UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10‑Q
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2014
Commission file number 001-2979
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware No. 41-0449260
(State of incorporation) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
420 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, California 94163
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: 1-866-249-3302
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non‑accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer þ Accelerated filer ¨
Non‑accelerated filer ¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting company ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes ¨ No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
Shares Outstanding
October 31, 2014
Common stock, $1-2/3 par value 5,187,624,483
FORM 10-Q
CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX
PART I
Financial Information
Item 1.
Financial Statements
Page
Consolidated Statement of Income.....................................................................................................................................................
73
Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income..................................................................................................................................
74
Consolidated Balance Sheet.............................................................................................................................................................
75
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity........................................................................................................................................
76
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows................................................................................................................................................
78
Notes to Financial Statements
1
-
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.....................................................................................................................................
79
2
Business Combinations..............................................................................................................................................................
81
3
Federal Funds Sold, Securities Purchased under Resale Agreements and Other Short-Term Investments...............................................................
4
Investment Securities................................................................................................................................................................
82
5
Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses...........................................................................................................................................
90
6
Other Assets..........................................................................................................................................................................
108
7
Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities......................................................................................................................................
109
8
Mortgage Banking Activities.......................................................................................................................................................
117
9
Intangible Assets.....................................................................................................................................................................
120
10
Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral........................................................................................................................................
121
11
Legal Actions.........................................................................................................................................................................
124
12
Derivatives............................................................................................................................................................................
126
13
Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities...............................................................................................................................................
133
14
Preferred Stock.......................................................................................................................................................................
154
15
Employee Benefits...................................................................................................................................................................
157
16
Earnings Per Common Share.......................................................................................................................................................
158
17
Other Comprehensive Income......................................................................................................................................................
159
18
Operating Segments..................................................................................................................................................................
161
19
Regulatory and Agency Capital Requirements....................................................................................................................................
162
Item 2.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Financial Review)
Summary Financial Data................................................................................................................................................................
Overview..................................................................................................................................................................................
Earnings Performance...................................................................................................................................................................
Balance Sheet Analysis..................................................................................................................................................................
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements......................................................................................................................................................
Risk Management........................................................................................................................................................................
Capital Management.....................................................................................................................................................................
60
Regulatory Reform.......................................................................................................................................................................
66
Critical Accounting Policies.............................................................................................................................................................
67
Current Accounting Developments....................................................................................................................................................
68
Forward-Looking Statements...........................................................................................................................................................
70
Risk Factors...............................................................................................................................................................................
71
Glossary of Acronyms..................................................................................................................................................................
163
Item 3.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk......................................................................................................................
45
Item 4.
Controls and Procedures................................................................................................................................................................
72
PART II
Other Information
Legal Proceedings........................................................................................................................................................................
164
Item 1A.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds......................................................................................................................
Item 6.
Exhibits....................................................................................................................................................................................
165
Signature.........................................................................................................................................................................................
Exhibit Index....................................................................................................................................................................................
166
PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION
FINANCIAL REVIEW
Summary Financial Data
% Change
Quarter ended
Sept. 30, 2014 from
Nine months ended
Sept. 30,
June 30,
%
($ in millions, except per share amounts)
2014
2013
Change
For the Period
Wells Fargo net income
$
5,729
5,726
5,578
17,348
16,268
applicable to common stock
5,408
5,424
5,317
16,439
15,520
Diluted earnings per common share
1.02
1.01
0.99
3.08
2.89
Profitability ratios (annualized):
Wells Fargo net income to
average assets (ROA) (1)
1.40
1.47
1.53
(5)
(8)
1.48
(3)
Wells Fargo net income applicable
to common stock to average
Wells Fargo common
stockholders' equity (ROE)
13.10
13.40
14.07
(2)
(7)
13.60
13.92
Efficiency ratio (2)
57.7
57.9
59.1
58.2
(1)
Total revenue
21,213
21,066
20,478
62,904
63,115
Pre-tax pre-provision profit (PTPP) (3)
8,965
8,872
8,376
26,514
26,358
Dividends declared per common share
0.35
0.30
1.00
0.85
Average common shares outstanding
5,225.9
5,268.4
5,295.3
5,252.2
5,293.0
Diluted average common shares outstanding
5,310.4
5,350.8
5,381.7
5,339.2
5,374.7
Average loans (1)
833,199
831,043
802,134
829,378
799,080
Average assets (1)
1,617,942
1,564,003
1,446,965
1,569,621
1,425,836
Average core deposits (4)
1,012,219
991,727
940,279
992,723
934,131
Average retail core deposits (5)
703,062
698,763
670,335
697,535
666,393
Net interest margin (1)
3.06
3.15
3.39
(10)
3.13
3.45
(9)
At Period End
Investment securities
289,009
279,069
259,399
Loans (1)
838,883
828,942
809,135
Allowance for loan losses
12,681
13,101
15,159
(16)
Goodwill
25,705
25,637
Assets (1)
1,636,855
1,598,874
1,484,865
Core deposits (4)
1,016,478
1,007,485
947,805
Wells Fargo stockholders' equity
182,481
180,859
167,165
Total equity
182,990
181,549
168,813
Tier 1 capital (6)
153,437
151,679
137,468
Total capital (6)
190,525
189,480
171,329
Capital ratios:
Total equity to assets (1)
11.18
11.35
11.37
Risk-based capital (6):
Tier 1 capital
12.55
12.72
12.11
Total capital
15.58
15.89
15.09
Tier 1 leverage (6)
9.64
9.86
9.76
Common Equity Tier 1 (7)
11.11
11.31
10.60
Common shares outstanding
5,215.0
5,249.9
5,273.7
Book value per common share
31.55
31.18
28.98
Common stock price:
High
53.80
53.05
44.79
20
Low
49.47
46.72
40.79
21
44.17
34.43
28
Period end
51.87
52.56
41.32
26
Team members (active, full-time equivalent)
263,900
263,500
270,600
Financial information for certain periods prior to 2014 was revised to reflect our determination that certain factoring arrangements did not qualify as loans. Accordingly, we revised our commercial loan balances for year-end 2012 and each of the quarters in 2013 in order to present the Company’s lending trends on a comparable basis over this period. This revision, which resulted in a reduction to total commercial loans and a corresponding decrease to other liabilities, did not impact the Company’s consolidated net income or total cash flows. We reduced our commercial loans by $3.5 billion, $3.2 billion, $2.1 billion, $1.6 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, September 30, June 30, and March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively, which represented less than 1% of total commercial loans and less than 0.5% of our total loan portfolio. Other affected financial information, including financial guarantees and financial ratios, has been appropriately revised to reflect this revision. See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in this Report for more information.
The efficiency ratio is noninterest expense divided by total revenue (net interest income and noninterest income).
Pre-tax pre-provision profit (PTPP) is total revenue less noninterest expense. Management believes that PTPP is a useful financial measure because it enables investors and others to assess the Company's ability to generate capital to cover credit losses through a credit cycle.
(4)
Core deposits are noninterest-bearing deposits, interest-bearing checking, savings certificates, certain market rate and other savings, and certain foreign deposits (Eurodollar sweep balances).
Retail core deposits are total core deposits excluding Wholesale Banking core deposits and retail mortgage escrow deposits.
(6)
See Note 19 (Regulatory and Agency Capital Requirements) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
See the “Capital Management” section in this Report for additional information.
This Quarterly Report, including the Financial Review and the Financial Statements and related Notes, contains forward-looking statements, which may include forecasts of our financial results and condition, expectations for our operations and business, and our assumptions for those forecasts and expectations. Do not unduly rely on forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from our forward-looking statements due to several factors. Factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements are described in this Report, including in the “Forward-Looking Statements” section, and the “Risk Factors” and “Regulation and Supervision” sections of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 (2013 Form 10-K).
When we refer to “Wells Fargo,” “the Company,” “we,” “our” or “us” in this Report, we mean Wells Fargo & Company and Subsidiaries (consolidated). When we refer to the “Parent,” we mean Wells Fargo & Company. When we refer to “legacy Wells Fargo,” we mean Wells Fargo excluding Wachovia Corporation (Wachovia). See the Glossary of Acronyms for terms used throughout this Report.
Financial Review[1]
Overview
Wells Fargo & Company is a nationwide, diversified, community-based financial services company with $1.6 trillion in assets. Founded in 1852 and headquartered in San Francisco, we provide banking, insurance, investments, mortgage, and consumer and commercial finance through more than 8,700 locations, 12,500 ATMs and the internet (wellsfargo.com), and we have offices in 36 countries to support customers who conduct business in the global economy. With approximately 265,000 active, full-time equivalent team members, we serve one in three households in the United States and rank No. 29 on Fortune’s 2014 rankings of America’s largest corporations. We ranked fourth in assets and first in the market value of our common stock among all U.S. banks at September 30, 2014.
We use our Vision and Valuesto guide us toward growth and success. Our vision is to satisfy all our customers’ financial needs, help them succeed financially, be recognized as the premier financial services company in our markets and be one of America’s great companies. Important to our strategy to achieve this vision is to increase the number of our products our customers utilize and to offer them all of the financial products that fulfill their financial needs. Our cross-sell strategy, diversified business model and the breadth of our geographic reach facilitate growth in both strong and weak economic cycles. We can grow by expanding the number of products our current customers have with us, gain new customers in our extended markets, and increase market share in many businesses.
We have six primary values, which are based on our vision and provide the foundation for everything we do. First, we value and support our people as a competitive advantage and strive to attract, develop, retain and motivate the most talented people we can find. Second, we strive for the highest ethical standards with our team members, our customers, our communities and our shareholders. Third, with respect to our customers, we strive to base our decisions and actions on what is right for them in everything we do. Fourth, for team members we strive to build and sustain a diverse and inclusive culture – one where they feel valued and respected for who they are as well as for the skills and experiences they bring to our company. Fifth, we also look to each of our team members to be leaders in establishing, sharing and communicating our vision. Sixth, we strive to make risk management a competitive advantage by working hard to ensure that appropriate controls are in place to reduce risks to our customers, maintain and increase our competitive market position, and protect Wells Fargo’s long-term safety, soundness and reputation.
Financial Performance
Wells Fargo net income was $5.7 billion in third quarter 2014 with diluted earnings per share (EPS) of $1.02, both up 3% from a year ago, reflecting the benefit of our diversified business model, which has enabled us to produce strong and consistent results over a variety of economic and interest rate environments. We continued our focus on meeting customers’ financial needs and creating long-term value for shareholders. Compared with a year ago:
· revenue grew 4% as a result of increases in both net interest income and noninterest income;
· pre-tax pre-provision profit increased 7%;
· our loans increased $29.7 billion, or 4%, even with the planned runoff in our non-strategic/liquidating portfolios, and our core loan portfolio grew by $50.8 billion, or 7%;
· our liquidating portfolio declined $21.0 billion and was only 8% of our total loans, down from 10% a year ago;
· our deposit franchise continued to generate strong customer and balance growth, with total deposits up $88.8 billion, or 9%;
· our credit performance continued to improve with total net charge-offs down $307 million, or 31%, and represented only 32 basis points (annualized) of average loans;
· our efficiency ratio improved to 57.7%, compared with 59.1%; and
· we continued to maintain our solid customer relationships across our company, with Retail Banking cross-sell of 6.15 products per household (August 2014); Wholesale Banking cross-sell of 7.2 products (June 2014); and Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement cross-sell of 10.44 products (August 2014).
Balance Sheet and Liquidity
Our balance sheet continued to strengthen in third quarter 2014 as we increased our liquidity position, improved the quality of our assets and held more capital. We have been able to grow our loans on a year-over-year basis for 13 consecutive quarters (for the past 10 quarters year-over-year loan growth has been 3% or greater) despite the planned runoff from our non-strategic/liquidating portfolios. Our non-strategic/liquidating loan portfolios decreased $2.3 billion during the quarter and our core loan portfolio increased $12.2 billion. Our investment securities increased by $9.9 billion during the quarter, driven primarily byour purchases of U.S. Treasuries. We issued $16.3 billion of liquidity-related long-term debt as well as some additional liquidity-related short-term funding during third quarter 2014.
[1]Financial information for certain periods prior to 2014 was revised to reflect our determination that certain factoring arrangements did not qualify as loans. See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in this Report for more information.
Deposit growth remained strong with period-end deposits up $51.4 billion, or 5%, from December 31, 2013. This increase reflected solid growth across both our commercial and consumer businesses. We grew our primary consumer checking customers by a net 4.9% and primary business checking customers by a net 5.6% from a year ago (August 2014 compared with August 2013). Our ability to grow primary customers is important to our results because these customers have more interactions with us, have higher cross-sell and are more than twice as profitable as non-primary customers.
Credit Quality
Credit quality continued to improve in third quarter 2014 as losses remained at historically low levels, nonperforming assets (NPAs) continued to decrease and we continued to originate high quality loans, reflecting our long-term risk focus and the benefit from the improved housing market.Net charge-offs were $668 million, or 0.32% (annualized) of average loans, in third quarter 2014, compared with $975 million a year ago (0.48%), a 31% year-over-year decrease in losses. Our commercial portfolio produced net recoveries of $24 million, or 2 basis points of average commercial loans. Net consumer losses declined to 62 basis points in third quarter 2014 from 86 basis points in third quarter 2013. Our commercial real estate portfolios were in a net recovery position for the seventh consecutive quarter, reflecting our conservative risk discipline and improved market conditions.Losses on our consumer real estate portfolios declined $263 million from a year ago, down 51%, which included an $80 million decline in losses in our core 1-4 family first mortgage portfolio. The consumer loss levels reflected the benefit of the improving economy and our continued focus on originating high quality loans. Approximately 57% of the consumer first mortgage portfolio was originated after 2008, when new underwriting standards were implemented.
Our provision for credit losses reflected a release from the allowance for credit losses of $300 million in third quarter 2014, which was $600 million less than what we released a year ago. We continue to expect future allowance releases absent a significant deterioration in the economy, but expect a lower level of future releases as the rate of credit improvement slows and the loan portfolio continues to grow.
In addition to lower net charge-offs and provision expense, NPAs also improved and were down $406 million, or 2%, from June 30, 2014, the eighth consecutive quarter of decline. Nonaccrual loans declined $607 million from the prior quarter while foreclosed assets were up $201 million.
Capital
We continued to maintain strong capital levels while returning more capital to shareholders, increasing total equity to $183.0 billion at September 30, 2014, up $1.4 billion from the prior quarter. In third quarter 2014, our common shares outstanding declined by 34.9 million shares, the largest decline in over six years. We continued to reduce our common share count through the repurchase of 48.7 million common shares in the quarter.We entered into a $1.0 billion forward repurchase contract with an unrelated third party that settled in October 2014 for 19.8 million shares. In addition, we entered into a $750 million forward repurchase contract with an unrelated third party in October 2014 that is expected to settle in first quarter 2015 for approximately 15.1 million shares. We expect our share count to continue to decline in 2014 as a result of anticipated net share repurchases.Our net payout ratio (which is the ratio of (i) common stock dividends ($0.35 per share in third quarter 2014) and share repurchases less issuancesand stock compensation-related items, divided by (ii) net income applicable to common stock) in third quarter 2014 was 66%, in line with our recent guidance of 55-75%.
We believe an important measure of our capital strength is the estimated Common Equity Tier 1ratio under Basel III, using the Advanced Approach, fully phased-in, which increased to 10.48% in third quarter 2014.
Our regulatory capital ratios under Basel III (General Approach) remained strong with atotal risk-based capital ratio of 15.58%, Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 12.55% and Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9.64% at September 30, 2014, compared with 15.89%, 12.72% and 9.86%, respectively, at June 30, 2014. See the “Capital Management” section in this Report for more information regarding our capital, including the calculation of common equity for regulatory purposes.
Earnings Performance
Wells Fargo net income for third quarter 2014 was $5.7 billion ($1.02 diluted earnings per common share) compared with $5.6 billion ($0.99) for third quarter 2013. Net income for the first nine months of 2014 was $17.3 billion ($3.08) compared with $16.3 billion ($2.89) for the same period a year ago. Our third quarter 2014 earnings reflected continued execution of our business strategy and growth in many of our businesses. The key drivers of our financial performance in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014 were balanced net interest and fee income, diversified sources of fee income, a diversified loan portfolio and strong underlying credit performance.
Revenue, the sum of net interest income and noninterest income, was $21.2 billion in third quarter 2014, compared with $20.5 billion in third quarter 2013. Revenue for the first nine months of 2014 was $62.9 billion, down from $63.1 billion for the first nine months of 2013. The increase in revenue for third quarter 2014 was due to an increase in net interest income, fee income (including trust and investment fees) and market sensitive revenue (net gains from trading activities, debt securities and equity investments). The decline in revenue for the first nine months of 2014 was predominantly due to a decline in mortgage banking revenue, partially offset by an increase in trust and investment fees, and market sensitive revenue. Noninterest income represented 48% and 49% of revenue for the third quarter 2014 and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with 48% and 49% for the same periods a year ago. The drivers of our fee income can differ depending on the interest rate and economic environment. For example, net gains on mortgage loan origination/sales activities were 9% of our fee income in third quarter 2014, down from 11% in the same period a year ago when the refinance market was stronger. Other businesses, such as equity investments, brokerage, and mortgage servicing, contributed more to fee income this quarter, demonstrating the benefit of our diversified business model.
Net Interest Income
Earnings Performance (continued)
Net interest income is the interest earned on debt securities, loans (including yield-related loan fees) and other interest-earning assets minus the interest paid on deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt. The net interest margin is the average yield on earning assets minus the average interest rate paid for deposits and our other sources of funding. Net interest income and the net interest margin are presented on a taxable-equivalent basis in Table 1 to consistently reflect income from taxable and tax-exempt loans and securities based on a 35% federal statutory tax rate.
While the Company believes that it has the ability to increase net interest income over time, net interest income and the net interest margin in any one period can be significantly affected by a variety of factors including the mix and overall size of our earning assets portfolio and the cost of funding those assets. In addition, some sources of interest income, such as resolutions from purchased credit-impaired (PCI) loans, loan prepayment fees and collection of interest on nonaccrual loans, can vary from period to period. Net interest income growth has been challenged during the prolonged low interest rate environment as higher yielding loans and securities runoff have been replaced with lower yielding assets. The pace of this repricing has slowed in recent periods.
Net interest income on a taxable-equivalent basis was $11.2 billion and $33.0 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, up from $10.9 billion and $32.6 billion, respectively, for the same periods a year ago. The net interest margin was 3.06% and 3.13% for the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, down from 3.39% and 3.45% in the same periods a year ago. The increase in net interest income in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014 from the same periods a year ago was largely driven by growth in earning assets, including larger trading balances, investment securities purchases and increased short-term investments, which offset the decrease in earning asset yields. Lower funding expense also contributed to higher net interest income due to reduced deposit costs and the maturing of higher yielding long-term debt. The decline in net interest margin in third quarter and first nine months of 2014, compared with the same periods a year ago was primarily driven by higher funding balances, including customer-driven deposit growth and actions we have taken in response to increased regulatory liquidity expectations which raised long-term debt and term deposits. This growth in funding increased cash and federal funds sold and other short-term investments which are dilutive to net interest margin although essentially neutral to net interest income.
Average earning assets increased $166.7 billion in the third quarter and $145.5 billion in the first nine months of 2014 from the same periods a year ago, as average federal funds sold and other short-term investments increased $97.3 billion in the third quarter and $94.3 billion in the first nine months of 2014 from the same periods a year ago, and average investment securities increased $27.7 billion in the third quarter and $29.5 billion in the first nine months of 2014 from the same periods a year ago. In addition, an increase in commercial and industrial loans contributed to $31.1 billion and $30.3 billion higher average loans in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with the same periods a year ago.
Core deposits are an important low-cost source of funding and affect both net interest income and the net interest margin. Core deposits include noninterest-bearing deposits, interest-bearing checking, savings certificates, market rate and other savings, and certain foreign deposits (Eurodollar sweep balances). Average core deposits rose to $1.0 trillion in third quarter 2014 ($992.7 billion in the first nine months of 2014), compared with $940.3 billion in third quarter 2013 ($934.1 billion in the first nine months of 2013), and funded 121% of average loans in third quarter 2014 (120% for the first nine months of 2014), compared with 117% for the same periods a year ago. Average core deposits decreased to 70% of average earning assets in third quarter and 71% for the first nine months of 2014, compared with 73% in third quarter 2013 and 74% for the first nine months of 2013. The cost of these deposits declined from the prior year due to a sustained low interest rate environment and a shift in our deposit mix from higher cost certificates of deposit to lower yielding checking and savings products. About 96% of our average core deposits are in checking and savings deposits, one of the highest industry percentages.
