) from the class settlements, and some of those opting out have filed complaints against Visa, MasterCard, and in some instances one or more issuing banks. One of these suits, 7-ELEVEN, INC., ET AL. V. VISA INC., ET AL., names Citigroup as a defendant. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under docket number 1:13-CV-04442 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.).

Settlement Payments

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

* * *

Additional matters asserting claims similar to those described above may be filed in the future.