Commitments And Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2012
Loss Contingency [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	Commitments and contingencies may arise in the ordinary course of business. Off Balance Sheet Commitments The company has transactions with various private equity, real estate and other investment entities sponsored by the company for the investment of client assets in the normal course of business. Many of the company's investment products are structured as limited partnerships. The company's investment may take the form of the general partner or a limited partner, and the entities are structured such that each partner makes capital commitments that are to be drawn down over the life of the partnership as investment opportunities are identified. Separately, the company entered into a share purchase agreement on September 27, 2012 to acquire 49.0% of Religare Asset Management Limited, a company incorporated in India. The purchase is subject to regulatory approval. At December 31, 2012, the company's undrawn capital and purchase commitments were $209.3 million (December 31, 2011: $161.2 million). During 2007, Invesco elected to enter into contingent support agreements for two of its investment trusts to enable them to sustain a stable pricing structure. These two trusts are unregistered trusts that invest in fixed income securities and are available only to limited types of investors. The agreements were amended to extend the term through June 30, 2013; further extensions are likely. As of December 31, 2012, the total committed support under these agreements was $21.0 million with an internal approval mechanism to increase the maximum possible support to $66.0 million at the option of the company. The estimated value of these agreements at December 31, 2012, was $1.0 million (December 31, 2011: $1.0 million), which was recorded in other current liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The estimated value of these agreements is lower than the maximum support amount, reflecting management’s estimation that the likelihood of funding under the support agreements is low. Significant investor redemptions out of the trusts before the scheduled maturity of the underlying securities or significant credit default issues of the securities held within the trusts’ portfolios could change the company’s estimation of likelihood of funding. No payment has been made under either agreement nor has Invesco realized any loss from the support agreements through the date of this Report. These trusts were not consolidated because the company was not deemed to be the primary beneficiary. A subsidiary of the company has received assessments related to various prior taxation periods for goods and services tax on revenue to which management fee rebates had been applied in those periods. The assessments, related interest, and penalty amounts are approximately $20.8 million. Management believes Canada Revenue Agency's claims are unfounded and that these assessments are unlikely to stand, and accordingly no provision has been recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. The Parent and various company subsidiaries have entered into agreements with financial institutions to guarantee certain obligations of other company subsidiaries. The company would be required to perform under these guarantees in the event of certain defaults. The company has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote. Legal Contingencies In July 2010, various closed-end funds formerly advised by Van Kampen Investments or Morgan Stanley Investment Management included in the acquired business had complaints filed against them in New York State Court commencing derivative lawsuits purportedly brought on behalf of the common shareholders of those funds. The funds are nominal defendants in these derivative lawsuits and the defendants also include Van Kampen Investments (acquired by Invesco on June 1, 2010), Morgan Stanley Investment Management and certain officers and trustees of the funds who are or were employees of those firms. Invesco has certain obligations under the applicable acquisition agreement regarding the defense costs and any damages associated with this litigation. The plaintiffs allege breaches of fiduciary duties owed by the non-fund defendants to the funds’ common shareholders related to the funds’ redemption in prior periods of Auction Rate Preferred Securities (ARPS) theretofore issued by the funds. The complaints are similar to other complaints filed against investment advisers, officers and trustees of closed-end funds in other fund complexes which issued and redeemed ARPS. The complaints allege that the advisers, distributors and certain officers and trustees of those funds breached their fiduciary duty by redeeming ARPS at their liquidation value when there was no obligation to do so and when the value of ARPS in the secondary marketplace were significantly below their liquidation value. The complaints also allege that the ARPS redemptions were principally motivated by the fund sponsors’ interests to preserve distribution relationships with brokers and other financial intermediaries who held ARPS after having repurchased them from their own clients. The complaints do not specify alleged damages. Certain other funds included in the acquired business have received demand letters expressing similar allegations. Such demand letters could be precursors to additional similar lawsuits being commenced against those other funds. The Boards of Trustees of the funds established special committees of independent trustees to conduct an inquiry regarding the allegations set forth in the complaints and demand letters. Those evaluations have been completed, and the Boards of Trustees of the funds accepted the recommendation of their special litigation committees to (i) reject the demands contained in the demand letters and (ii) to seek dismissal of the related lawsuits. Motions to dismiss were filed on October 4, 2011 and are pending. Invesco believes the cases and other claims identified above should be dismissed or otherwise will terminate, although there can be no assurance of that result. Invesco intends to defend vigorously any cases which may survive beyond initial motions to dismiss. The company cannot predict with certainty, however, the eventual outcome of such cases and other claims, nor whether they will have a material negative impact on the company. The nature and progression of litigation can make it difficult to predict the impact a particular lawsuit will have on the company. There are many reasons that the company cannot make these assessments, including, among others, one or more of the following: the proceeding is in its early stages; the damages sought are unspecified, unsupportable, unexplained or uncertain; the claimant is seeking relief other than compensatory damages; the matter presents novel legal claims or other meaningful legal uncertainties; discovery has not started or is not complete; there are significant facts in dispute; and there are other parties who may share in any ultimate liability. The company is from time to time involved in litigation relating to other claims arising in the ordinary course of its business. Management is of the opinion that the ultimate resolution of such claims will not materially affect the company’s business, financial position, results of operation or liquidity. In management’s opinion, adequate accrual has been made as of December 31, 2012 to provide for any such losses that may arise from matters for which the company could reasonably estimate an amount. Furthermore, in management’s opinion, it is not possible to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to other litigation contingencies. The investment management industry also is subject to extensive levels of ongoing regulatory oversight and examination. In the United States and other jurisdictions in which the company operates, governmental authorities regularly make inquiries, hold investigations and administer market conduct examinations with respect to compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Additional lawsuits or regulatory enforcement actions arising out of these inquiries may in the future be filed against the company and related entities and individuals in the U.S. and other jurisdictions in which the company and its affiliates operate. Any material loss of investor and/or client confidence as a result of such inquiries and/or litigation could result in a significant decline in assets under management, which would have an adverse effect on the company’s future financial results and its ability to grow its business.