Table 1: Average Balances, Yields and Rates Paid (Taxable-Equivalent Basis) (1)(2)
Quarter ended September 30,
Interest
Average
Yields/
income/
(in millions)
balance
rates
expense
Earning assets
Federal funds sold, securities purchased under
resale agreements and other short-term investments
253,231
0.28
180
155,888
0.31
Trading assets
57,439
3.00
432
44,809
3.02
339
Investment securities (3):
Available-for-sale securities:
Securities of U.S. Treasury and federal agencies
8,816
1.69
38
6,633
Securities of U.S. states and political subdivisions
43,324
4.24
459
40,754
4.35
444
Mortgage-backed securities:
Federal agencies
113,022
2.76
780
112,997
2.83
800
Residential and commercial
25,946
5.98
388
30,216
6.56
496
Total mortgage-backed securities
138,968
3.36
1,168
143,213
3.62
1,296
Other debt and equity securities
47,131
408
55,404
3.27
455
Total available-for-sale securities
238,239
3.48
2,073
246,004
3.61
2,223
Held-to-maturity securities:
23,672
2.22
5.51
Federal agency mortgage-backed securities
5,854
2.23
32
Other debt securities
5,918
1.83
Total held-to-maturity securities
35,510
2.17
194
Total investment securities
273,749
3.31
2,267
Mortgages held for sale (4)
21,444
4.01
215
33,227
3.86
320
Loans held for sale (4)
9,533
2.10
50
197
7.25
Loans:
Commercial:
Commercial and industrial
207,570
3.29
1,716
185,809
3.63
1,697
Real estate mortgage
107,769
3.52
957
104,637
4.12
1,086
Real estate construction
17,610
3.93
175
16,188
4.43
181
Lease financing
12,007
5.39
11,700
5.29
155
Foreign
48,217
2.69
327
44,799
2.09
236
Total commercial
393,173
3.37
3,337
363,133
3.67
3,355
Consumer:
Real estate 1-4 family first mortgage
262,134
4.23
2,773
254,082
4.20
2,670
Real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgage
61,575
4.30
665
68,785
743
Credit card
27,713
11.96
836
24,989
12.45
784
Automobile
54,638
6.19
852
49,134
6.85
848
Other revolving credit and installment
33,966
6.03
516
42,011
4.83
512
Total consumer
440,026
5.11
5,642
439,001
5.04
5,557
Total loans (4)
4.29
8,979
4.42
8,912
Other
4,674
5.41
64
4,279
5.62
61
Total earning assets
1,453,269
3.34
12,187
1,286,538
3.71
11,979
Funding sources
Deposits:
Interest-bearing checking
41,368
0.07
34,499
0.06
Market rate and other savings
586,353
98
553,062
0.08
107
Savings certificates
37,347
0.84
80
47,339
1.08
129
Other time deposits
55,128
0.39
54
30,423
0.62
47
Deposits in foreign offices
98,862
0.14
34
81,087
0.15
30
Total interest-bearing deposits
819,058
0.13
273
746,410
0.17
318
Short-term borrowings
62,285
0.10
53,403
Long-term debt
172,982
1.46
629
133,397
1.86
621
Other liabilities
15,536
2.73
106
12,128
2.64
Total interest-bearing liabilities
1,069,861
0.38
1,024
945,338
0.43
1,030
Portion of noninterest-bearing funding sources
383,408
341,200
Total funding sources
0.32
Net interest margin and net interest income on
a taxable-equivalent basis (5)
11,163
10,949
Noninterest-earning assets
Cash and due from banks
16,189
16,350
122,779
118,440
Total noninterest-earning assets
164,673
160,427
Noninterest-bearing funding sources
Deposits
307,991
279,156
57,979
57,324
182,111
165,147
Noninterest-bearing funding sources used to fund earning assets
(383,408)
(341,200)
Net noninterest-bearing funding sources
Total assets
Our average prime rate was 3.25% for the quarters ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, and 3.25% for the first nine months of both 2014 and 2013. The average three-month London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) was 0.23% and 0.26% for the quarters ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and 0.23% and 0.28% for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Yield/rates and amounts include the effects of hedge and risk management activities associated with the respective asset and liability categories.
Yields and rates are based on interest income/expense amounts for the period, annualized based on the accrual basis for the respective accounts. The average balance amounts represent amortized cost for the periods presented.
Nonaccrual loans and related income are included in their respective loan categories.
Includes taxable-equivalent adjustments of $222 million and $201 million for the quarters ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $664 million and $573 million for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively, primarily related to tax-exempt income on certain loans and securities. The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 35% for the periods presented.
Nine months ended September 30,
232,241
485
137,926
0.33
342
53,373
3.07
1,227
44,530
3.05
1,020
7,331
1.72
95
6,797
1.66
85
42,884
1,380
39,213
4.38
1,288
115,696
2.85
2,475
103,522
2.79
2,164
27,070
6.07
1,233
31,217
6.51
1,524
142,766
3.46
3,708
134,739
3.65
3,688
48,333
3.60
1,303
54,893
3.56
1,463
241,314
3.58
6,486
235,642
3.69
6,524
11,951
198
25
6,034
2.70
122
5,844
23,854
2.26
403
265,168
3.47
6,889
18,959
4.08
580
39,950
3.57
1,069
3,302
2.15
53
172
7.88
200,277
5,044
184,421
3.70
5,113
107,746
3.53
2,849
105,367
3.96
3,121
17,249
4.15
536
16,401
4.76
584
11,922
5.75
514
12,151
6.26
571
48,315
2.43
879
42,326
2.16
683
385,509
3.41
9,822
360,666
3.73
10,072
260,538
8,207
252,904
8,044
63,264
2,037
71,390
2,292
26,811
12.08
2,423
24,373
12.54
2,285
53,314
6.34
2,528
47,890
7.03
2,516
39,942
5.32
1,589
41,857
1,489
443,869
5.05
16,784
438,414
5.06
16,626
4.28
26,606
4.46
26,698
4,622
195
4,229
5.45
1,407,043
3.42
36,035
1,261,529
3.79
35,835
39,470
35,704
583,128
304
544,208
341
38,867
0.86
251
51,681
1.18
457
49,855
0.41
152
24,177
0.81
146
94,743
100
73,715
806,063
827
729,485
0.19
1,040
58,573
43
55,535
55
162,073
1.54
1,868
128,691
2.02
1,950
14,005
286
12,352
2.37
220
1,040,714
3,024
926,063
0.47
3,265
366,329
335,466
0.29
0.34
33,011
32,570
16,169
16,364
25,681
120,728
122,306
162,578
164,307
296,066
277,820
54,057
58,788
178,784
163,165
(366,329)
(335,466)
Noninterest Income
Table 2: Noninterest Income
Nine months
Quarter ended Sept. 30,
ended Sept. 30,
Service charges on deposit accounts
1,311
1,278
3,809
3,740
Trust and investment fees:
Brokerage advisory, commissions and other fees
2,327
2,068
6,848
6,245
Trust and investment management
856
811
2,538
2,439
Investment banking
371
397
1,189
Total trust and investment fees
3,554
3,276
10,575
9,972
Card fees
875
813
2,506
2,364
Other fees:
Charges and fees on loans
296
390
(24)
1,005
1,161
(13)
Merchant processing fees
184
169
539
497
Cash network fees
134
382
Commercial real estate brokerage commissions
143
91
57
314
209
Letters of credit fees
288
311
All other fees
233
219
697
672
Total other fees
1,090
1,098
3,225
3,221
Mortgage banking:
Servicing income, net
679
504
35
2,652
1,211
119
Net gains on mortgage loan origination/sales activities
954
1,104
(14)
2,214
5,993
(63)
Total mortgage banking
1,633
1,608
4,866
7,204
(32)
Insurance
413
1,273
1,361
Net gains from trading activities
168
(58)
982
1,298
Net gains (losses) on debt securities
253
NM
407
(15)
Net gains from equity investments
712
502
42
2,008
818
145
Lease income
137
160
399
515
(23)
Life insurance investment income
441
All other
37
(78)
94
199
(53)
Total
10,272
9,730
30,557
31,118
NM - Not meaningful
Noninterest income was $10.3 billion and $9.7 billion for third quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $30.6 billion and $31.1 billion for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively. This income represented 48% and 49% of revenue for the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, consistent with the same periods a year ago. The increase in noninterest income in third quarter 2014 from the same period a year agoreflected growth in many of our businesses, including debit card, asset-backed finance, equipment finance, international, venture capital, wealth management, retail brokerage and retirement. The decrease in noninterest income in the first nine months of 2014, compared with the same period a year ago, was primarily due to a decline in mortgage banking origination volume. Excluding mortgage banking, noninterest income increased $1.8 billion in the first nine months of 2014, from the same period a year ago.
Service charges on deposit accounts increased $33 million in third quarter 2014, or 3%, from third quarter 2013, and $69 million in the first nine months of 2014, or 2%, from the first nine months of 2013, due to account growth, new commercial product sales and commercial product re-pricing.
Brokerage advisory, commissions and other fees are received for providing services to full‑service and discount brokerage customers. Income from these brokerage-related activities include asset‑based fees, which are based on the market value of the customer’s assets, and transactional commissions based on the number of transactions executed at the customer’s direction. These fees increased to $2.3billion and $6.8 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, from $2.1 billion and $6.2 billion for the same periods in 2013. The increase in brokerage income was predominantly due to higher asset-based fees as a result of higher market values and growth in assets under management, partially offset by a decrease in brokerage transaction revenue. Retail brokerage client assets totaled $1.4 trillion at September 30, 2014, an increase from $1.3 trillion at September 30, 2013.
We earn trust and investment management fees from managing and administering assets, including mutual funds, corporate trust, personal trust, employee benefit trust and agency assets. Trust and investment management fees are largely based on a tiered scale relative to the market value of the assets under management or administration.These fees increased to $856 million and $2.5 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, from $811 million and $2.4 billion for the same periods in 2013, primarily due to growth in assets under management reflecting higher market values. At September 30, 2014, these assets totaled $2.5 trillion, an increase from $2.3 trillion at September 30, 2013.
We earn investment banking fees from underwriting debt and equity securities, arrangingloan syndications, and performing other
related advisory services. Investment banking fees decreased to $371 million and $1.2 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, from $397 million and $1.3 billion, respectively, for the same periods a year ago, primarily due to lower syndication fees in line with the overall market.
Card fees were $875 million and $2.5 billion in the third quarterand first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with $813 million and $2.4 billion from the same periods a year ago. The increase in both periods was primarily due to account growth and increased purchase activity.
Other fees of $1.1 billion and $3.2 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, were unchanged compared with the same periods a year ago as a decline in charges and fees on loans was offset by an increase in commercial real estate brokerage commissions. Charges and fees on loans decreased to $296 million and $1.0 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with $390 million and $1.2 billion for the same periods a year ago primarily due to the phase out of the direct deposit advance product during the first half of 2014. Commercial real estate brokerage commissions increased by $52 million and $105 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with the same periods a year ago, driven by increased sales and other property-related activities including financing and advisory services.
Mortgage banking noninterest income, consisting of net servicing income and net gains on loan origination/sales activities, totaled $1.6 billion in both third quarter 2014 and 2013. For the first nine months of 2014, mortgage banking noninterest income totaled $4.9 billion, compared with $7.2 billion for the same period a year ago.
Net mortgage loan servicing income includes amortization of commercial mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), changes in the fair value of residential MSRs during the period, as well as changes in the value of derivatives (economic hedges) used to hedge the residential MSRs. Net servicing income for third quarter 2014 included a $270 million net MSR valuation gain ($253 million increase in the fair value of the MSRs and a $17 million hedge gain) and for third quarter 2013 included a $26 million net MSR valuation gain ($213 million decrease in the fair value of the MSRs offset by a $239 million hedge gain). For the first nine months of 2014, net servicing income included a $1.15 billion net MSR valuation gain ($1.02 billion decrease in the fair value of the MSRs offset by a $2.18 billion hedge gain) and for the same period of 2013, included a $223 million net MSR valuation gain ($2.42 billion increase in the fair value of MSRs offset by a $2.19 billion hedge loss). The increase in net MSR valuation gains in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, compared with the same periods in 2013, was attributable to higher valuation adjustments, which reduced the value of MSRs in 2013 primarily associated with higher prepayments and increases in servicing and foreclosure costs. Our portfolio of loans serviced for others was $1.87 trillion at September 30, 2014, and $1.90 trillion at December 31, 2013. At September 30, 2014, the ratio of MSRs to related loans serviced for others was 0.82%, compared with 0.88% at December 31, 2013. See the “Risk Management – Mortgage Banking Interest Rate and Market Risk” section of this Report for additional information regarding our MSRs risks and hedging approach.
Net gains on mortgage loan origination/sale activities were $954 million and $2.2 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, down from $1.1 billion and $6.0 billion for the same periods a year ago. The decline in third quarter 2014, compared with the same period a year ago, was primarily driven by lower origination volumes, partially offset by higher origination margins and a repurchase liability release in third quarter 2014. Mortgage loan originations were $48 billion for third quarter 2014, of which 70% were for home purchases, compared with $80 billion and 59% for the same period a year ago. The year-over-year decrease in the first nine months of 2014 was primarily driven by lower margins and origination volumes. Mortgage loan originations were $131 billion for the first nine months of 2014, compared with $301 billion for the same period last year. Mortgage applications were $64 billion and $196 billion in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with $87 billion and $373 billion for the same periods a year ago. The real estate 1-4 family first mortgage unclosed pipeline was $25 billion at September 30, 2014, and $35 billion at September 30, 2013. For additional information about our mortgage banking activities and results, see the “Risk Management – Mortgage Banking Interest Rate and Market Risk” section and Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities) and Note 13 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Net gains on mortgage loan origination/sales activities include adjustments to the mortgage repurchase liability. Mortgage loans are repurchased from third parties based on standard representations and warranties, and early payment default clauses in mortgage sale contracts. For the first nine months of 2014, we released a net $101 million from the repurchase liability, including $81 million in third quarter 2014, compared with a provision of $402 million for the first nine months of 2013, including $28 million in third quarter 2013. For additional information about mortgage loan repurchases, see the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Liability for Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses” section and Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities) to Financial Statements in this Report.
We engage in trading activities primarily to accommodate the investment activities of our customers, execute economic hedging to manage certain of our balance sheet risks and for a very limited amount of proprietary trading for our own account. Net gains from trading activities, which reflect unrealized changes in fair value of our trading positions and realized gains and losses, were $168 million and $982 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with $397 million and $1.3 billion for the same periods a year ago. The third quarter year-over-year decrease was primarily driven by lower deferred compensation gains (offset in employee benefits expense). The first nine months year-over-year decrease was driven by lower trading from customer accommodation activity within our capital markets business and lower deferred compensation gains (offset in employee benefits expense). Net gains from trading activities do not include interest and dividend income and expense on trading securities. Those amounts are reported within interest income from trading assets and other interest expense from trading liabilities. Interest and fees related to proprietary trading are reported in their corresponding income statement line items. Proprietary trading activities are not significant to our client-focused business model. For additional information about proprietary and other trading, see the “Risk Management – Asset and Liability Management – Market Risk – Trading Activities” section in this Report.
Net gains on debt and equity securities totaled $965 million for third quarter 2014 and $496 million for third quarter 2013 ($2.4 billion and $803 million for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively), net of other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI) write-
downs of $55 million and $60 million for third quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $272 million and $249 million for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively. Net gains from equity investments increased over the past year, reflecting our portfolio’s positive operating performance and the benefit of strong public and private equity markets.
All other income was $8 million and $94 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, compared with $37 million and $199 million for the same periods a year ago. All other income includes ineffectiveness recognized on derivatives that qualify for hedge accounting, losses on low income housing tax credit investments, foreign currency adjustments, and income from investments accounted for under the equity accounting method, any of which can cause decreases and net losses in other income. Lower other income for the third quarter and first nine months of 2014,compared with the same periods a year ago, primarily reflected lower income from equity method investments.
Noninterest Expense
Table 3: Noninterest Expense
Salaries
3,914
3,910
11,437
11,341
Commission and incentive compensation
2,527
2,401
7,388
7,604
Employee benefits
931
1,172
(21)
3,473
3,873
Equipment
471
1,392
1,417
Net occupancy
731
728
2,195
2,163
Core deposit and other intangibles
375
1,032
1,129
FDIC and other deposit assessments
229
214
765
Outside professional services
684
623
1,889
1,765
Outside data processing
264
764
719
Contract services
247
241
730
674
Travel and entertainment
226
688
651
Operating losses
417
114
940
640
Postage, stationery and supplies
182
543
567
Advertising and promotion
153
458
445
Foreclosed assets
419
(17)
Telecommunications
116
347
364
97
362
378
Operating leases
58
56
510
540
1,474
1,607
12,248
12,102
36,390
36,757
Noninterest expense was $12.2 billion in third quarter 2014, up slightly from $12.1 billion a year ago, due to higher operating losses ($417 million, up from $195 million a year ago) and higher outside professional services ($684 million, up from $623 million a year ago), partially offset by lower personnel expenses ($7.4 billion, down from $7.5 billion a year ago). For the first nine months of 2014, noninterest expense was down $367 million, or 1%, from the same period a year ago, primarily due to lower personnel expenses ($22.3 billion, down from $22.8 billion in the first nine months of 2013), lower foreclosed assets expense ($419 million, down from $502 million in the first nine months of 2013) and lower FDIC and other deposit assessments ($697 million, down from $765 million in the first nine months of 2013), partially offset by higher operating losses ($940 million, up from $640 million in the first nine months of 2013) and higher outside professional services ($1.9 billion, up from $1.8 billion in the first nine months of 2013).
Personnel expenses, which include salaries, commissions, incentive compensation and employee benefits, were down $111 million, or 1%, in third quarter 2014 compared with the same quarter last year, predominantly due to lower deferred compensation expense (offset in trading revenue) and reduced staffing in our mortgage business. These decreases were partially offset by higher revenue-related compensation, annual salary increases, and increased staffing in our risk management and compliance groups as well as in our non-mortgage businesses. Personnel expenses were down $520 million, or 2%, for the first nine months of 2014 compared with the same period in 2013, predominantly due to lower volume-related compensation in our mortgage business, lower deferred compensation expense (offset in trading revenue) and other employee benefit costs, partially offset by annual salary increases.
FDIC and other deposit assessments were down 9% in the first nine months of 2014 compared with the same period in 2013, predominantly due to lower FDIC assessment rates related to improved credit performance and the Company’s liquidity position.
Outside professional services were up 10% in third quarter 2014 compared with the same quarter last year and up 7% in the first nine months of 2014 compared with the same period a year ago. The increase for both periods reflected higher costs associated with investments by our businesses to improve their service delivery systems to customers. We have also continued to incur outside professional services and other costs to invest in our risk management infrastructure to meet increased regulatory and compliance requirements as well as evolving cybersecurity risks.
Operating losses were up 114% and 47% in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with the same
periods a year ago. The increase in both periods was predominantly due to litigation accruals.
Foreclosed assets expense was down 2% and 17% in third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with the same periods in 2013, reflecting lower expenses associated with foreclosed properties and lower write-downs, partially offset by decreased gains on sale of foreclosed properties.
Our efficiency ratio improved to 57.7% in third quarter 2014, compared with 59.1% in third quarter 2013. The Company expects to operate within its targeted efficiency ratio range of 55 to 59% in fourth quarter 2014.
Income Tax Expense
Our effective tax rate was 31.6% and 31.9% for third quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our effective tax rate was 31.0% in the first nine months of 2014, down from 32.7% in the first nine months of 2013. The lower effective tax rate for the first nine months of 2014 reflected a net reduction in the reserve for uncertain tax positions primarily due to the first quarter 2014 resolution of prior period matters with state taxing authorities.
Operating Segment Results
We are organized for management reporting purposes into three operating segments: Community Banking; Wholesale Banking; and Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement. These segments are defined by product type and customer segment and their results are based on our management accounting process, for which there is no comprehensive, authoritative financial accounting guidance equivalent to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Table 4 and the following discussion present our results by operating segment. For a more complete description of our operating segments, including additional financial information and the underlying management accounting process, see Note 18 (Operating Segments) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Table 4: Operating Segment Results – Highlights
Wealth, Brokerage
Consolidated
(income/expense in millions,
Community Banking
Wholesale Banking
and Retirement
Other (1)
Company
average balances in billions)
Revenue
12,828
12,244
5,902
5,871
3,553
3,307
(1,070)
(944)
Provision (reversal of provision)
for credit losses
465
240
(85)
(144)
(25)
(38)
368
Noninterest expense
7,051
7,060
3,250
3,084
2,690
2,619
(743)
(661)
Net income
3,470
3,341
1,920
1,973
550
450
(211)
(186)
Average loans
498.6
497.7
316.5
287.7
52.6
46.7
(34.5)
(30.0)
833.2
802.1
Average core deposits
646.9
618.2
278.4
235.3
153.6
150.6
(66.7)
(63.8)
1,012.2
940.3
Nine months ended Sept. 30,
38,027
38,085
17,428
18,092
10,571
9,765
(3,122)
(2,827)
1,163
2,265
(227)
(320)
910
1,946
20,845
21,650
9,668
9,358
8,096
7,800
(2,219)
(2,051)
10,745
9,510
5,614
6,022
1,569
1,221
(580)
(485)
503.0
498.3
308.9
285.3
51.2
45.3
(33.7)
(29.8)
829.4
799.1
637.8
620.1
267.8
230.0
154.2
148.8
(67.1)
(64.8)
992.7
934.1
Includes corporate items not specific to a business segment and the elimination of certain items that are included in more than one business segment, substantially all of which represents products and services for wealth management customers provided in Community Banking stores.
Community Banking offers a complete line of diversified financial products and services for consumers and small businesses. These products include investment, insurance and trust services in 39 states and D.C., and mortgage and home equity loans in all 50 states and D.C. through its Regional Banking and Wells Fargo Home Lending business units. Cross-sell of our products is an important part of our strategy to achieve our vision to satisfy all our customers’ financial needs. Our retail bank household cross-sell was 6.15 products per household in August 2014, unchanged from the prior year. We believe there is more opportunity for cross-sell as we continue to earn more business from our customers. Our goal is eight products per household, which is approximately one-half of our estimate of potential demand for an average U.S. household. In August 2014, one of every four of our retail banking households had eight or more of our products.
Community Banking had net income of $3.5 billion, up $129 million, or 4%, from third quarter 2013, and $10.7 billion for the first nine months of 2014, up $1.2 billion, or 13%, compared with the same period a year ago. Revenue of $12.8 billion, increased $584 million, or 5%, from third quarter 2013, and was $38.0 billion for the first nine months of 2014, a slight decrease of $58 million, or 0.2%, compared with the same period last year. The increase in revenue from third quarter 2013 was due to higher net interest income, trust and investment fees, card fees, and market sensitive revenue, mainly gains on sale of debt securities and equity investments, partially offset by the phase out of the direct deposit advance product during the first half of 2014 and lower deferred compensation plan investment gains (offset in employee benefits expense). The decrease in revenue for the first nine months of 2014 was primarily driven by lower mortgage banking revenue and the phase out of the direct deposit advance product during the first half of 2014, partially offset by higher net interest income and equity gains. Average core deposits increased $28.7 billion, or 5%, from third quarter 2013 and $17.7 billion, or 3%, from the first nine months of 2013. Primary consumer checking and primary business checking customers as of August 2014 (customers who actively use their checking account with transactions such as debit card purchases, online bill payments, and direct deposit) were up a net 4.9% and 5.6%, respectively, from August 2013. Noninterest expense declined 0.1% and 4% from the third quarter and first nine months of 2013, respectively, largely driven by lower mortgage volume-related expenses and deferred compensation expense (offset in revenue), partially offset by higher operating losses. The provision for credit losses was $225 million higher than third quarter 2013, as the $301 million improvement in net charge-offs was more than offset by a lower allowance release, but the provision was $1.1 billion lower than the first nine months of 2013, due to improved portfolio performance reflecting lower consumer real estate losses.
Wholesale Banking provides financial solutions to businesses across the United States and globally with annual sales generally in excess of $20 million. Products and business segments include Middle Market Commercial Banking, Government and Institutional Banking, Corporate Banking, Commercial Real Estate, Treasury Management, Wells Fargo Capital Finance, Insurance, International, Real Estate Capital Markets, Commercial Mortgage Servicing, Corporate Trust,
Equipment Finance, Wells Fargo Securities, Principal Investments, Asset Backed Finance, and Asset Management. Wholesale Banking cross-sell was 7.2 products per relationship in third quarter 2014, up from 7.0 a year ago.
Wholesale Banking had net income of $1.9 billion in third quarter 2014, down $53 million, or 3%, from third quarter 2013 as increased revenue was more than offset by increased expenses and increased provision for credit losses related to a lower reserve release. The revenue increase was driven by loan and deposit growth, strong treasury management fee growth and higher asset backed finance underwriting, commercial real estate brokerage and foreign exchange fees. In the first nine months of 2014, net income of $5.6 billion decreased $408 million, or 7%, from the same period a year ago driven by decreased revenues and increased expenses and provision for credit losses. Revenue declined $664 million, or 4%, from the first nine months of 2013 on both lower net interest income and noninterest income. Net interest income declined as the income benefit of strong loan and deposit growth was more than offset by lower PCI resolution income. Noninterest income declined on lower equity fund gains and lower investment banking origination fees as well as lower market sensitive revenue driven by lower customer accommodation trading, partially offset by increased asset management fees and increased commercial real estate brokerage fees. Average loans of $316.5 billion in third quarter 2014 increased $28.8 billion, or 10%, from third quarter 2013, driven by growth in asset-backed finance, capital finance, commercial banking, commercial real estate, corporate banking, equipment finance, government and institutional banking, international, and real estate capital markets. Average core deposits of $278.4 billion increased $43.1 billion, or 18%, from third quarter 2013 reflecting continued customer liquidity. Noninterest expense increased 5% from third quarter 2013 and 3% from the first nine months of 2013, primarily due to expenses related to growth initiatives, compliance, and regulatory requirements. The provision for credit losses increased $59 million from third quarter 2013 and $93 million from the first nine months of 2013 driven by a lower allowance release.
Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement provides a full range of financial advisory services to clients using a planning approach to meet each client's financial needs. Wealth Management provides affluent and high net worth clients with a complete range of wealth management solutions, including financial planning, private banking, credit, investment management and fiduciary services. Abbot Downing, a Wells Fargo business, provides comprehensive wealth management services to ultra-high net worth families and individuals as well as endowments and foundations. Brokerage serves customers' advisory, brokerage and financial needs as part of one of the largest full-service brokerage firms in the United States. Retirement is a national leader in providing institutional retirement and trust services (including 401(k) and pension plan record keeping) for businesses, retail retirement solutions for individuals, and reinsurance services for the life insurance industry. Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement cross-sell was 10.44 products per household in August 2014, up from 10.41 in August 2013.
Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement reported net income of $550 million in third quarter 2014, up 22% from third quarter 2013. Net income for the first nine months of 2014 was $1.6 billion, up 29% compared with the same period a year ago. Net income growth was driven by significant revenue growth. Revenue increased 7% from third quarter 2013 and 8% from the first nine months of 2013, primarily due to strong growth in asset-based fees and higher net interest income, partially offset by a decrease in brokerage transaction revenue. Average core deposits of $153.6 billion in third quarter 2014 increased 2% from third quarter 2013. Noninterest expense for third quarter 2014 was up 3% from third quarter 2013 and up 4% from the first nine months of 2013 largely due to increased broker commissions and other expenses. Total provision for credit losses increased $13 million from third quarter 2013 as lower allowance releases more than offset lower net charge-offs. The provision for the first nine months of 2014 decreased $53 million from the same period a year ago due to a decrease in net charge-offs.
Balance Sheet Analysis
At September 30, 2014, our assets totaled $1.6 trillion, up $113.4 billion from December 31, 2013. The predominant areas of asset growth were in federal funds sold and other short-term investments, which increased $48.1 billion, investment securities, which increased $24.7 billion, loans, which increased $16.6 billion ($26.3 billion excluding the transfer of $9.7 billion of government guaranteed student loans to loans held for sale at June 30, 2014), and trading assets, which increased $4.9 billion. Deposit growth of $51.4 billion, an increase in long-term debt of $31.6 billion, total equity growth of $12.0 billion and an increase in short-term borrowings of $9.0 billion from December 31, 2013, were the predominant sources that funded our asset growth for the first nine months of 2014. Equity growth benefited from $11.1 billion in earnings net of dividends paid. The strength of our business model produced solid earnings and continued internal capital generation as reflected in our capital ratios, all of which improved from December 31, 2013. Tier 1 capital as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets increased to 12.55%, total capital increased to 15.58%, Tier 1 leverage increased to 9.64%, and Common Equity Tier 1 (General Approach) increased to 11.11% at September 30, 2014, compared with 12.33%, 15.43%, 9.60%, and 10.82%, respectively, at December 31, 2013.
The following discussion provides additional information about the major components of our balance sheet. Information regarding our capital and changes in our asset mix is included in the “Earnings Performance – Net Interest Income” and “Capital Management” sections and Note 19 (Regulatory and Agency Capital Requirements) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Investment Securities
Table 5: Investment Securities – Summary
September 30, 2014
December 31, 2013
Net
unrealized
Fair
Cost
gain
value
gain (loss)
Debt securities
239,705
6,011
245,716
246,048
2,574
248,622
Marketable equity securities
1,930
605
2,535
2,039
1,346
3,385
241,635
6,616
248,251
248,087
3,920
252,007
Held-to-maturity debt securities
40,758
40,915
12,346
(99)
12,247
Total investment securities (1)
282,393
6,773
289,166
260,433
3,821
264,254
Available-for-sale securities are carried on the balance sheet at fair value. Held-to-maturity securities are carried on the balance sheet at amortized cost.
Table 5 presents a summary of our investment securities portfolio, which increased $24.7 billion from December 31, 2013, primarily due to purchases of U.S. Treasury securities for our held-to-maturity portfolio. The total net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities were $6.6 billion at September 30, 2014, up from net unrealized gains of $3.9 billion at December 31, 2013, due primarily to a decrease in long-term interest rates and modest tightening of credit spreads.
The size and composition of the investment securities portfolio is largely dependent upon the Company’s liquidity and interest rate risk management objectives. Our business generates assets and liabilities, such as loans, deposits and long-term debt, which have different maturities, yields, re-pricing, prepayment characteristics and other provisions that expose us to interest rate and liquidity risk. The available-for-sale securities portfolio consists primarily of liquid, high quality U.S. Treasury and federal agency debt, agency MBS, privately issued residential and commercial MBS, securities issued by U.S. states and political subdivisions, corporate debt securities, and highly rated collateralized loan obligations. Due to its highly liquid nature, the available-for-sale portfolio can be used to meet funding needs that arise in the normal course of business or due to market stress. Changes in our interest rate risk profile may occur due to changes in overall economic or market conditions, which could influence loan origination demand, prepayment speeds, or deposit balances and mix. In response, the available-for-sale securities portfolio can be rebalanced to meet the Company’s interest rate risk management objectives. In addition to meeting liquidity and interest rate risk management objectives, the available-for-sale securities portfolio may provide yield enhancement over other short-term assets. See the “Risk Management – Asset/Liability Management” section in this Report for more information on liquidity and interest rate risk. The held-to-maturity securities portfolio consists primarily of high quality U.S. Treasury debt, agency MBS, ABS primarily collateralized by auto loans and leases, and collateralized loan obligations, where our intent is to hold these securities to maturity and collect the contractual cash flows. The held-to-maturity portfolio may also provide yield enhancement over short-term assets.
We analyze securities for OTTI quarterly or more often if a potential loss-triggering event occurs. Of the $272 million in OTTI write-downs recognized in earnings in the first nine months of 2014, $35million related to debt securities and $2 million related to marketable equity securities, which are each included in available-for-sale securities. Another $235 million in OTTI write-downs was related to nonmarketable equity investments, which are included in other assets. For a discussion of our OTTI accounting policies and underlying considerations and analysis see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 4 (Investment Securities) to Financial Statements in this Report.
At September 30, 2014, investment securities included $45.9 billion of municipal bonds, of which 90% were rated “A-” or better
Balance Sheet Analysis (continued)
based predominantly on external and, in some cases, internal ratings. Additionally, some of the securities in our total municipal bond portfolio are guaranteed against loss by bond insurers. These guaranteed bonds are predominantly investment grade and were generally underwritten in accordance with our own investment standards prior to the determination to purchase, without relying on the bond insurer’s guarantee in making the investment decision. Our municipal bond holdings are monitored as part of our ongoing impairment analysis.
The weighted-average expected maturity of debt securities available-for-sale was 6.8 years at September 30, 2014. Because 57% of this portfolio is MBS, the expected remaining maturity is shorter than the remaining contractual maturity because borrowers generally have the right to prepay obligations before the underlying mortgages mature. The estimated effects of a 200 basis point increase or decrease in interest rates on the fair value and the expected remaining maturity of the MBS available-for-sale portfolio are shown in Table 6.
Table 6: Mortgage-Backed Securities
Expected
remaining
maturity
(in billions)
(in years)
At September 30, 2014
Actual
140.1
2.9
5.3
Assuming a 200 basis point:
Increase in interest rates
127.0
(10.2)
7.0
Decrease in interest rates
145.9
8.7
2.7
The weighted-average expected maturity of held-to-maturity debt securities was 6.2 years at September 30, 2014. See Note 4 (Investment Securities) to Financial Statements in this Report for a summary of investment securities by security type.
Loan Portfolio
Total loans were $838.9 billion at September 30, 2014, up $16.6 billion from December 31, 2013. This growth was reduced by the transfer of $9.7 billion of government guaranteed student loans to loans held for sale at the end of the second quarter, which were previously included in the non-strategic/liquidating loan portfolio. Excluding this transfer, total loans would have increased $26.3 billion from December 31, 2013. Table 7 provides a summary of total outstanding loans by non-strategic/liquidating and core loan portfolios. The decrease in the non-strategic/liquidating portfolios including the government guaranteed student loan transfer was $17.8 billion, while loans in the core portfolio grew $34.4 billion from December 31, 2013. Our core loan growth during the first nine months of 2014 included:
· a $19.8 billion increase in the commercial segment predominantly due to growth in commercial and industrial and commercial real estate loans; and
· a $14.6 billion increase in consumer loans, predominantly from growth in the nonconforming mortgage, automobile, credit card and other revolving credit and installment loan portfolios, partially offset by a decrease in the real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgage portfolio.
Additional information on the non-strategic and liquidating loan portfolios is included in Table 12 in the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management” section in this Report.
Table 7: Loan Portfolios
Core
Liquidating
Commercial
395,018
1,465
396,483
375,230
2,013
377,243
Consumer
380,773
61,627
442,400
366,190
78,853
445,043
Total loans
775,791
63,092
741,420
80,866
822,286
A discussion of average loan balances and a comparative detail of average loan balances is included in Table 1 under “Earnings Performance – Net Interest Income” earlier in this Report. Additional information on total loans outstanding by portfolio segment and class of financing receivable is included in the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management” section in this Report. Period-end balances and other loan related information are in Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Table 8 shows contractual loan maturities for loan categories normally not subject to regular periodic principal reduction and distribution of those loans to changes in interest rates.
Table 8: Maturities for Selected Commercial Loan Categories
After
Within
one year
one
through
five
year
five years
years
Selected loan maturities:
45,382
145,405
21,583
212,370
41,402
131,745
20,664
193,811
16,118
59,245
31,845
107,208
17,746
60,004
29,350
107,100
6,073
10,750
1,057
17,880
6,095
9,207
1,445
16,747
30,334
14,679
2,337
47,350
33,567
11,602
2,382
47,551
Total selected loans
97,907
230,079
56,822
384,808
98,810
212,558
53,841
365,209
Distribution of loans to
changes in interest rates:
Loans at fixed
interest rates
14,144
25,285
18,907
58,336
14,896
23,891
14,684
53,471
Loans at floating/variable
83,763
204,794
37,915
326,472
83,914
188,667
39,157
311,738
Deposits totaled $1.1 trillion at both September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013. Table 9 provides additional information regarding deposits. Deposit growth of $51.4 billion from December 31, 2013, reflected continued customer-driven growth as well as liquidity-related issuances of term deposits. Information regarding the impact of deposits on net interest income and a comparison of average deposit balances is provided in “Earnings Performance – Net Interest Income” and Table 1 earlier in this Report. Total core deposits were $1.0 trillion at September 30, 2014, up $36.4 billion from $980.1 billion at December 31, 2013.
Table 9: Deposits
% of
total
Dec. 31,
($ in millions)
deposits
Noninterest-bearing
313,791
288,116
27
43,563
37,346
567,148
556,763
52
36,474
41,567
(12)
Foreign deposits (1)
55,502
56,271
Core deposits
980,063
Other time and savings deposits
73,639
64,477
Other foreign deposits
40,508
34,637
Total deposits
1,130,625
1,079,177
Reflects Eurodollar sweep balances included in core deposits.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We use fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain financial instruments and to determine fair value disclosures. See our 2013 Form 10-K for a description of our critical accounting policy related to fair value of financial instruments and a discussion of our fair value measurement techniques.
Table 10 presents the summary of the fair value of financial instruments recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, and the amounts measured using significant Level 3 inputs (excluding derivative netting adjustments), which are significant assumptions not observable in the market. The fair value of the remaining assets and liabilities were measured using valuation methodologies involving market-based or market-derived information (collectively Level 1 and 2 measurements).
Table 10: Fair Value Level 3 Summary
($ in billions)
Level 3 (1)
Assets carried
at fair value
358.0
33.5
353.1
37.2
As a percentage
of total assets
22
23
Liabilities carried
28.8
2.3
22.7
3.7
As a percentage of
total liabilities
*
Less than 1%.
Excludes derivative netting adjustments.
See Note 13 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information on fair value measurements.
Equity
Total equity was $183.0 billion at September 30, 2014, compared with $171.0 billion at December 31, 2013. The increase was predominantly driven by a $11.1 billion increase in retained earnings from earnings net of dividends paid and a $1.7 billion increase in cumulative other comprehensive income (OCI). The increase in OCI was primarily due toa $2.7 billion ($1.5 billionafter tax) increase in net unrealized gains on our investment securities portfolio resulting from a decrease in long-term interest rates and modest tightening of credit spreads. See Note 4 (Investment Securities) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the ordinary course of business, we engage in financial transactions that are not recorded on the balance sheet, or may be recorded on the balance sheet in amounts that are different from the full contract or notional amount of the transaction. Our off-balance sheet arrangements include commitments to lend, transactions with unconsolidated entities, guarantees, derivatives, and other commitments. These transactions are designed to (1) meet the financial needs of customers, (2) manage our credit, market or liquidity risks, and/or (3) diversify our funding sources.
We enter into commitments to lend funds to customers, which are usually at a stated interest rate, if funded, and for specific purposes and time periods. When we make commitments, we are exposed to credit risk. However, the maximum credit risk for these commitments will generally be lower than the contractual amount because a significant portion of these commitments are expected to expire without being used by the customer. For more information on lending commitments, see Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
We routinely enter into various types of on- and off-balance sheet transactions with special purpose entities (SPEs), which are corporations, trusts or partnerships that are established for a limited purpose. Generally, SPEs are formed in connection with securitization transactions. For more information on securitizations, including sales proceeds and cash flows from securitizations, see Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Guarantees and Certain Contingent Arrangements
Guarantees are contracts that contingently require us to make payments to a guaranteed party based on an event or a change in an underlying asset, liability, rate or index. Guarantees are generally in the form of standby letters of credit, securities lending and other indemnifications, written put options, recourse obligations and other types of guarantee arrangements.
For more information on guarantees and certain contingent arrangements, see Note 10 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Derivatives
We primarily use derivatives to manage exposure to market risk, including interest rate risk, credit risk and foreign currency risk, and to assist customers with their risk management objectives. Derivatives are recorded on the balance sheet at fair value and can be measured in terms of the notional amount, which is generally not exchanged, but is used only as the basis on which interest and other payments are determined. The notional amount is not recorded on the balance sheet and is not, when viewed in isolation, a meaningful measure of the risk profile of the instruments.
For more information on derivatives, see Note 12 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Other Commitments
We also have other off-balance sheet transactions, including obligations to make rental payments under noncancelable operating leases and commitments to purchase certain debt and equity securities. Our operating lease obligations are discussed in Note 7 (Premises, Equipment, Lease Commitments and Other Assets) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K. For more information on commitments to purchase debt and equity securities, see the “Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements” section in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Risk Management
Financial institutions must manage a variety of business risks that can significantly affect their financial performance. Among the key risks that we must manage are operational risks, credit risks, and asset/liability management risks, which include interest rate, market, and liquidity and funding risks. Our risk culture is strongly rooted in our Vision and Values, and in order to succeed in our mission of satisfying all our customers’ financial needs and helping them succeed financially, our business practices and operating model must support prudent risk management practices. For more information about how we manage these risks, see the “Risk Management” section in our 2013 Form 10-K. The discussion that follows provides an update regarding these risks.