Commitments and contingencies may arise in the ordinary course of business.

Off Balance Sheet Commitments

The company has transactions with various private equity, real estate and other investment entities sponsored by the company for the investment of client assets in the normal course of business. Many of the company's investment products are structured as limited partnerships. The company's investment may take the form of the general partner or a limited partner, and the entities are structured such that each partner makes capital commitments that are to be drawn down over the life of the partnership as investment opportunities are identified. Separately, the company entered into a share purchase agreement on September 27, 2012 to acquire 49.0% of Religare Asset Management Limited, a company incorporated in India. The purchase is subject to regulatory approval. At December 31, 2012, the company's undrawn capital and purchase commitments were $209.3 million (December 31, 2011: $161.2 million).

During 2007, Invesco elected to enter into contingent support agreements for two of its investment trusts to enable them to sustain a stable pricing structure. These two trusts are unregistered trusts that invest in fixed income securities and are available only to limited types of investors. The agreements were amended to extend the term through June 30, 2013; further extensions are likely. As of December 31, 2012, the total committed support under these agreements was $21.0 million with an internal approval mechanism to increase the maximum possible support to $66.0 million at the option of the company. The estimated value of these agreements at December 31, 2012, was $1.0 million (December 31, 2011: $1.0 million), which was recorded in other current liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. The estimated value of these agreements is lower than the maximum support amount, reflecting management’s estimation that the likelihood of funding under the support agreements is low. Significant investor redemptions out of the trusts before the scheduled maturity of the underlying securities or significant credit default issues of the securities held within the trusts’ portfolios could change the company’s estimation of likelihood of funding. No payment has been made under either agreement nor has Invesco realized any loss from the support agreements through the date of this Report. These trusts were not consolidated because the company was not deemed to be the primary beneficiary.