Operational Risk Management
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes or systems, or resulting from external events or third parties. Information security is a significant operational risk for financial institutions such as Wells Fargo, and includes the risk of losses resulting from cyber attacks. Wells Fargo and other financial institutions continue to be the target of various evolving and adaptive cyber attacks, including malware and denial-of-service, as part of an effort to disrupt the operations of financial institutions, potentially test their cybersecurity capabilities, or obtain confidential, proprietary or other information. Wells Fargo has not experienced any material losses relating to these or other cyber attacks. Addressing cybersecurity risks is a priority for Wells Fargo, and we continue to develop and enhance our controls, processes and systems in order to protect our networks, computers, software and data from attack, damage or unauthorized access. We are also proactively involved in industry cybersecurity efforts and working with other parties, including our third-party service providers and governmental agencies, to continue to enhance defenses and improve resiliency to cybersecurity threats. See the “Risk Factors” section in our 2013 Form 10-K for additional information regarding the risks associated with a failure or breach of our operational or security systems or infrastructure, including as a result of cyber attacks.
Credit Risk Management
We define credit risk as the risk of loss associated with a borrower or counterparty default (failure to meet obligations in accordance with agreed upon terms). Credit risk exists with many of our assets and exposures such as debt security holdings, certain derivatives, and loans. The following discussion focuses on our loan portfolios, which represent the largest component of assets on our balance sheet for which we have credit risk. Table 11 presents our total loans outstanding by portfolio segment and class of financing receivable.
Table 11: Total Loans Outstanding by Portfolio Segment and Class of Financing Receivable
11,675
12,034
Foreign (1)
263,326
258,497
60,844
65,914
28,270
26,870
55,242
50,808
34,718
42,954
Substantially all of our foreign loan portfolio is commercial loans. Loans are classified as foreign primarily based on whether the borrower’s primary address is outside of the United States.
Credit Quality Overview Credit quality continued to improve during third quarter 2014 due in part to improving economic conditions, in particular the housing market, as well as our proactive credit risk management activities. The improvement occurred for both commercial and consumer portfolios as evidenced by their credit metrics:
· Nonaccrual loans decreased to$2.5 billion and $10.9 billion in our commercial and consumer portfolios, respectively, at September 30, 2014, from $3.5 billion and $12.2 billion at December 31, 2013. Nonaccrual loans represented 1.59% of total loans at September 30, 2014, compared with 1.91% at December 31, 2013.
· Net charge-offs (annualized) as a percentage of average total loans improved to 0.32% and 0.36% in third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with 0.48% and 0.59% respectively, for the same periods a year ago. Net charge-offs (recoveries) (annualized) as a percentage of our average commercial and consumer portfolios were (0.02)% and 0.62% in third quarter and less than 0.01% and 0.66% in the first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with0.02% and 0.86% in third quarter, and 0.06% and 1.03%, respectively, in the first nine months of 2013.
· Loans that are not government insured/guaranteed and 90 days or more past due and still accruing decreased to $91 million and $855 million in our commercial and consumer portfolios, respectively, at September 30, 2014, from $143 million and $902 million at December 31, 2013.
In addition to credit metric improvements, we continued to see improvement in various economic indicators such as home prices that influenced our evaluation of the allowance and provision for credit losses. Accordingly:
· Our provision for credit losses was $368 million in third quarter 2014 and $910 million for the first nine months of2014, compared with$75 million and $1.9 billion, respectively, for the same periods a year ago.
· The allowance for credit losses decreased to $13.5 billion, or 1.61% of total loans, at September 30, 2014 from $15.0 billion, or 1.82%, at December 31, 2013.
Additional information on our loan portfolios and our credit quality trends follows.
Non-Strategic and Liquidating Loan Portfolios We continually evaluate and, when appropriate, modify our credit policies to address appropriate levels of risk. We may designate certain portfolios and loan products as non-strategic or liquidating after which we cease their continued origination and actively work to limit losses and reduce our exposures.
Table 12 identifies our non-strategic and liquidating loan portfolios, which have continued to decline since the 2008 merger with Wachovia. They consist primarily of the Pick-a-Pay mortgage portfolio and PCI loans acquired from Wachovia, certain portfolios from legacy Wells Fargo Home Equity and Wells Fargo Financial, and our Education Finance government guaranteed loan portfolio. We transferred the government guaranteed student loan portfolio to loans held for sale at the end of second quarter 2014.
The home equity portfolio of loans generated through third party channels is designated as liquidating. Additional information regarding this portfolio, as well as the liquidating PCI and Pick-a-Pay loan portfolios, is provided in the discussion of loan portfolios that follows.
Table 12: Non-Strategic and Liquidating Loan Portfolios
Outstanding balance
December 31,
2008
Legacy Wachovia commercial and industrial, CRE and foreign PCI loans (1)
18,704
Pick-a-Pay mortgage (1)
46,389
50,971
95,315
Liquidating home equity
3,083
3,695
10,309
Legacy Wells Fargo Financial indirect auto
207
18,221
Legacy Wells Fargo Financial debt consolidation
11,781
12,893
25,299
Education Finance - government guaranteed (2)
10,712
20,465
Legacy Wachovia other PCI loans (1)
2,478
172,087
Total non-strategic and liquidating loan portfolios
190,791
Net of purchase accounting adjustments related to PCI loans.
The government guaranteed student loan portfolio was transferred to held for sale at the end of second quarter 2014.
Risk Management – Credit Risk Management (continued)
PURCHASED CREDIT-IMPAIRED (PCI) Loans Loans acquired with evidence of credit deterioration since their origination and where it is probable that we will not collect all contractually required principal and interest payments are PCI loans. Substantially all of our PCI loans were acquired in the Wachovia acquisition on December 31, 2008. PCI loans are recorded at fair value at the date of acquisition, and the historical allowance for credit losses related to these loans is not carried over. The carrying value of PCI loans totaled $24.2 billion at September 30, 2014, down from $26.7 billion and $58.8 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2008, respectively. Such loans are considered to be accruing due to the existence of the accretable yield and not based on consideration given to contractual interest payments. For additional information on PCI loans, see the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Purchased Credit-Impaired Loans” section in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
During the first nine months of 2014, we recognized as income $41 million released from the nonaccretable difference related to commercial PCI loans due to payoffs and other resolutions. We also transferred $2.1 billion from the nonaccretable difference to the accretable yield for PCI loans with improving credit-related cash flows and recovered$30 million primarily related to reversals of write-downs in excess of the respective loan resolution realized losses. Our cash flows expected to be collected have been favorably affected since the Wachovia acquisition by lower than expected defaults and losses as a result of observed economic strengthening, particularly in housing prices, and by our loan modification efforts. See the “Real Estate 1-4 Family First and Junior Lien Mortgage Loans” section in this Report for additional information. Table 13 provides an analysis of changes in the nonaccretable difference.
Table 13: Changes in Nonaccretable Difference for PCI Loans
Pick-a-Pay
consumer
Balance, December 31, 2008
10,410
26,485
4,069
40,964
Addition of nonaccretable difference due to acquisitions
213
Release of nonaccretable difference due to:
Loans resolved by settlement with borrower (1)
(1,512)
Loans resolved by sales to third parties (2)
(308)
(393)
Reclassification to accretable yield for loans with improving credit-related cash flows (3)
(1,605)
(3,897)
(823)
(6,325)
Use of nonaccretable difference due to:
Losses from loan resolutions and write-downs (4)
(6,933)
(17,884)
(2,961)
(27,778)
Balance, December 31, 2013
265
4,704
200
5,169
(27)
(116)
(1,954)
(19)
(2,089)
Net recoveries (losses) from loan resolutions and write-downs (4)
Balance, September 30, 2014
2,772
196
3,082
Balance, June 30, 2014
140
2,771
3,111
Release of the nonaccretable difference for settlement with borrower, on individually accounted PCI loans, increases interest income in the period of settlement. Pick-a-Pay and Other consumer PCI loans do not reflect nonaccretable difference releases for settlements with borrowers due to pool accounting for those loans, which assumes that the amount received approximates the pool performance expectations.
Release of the nonaccretable difference as a result of sales to third parties increases noninterest income in the period of the sale.
Reclassification of nonaccretable difference to accretable yield will result in increased interest income as a prospective yield adjustment over the remaining life of the loan or pool of loans.
Write-downs to net realizable value of PCI loans are absorbed by the nonaccretable difference when severe delinquency (normally 180 days) or other indications of severe borrower financial stress exist that indicate there will be a loss of contractually due amounts upon final resolution of the loan. Also includes foreign exchange adjustments related to underlying principal for which the nonaccretable difference was established.
Since December 31, 2008, we have released over $10.3 billion in nonaccretable difference, including $8.4 billion transferred from the nonaccretable difference to the accretable yield and $1.9 billion released to income through loan resolutions. Also, we have provided $1.7 billion for losses on certain PCI loans or pools of PCI loans that have had credit-related decreases to cash flows expected to be collected. The net result is a $8.6 billion reduction from December 31, 2008, through September 30, 2014, in our initial projected losses of $41.0 billion on all PCI loans.
At September 30, 2014, the allowance for credit losses on certain PCI loans was $11 million. The allowance is to absorb credit-related decreases in cash flows expected to be collected and primarily relates to individual PCI commercial loans. Table 14 analyzes the actual and projected loss results on PCI loans since acquisition through September 30, 2014.
For additional information on PCI loans, see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Table 14: Actual and Projected Loss Results on PCI Loans Since Acquisition of Wachovia
1,539
322
1,721
5,851
842
8,414
Total releases of nonaccretable difference due to better than expected losses
3,582
927
10,360
Provision for losses due to credit deterioration (4)
(1,626)
(107)
(1,733)
Actual and projected losses on PCI loans less than originally expected
1,956
820
8,627
Provision for additional losses is recorded as a charge to income when it is estimated that the cash flows expected to be collected for a PCI loan or pool of loans may not support full realization of the carrying value.
Significant Loan Portfolio Reviews Measuring and monitoring our credit risk is an ongoing process that tracks delinquencies, collateral values, FICO scores, economic trends by geographic areas, loan-level risk grading for certain portfolios (typically commercial) and other indications of credit risk. Our credit risk monitoring process is designed to enable early identification of developing risk and to support our determination of an appropriate allowance for credit losses. The following discussion provides additional characteristics and analysis of our significant portfolios. See Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses)to Financial Statements in this Report for more analysis and credit metric information for each of the following portfolios.
Commercial AND INDUSTRIAL Loans and Lease Financing For purposes of portfolio risk management, we aggregate commercial and industrial loans and lease financing according to market segmentation and standard industry codes. Table 15 summarizes commercial and industrial loans and lease financing by industry with the related nonaccrual totals. We generally subject commercial and industrial loans and lease financing to individual risk assessment using our internal borrower and collateral quality ratings. Our ratings are aligned to regulatory definitions of pass and criticized categories with criticized divided between special mention, substandard and doubtful categories.
The commercial and industrial loans and lease financing portfolio totaled $224.0 billion, or 27%, of total loans at September 30, 2014. The annualized net charge-off rate for this portfolio was0.12% and 0.11% in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with 0.12% and 0.17% for the same periods a year ago.At September 30, 2014, 0.27% of this portfolio was nonaccruing, compared with 0.37% at December 31, 2013. In addition, $15.8 billion of this portfolio was rated as criticized in accordance with regulatory guidance at September 30, 2014, compared with $15.5 billion at December 31, 2013.
A majority of our commercial and industrial loans and lease financing portfolio is secured by short-term assets, such as accounts receivable, inventory and securities, as well as long-lived assets, such as equipment and other business assets. Generally, the collateral securing this portfolio represents a secondary source of repayment.
Table 15: Commercial and Industrial Loans and Lease Financing by Industry
Nonaccrual
loans
portfolio
Investors
23,046
Oil and gas
15,423
Food and beverage
13,694
Cyclical retailers
13,207
Financial institutions
12,470
Real estate lessor
11,911
Healthcare
33
11,857
Industrial equipment
11,769
Public administration
7,844
Technology
7,458
Business services
31
6,158
Transportation
6,067
83,141
611
224,045
(1) Includes $246 million PCI loans, which are considered to be accruing due to the existence of the accretable yield and not based on consideration given to contractual interest payments.
(2) No other single industry had total loans in excess of $5.3 billion.
Commercial Real Estate (CRE) The CRE portfolio totaled $125.1 billion, or 15% of total loans, at September 30, 2014, and consisted of$107.2 billion of mortgage loans and $17.9 billion of construction loans. Table 16summarizes CRE loans by state and property type with the related nonaccrual totals. The portfolio is diversified both geographically and by property type. The largest geographic concentrations of combined CRE loans are in California (28% of the total CRE portf0lio) and in Texas and Florida (8% in each state). By property type, the largest concentrations are office buildings at 27% and apartments at 14% of the portfolio. CRE nonaccrual loans totaled 1.5% of the CRE outstanding balance at September 30, 2014, compared with 2.2% at December 31, 2013. At September 30, 2014, we had $8.8 billion of criticized CRE mortgage loans, down from $11.8 billion at December 31, 2013, and $1.1 billion of criticized CRE construction loans, down from $2.0 billion at December 31, 2013.
At September 30, 2014, the recorded investment in PCI CRE loans totaled $1.2 billion, down from $12.3 billion when acquired at December 31, 2008, reflecting principal payments, loan resolutions and write-downs.
Table 16: CRE Loans by State and Property Type
By state:
California
389
32,280
3,183
422
35,463
Texas
102
8,528
1,679
10,207
Florida
205
7,886
2,063
223
9,949
New York
44
6,255
1,244
49
7,499
North Carolina
103
3,950
952
111
4,902
Arizona
3,770
409
86
4,179
Washington
537
3,839
Virginia
46
2,650
3,690
Georgia
104
3,107
434
135
3,541
Colorado
29
2,834
560
3,394
495
32,646
5,779
38,425
1,636
217
1,853
125,088
By property:
Office buildings
423
31,493
2,027
33,520
Apartments
11,853
5,702
17,555
Industrial/warehouse
256
12,220
838
13,058
Retail (excluding shopping center)
11,888
966
216
12,854
Real estate - other
203
10,338
10,741
Hotel/motel
8,358
1,114
9,472
Shopping center
7,741
1,089
8,830
Institutional
77
3,171
430
3,601
Land (excluding 1-4 family)
40
2,469
2,576
Agriculture
41
2,448
2,474
187
7,591
171
2,816
358
10,407
Includes a total of $1.2 billion PCI loans, consisting of $973 million of real estate mortgage and $237 million of real estate construction, which are considered to be accruing due to the existence of the accretable yield and not based on consideration given to contractual interest payments.
Includes 40 states; no state had loans in excess of $3.1 billion.
24
FOREIGN Loans and country risk exposure We classify loans for financial statement and certain regulatory purposes as foreign primarily based on whether the borrower’s primary address is outside of the United States. At September 30, 2014, foreign loans totaled $47.4 billion, representing approximately 6% of our total consolidated loans outstanding, compared with $47.6 billion, or approximately 6% of total consolidated loans outstanding, at December 31, 2013. Foreign loans were approximately 3% of our consolidated total assets at September 30, 2014 and at December 31, 2013.
Our foreign country risk monitoring process incorporates frequent dialogue with our financial institution customers, counterparties and regulatory agencies, enhanced by centralized monitoring of macroeconomic and capital markets conditions in the respective countries. We establish exposure limits for each country through a centralized oversight process based on customer needs, and in consideration of relevant economic, political, social, legal, and transfer risks. We monitor exposures closely and adjust our country limits in response to changing conditions.
We evaluate our individual country risk exposure on an ultimate country of risk basis, which is normally based on the country of residence of the guarantor or collateral location, and is different from the reporting based on the borrower’s primary address. Our largest single foreign country exposure on an ultimate risk basis at September 30, 2014, was the United Kingdom, which totaled $21.2 billion, or approximately 1% of our total assets, and included $4.1 billion of sovereign claims. Our United Kingdom sovereign claims arise primarily from deposits we have placed with the Bank of England pursuant to regulatory requirements in support of our London branch.
We conduct periodic stress tests of our significant country risk exposures, analyzing the direct and indirect impacts on the risk of loss from various macroeconomic and capital markets scenarios. We do not have significant exposure to foreign country risks because our foreign portfolio is relatively small. However, we have identified exposure to increased loss from U.S. borrowers associated with the potential impact of a regional or worldwide economic downturn on the U.S. economy. We mitigate these potential impacts on the risk of loss through our normal risk management processes which include active monitoring and, if necessary, the application of aggressive loss mitigation strategies.
Table 17 provides information regarding our top 20 exposures by country (excluding the U.S.) and our Eurozone exposure, on an ultimate risk basis.
Table 17: Select Country Exposures
Lending (1)
Securities (2)
Derivatives and other (3)
Total exposure
Non-
Sovereign
sovereign
sovereign (4)
Top 20 country exposures:
United Kingdom
4,052
11,363
4,348
1,394
4,053
17,105
21,158
Canada
7,960
2,653
564
11,177
11,178
China
4,215
130
4,349
4,356
Brazil
2,524
2,541
2,543
Netherlands
2,031
266
2,325
Germany
92
1,328
588
2,111
2,203
India
2,017
127
2,144
Bermuda
1,831
Switzerland
1,061
360
451
1,872
France
227
1,193
1,661
Turkey
1,600
Australia
975
556
1,586
Luxembourg
1,342
1,452
Chile
1,352
36
1,402
Cayman Islands
1,304
1,348
Ireland
1,076
131
1,228
1,251
South Korea
1,094
1,162
1,183
Mexico
992
1,027
1,031
Jersey, C.I.
192
1,022
Taiwan
823
830
Total top 20 country exposures
4,167
45,942
10,825
3,064
4,203
59,831
64,034
Eurozone exposure:
Eurozone countries included in Top 20 above (5)
115
6,004
2,282
491
8,777
8,892
Spain
657
62
723
Austria
353
428
Belgium
148
Other Eurozone exposure (6)
238
Total Eurozone exposure
211
7,231
2,466
511
221
10,208
10,429
Lending exposure includes funded loans and unfunded commitments, leveraged leases, and money market placements presented on a gross basis prior to the deduction of impairment allowance and collateral received under the terms of the credit agreements. For the countries listed above, includes $403 million in PCI loans, predominantly to customers in Jersey, C.I. and Germany, and $1.8 billion in defeased leases secured largely by U.S. Treasury and government agency securities, or government guaranteed.
Represents issuer exposure on cross-border debt and equity securities.
Represents counterparty exposure on foreign exchange and derivative contracts, and securities resale and lending agreements. This exposure is presented net of counterparty netting adjustments and reduced by the amount of cash collateral. It includes credit default swaps (CDS) predominantly used to manage our U.S. and London-based cash credit trading businesses, which sometimes results in selling and purchasing protection on the identical reference entity. Generally, we do not use market instruments such as CDS to hedge the credit risk of our investment or loan positions, although we do use them to manage risk in our trading businesses. At September 30, 2014, the gross notional amount of our CDS sold that reference assets in the Top 20 or Eurozone countries was $3.9 billion, which was offset by the notional amount of CDS purchased of $3.9 billion. We did not have any CDS purchased or sold that reference pools of assets that contain sovereign debt or where the reference asset was solely the sovereign debt of a foreign country.
For countries presented in the table, total non-sovereign exposure comprises $24.4 billion exposure to financial institutions and $36.9 billion to non-financial corporations at September 30, 2014.
Consists of exposure to Netherlands, Germany, France, Luxembourg and Ireland included in Top 20.
Includes non-sovereign exposure to Portugal in the amount of $47 million and less than $1 million each to Greece and Cyprus. We had no sovereign debt exposure to these countries at September 30, 2014.
Real Estate 1-4 Family FIRST AND JUNIOR LIEN Mortgage Loans Our real estate 1-4 family first and junior lien mortgage loans primarily include loans we have made to customers and retained as part of our asset/liability management strategy. These loans, as presented in Table 18, include the Pick-a-Pay portfolio acquired from Wachovia which is discussed later in this Report. These loans also include other purchased loans and loans included on our balance sheet as a result of consolidation of variable interest entities (VIEs).
Table 18: Real Estate 1-4 Family First and Junior Lien Mortgage Loans
Balance
Core portfolio
205,031
63
194,488
Non-strategic and liquidating loan portfolios:
Pick-a-Pay mortgage
Other PCI and liquidating first mortgage
11,906
13,038
58,295
64,009
Total real estate 1-4 family first mortgage loans
57,577
62,001
Non-strategic and liquidating loan portfolios
3,267
3,913
Total real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgage loans
Total real estate 1-4 family mortgage loans
324,170
324,411
The real estate 1-4 family mortgage loan portfolio includes some loans with adjustable-rate features and some with an interest-only feature as part of the loan terms. Interest-only loans were approximately 13% and 15% of total loans at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. We believe we have manageable adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) reset risk across our owned mortgage loan portfolios. We do not offer option ARM products, nor do we offer variable-rate mortgage products with fixed payment amounts, commonly referred to within the financial services industry as negative amortizing mortgage loans. The option ARMs we do have are included in the Pick-a-Pay portfolio which was acquired from Wachovia and are part of our liquidating loan portfolios. Since our acquisition of the Pick-a-Pay loan portfolio at the end of 2008, the option payment portion of the portfolio has reduced from 86% to 41% atSeptember 30, 2014, as a result of our modification activities and customers exercising their option to convert to fixed payments. For more information, see the “Pick-a-Pay Portfolio” section in this Report. We continue to modify real estate 1-4 family mortgage loans to assist homeowners and other borrowers experiencing financial difficulties. For more information on our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s Making Home Affordable (MHA) programs, see the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Real Estate 1-4 Family First and Junior Lien Mortgage Loans” section in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Part of our credit monitoring includes tracking delinquency, FICO scores and collateral values (LTV/CLTV) on the entire real estate 1-4 family mortgage loan portfolio. These credit risk indicators, which exclude government insured/guaranteed loans, continued to improve in third quarter 2014 on the non-PCI mortgage portfolio. Loans 30 days or more delinquent at September 30, 2014, totaled $10.7 billion, or 4%, of total non-PCI mortgages, compared with $11.9 billion, or 4%, at December 31, 2013. Loans with FICO scores lower than 640 totaled $26.8 billion at September 30, 2014, or 9% of total non-PCI mortgages, compared with $31.5 billion, or 10%, at December 31, 2013. Mortgages with a LTV/CLTV greater than 100% totaled $22.0 billion at September 30, 2014, or 7% of total non-PCI mortgages, compared with $34.3 billion, or 11%, at December 31, 2013. Information regarding credit risk indicators, including PCI credit risk indicators, can be found in Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Real estate 1-4 family first and junior lien mortgage loans by state are presented in Table 19. Our real estate 1-4 family mortgage loans to borrowers in California represented approximately 13% of total loans at September 30, 2014, located mostly within the larger metropolitan areas, with no single California metropolitan area consisting of more than 4% of total loans. Our underwriting and periodic review of loans secured by residential real estate collateral includes appraisals or estimates from automated valuation models (AVMs) to support property values. We monitor changes in real estate values and underlying economic or market conditions for all geographic areas of our real estate 1-4 family mortgage portfolio as part of our credit risk management process. Additional information about AVMs and our policy for their use can be found in Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Reportand the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Real Estate 1-4 Family First and Junior Lien Mortgage Loans” section in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Table 19: Real Estate 1-4 Family First and Junior Lien Mortgage Loans by State
Real estate
Total real
1-4 family
estate 1-4
first
junior lien
family
mortgage
Real estate 1-4 family
loans (excluding PCI):
78,481
16,868
95,349
14,510
5,531
20,041
16,704
2,682
19,386
New Jersey
10,868
4,886
15,754
7,099
3,368
10,467
Pennsylvania
5,932
3,020
8,952
7,994
877
8,871
6,019
2,683
8,702
4,936
2,436
7,372
Other (2)
62,570
18,387
80,957
Government insured/
guaranteed loans (3)
25,942
241,055
60,738
301,793
Real estate 1-4
family PCI loans:
15,340
15,368
1,654
1,671
833
4,459
4,505
22,271
22,377
39
* Less than 1%.
(1) Consists of 45 states; no state had loans in excess of $548 million.
(2) Consists of 41 states; no state had loans in excess of $7.4 billion.
(3) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
First Lien Mortgage Portfolio The credit performance associated with our real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage portfolio continued to improve in third quarter 2014, as measured through net charge-offs and nonaccrual loans. Net charge-offs (annualized) as a percentage of average total loans improved to 0.17% and 0.22% in the third quarter and the first nine months of 2014, respectively, compared with 0.38% and 0.53%, respectively, for the same periods a year ago. Nonaccrual loans were $8.8 billion at September 30, 2014, compared with $9.8 billion at December 31, 2013. Improvement in the credit performance was driven by both an improvingeconomic and housing environment and declining balances in non-strategic and liquidating loans, which have been replaced with higher quality assets originated after 2008 utilizing tighter underwriting standards. Real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage loans originated after 2008 have resulted in minimal losses to date and were approximately 57% of our total real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage portfolio as of September 30, 2014.
In third quarter 2014, we continued to grow our real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage portfolio through the retention of high-quality non-conforming mortgages. Substantially all non-conforming loans originated in third quarter 2014 were classified as non-conforming due to the loan amount exceeding conventional conforming loan amount limits established by the GSEs. Our total real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage portfolio increased $3.2 billion in third quarter 2014 and $4.8 billion in the first nine months of 2014. The growth in this portfolio has been largely offset by runoff in our real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage non-strategic and liquidating portfolios. Excluding this runoff, our core real estate 1-4 family first lien mortgage portfolio increased $5.1 billion in third quarter 2014 and $10.5 billion in the first nine months of 2014 as we retained $11.6 billion and $30.8 billion in non-conforming originations in the third quarter and the first nine months of 2014, respectively.
Pick‑a‑Pay Portfolio The Pick-a-Pay portfolio was one of the consumer residential first mortgage portfolios we acquired from Wachovia and a majority of the portfolio was identified as PCI loans.
The Pick-a-Pay portfolio includes loans that offer payment options (Pick-a-Pay option payment loans), and also includes loans that were originated without the option payment feature, loans that no longer offer the option feature as a result of our modification efforts since the acquisition, and loans where the customer voluntarily converted to a fixed-rate product. The Pick-a-Pay portfolio is included in the consumer real estate 1-4 family first mortgage class of loans throughout this Report. Table 20 provides balances by types of loans as of September 30, 2014, as a result of modification efforts, compared to the types of loans included in the portfolio at acquisition. Total adjusted unpaid principal balance of PCI Pick-a-Pay loans was $26.9 billion at September 30, 2014, compared with $61.0 billion at acquisition. Primarily due to modification efforts, the adjusted unpaid principal balance of option payment PCI loans has declined to 16% of the total Pick-a-Pay portfolio at September 30, 2014, compared with 51% at acquisition.
Table 20: Pick-a-Pay Portfolio - Comparison to Acquisition Date
Adjusted
unpaid
principal
balance (1)
Option payment loans
21,150
24,420
99,937
Non-option payment adjustable-rate
and fixed-rate loans
7,036
7,892
15,763
Full-term loan modifications
22,973
23,509
Total adjusted unpaid principal balance
51,159
55,821
115,700
Total carrying value
Adjusted unpaid principal balance includes write-downs taken on loans where severe delinquency (normally 180 days) or other indications of severe borrower financial stress exist that indicate there will be a loss of contractually due amounts upon final resolution of the loan.
Pick-a-Pay loans may have fixed or adjustable rates with payment options that include a minimum payment, an interest-only payment or fully amortizing payment (both 15 and 30 year options). Total interest deferred due to negative amortization on Pick-a-Pay loans was $665 million at September 30, 2014, and $902 million at December 31, 2013. Approximately 95% of the Pick-a-Pay customers making a minimum payment in September 2014 did not defer interest, compared with 93% in December 2013.
Deferral of interest on a Pick-a-Pay loan may continue as long as the loan balance remains below a pre-defined principal cap, which is based on the percentage that the current loan balance represents to the original loan balance. A significant portion of the Pick-a-Pay portfolio has a cap of 125% of the original loan balance. Most of the Pick-a-Pay loans on which there is a deferred interest balance re-amortize (the monthly payment amount is reset or “recast”) on the earlier of the date when the loan balance reaches its principal cap, or generally the 10-year anniversary of the loan. After a recast, the customers’ new payment terms are reset to the amount necessary to repay the balance over the remainder of the original loan term.
Due to the terms of the Pick-a-Pay portfolio, there is little recast risk in the near term where borrowers will have a payment change over 7.5%. Based on assumptions of a flat rate environment, if all eligible customers elect the minimum payment option 100% of the time and no balances prepay, we would expect the following balances of loans to recast based on reaching the principal cap and also experiencing a payment change over the annual 7.5% reset: $26 million for the remainder of 2014, $50 million in 2015 and $27 million in 2016. In addition, in a flat rate environment, we would expect the following balances of loans to start fully amortizing due to reaching their recast anniversary date and also having a payment change over the annual 7.5% reset: $59 million for the remainder of 2014, $353 million in 2015 and $399 million in 2016. In third quarter 2014, the amount of loans reaching their principal cap or recast anniversary date and also having a payment change over the annual 7.5% reset was $26 million.
Table 21 reflects the geographic distribution of the Pick-a-Pay portfolio broken out between PCI loans and all other loans. The LTV ratio is a useful metric in evaluating future real estate 1-4 family first mortgage loan performance, including potential charge-offs. Because PCI loans were initially recorded at fair value, including write-downs for expected credit losses, the ratio of the carrying value to the current collateral value will be lower compared with the LTV based on the adjusted unpaid principal balance. For informational purposes, we have included both ratios for PCI loans in the following table.
Table 21: Pick-a-Pay Portfolio (1)
PCI loans
All other loans
Ratio of
carrying
Current
value to
LTV
Carrying
current
balance (2)
ratio (3)
value (4)
value (5)
18,654
15,327
11,846
2,173
2,459
913
83
789
65
1,580
573
529
960
51
Other states
4,363
3,591
6,756
69
Total Pick-a-Pay loans
26,917
22,057
24,332
The individual states shown in this table represent the top five states based on the total net carrying value of the Pick-a-Pay loans at the beginning of 2014.
The current LTV ratio is calculated as the adjusted unpaid principal balance divided by the collateral value. Collateral values are generally determined using automated valuation models (AVM) and are updated quarterly. AVMs are computer-based tools used to estimate market values of homes based on processing large volumes of market data including market comparables and price trends for local market areas.
Carrying value, which does not reflect the allowance for loan losses, includes remaining purchase accounting adjustments, which, for PCI loans may include the nonaccretable difference and the accretable yield and, for all other loans, an adjustment to mark the loans to a market yield at date of merger less any subsequent charge-offs.
The ratio of carrying value to current value is calculated as the carrying value divided by the collateral value.
To maximize return and allow flexibility for customers to avoid foreclosure, we have in place several loss mitigation strategies for our Pick-a-Pay loan portfolio. We contact customers who are experiencing financial difficulty and may in certain cases modify the terms of a loan based on a customer’s documented income and other circumstances.
We also have taken steps to work with customers to refinance or restructure their Pick-a-Pay loans into other loan products. For customers at risk, we offer combinations of term extensions of up to 40 years (from 30 years), interest rate reductions, forbearance of principal, and, in certain cases we may offer principal forgiveness to customers with substantial property value declines based on affordability needs.
In third quarter 2014, we completed more than 1,000 proprietary and Home Affordability Modification Program (HAMP) Pick-a-Pay loan modifications. We have completed more than 127,800modifications since the Wachovia acquisition, resulting in $6.0 billion of principal forgiveness to our Pick-a-Pay customers as well as an additional $70 million of conditional forgiveness that can be earned by borrowers through performance over a three year period.
Due to better than expected performance observed on the Pick-a-Pay PCI portfolio compared with the original acquisition estimates, we have reclassified $5.9 billion from the nonaccretable difference to the accretable yield since acquisition. Our cash flows expected to be collected have been favorably affected by lower expected defaults and losses as a result of observed and forecasted economic strengthening, particularly in housing prices, and our loan modification efforts. These factors are expected to reduce the frequency and severity of defaults and keep these loans performing for a longer period, thus increasing future principal and interest cash flows. The resulting increase in the accretable yield will be realized over the remaining life of the portfolio, which is estimated to have a weighted-average remaining life of approximately 11.9 years at September 30, 2014. The weighted average remaining life decreased slightly from December 31, 2013 due to updated expectations for prepayments and the passage of time. The accretable yield percentage at September 30, 2014, was 6.15%, up from 4.98% at the end of 2013 due to favorable changes in the expected timing and composition of cash flows resulting from improving credit and prepayment expectations. Fluctuations in the accretable yield are driven by changes in interest rate indices for variable rate PCI loans, prepayment assumptions, and expected principal and interest payments over the estimated life of the portfolio, which will be affected by the pace and degree of improvements in the U.S. economy and housing markets and projected lifetime performance resulting from loan modification activity. Changes in the projected timing of cash flow events, including loan liquidations, modifications and short sales, can also affect the accretable yield and the estimated weighted-average life of the portfolio.
The predominant portion of our PCI loans is included in the Pick-a-Pay portfolio. For further information on the judgment involved in estimating expected cash flows for PCI loans, see the “Critical Accounting Policies – Purchased Credit-Impaired Loans” section and Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Junior Lien Mortgage Portfolio The junior lien mortgage portfolio consists of residential mortgage lines and loans that are subordinate in rights to an existing lien on the same property. It is not unusual for these lines and loans to have draw periods, interest only payments, balloon payments, adjustable rates and similar features. The majority of our junior lien loan products are amortizing payment loans with fixed interest rates and repayment periods between five to 30 years.
We continuously monitor the credit performance of our junior lien mortgage portfolio for trends and factors that influence the frequency and severity of loss. We have observed that the severity of loss for junior lien mortgages is high and generally not affected by whether we or a third party own or service the related first mortgage, but the frequency of delinquency is typically lower when we own or service the first lien mortgage. In general, we have limited information available on the delinquency status of the third party owned or serviced senior lien where we also hold a junior lien. To capture this inherent loss content, we use the experience of our junior lien mortgages behind delinquent first liens that are owned or serviced by us adjusted for any observed differences in delinquency and loss rates associated with junior lien mortgages behind third party first mortgages. We incorporate this inherent loss content into our allowance for loan losses. Our allowance process for junior liens ensures appropriate consideration of the relative difference in loss experience for junior liens behind first lien mortgage loans we own or service, compared with those behind first lien mortgage loans owned or serviced by third parties. In addition, our allowance process for junior liens that are current, but are in their revolving period, appropriately reflects the inherent loss where the borrower is delinquent on the corresponding first lien mortgage loans.
Table 22 summarizes delinquency and loss rates for our junior lien mortgages by the holder of the first lien.
Table 22: Junior Lien Mortgage Portfolios Performance by Holder of 1st Lien (1)
% of loans
Loss rate
two payments
(annualized)
or more past due
quarter ended
Mar. 31,
Junior lien mortgages behind:
Wells Fargo owned or
serviced first lien
29,945
32,681
2.34
1.16
1.34
1.59
Third party first lien
30,793
33,110
2.55
2.53
0.94
0.96
1.23
1.35
1.58
Total junior lien mortgages
65,791
2.44
2.45
0.90
1.20
Excludes PCI loans because their losses were generally reflected in PCI accounting adjustments at the date of acquisition.
We monitor the number of borrowers paying the minimum amount due on a monthly basis. In September 2014, approximately 94% of our borrowers with a junior lien mortgage outstanding balance paid the minimum amount due or more, including approximately 46% who paid only the minimum amount due.
Table 23 shows the credit attributes of the core and liquidating junior lien mortgage portfolios and lists the top five states by outstanding balance for the core portfolio. Loans to California borrowers represent the largest state concentration in each of these portfolios. The decrease in outstanding balances since December 31, 2013 predominantly reflects loan paydowns. As of September 30, 2014, 20% of the outstanding balance of the junior lien mortgage portfolio was associated with loans that had a combined loan to value (CLTV) ratio in excess of 100%. CLTV means the ratio of the total loan balance of first mortgages and junior lien mortgages (including unused line amounts for credit line products) to property collateral value. The unsecured portion (the outstanding amount that was in excess of the most recent property collateral value) of the outstanding balances of these loans totaled 8% of the junior lien mortgage portfolio at September 30, 2014.
Table 23: Junior Lien Mortgage Portfolios (1)
15,777
17,003
1.99
2.03
0.44
0.67
5,359
5,811
2.96
3.16
1.29
1.85
2.12
4,754
5,019
3.43
1.38
1.45
1.49
1.50
1.81
3,206
3,378
0.59
0.87
0.93
2,977
3,137
2.81
1.04
1.24
1.17
25,504
27,653
2.18
0.83
1.05
1.15
1.43
2.33
2.35
1.09
1.42
Liquidating portfolio
3,161
3,790
4.58
4.10
2.61
2.46
2.94
3.20
Total core and
liquidating portfolios
Our junior lien, as well as first lien, lines of credit products generally have a draw period of 10 years (with some up to 15 or 20 years) with variable interest rate and payment options during the draw period of (1) interest only or (2) 1.5% of outstanding principal balance plus accrued interest. During the draw period, the borrower has the option of converting all or a portion of the line from a variable interest rate to a fixed rate with terms including interest-only payments for a fixed period between three to seven years or a fully amortizing payment with a fixed period between five to 30 years. At the end of the draw period, a line of credit generally converts to an amortizing payment schedule with repayment terms of up to 30 years based on the balance at time of conversion. Certain lines and loans have been structured with a balloon payment, which requires full repayment of the outstanding balance at the end of the term period. The conversion of lines or loans to fully amortizing or balloon payoff may result in a significant payment increase, which can affect some borrowers’ ability to repay the outstanding balance.
The lines that enter their amortization period may experience higher delinquencies and higher loss rates than the ones in their draw or term period. We have considered this increased inherent risk in our allowance for credit loss estimate.
In anticipation of our borrowers reaching the end of their contractual commitment, we have created a program to inform, educate and help these borrowers transition from interest-only to fully-amortizing payments or full repayment. We monitor the performance of the borrowers moving through the program in an effort to refine our ongoing program strategy.
Table 24 reflects the outstanding balance of our portfolio of junior lien lines and loans and senior lien lines segregated into scheduled end of draw or end of term periods and products that are currently amortizing, or in balloon repayment status. It excludes real estate 1-4 family first lien line reverse mortgages, which total $2.3 billion, because they are predominantly insured by the FHA, and it excludes PCI loans, which total $138 million, because their losses were generally reflected in our nonaccretable difference established at the date of acquisition.
Table 24: Junior Lien Mortgage Line and Loan and Senior Lien Mortgage Line Portfolios Payment Schedule
Scheduled end of draw / term
Remainder of
2019 and
2015
2016
2017
2018
thereafter (1)
Amortizing
Junior residential lines
53,464
5,220
6,767
6,917
3,768
25,575
4,286
Junior loans (2)
7,274
105
112
5,719
Total junior lien (3)(4)
933
5,293
6,872
7,029
3,780
26,826
10,005
First lien lines
17,454
269
1,199
974
969
11,889
1,056
Total (3)(4)
78,192
1,202
6,492
7,846
7,998
4,878
38,715
11,061
% of portfolios
The annual scheduled end of draw or term ranges from $1.8 billion to $10.2 billion and averages $5.5 billion per year for 2019 and thereafter. Loans that convert in 2025 and thereafter have draw periods that generally extend to 15 or 20 years.
Junior loans within the term period predominantly represent principal and interest products that require a balloon payment upon the end of the loan term. Amortizing junior loans include $58 million of balloon loans that have reached end of term and are now past due.
Lines in their draw period are predominantly interest-only. The unfunded credit commitments for junior and first lien lines totaled $70.8 billion at September 30, 2014.
Includes scheduled end-of-term balloon payments totaling $148 million, $509 million, $414 million, $518 million, $542 million and $2.5 billion for 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019 and thereafter, respectively. Amortizing lines include $178 million of end-of-term balloon payments, which are past due. At September 30, 2014, $365 million, or 7% of outstanding lines of credit that are amortizing, are 30 or more days past due compared to $1.3 billion, or 2% for lines in their draw period.
Credit Cards Our credit card portfolio totaled $28.3 billion at September 30, 2014, which represented 3% of our total outstanding loans. The net charge-off rate (annualized) for our credit card portfolio was 2.87% for third quarter 2014, compared with 3.28% for third quarter 2013 and 3.21% and 3.71% for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
AUTOmobile Our automobile portfolio, predominantly composed of indirect loans, totaled $55.2 billion at September 30, 2014. The net charge-off rate (annualized) for our automobile portfolio was 0.81% for third quarter 2014, compared with 0.63% for third quarter 2013 and 0.62% and 0.55% for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively. Increased charge-off rates were primarily driven by increased occurrence and severity of loss with lower collateral values being realized on automobile repossessions.Other revolving Credit and installment Other revolving credit and installment loans totaled $34.7 billion at September 30, 2014, and primarily included student and security-based margin loans. Student loans totaled $11.9 billion at September 30, 2014, compared with $22.0 billion at December 31, 2013, primarily reflecting the transfer of $9.7 billion in government guaranteed student loans to loans held for sale on June 30, 2014. The net charge-off rate (annualized) for other revolving credit and installment loans was 1.46% for third quarter 2014 and 2013 and 1.32% and 1.40% for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
nonperforming assets (Nonaccrual Loans and Foreclosed assets) Table 25 summarizes nonperforming assets (NPAs) for each of the last four quarters. We generally place loans on nonaccrual status when:
· the full and timely collection of interest or principal becomes uncertain (generally based on an assessment of the borrower’s financial condition and the adequacy of collateral, if any);
· they are 90 days (120 days with respect to real estate 1-4 family first and junior lien mortgages) past due for interest or principal, unless both well-secured and in the process of collection;
· part of the principal balance has been charged off (including loans discharged in bankruptcy);
· for junior lien mortgages, we have evidence that the related first lien mortgage may be 120 days past due or in the process of foreclosure regardless of the junior lien delinquency status; or
· performing consumer loans are discharged in bankruptcy, regardless of their delinquency status.