A subsidiary of the company has received assessments related to various prior taxation periods for goods and services tax on revenue to which management fee rebates had been applied in those periods. The assessments, related interest, and penalty amounts are approximately $20.8 million. Management believes Canada Revenue Agency's claims are unfounded and that these assessments are unlikely to stand, and accordingly no provision has been recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Parent and various company subsidiaries have entered into agreements with financial institutions to guarantee certain obligations of other company subsidiaries. The company would be required to perform under these guarantees in the event of certain defaults. The company has not had prior claims or losses pursuant to these contracts and expects the risk of loss to be remote.

Legal Contingencies

In July 2010, various closed-end funds formerly advised by Van Kampen Investments or Morgan Stanley Investment Management included in the acquired business had complaints filed against them in New York State Court commencing derivative lawsuits purportedly brought on behalf of the common shareholders of those funds. The funds are nominal defendants in these derivative lawsuits and the defendants also include Van Kampen Investments (acquired by Invesco on June 1, 2010), Morgan Stanley Investment Management and certain officers and trustees of the funds who are or were employees of those firms. Invesco has certain obligations under the applicable acquisition agreement regarding the defense costs and any damages associated with this litigation. The plaintiffs allege breaches of fiduciary duties owed by the non-fund defendants to the funds’ common shareholders related to the funds’ redemption in prior periods of Auction Rate Preferred Securities (ARPS) theretofore issued by the funds. The complaints are similar to other complaints filed against investment advisers, officers and trustees of closed-end funds in other fund complexes which issued and redeemed ARPS. The complaints allege that the advisers, distributors and certain officers and trustees of those funds breached their fiduciary duty by redeeming ARPS at their liquidation value when there was no obligation to do so and when the value of ARPS in the secondary marketplace were significantly below their liquidation value. The complaints also allege that the ARPS redemptions were principally motivated by the fund sponsors’ interests to preserve distribution relationships with brokers and other financial intermediaries who held ARPS after having repurchased them from their own clients. The complaints do not specify alleged damages. Certain other funds included in the acquired business have received demand letters expressing similar allegations. Such demand letters could be precursors to additional similar lawsuits being commenced against those other funds. The Boards of Trustees of the funds established special committees of independent trustees to conduct an inquiry regarding the allegations set forth in the complaints and demand letters. Those evaluations have been completed, and the Boards of Trustees of the funds accepted the recommendation of their special litigation committees to (i) reject the demands contained in the demand letters and (ii) to seek dismissal of the related lawsuits. Motions to dismiss were filed on October 4, 2011 and are pending.

Invesco believes the cases and other claims identified above should be dismissed or otherwise will terminate, although there can be no assurance of that result. Invesco intends to defend vigorously any cases which may survive beyond initial motions to dismiss. The company cannot predict with certainty, however, the eventual outcome of such cases and other claims, nor whether they will have a material negative impact on the company. The nature and progression of litigation can make it difficult to predict the impact a particular lawsuit will have on the company. There are many reasons that the company cannot make these assessments, including, among others, one or more of the following: the proceeding is in its early stages; the damages sought are unspecified, unsupportable, unexplained or uncertain; the claimant is seeking relief other than compensatory damages; the matter presents novel legal claims or other meaningful legal uncertainties; discovery has not started or is not complete; there are significant facts in dispute; and there are other parties who may share in any ultimate liability.

The company is from time to time involved in litigation relating to other claims arising in the ordinary course of its business. Management is of the opinion that the ultimate resolution of such claims will not materially affect the company’s business, financial position, results of operation or liquidity. In management’s opinion, adequate accrual has been made as of December 31, 2012 to provide for any such losses that may arise from matters for which the company could reasonably estimate an amount. Furthermore, in management’s opinion, it is not possible to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses with respect to other litigation contingencies.

The investment management industry also is subject to extensive levels of ongoing regulatory oversight and examination. In the United States and other jurisdictions in which the company operates, governmental authorities regularly make inquiries, hold investigations and administer market conduct examinations with respect to compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Additional lawsuits or regulatory enforcement actions arising out of these inquiries may in the future be filed against the company and related entities and individuals in the U.S. and other jurisdictions in which the company and its affiliates operate. Any material loss of investor and/or client confidence as a result of such inquiries and/or litigation could result in a significant decline in assets under management, which would have an adverse effect on the company’s future financial results and its ability to grow its business.