Table 25: Nonperforming Assets (Nonaccrual Loans and Foreclosed Assets)
June 30, 2014
March 31, 2014
Nonaccrual loans:
586
693
630
738
1,802
2,030
1.88
2,252
1.21
239
1.78
416
2.48
0.21
0.24
0.26
Total commercial (1)
2,495
0.63
2,798
0.71
3,027
0.79
3,475
0.92
first mortgage (2)
8,784
9,026
9,357
9,799
junior lien mortgage
1,903
1,964
3.14
2,072
3.24
2,188
3.32
150
173
0.12
10,870
11,174
11,623
12,193
2.74
Total nonaccrual
loans (3)(4)(5)
13,365
13,972
14,650
1.77
15,668
1.91
Foreclosed assets:
Government insured/guaranteed (6)
2,617
2,359
2,302
2,093
Non-government insured/guaranteed
1,691
1,748
1,813
1,844
Total foreclosed assets
4,308
4,107
4,115
3,937
Total nonperforming assets
17,673
2.11
18,079
18,765
2.27
19,605
2.38
Change in NPAs from prior quarter
(406)
(686)
(840)
(1,090)
Includes LHFS of $1 million at September 30, 2014, June 30, 2014, March 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
Includes MHFS of $182 million, $238 million, $227 million, and $227 million at September 30, June 30 and March 31, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively.
Excludes PCI loans because they continue to earn interest income from accretable yield, independent of performance in accordance with their contractual terms.
Real estate 1-4 family mortgage loans predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA and student loans predominantly guaranteed by agencies on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education under the Federal Family Education Loan Program are not placed on nonaccrual status because they are insured or guaranteed.
See Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report for further information on impaired loans and loans in process of foreclosure.
Consistent with regulatory reporting requirements, foreclosed real estate resulting from government insured/guaranteed loans are classified as nonperforming. Both principal and interest related to these foreclosed real estate assets are collectible because the loans were predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA. The increase in balance from a year ago, reflects a continued slowdown in the processing of foreclosed properties through the HUD conveyance requirements as a result of industry resource constraints, as well as other factors, including an increase in foreclosures in states with longer redemption periods, longer occupant evacuation periods, increased maintenance required for aging foreclosures and longer repair authorization periods.
Table 26 provides an analysis of the changes in nonaccrual loans.
Table 26: Analysis of Changes in Nonaccrual Loans
Commercial nonaccrual loans
Balance, beginning of quarter
3,886
4,455
Inflows
343
433
367
520
490
Outflows:
Returned to accruing
(37)
(81)
(98)
(67)
(192)
Foreclosures
(18)
(79)
(34)
(77)
Charge-offs
(124)
(120)
(191)
(150)
Payments, sales and other (1)
(467)
(429)
(522)
(639)
(640)
Total outflows
(646)
(662)
(815)
(931)
(1,059)
Balance, end of quarter
Consumer nonaccrual loans
13,007
13,460
1,529
1,673
1,650
2,015
(817)
(1,107)
(1,104)
(953)
(997)
(148)
(132)
(146)
(162)
(167)
(290)
(348)
(400)
(437)
(480)
(578)
(535)
(570)
(824)
(1,833)
(2,122)
(2,220)
(2,505)
(2,468)
Total nonaccrual loans
16,893
Other outflows include the effects of VIE deconsolidations and adjustments for loans carried at fair value.
Typically, changes to nonaccrual loans period-over-periodrepresent inflows for loans that are placed on nonaccrual status in accordance with our policy, offset by reductions for loans that are paid down, charged off, sold, transferred to foreclosed properties, or are no longer classified as nonaccrual as a result of continued performance and an improvement in the borrower’s financial condition and loan repayment capabilities. Also, reductions can come from borrower repayments even if the loan remains on nonaccrual.
While nonaccrual loans are not free of loss content, we believe exposure to loss is significantly mitigated by the following factors at September 30, 2014:
· 97% of total commercial nonaccrual loans and 99% of total consumer nonaccrual loans are secured. Of the consumer nonaccrual loans, 98% are secured by real estate and 72% have a combined LTV (CLTV) ratio of 80% or less.
· losses of$625 million and $3.5billion have already been recognized on 30% of commercial nonaccrual loans and 54% of consumer nonaccrual loans, respectively. Generally, when a consumer real estate loan is 120 days past due (except when required earlier by the Interagency or OCC Guidance), we transfer it to nonaccrual status. When the loan reaches 180 days past due, or is discharged in bankruptcy, it is our policy to write these loans down to net realizable value (fair value of collateral less estimated costs to sell), except for modifications in their trial period that are not written down as long as trial payments are made on time. Thereafter, we reevaluate each loan regularly and record additional write-downs if needed.
· 70% of commercial nonaccrual loans were current on interest.
· the risk of loss of all nonaccrual loans has been considered and we believe is adequately covered by the allowance for loan losses.
· $2.1 billion of consumer loans discharged in bankruptcy and classified as nonaccrual were 60 days or less past due, of which $1.9 billion were current.
We continue to work with our customers experiencing financial difficulty to determine if they can qualify for a loan modification so that they can stay in their homes. Under both our proprietary modification programs and the MHA programs, customers may be required to provide updated documentation, and some programs require completion of payment during trial periods to demonstrate sustained performance before the loan can be removed from nonaccrual status. In addition, for loans in foreclosure in certain states, including New York and New Jersey, the foreclosure timeline has significantly increased due to backlogs in an already complex process. Therefore, loans remain on nonaccrual status for longer periods.
Table 27 provides a summary and an analysis of changes in foreclosed assets.
Table 27: Foreclosed Assets
Summary by loan segment
Government insured/guaranteed (1)
1,781
PCI loans:
394
461
559
208
177
149
125
Total PCI loans
608
638
646
All other loans:
579
634
736
759
944
449
439
393
Total all other loans
1,083
1,175
1,198
1,337
3,802
Analysis of changes in foreclosed assets
3,140
Net change in government insured/guaranteed (1)(2)
258
312
755
Additions to foreclosed assets (3)
421
448
Reductions:
Sales
(421)
(493)
(490)
(545)
Write-downs and gains (losses) on sales
218
Total reductions
(486)
(479)
(605)
(552)
Foreclosed government insured/guaranteed loans are temporarily transferred to and held by us as servicer, until reimbursement is received from FHA or VA. The net change in government insured/guaranteed foreclosed assets is made up of inflows from mortgages held for investment and MHFS, and outflows when we are reimbursed by FHA/VA. Transfers from government insured/guaranteed loans to foreclosed assets amounted to $617 million, $654 million, $801 million, $892 million, and $1.3 billion for the quarters ended September 30, June 30 and March 31, 2014 and December 31 and September 30, 2013, respectively.
Predominantly include loans moved into foreclosure from nonaccrual status, PCI loans transitioned directly to foreclosed assets and repossessed automobiles.
Foreclosed assets at September 30, 2014, included $3.3 billion of foreclosed residential real estate that had collateralized commercial and consumer loans, of which 80% is predominantly FHA insured or VA guaranteed and expected to have minimal or no loss content. The remaining foreclosed assets balance of $1.0 billion has been written down to estimated net realizable value. Foreclosed assets at September 30, 2014, increased slightly, compared with December 31, 2013. AtSeptember 30, 2014,62% of foreclosed assets of $4.3 billion have been in the foreclosed assets portfolio one year or less.
Given the industry resource constraints and other factors affecting our ability to meet HUD conveyance requirements, we anticipate continuing to hold an elevated level of foreclosed assets on our balance sheet.
TROUBLED DEBT RESTRUCTURINGS (TDRs)
Table 28: Troubled Debt Restructurings (TDRs)
Commercial TDRs
834
948
1,081
1,153
2,034
2,179
2,233
2,248
2,457
328
391
454
475
598
Total commercial TDRs
3,201
3,525
3,781
3,765
4,219
Consumer TDRs
18,366
18,582
19,043
18,925
18,974
2,464
2,463
2,460
2,468
2,399
Credit Card
379
431
151
189
212
Trial modifications
473
469
593
650
717
Total consumer TDRs (1)
21,841
22,082
22,698
22,696
22,789
Total TDRs
25,042
25,607
26,479
26,461
27,008
TDRs on nonaccrual status
7,313
7,638
7,774
8,172
8,609
TDRs on accrual status (1)
17,729
17,969
18,705
18,289
18,399
TDR loans include $2.1 billion, $2.2 billion, $2.6 billion, $2.5 billion, and $2.4 billion at September 30, June 30, and March 31, 2014, and December 31, and September 30, 2013, respectively, of government insured/guaranteed loans that are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA and are accruing.
Table 28 provides information regarding the recorded investment of loans modified in TDRs. The allowance for loan losses for TDRs was $3.7 billion and $4.5 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. See Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information regarding TDRs. In those situations where principal is forgiven, the entire amount of such forgiveness is immediately charged off to the extent not done so prior to the modification. We sometimes delay the timing on the repayment of a portion of principal (principal forbearance) and charge off the amount of forbearance if that amount is not considered fully collectible.
Our nonaccrual policies are generally the same for all loan types when a restructuring is involved. We re-underwrite loans at the time of restructuring to determine whether there is sufficient evidence of sustained repayment capacity based on the borrower’s documented income, debt to income ratios, and other factors. Loans lacking sufficient evidence of sustained repayment capacity at the time of modification are charged down to the fair value of the collateral, if applicable. For an accruing loan that has been modified, if the borrower has demonstrated performance under the previous terms and the underwriting process shows the capacity to continue to perform under the restructured terms, the loan will generally remain in accruing status. Otherwise, the loan will be placed in nonaccrual status until the borrower demonstrates a sustained period of performance, generally six consecutive months of payments, or equivalent, inclusive of consecutive payments made prior to modification. Loans will also be placed on nonaccrual, and a corresponding charge-off is recorded to the loan balance, when we believe that principal and interest contractually due under the modified agreement will not be collectible.
Table 29 provides an analysis of the changes in TDRs. Loans that may be modified more than once are reported as TDR inflows only in the period they are first modified. Other than resolutions such as foreclosures, sales and transfers to held for sale, we may remove loans held for investment from TDR classification, but only if they have been refinanced or restructured at market terms and qualify as a new loan.
Table 29: Analysis of Changes in TDRs
4,551
276
442
292
534
Outflows
(42)
(28)
(44)
(478)
(496)
(826)
22,969
946
1,003
1,248
1,282
(139)
(157)
(155)
(183)
(303)
(283)
(325)
(417)
(519)
(768)
(1,073)
(563)
(701)
(761)
Net change in trial modifications (2)
(57)
(68)
Other outflows include normal amortization/accretion of loan basis adjustments and loans transferred to held-for-sale. It also includes $1 million, and $29 million of loans refinanced or restructured as new loans and removed from TDR classification for the quarters ended March 31, 2014, and September 30, 2013, respectively. No loans were removed from TDR classification for the quarters ended September 30 and June 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, as a result of being refinanced or restructured as new loans.
Net change in trial modifications includes: inflows of new TDRs entering the trial payment period, net of outflows for modifications that either (i) successfully perform and enter into a permanent modification, or (ii) did not successfully perform according to the terms of the trial period plan and are subsequently charged-off, foreclosed upon or otherwise resolved. Our experience is that substantially all of the mortgages that enter a trial payment period program are successful in completing the program requirements.
Loans 90 Days or More Past Due and Still AccruinG Loans 90 days or more past due as to interest or principal are still accruing if they are (1) well-secured and in the process of collection or (2) real estate 1‑4 family mortgage loans or consumer loans exempt under regulatory rules from being classified as nonaccrual until later delinquency, usually 120 days past due. PCI loans are not included in past due and still accruing loans even though they are 90 days or more contractually past due. These PCI loans are considered to be accruing because they continue to earn interest from accretable yield, independent of performance in accordance with their contractual terms.
Excluding insured/guaranteed loans, loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing at September 30, 2014, were down $99 million, or9%, from December 31, 2013, due to payoffs, modifications and other loss mitigation activities, decline in non-strategic and liquidating portfolios, and credit stabilization.
Loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA for mortgages and the U.S. Department of Education for student loans under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) were $17.3 billion at September 30, 2014, down from $22.2 billion at December 31, 2013. The decrease since December 31, 2013, reflected the effects of modification activities and improving delinquency trends.
Table 30 reflects non-PCI loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing by class for loans not government insured/guaranteed. For additional information on delinquencies by loan class, see Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Table 30: Loans 90 Days or More Past Due and Still Accruing
Loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing:
Total (excluding PCI (1)):
18,295
21,215
23,219
22,181
Less: FHA insured/VA guaranteed (2)(3)
16,628
16,978
19,405
21,274
20,214
Less: Student loans guaranteed under the FFELP (4)
721
707
860
900
917
Total, not government insured/guaranteed
897
950
1,045
1,050
By segment and class, not government insured/guaranteed:
167
Real estate 1-4 family first mortgage (3)
333
354
383
Real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgage (3)
88
89
302
308
321
285
48
84
855
775
902
883
PCI loans totaled $4.0 billion, $4.0 billion, $4.3 billion, $4.5 billion, and $4.9 billion at September 30, June 30, and March 31, 2014 and December 31 and September 30, 2013, respectively.
Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA.
Includes mortgages held for sale 90 days or more past due and still accruing.
Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly guaranteed by agencies on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education under the FFELP. At the end of second quarter 2014, all government guaranteed student loans were transferred to loans held for sale.
NET CHARGE-OFFS
Table 31: Net Charge-offs
Sept. 30, 2014
Mar. 31, 2014
Dec. 31, 2013
Sept. 30, 2013
Net loan
charge-
avg.
offs
loans(1)
loans (1)
Commercial and
industrial
0.11
0.09
0.22
(0.14)
(0.04)
(22)
(0.08)
(41)
(0.15)
(20)
(1.29)
(0.47)
(0.55)
(0.32)
(0.41)
0.05
0.03
0.02
(0.02)
0.01
first mortgage
170
0.27
242
275
201
2.87
231
3.38
3.28
0.70
Other revolving credit
and installment
132
1.22
692
686
0.75
0.82
956
668
825
963
0.48
Quarterly net charge-offs (recoveries) as a percentage of average respective loans are annualized.
Table 31 presents net charge-offs for third quarter 2014 and the previous four quarters. Net charge-offs in third quarter 2014 were $668 million (0.32% of average total loans outstanding) compared with $975 million (0.48%) in third quarter 2013.
Due to higher dollar amounts associated with individual commercial and industrial and CRE loans, loss recognition tends to be irregular and varies more, compared with consumer loan portfolios. We continued to have improvement in our residential real estate secured portfolios.
Allowance for Credit Losses The allowance for credit losses, which consists of the allowance for loan losses and the allowance for unfunded credit commitments, is management’s estimate of credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio and unfunded credit commitments at the balance sheet date, excluding loans carried at fair value. The detail of the changes in the allowance for credit losses by portfolio segment (including charge-offs and recoveries by loan class) is in Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
We apply a disciplined process and methodology to establish our allowance for credit losses each quarter. This process takes into consideration many factors, including historical and forecasted loss trends, loan-level credit quality ratings and loan grade-specific characteristics. The process involves subjective and complex judgments. In addition, we review a variety of credit metrics and trends. These credit metrics and trends, however, do not solely determine the amount of the allowance as we use several analytical tools. Our estimation approach for the commercial portfolio reflects the estimated probability of default in accordance with the borrower’s financial strength, and the severity of loss in the event of default, considering the quality of any underlying collateral. Probability of default and severity at the time of default are statistically derived through historical observations of defaults and losses after default within each credit risk rating. Our estimation approach for the consumer portfolio uses forecasted losses that represent our best estimate of inherent loss based on historical experience, quantitative and other mathematical techniques over the loss emergence period. For additional information on our allowance for credit losses, see the “Critical Accounting Policies – Allowance for Credit Losses” section in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Table 32 presents the allocation of the allowance for credit losses by loan segment and class for the most recent quarter end and last four year ends.
Table 32: Allocation of the Allowance for Credit Losses (ACL)
Dec. 31, 2012
Dec. 31, 2011
Dec. 31, 2010
Loans
as %
of total
ACL
3,165
2,775
2,649
3,299
2,102
2,283
2,550
3,072
770
552
893
1,387
331
329
6,410
6,103
5,714
6,358
8,169
3,113
4,087
6,100
6,934
7,603
1,699
2,534
3,462
3,897
4,557
1,224
1,234
1,294
1,945
528
555
771
533
548
418
7,071
8,868
11,763
13,310
15,294
13,481
14,971
17,477
19,668
23,463
Components:
14,502
17,060
19,372
23,022
Allowance for unfunded
credit commitments
Allowance for credit losses
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage
of total loans
1.51
1.76
2.13
2.52
3.04
of total net charge-offs (1)
479
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage
1.61
1.82
2.19
2.56
3.10
of total nonaccrual loans
101
96
Total net charge-offs are annualized for quarter ended September 30, 2014.
In addition to the allowance for credit losses, there was $3.1 billion at September 30, 2014, and $5.2 billion at December 31, 2013, of nonaccretable difference to absorb losses for PCI loans. The allowance for credit losses is lower than otherwise would have been required without PCI loan accounting. As a result of PCI loans, certain ratios of the Company may not be directly comparable with credit-related metrics for other financial institutions. For additional information on PCI loans, see the “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Purchased Credit-Impaired Loans” section and Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) to Financial Statements in this Report.
The ratio of the allowance for credit losses to total nonaccrual loans may fluctuate significantly from period to period due to such factors as the mix of loan types in the portfolio, borrower credit strength and the value and marketability of collateral. Over one-half of nonaccrual loans were real estate 1-4 family first and junior lien mortgage loans at September 30, 2014.
The allowance for credit losses declined in third quarter 2014, which reflected continued credit improvement,particularly in residential real estateportfolios primarily associated with continued improvement in the housing market. Total provision for credit losses was $368 million in third quarter 2014, compared with $75 million in third quarter 2013, reflecting a lower allowance release as the loan portfolio continued to grow and the rate of credit improvement slowed.
We believe the allowance for credit losses of $13.5 billion at September 30, 2014, was appropriate to cover credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio, including unfunded credit commitments, at that date. The allowance for credit losses is subject to change and reflects existing factors as of the date of determination, including economic or market conditions and ongoing internal and external examination processes. Due to the sensitivity of the allowance for credit losses to changes in the economic and business environment, it is possible that we will incur incremental credit losses not anticipated as of the balance sheet date.We continue to expect future allowance releases absent a significant deterioration in the economy, but expect a lower level of future releases as the rate of credit improvement slows and the loan portfolio continues to grow. Our process for determining the allowance for credit losses is discussed in the “Critical Accounting Policies – Allowance for Credit Losses” section and Note 1 (Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
LIABILITY for Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses In connection with our sales and securitization of residential mortgage loans to various parties, we have established a mortgage repurchase liability, initially at fair value, related to various representations and warranties that reflect management’s estimate of losses for loans for which we could have a repurchase obligation, whether or not we currently service those loans, based on a combination of factors. Our mortgage repurchase liability estimation process also incorporates a forecast of repurchase demands associated with mortgage insurance rescission activity.
Because we retain the servicing for most of the mortgage loans we sell or securitize, we believe the quality of our residential mortgage loan servicing portfolio provides helpful information in evaluating our repurchase liability. Of the $1.8 trillion in the residential mortgage loan servicing portfolio at September 30, 2014, 94% was current and less than 2% was subprime at origination. Our combined delinquency and foreclosure rate on this portfolio was 5.80% at September 30, 2014, compared with 5.64% at June 30, 2014, and 6.40% at December 31, 2013. Three percent of this portfolio is private label securitizations for which we originated the loans and therefore have some repurchase risk.
The overall level of unresolved repurchase demands and mortgage insurance rescissions outstanding at September 30, 2014, was down from a year ago both in number of outstanding loans and in total dollar balances as we continued to work through the new demands and mortgage insurance rescissions and as we announced settlements with both Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) and Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA) in 2013, that resolved substantially all repurchase liabilities associated with loans sold to FHLMC prior to January 1, 2009, and loans sold to FNMA that were originated prior to January 1, 2009. Demands from private investors declined from December 31, 2013, primarily due to settlements with two private investors in first quarter 2014 that resolved many of the increased demands we experienced from 2012 through 2013, with a significant increase experienced in fourth quarter 2013.
Table 33 provides the number of unresolved repurchase demands and mortgage insurance rescissions.
Table 33: Unresolved Repurchase Demands and Mortgage Insurance Rescissions
Government
Mortgage insurance
sponsored entities (1)
Private
rescissions with no demand (2)
Number of
Original loan
balance (3)
September 30,
426
93
981
678
305
1,345
295
March 31,
599
1,399
2,260
87
3,328
708
4,422
958
1,240
385
6,047
1,309
6,313
1,413
1,206
561
8,080
1,798
5,910
1,371
278
652
7,840
1,794
Includes unresolved repurchase demands of 7 and $1 million, 14 and $3 million, 25 and $3 million, 42 and $6 million, and 1,247 and $225 million at September 30, June 30, and March 31, 2014, and December 31, and September 30, 2013, respectively, received from investors on mortgage servicing rights acquired from other originators. We generally have the right of recourse against the seller and may be able to recover losses related to such repurchase demands subject to counterparty risk associated with the seller.
As part of our representations and warranties in our loan sales contracts, we typically represent to GSEs and private investors that certain loans have mortgage insurance to the extent there are loans that have loan to value ratios in excess of 80% that require mortgage insurance. If the mortgage insurance is rescinded by the mortgage insurer due to a claim of breach of a contractual representation or warranty, the lack of insurance may result in a repurchase demand from an investor. Similar to repurchase demands, we evaluate mortgage insurance rescission notices for validity and appeal for reinstatement if the rescission was not based on a contractual breach. When investor demands are received due to lack of mortgage insurance, they are reported as unresolved repurchase demands based on the applicable investor category for the loan (GSE or private).
While the original loan balances related to these demands are presented above, the establishment of the repurchase liability is based on a combination of factors, such as our appeals success rates, reimbursement by correspondent and other third party originators, and projected loss severity, which is driven by the difference between the current loan balance and the estimated collateral value less costs to sell the property.
Table 34 summarizes the changes in our mortgage repurchase liability.
Table 34: Changes in Mortgage Repurchase Liability
Balance, beginning of period
766
799
899
1,421
2,222
2,206
Provision for repurchase losses:
Loan sales
Change in estimate (1)
(93)
(135)
Total additions (reductions)
(26)
(101)
402
Losses
(106)
(548)
(829)
(129)
(1,187)
Balance, end of period
669
Results from changes in investor demand and mortgage insurer practices, credit deterioration and changes in the financial stability of correspondent lenders.
Our liability for mortgage repurchases, included in “Accrued expenses and other liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheet, represents our best estimate of the probable loss that we expect to incur for various representations and warranties in the contractual provisions of our sales of mortgage loans. The liability was $669 million at September 30, 2014 and $1.4 billion at September 30, 2013. In third quarter 2014, we recorded through the provision for repurchase losses a net $81 million reduction in the liability (reflecting release of $93 million for change in estimate of provision for prior period originations), compared with a $28 million increase in the provision a year ago. The reduction in third quarter 2014 was primarily due to a re-estimation of our liability based on recently observed trends.
Total losses charged to mortgage repurchase liability were $16 million in third quarter 2014, compared with $829 million a year ago. Third quarter 2013 losses included $746 million for the FHLMC settlement agreement that resolved substantially all repurchase liabilities related to loans sold to FHLMC prior to January 1, 2009. Losses for fourth quarter 2013 included $508 million for the FNMA settlement agreement that resolved substantially all repurchase liabilities related to loans sold to FNMA that were originated prior to January 1, 2009.
Because of the uncertainty in the various estimates underlying the mortgage repurchase liability, there is a range of losses in excess of the recorded mortgage repurchase liability that are reasonably possible. The estimate of the range of possible loss for representations and warranties does not represent a probable loss, and is based on currently available information, significant judgment, and a number of assumptions that are subject to change. The high end of this range of reasonably possible losses in excess of our recorded liability was $984 million at September 30, 2014, and was determined based upon modifying the assumptions (particularly to assume significant changes in investor repurchase demand practices) used in our best estimate of probable loss to reflect what we believe to be the high end of reasonably possible adverse assumptions.
For additional information on our repurchase liability, see the “Risk Management –Credit Risk Management –Liability For Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses” and the “Critical Accounting Policies Liability for Mortgage Loan Repurchase Losses” sections in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities) to Financial Statements in this Report.
RISKS RELATING TO SERVICING ACTIVITIES In addition to servicing loans in our portfolio, we act as servicer and/or master servicer of residential mortgage loans included in GSE-guaranteed mortgage securitizations, GNMA-guaranteed mortgage securitizations of FHA-insured/VA-guaranteed mortgages and private label mortgage securitizations, as well as for unsecuritized loans owned by institutional investors. In connection with our servicing activities we have entered into various settlements with federal and state regulators to resolve certain alleged servicing issues and practices. In general, these settlements require us to provide customers with loan modification relief, refinancing relief, and foreclosure prevention and assistance, as well as imposed certain monetary penalties on us.
In particular, on February 28, 2013, we entered into amendments to the April 2011 Consent Order with both the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the FRB, which effectively ceased the Independent Foreclosure Review program created by such Consent Order and replaced it with an accelerated remediation process to be administered by the OCC and the FRB. We are required to meet the commitment to provide foreclosure prevention actions on $1.2 billion of loans under this accelerated remediation process by January 7, 2015. We believe we have reported sufficient foreclosure prevention actions to the monitor of the accelerated remediation process to meet the $1.2 billion commitment, but are awaiting monitor approval.On February 9, 2012, a federal/state settlement was announced among the DOJ, HUD, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Veteran Affairs, the Federal Trade Commission, the Executive Office of the U.S. Trustee, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a task force of Attorneys General, Wells Fargo, and four other servicers related to investigations of mortgage industry servicing and foreclosure practices. Under the terms of this settlement, which will remain in effect through October 4, 2015 (subject to a trailing review period) we have agreed to the following programmatic commitments, consisting of three components totaling approximately $5.3 billion:
· Consumer Relief Program commitment of $3.4 billion
· Refinance Program commitment of $900 million
· Foreclosure Assistance Program of $1 billion
Additionally and simultaneously, the OCC and FRB announced the imposition of civil money penalties of $83 million and $87 million, respectively, pursuant to the Consent Orders. The civil money obligations were satisfied through payments made under the Foreclosure Assistance Program to the federal government and participating states for their use to address the impact of foreclosure challenges as they determine and which may include direct payments to consumers.
As announced on March 18, 2014, we have successfully fulfilled our commitments under both the Consumer Relief (and state-level sub-commitments) and the Refinance Programs in accordance with the terms of our commitments.
For additional information about the risks and various settlements related to our servicing activities see “Risk Management – Credit Risk Management – Risks Relating to Servicing Activities” in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Asset/Liability Management
Asset/liability management involves evaluating, monitoring and managing interest rate risk, market risk, liquidity and funding. Primary oversight of interest rate risk and market risk resides with the Finance Committee of our Board of Directors (Board), which oversees the administration and effectiveness of financial risk management policies and processes used to assess and manage these risks. Primary oversight of liquidity and funding resides with the Risk Committee of the Board. At the management level we utilize a Corporate Asset/Liability Management Committee (Corporate ALCO), which consists of senior financial, risk, and business executives, to oversee these risks and report on them periodically to the Board’s Finance Committee and Risk Committee as appropriate. Each of our principal lines of business has its own asset/liability management committee and process linked to the Corporate ALCO process. As discussed in more detail for trading activities below, we employ separate management level oversight specific to market risk. Market risk, in its broadest sense, refers to the possibility that losses will result from the impact of adverse changes in market rates and prices on our trading and non-trading portfolios and financial instruments.
Interest Rate Risk Interest rate risk, which potentially can have a significant earnings impact, is an integral part of being a financial intermediary. We are subject to interest rate risk because:
· assets and liabilities may mature or reprice at different times (for example, if assets reprice faster than liabilities and interest rates are generally falling, earnings will initially decline);
· assets and liabilities may reprice at the same time but by different amounts (for example, when the general level of interest rates is falling, we may reduce rates paid on checking and savings deposit accounts by an amount that is less than the general decline in market interest rates);
· short-term and long-term market interest rates may change by different amounts (for example, the shape of the yield curve may affect new loan yields and funding costs differently);
· the remaining maturity of various assets or liabilities may shorten or lengthen as interest rates change (for example, if long-term mortgage interest rates decline sharply, MBS held in the investment securities portfolio may prepay significantly earlier than anticipated, which could reduce portfolio income); or
· interest rates may also have a direct or indirect effect on loan demand, collateral values, credit losses, mortgage origination volume, the fair value of MSRs and other financial instruments, the value of the pension liability and other items affecting earnings.
We assess interest rate risk by comparing outcomes under various earnings simulations using many interest rate scenarios that differ in the direction of interest rate changes, the degree of change over time, the speed of change and the projected shape of the yield curve. These simulations require assumptions regarding how changes in interest rates and related market conditions could influence drivers of earnings and balance sheet composition such as loan origination demand, prepayment speeds, deposit balances and mix, as well as pricing strategies.
Our risk measures include both net interest income sensitivity and interest rate sensitive noninterest income and expense impacts. We refer to the combination of these exposures as interest rate sensitive earnings. In general, the Company is positioned to benefit from higher interest rates. Currently, our profile is such that net interest income will benefit from higher interest rates as our assets reprice faster and to a greater degree than our liabilities, and, in response to lower market rates, our assets will reprice downward and to a greater degree than our liabilities. Our interest rate sensitive noninterest income and expense is largely driven by mortgage activity, and tends to move in the opposite direction of our net interest income. So, in response to higher interest rates, mortgage activity, primarily refinancing activity, generally declines. And in response to lower rates, mortgage activity generally increases. Mortgage results are also impacted by the valuation of MSRs and related hedge positions. See the “Risk Management – Mortgage Banking Interest Rate and Market Risk” section in this Report for more information.
The degree to which these sensitivities offset each other is dependent upon the timing and magnitude of changes in interest rates, and the slope of the yield curve. During a transition to a higher or lower interest rate environment, a reduction or increase in interest-sensitive earnings from the mortgage banking business could occur quickly, while the benefit or detriment from balance sheet repricing could take more time to develop. For example, our lower rate scenarios (scenario 1 and scenario 2) in the following table initially measure a decline in long-term interest rates versus our most likely scenario. Although the performance in these rate scenarios contain initial benefit from increased mortgage banking activity, the result is lower earnings relative to the most likely scenario over timegiven pressure on net interest income. The higher rate scenarios (scenario 3 and scenario 4) measure the impact of varying degrees of rising short-term and long-term interest rates over the course of the forecast horizon relative to the most likely scenario, both resulting in positive earnings sensitivity.
As of September 30, 2014, our most recent simulations estimate earnings at risk over the next 24 months under a range of both lower and higher interest rates. The results of the simulations are summarized in Table 35, indicating cumulative net income after tax earnings sensitivity relative to the most likely earnings plan over the 24 month horizon (a positive range indicates a beneficial earnings sensitivity measurement relative to the most likely earnings plan and a negative range indicates a detrimental earnings sensitivity relative to the most likely earnings plan).
Table 35: Earnings Sensitivity Over 24 Month Horizon Relative to Most Likely Earnings Plan
Most
Lower rates
Higher rates
likely
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Scenario 4
Ending rates:
Federal funds
0.25
1.10
4.75
10-year treasury (1)
3.64
1.70
4.14
Earnings relative to
most likely
N/A
(6)-(7)
(2)-(3)
0 - 5
>5
U.S. Constant Maturity Treasury Rate
We use the investment securities portfolio and exchange-traded and over-the-counter (OTC) interest rate derivatives to hedge our interest rate exposures. See the “Balance Sheet Analysis – Investment Securities” section in this Report for more information on the use of the available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios. The notional or contractual amount, credit risk amount and fair value of the derivatives used to hedge our interest rate risk exposures as of September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, are presented in Note 12 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in this Report. We use derivatives for asset/liability management in two main ways:
· to convert the cash flows from selected asset and/or liability instruments/portfolios including a major portion of our long-term debt, from fixed-rate payments to floating-rate payments, or vice versa; and
· to economically hedge our mortgage origination pipeline, funded mortgage loans and MSRs using interest rate swaps, swaptions, futures, forwards and options.
Mortgage Banking Interest Rate and Market Risk We originate, fund and service mortgage loans, which subjects us to various risks, including credit, liquidity and interest rate risks. For a discussion of mortgage banking interest rate and market risk, see pages 85-87 of our 2013 Form 10-K.
While our hedging activities are designed to balance our mortgage banking interest rate risks, the financial instruments we use may not perfectly correlate with the values and income being hedged. For example, the change in the value of ARM production held for sale from changes in mortgage interest rates may or may not be fully offset by Treasury and LIBOR index-based financial instruments used as economic hedges for such ARMs. Additionally, hedge-carry income on our economic hedges for the MSRsmay not continue if the spread between short-term and long-term rates decreases, we shift composition of the hedge to more interest rate swaps, or there are other changes in the market for mortgage forwards that affect the implied carry.
The total carrying value of our residential and commercial MSRs was $15.3 billion at September 30, 2014, and $16.8 billion at December 31, 2013. The weighted-average note rate on our portfolio of loans serviced for others was 4.47% at September 30, 2014, and 4.52% at December 31, 2013. The carrying value of our total MSRs represented0.82% of mortgage loans serviced for others at September 30, 2014, and 0.88% at December 31, 2013.
Market Risk – Trading Activities The Finance Committee of our Board of Directors reviews the acceptable market risk appetite for our trading activities. We engage in trading activities primarily to accommodate the investment and risk management activities of our customers, execute economic hedging to manage certain balance sheet risks and, to a very limited degree, for proprietary trading for our own account. These activities primarily occur within our Wholesale businesses and to a lesser extent other divisions of the Company. This includes entering into transactions with our customers that are recorded as trading assets and liabilities on our balance sheet. All of our trading assets and liabilities, including securities, foreign exchange transactions, commodity transactions, and derivatives are carried at fair value. Income earned related to these trading activities include net interest income and changes in fair value related to trading assets and liabilities. Net interest income earned on trading assets and liabilities is reflected in the interest income and interest expense components of our income statement. Changes in fair value of trading assets and liabilities are reflected in net gains on trading activities, a component of noninterest income in our income statement.
Table 36 presents total revenue from trading activities.
Table 36: Income from Trading Activities
Interest income (1)
427
1,208
998
Less: Interest expense (2)
Net interest income
922
778
Noninterest income:
Net gains from trading
activities (3):
Customer accommodation
202
263
804
1,067
Economic hedges and other (4)
174
Proprietary trading
Total net trading gains
Total trading-related net interest
and noninterest income
489
648
1,904
2,076
Represents interest and dividend income earned on trading securities.
Represents interest and dividend expense incurred on trading securities we have sold but have not yet purchased.
Represents realized gains (losses) from our trading activity and unrealized gains (losses) due to changes in fair value of our trading positions, attributable to the type of business activity.
Excludes economic hedging of mortgage banking and asset/liability management activities, for which hedge results (realized and unrealized) are reported with the respective hedged activities.
Customer accommodation Customer accommodation activities are conducted to help customers manage their investment and risk management needs. We engage in market-making activities or act as an intermediary to purchase or sell financial instruments in anticipation of or in response to customer needs. This category also includes positions we use to manage our exposure to customer transactions.
For the majority of our customer accommodation trading, we serve as intermediary between buyer and seller. For example, we may purchase or sell a derivative to a customer who wants to manage interest rate risk exposure. We typically enter into offsetting derivative or security positions with a separate counterparty or exchange to manage our exposure to the derivative with our customer. We earn income on this activity based on the transaction price difference between the customer and offsetting derivative or security positions, which is reflected in the fair value changes of the positions recorded in net gains on trading activities.
Customer accommodation trading also includes net gains related to market-making activities in which we take positions to facilitate customer order flow. For example, we may own securities recorded as trading assets (long positions) or sold securities we have not yet purchased, recorded as trading liabilities (short positions), typically on
Risk Management – Asset/Liability Management (continued)
a short-term basis, to facilitate support of buying and selling demand from our customers. As a market maker in these securities, we earn income due to: (1) the difference between the price paid or received for the purchase and sale of the security (bid-ask spread), (2) the net interest income, and (3) the change in fair value of the long or short positions during the short-term period held on our balance sheet. Additionally, we may enter into separate derivative or security positions to manage our exposure related to our long or short security positions. Collectively, income earned on this type of market-making activity is reflected in the fair value changes of these positions recorded in net gain on trading activities.
Economic hedges and other Economic hedges in trading are not designated in a hedge accounting relationship and exclude economic hedging related to our asset/liability risk management and substantially all mortgage banking risk management activities. Economic hedging activities include the use of trading securities to economically hedge risk exposures related to non-trading activities or derivatives to hedge risk exposures related to trading assets or trading liabilities. Economic hedges are unrelated to our customer accommodation activities. Other activities include financial assets held for investment purposes that we elected to carry at fair value with changes in fair value recorded to earnings in order to mitigate accounting measurement mismatches or avoid embedded derivative accounting complexities.
Proprietary trading Proprietary trading consists of security or derivative positions executed for our own account based upon market expectations or to benefit from price differences between financial instruments and markets. Proprietary trading activity has been substantially restricted by the Dodd-Frank Act provisions known as the “Volcker Rule.” Accordingly, we reduced and are exiting certain business activities in anticipation of the rule’s compliance date. As discussed within this section and the noninterest income section of our financial results, proprietary trading activity is insignificant to our business and financial results. For more details on the Volcker Rule, see the “Regulatory Reform” section in this Report and in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Daily Trading-RelatedRevenue Table 37 provides information on the distribution of daily trading-related revenues for the Company’s trading portfolio. This trading-related revenue is defined as the change in value of the trading assets and trading liabilities, trading-related net interest income, and trading-related intra-day gains and losses. Net trading-related revenue does not include activity related to long-term positions held for economic hedging purposes, period-end adjustments, and other activity not representative of daily price changes driven by market factors.
Table 37: Distribution of Daily Trading-Related Revenues
Market risk is the risk of adverse changes in the fair value of the trading portfolios and financial instruments held by the Company due to changes in market risk factors such as interest rates, credit spreads, foreign exchange rates, equity, and commodity prices. Market risk is intrinsic to the Company’s sales and trading, market making, investing, and risk management activities.
The Company uses Value-at-Risk (VaR) metrics complemented with sensitivity analysis and stress testing in measuring and monitoring market risk. These market risk measures are monitored at both the business unit level and at aggregated levels on a daily basis. Our corporate market risk management function aggregates and monitors all exposures to ensure risk measures are within our established risk appetite. Changes to the market risk profile are analyzed and reported on a daily basis. The Company monitors various market risk exposure measures from a variety of perspectives, which include line of business, product, risk type, and legal entity.
VaR is a statistical risk measure used to estimate the potential loss from adverse moves in the financial markets. The VaR measures assume that historical changes in market values (historical simulation analysis) are representative of the potential future outcomes and measure the expected loss over a given time interval (for example, 1 day or 10 days) within a given confidence level. Our historical simulation analysis approach uses historical observations of daily changes of each of the market risk factors from each trading day in the previous 12 months. The risk drivers of each market risk exposure are updated on a daily basis. We measure and report VaR for a 1-day holding period at a 99% confidence level. This means that we would expect to incur single day losses greater than predicted by VaR estimates for the measured positions one time in every 100 trading days. We treat data from all historical periods as equally relevant and consider using data for the previous 12 months as appropriate for determining VaR. We believe using a 12-month look back period helps ensure the Company’s VaR is responsive to current market conditions.
VaR measurement between different financial institutions is not readily comparable due to modeling and assumption differences from company to company. VaR measures are more useful when interpreted as an indication of trends rather than an absolute measure to be compared across financial institutions.
VaR models are subject to limitations which include, but are not limited to, the use of historical changes in market factors that may not accurately reflect future changes in market factors, and the inability to predict market liquidity in extreme market conditions. All limitations such as model inputs, model assumptions, and calculation methodology risk are monitored by the Corporate Market Risk Group and the Corporate Model Risk Group.
The VaR models measure exposure to the following categories:
· credit risk – exposures from corporate credit spreads, asset-backed security spreads, and mortgage prepayments.
· interest rate risk – exposures from changes in the level, scope, and curvature of interest rate curves and the volatility of interest rates.
· equity risk – exposures to changes in equity prices and volatilities of single name, index, and basket exposure.
· commodity risk – exposures to changes in commodity prices and volatilities.
· foreign exchange risk – exposures to changes in foreign exchange rates and volatilities.
VaR is the primary market risk management measurefor the assets and liabilities classified as trading and is used as a supplemental analysis tool to monitor exposures classified as available for sale (AFS) and other exposures that we carry at fair value.
Trading VaR is the measure used to provide insight into the market risk exhibited by the Company’s trading positions. The Company calculates Trading VaR for risk management purposes to establish line of business and Company-wide risk limits. Trading VaR is calculated based on all trading positions classified as trading assets or trading liabilities on our balance sheet.
Table 38 shows the results of the Company’s Trading VaR by risk category. As presented in the table, average Trading VaR was $17 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, compared with $24 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2014. The decrease was primarily the result of volatile market moves in June through September 2013 no longer being included in the 12-month look back period.
Table 38: Trading 1-Day 99% VaR Metrics
Period
end
Trading VaR Risk Categories
Credit
Interest rate
Commodity
Foreign exchange
Diversification benefit (1)
(43)
Total Trading VaR
The period-end Trading VaR was less than the sum of the Trading VaR components described above, which is due to portfolio diversification. The diversification benefit arises because the risks are not perfectly correlated causing a portfolio of positions to usually be less risky than the sum of the risks of the positions alone. The diversification benefit is not meaningful for low and high metrics since they may occur on different days.
Sensitivity Analysis Given the inherent limitations of the VaR models, the Company uses other measures, including sensitivity analysis, to measure and monitor risk. Sensitivity analysis is the measure of exposure to a single risk factor, such as a 0.01% increase in interest rates or a 1% increase in equity prices. We conduct and monitor sensitivity on interest rates, credit spreads, volatility, equity, commodity, and foreign exchange exposure. Sensitivity analysis complements VaR as it provides an indication of risk relative to each factor irrespective of historical market moves.
Stress Testing While VaR captures the risk of loss due to adverse changes in markets using recent historical market data, stress testing captures the Company’s exposure to extreme but low probability market movements. Stress scenarios estimate the risk of losses based on management’s assumptions of abnormal but severe market movements such as severe credit spread widening or a large decline in equity prices. These scenarios assume that the market moves happen instantaneously and no repositioning or hedging activity takes place to mitigate losses as events unfold (a conservative approachsince experience demonstrates otherwise).
An inventory of scenarios is maintained representing both historical and hypothetical stress events that affect a broad range of market risk factors with varying degrees of correlation and differing time horizons. Hypothetical scenarios assess the impact of large movements in financial variables on portfolio values. Typical examples include a 100 basis point increase across the yield curve or a 10% decline in stock market indexes. Historical scenarios utilize an event-driven approach: the stress scenarios are based on plausible but rare events, and the analysis addresses how these events might affect the risk factors relevant to a portfolio.
The Company’s stress testing framework is also used in calculating results in support of the Federal Reserve Board’s Comprehensive Capital Analysis & Review (CCAR) and internal stress tests. Stress scenarios are regularly reviewed and updated to address potential market events or concerns. For more detail on the CCAR process, see the “Capital Management” section in this Report.
Regulatory Market Risk Capital is based on U.S. regulatory agency risk-based capital regulations that are based on the Basel Committee Capital Accord of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. Prior to January 1, 2013, U.S. banking regulators’ market risk capital requirements were subject to Basel I and thereafter based on Basel 2.5. Effective January 1, 2014, the Company must calculate regulatory capital based on the Basel III market risk capital rule, which integrated Basel 2.5, and requires banking organizations with significant trading activities to adjust their capital requirements to better account for the market risks of those activities based on a comprehensive and risk sensitive method and models. The market risk capital rule is intended to cover the risk of loss in value of covered positions due to changes in market conditions.
Composition of Material Portfolio of Covered Positions The market risk capital rule substantially modified the determination of market riskrisk-weighted assets (RWAs), and implemented a more risk-sensitive methodology for the risks inherent in certain “covered” trading positions. The positions that are “covered” by the market risk capital rule are generally a subset of our trading assets and trading liabilities, specifically those held by the Company for the purpose of short-term resale or with the intent of benefiting from actual or expected short-term price movements, or to lock in arbitrage profits. Positions excluded from market risk regulatory capital treatment are subject to
the credit risk capital rules applicable to the “non-covered”trading positions.
The material portfolio of the Company’s “covered” positions is predominantly concentrated in the trading assets and trading liabilities managed within Wholesale Banking where the substantial portion of market risk capital is required. Wholesale Banking engages in the fixed income, traded credit, foreign exchange, equities, and commodities markets businesses. Other business segments hold small additional trading positions covered under the market risk capital rule.
Table 39 summarizes the market risk-based capital requirements charge and market RWAs in accordance with the Basel III market risk capital rule as of September 30, 2014, and in accordance with the Basel 2.5 market risk capital rule as of December 31, 2013. The market RWAs are calculated as the sum of the components in the table below.
Table 39: Market Risk Regulatory Capital and RWAs
Risk-
based
weighted
capital
assets
Total VaR
243
3,037
252
3,149
Total Stressed VaR
1,359
16,989
921
11,512
Incremental Risk Charge
4,601
4,913
Securitized Products Charge
748
9,350
633
7,913
Standardized Specific Risk Charge
1,297
16,209
583
7,289
De minimis Charges (positions not included in models)
1,563
4,089
51,117
2,907
36,339
RWA Rollforward Table 40 depicts the changes in the market risk regulatory capital and RWAs under Basel III for the first nine months and third quarter of 2014.
Table 40: Analysis of Changes in Market Risk Regulatory Capital and RWAs
(112)
438
5,477
(312)
1,437
714
8,920
De minimis Charges
(51)
(632)
3,743
46,782
437
2,400
749
330
176
The increase in standardized specific risk charge for risk-based capital and RWAs in the first nine months of 2014 resulted primarily from a change during the quarter ended March 31, 2014, in positions now subject to standardized specific risk charges. All changes to market risk regulatory capital and RWAs in the quarter ended September 30, 2014, were associated with changes in positions due to normal trading activity.
Regulatory Market Risk Capital Components The capital required for market risk on the Company’s “covered” positions is determined by internally developed models or standardized specific risk charges. The market risk regulatory capital models are subject to internal model risk management and validation. The models are continuously monitored and enhanced in response to changes in market conditions, improvements in system capabilities, and changes in the Company’s market risk exposure. The Company is required to obtain and has received prior written approval from its regulators before using its internally developed models to calculate the market risk capital charge.
Basel III prescribes various VaR measures in the determination of regulatory capital and risk-weighted assets. The Company uses the same VaR models for both market risk management purposes as well as regulatory capital calculations. For regulatory purposes, we use the following metrics to determine the Company’s market riskcapital requirements:
General VaR measures the risk of broad market movements such as changes in the level of credit spreads, interest rates, equity prices, commodity prices, and foreign exchange rates. General VaR uses historical simulation analysis based on 99% confidence level and a 10-day time horizon.
Table 41 shows the General VaR measure categorized by major risk categories. Average 10-day General VaR was $29 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, compared with $58 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2014. The decrease was primarily the result of volatile market moves in June through September 2013 no longer being included in the 12-month look back period.
Table 41: 10-Day 99% Regulatory General VaR by Risk Category
Wholesale General VaR by Risk Category
(102)
(153)
Wholesale General VaR
Company General VaR
The period-end VaR was less than the sum of the VaR components described above, which is due to portfolio diversification. The diversification benefit arises because the risks are not perfectly correlated causing a portfolio of positions to usually be less risky than the sum of the risks of the positions alone. The diversification benefit is not meaningful for low and high metrics since they may occur on different days.
Specific Risk measures the risk of loss that could result from factors other than broad market movements, or name-specific market risk. Specific Risk uses Monte Carlo simulation analysis based on a 99% confidence level and a 10-day time horizon.
Total VaR (as presented in Table 42) is composed of General VaR and Specific Risk and uses the previous 12 months of historical market data to comply with regulatory requirements.
Table 42: Total VaR
Quarter ended September 30, 2014
178
RWAs
Total Stressed VaR (as presented in Table 43) uses a historical period of significant financial stress over a continuous 12 month period using historically available market data and is composed of Stressed General VaR and Stressed Specific Risk. Total Stressed VaR uses the same methodology and models as Total VaR.
Table 43: Total Stressed VaR
453
350
589
Incremental Risk Charge according to the market risk capital rule, must capture losses due to both issuer default and migration risk at the 99.9% confidence level over the one-year capital horizon under the assumption of constant level of risk or a constant position assumption. The model covers all non-securitized credit-sensitive products.
The Company calculates Incremental Risk by generating a portfolio loss distribution using Monte Carlo simulation, which assumes numerous scenarios, where an assumption is made that the portfolio’s composition remains constant for a one-year time horizon. Individual issuer credit grade migration and issuer default risk is modeled through generation of the issuer’s credit rating transition based upon statistical modeling. Correlation between credit grade migration and default is captured by a multifactor proprietary model which takes into account industry classifications as well as regional effects. Additionally, the impact of market and issuer specific concentrations is reflected in the modeling framework by assignment of a higher charge for portfolios that have increasing concentrations in particular issuers or sectors. Lastly, the model captures product basis risk; that is, it reflects the material disparity between a position and its hedge.
Table 44provides information on the Incremental Risk Charge results for the quarter ended September 30, 2014. For this charge, the required capital at quarter end equals the average for the quarter.
Table 44: Incremental Risk Charge
Incremental
Risk Charge
346
291
Securitized Products Charge Basel III requires a separate market risk capital charge for positions classified as a securitization or re-securitization. The primary criteria for classification as a securitization are whether there is a transfer of risk and whether the credit risk associated with the underlying exposures has been separated into at least two tranches reflecting different levels of seniority. Covered trading securitizations positions include consumer and commercial asset-backed securities (ABS), commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS), and collateralized loan and other debt obligations (CLO/CDO) positions. The securitization capital requirements are the greater of the capital requirements of the net long or short exposure, and are capped at the maximum loss that could be incurred on any given transaction. Table 45 shows the aggregate net fair market value of securities and derivative securitization positions by exposure type that meet the regulatory definition of a covered trading securitization position at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013.
Table 45: Covered Securitization Positions by Exposure Type (Market Value)
ABS
CMBS
RMBS
CLO/CDO
Securitization exposure:
Securities
392
(31)
725
662
361
604
(72)
602
SECURITIZATION DUE DILIGENCE AND RISK MONITORING The market risk capital rule requires that the Company conduct due diligence on the risk of each position within three days of the purchase of a securitization position. The Company’s due diligence on the creditworthiness of each position provides an understanding of the features that would materially affect the performance of a securitization or re-securitization. The due diligence analysis is performed again on a quarterly basis for each securitization and re-securitization position. The Company uses an automated solution to track the due diligence associated with securitization activity. The Company manages the risks associated with securitization and re-securitization positions through the use of offsetting positions and portfolio diversification. The risk is managed in accordance with credit risk, market risk, and line of business policies.
Standardized Specific Risk Charge For debt and equity positions that are not evaluated by the approved internal specific risk models, a regulatory prescribed standard specific risk charge is applied. The standard specific risk add-on for sovereign entities, public sector entities, and depository institutions is based on the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) country risk classifications (CRC) and the remaining contractual maturity of the position. These risk add-ons for debt positions range from 0.25% to 12%. The add-on for corporate debt is based on creditworthiness and the remaining contractual maturity of the position. All other types of debt positions are subject to an 8% add-on. The standard specific risk add-on for equity positions is generally 8%.
Comprehensive Risk Charge / Correlation Trading The market risk capital rule requires capital for correlation trading positions. The net market value of correlation trading positions that meet the definition of a covered position at September 30, 2014 was a net gain of less than $1 million. Correlation trading is a discontinued business in which the Company is no longer active, with current positions hedged and maturing over time. Given the immaterial aspect of this discontinued activity, the Company has elected not to develop an internal model based approach but will instead use standard specific risk charges for these positions.
VaR Backtesting The market risk capital rule requires backtesting as one form of validation of the VaR model. Backtesting is a comparison of the daily VaR estimate with the actual clean profit and loss (clean P&L) as defined by the market risk capital rule. Clean P&L is the change in the value of the Company’s covered trading positions that would have occurred had previous end-of-day covered trading positions remained unchanged (therefore, excluding fees, commissions, net interest income, and intraday trading gains and losses). The backtesting analysis compares the daily Total VaR for each of the trading days in the preceding 12 months with the net clean P&L. Clean P&L does not include credit adjustments and other activity not representative of daily price changes driven by market risk factors. The clean P&L measure of revenue is used to evaluate the performance of the Total VaR and is not comparable to our actual daily trading net revenues, as reported elsewhere in this Report.
Any observed clean P&L loss in excess of the Total VaR is considered a market risk regulatory capital backtesting exception. The actual number of exceptions (that is, the number of business days for which the clean P&L losses exceed the corresponding 1-day, 99% Total VaR measure) over the preceding 12 months is used to determine the capital multiplier for the capital calculation. The number of actual backtesting exceptions is dependent on current market performance relative to historic market volatility. This capital multiplier increases from a minimum of three to a maximum of four, depending on the number of exceptions. No backtesting exceptions occurred over the preceding 12 months. Backtesting is also performed at granular levels within the Company with sub-portfolio results provided to federal regulators.
Table 46 shows daily Total VaR (1-day, 99%) for the 12 months ended September 30, 2014. The Company’s average Total VaR for third quarter 2014 was $25 million with a low of $15 million and a high of $33 million.
Table 46: Daily Total VaR Measure (Rolling 12 Months)
Market Risk Governance The Finance Committee of our Board has primary oversight over market risk-taking activities of the Company and reviews the acceptable market risk appetite. The Corporate Risk Group’s Market Risk Committee, which reports to the Finance Committee of the Board, is responsible for governance and oversight over market risk-taking activities across the Company as well as the establishment of market risk appetite and associated limits. The Corporate Market Risk Group, which is part of the Corporate Risk Group, administers and monitors compliance with the requirements established by the Market Risk Committee. The Corporate Market Risk Group has oversight responsibilities in identifying, measuring and monitoring the Company’s market risk. The group is responsible for developing corporate market risk policy, creating quantitative market risk models, establishing independent risk limits, calculating and analyzing market risk capital, and reporting aggregated and line-of-business market risk information. Limits are regularly reviewed to ensure they remain relevant and within the market risk appetite for the Company. An automated limits-monitoring system enables a daily comprehensive review of multiple limits mandated across businesses. Limits are set with inner boundaries that will be periodically breached to promote an ongoing dialogue of risk exposure within the Company. Each line of business that exposes the Company to market risk has direct responsibility for managing market risk in accordance with defined risk tolerances and approved market risk mandates and hedging strategies. We measure and monitor market risk for both management and regulatory capital purposes.
Market Risk – Equity INVESTMENTS We are directly and indirectly affected by changes in the equity markets. We make and manage direct equity investments in start-up businesses, emerging growth companies, management buy-outs, acquisitions and corporate recapitalizations. We also invest in non-affiliated funds that make similar private equity investments. These private equity investments are made within capital allocations approved by management and the Board. The Board’s policy is to review business developments, key risks and historical returns for the private equity investment portfolio at least annually. Management reviews these investments at least quarterly and assesses them for possible OTTI. For nonmarketable investments, the analysis is based on facts and circumstances of each individual investment and the expectations for that investment’s cash flows and capital needs, the viability of its business model and our exit strategy. Nonmarketable investments include private equity investments accounted for under the cost method, equity method and fair value option.
As part of our business to support our customers, we trade public equities, listed/OTC equity derivatives and convertible bonds. We have parameters that govern these activities. We also have marketable equity securities in the available-for-sale securities portfolio, including securities relating to our venture capital activities. We manage these investments within capital risk limits approved by management and the Board and monitored by Corporate ALCO. Gains and losses on these securities are recognized in net income when realized and periodically include OTTI charges.
Changes in equity market prices may also indirectly affect our net income by (1) the value of third party assets under management and, hence, fee income, (2) borrowers whose ability to repay principal and/or interest may be affected by the stock market, or (3) brokerage activity, related commission income and other business activities. Each business line monitors and manages these indirect risks.
Table 47 provides information regarding our marketable and nonmarketable equity investments as of September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013.
Table 47: Nonmarketable and Marketable Equity Investments
Nonmarketable equity investments:
Cost method:
Private equity investments
2,308
Federal bank stock
4,993
4,670
Total cost method
7,394
6,978
Equity method and other:
LIHTC investments (1)
6,477
6,209
Private equity and other
5,052
5,782
Total equity method and other
11,529
11,991
Fair value (2)
1,386
Total nonmarketable
equity investments (3)
20,887
20,355
Marketable equity securities:
Net unrealized gains
Total marketable
equity securities (4)
Represents low income housing tax credit investments.
Represents nonmarketable equity investments for which we have elected the fair value option. See Note 6 (Other Assets) and Note 13 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
Included in other assets on the balance sheet. See Note 6 (Other Assets) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
Included in available-for-sale securities. See Note 4 (Investment Securities) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
Liquidity and Funding The objective of effective liquidity management is to ensure that we can meet customer loan requests, customer deposit maturities/withdrawals and other cash commitments efficiently under both normal operating conditions and under periods of Wells Fargo-specific and/or market stress. To achieve this objective, the Board of Directors establishes liquidity guidelines that require sufficient asset-based liquidity to cover potential funding requirements and to avoid over-dependence on volatile, less reliable funding markets. These guidelines are monitored on a monthly basis by the Corporate ALCO and on a quarterly basis by the Board of Directors. These guidelines are established and monitored for both the consolidated company and for the Parent on a stand-alone basis to ensure that the Parent is a source of strength for its regulated, deposit-taking banking subsidiaries.
We maintain liquidity in the form of cash, cash equivalents and unencumbered high-quality, liquid securities. These assets make up our primary sources of liquidity, which are presented inTable 48. Our cash is primarily on deposit with the Federal Reserve. Securities included as part of our primary sources of liquidity are comprised of U.S. Treasury and federal agency debt, and mortgage-backed securities issued by federal agencies within our investment securities portfolio. We believe these securities provide quick sources of liquidity through sales or by pledging to obtain financing, regardless of market conditions. Some of these securities are within the held-to-maturity portion of our investment securities portfolio and as such are not intended for sale but may be pledged to obtain financing. Some of the legal entities within our consolidated group of companies are subject to various regulatory, tax, legal and other restrictions that can limit the transferability of their funds. Accordingly, we believe we maintain adequate liquidity at these entities in consideration of such funds transfer restrictions.
Table 48: Primary Sources of Liquidity
Encumbered
Unencumbered
Interest-earning deposits
224,854
186,249
Securities of U.S. Treasury and federal agencies (1)
43,732
1,041
42,691
6,280
5,709
Mortgage-backed securities of federal agencies (2)
118,468
66,969
51,499
123,796
60,605
63,191
387,054
68,010
319,044
316,325
61,176
255,149
Included in encumbered securities at September 30, 2014, were securities with a fair value of $247 million which were purchased in September, but settled in October 2014.
Included in encumbered securities at September 30, 2014, were securities with a fair value of $3 million, which were purchased in September, but settled in October 2014. Included in encumbered securities at December 31, 2013, were securities with a fair value of $653 million, which were purchased in December 2013, but settled in January 2014.
Other than our primary sources of liquidity shown in Table 48, liquidity is also available through the sale or financing of other securities including trading and/oravailable-for-sale securities, as well as through the sale, securitization or financing of loans, to the extent such securities and loans are not encumbered. In addition, other securities in our held-to-maturity portfolio, to the extent not encumbered, may be pledged to obtain financing.
Core customer deposits have historically provided a sizeable source of relatively stable and low-cost funds. At September 30, 2014, core deposits were 121% of total loans compared with 119% at December 31, 2013. Additional funding is provided by long-term debt, other foreign deposits, and short-term borrowings.
Table 49 shows selected information for short-term borrowings, which generally mature in less than 30 days.
Table 49: Short-Term Borrowings
Balance, period end
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase
48,164
45,379
39,254
36,263
36,881
Commercial paper
4,365
4,261
6,070
5,162
5,116
Other short-term borrowings
10,398
12,209
11,737
12,458
11,854
62,927
61,849
57,061
53,883
53,851
Average daily balance for period
47,088
42,233
37,711
36,232
35,894
4,587
5,221
5,713
4,731
4,610
10,610
11,391
11,078
11,323
12,899
58,845
54,502
52,286
Maximum month-end balance for period
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase (1)
39,589
Commercial paper (2)
4,665
5,175
Other short-term borrowings (3)
10,990
13,384
Highest month-end balance in each of the last five quarters was in September, June and February 2014 and December and September 2013.
Highest month-end balance in each of the last five quarters was in July, April and March 2014 and December and September 2013.
Highest month-end balance in each of the last five quarters was in July, June and March 2014 and December and July 2013.
We access domestic and international capital markets for long-term funding (generally greater than one year) through issuances of registered debt securities, private placements and asset-backed secured funding. Investors in the long-term capital markets, as well as other market participants, generally will consider, among other factors, a company’s debt rating in making investment decisions. Rating agencies base their ratings on many quantitative and qualitative factors, including capital adequacy, liquidity, asset quality, business mix, the level and quality of earnings, and rating agency assumptions regarding the probability and extent of federal financial assistance or support for certain large financial institutions. Adverse changes in these factors could result in a reduction of our credit rating; however, our debt securities do not contain credit rating covenants.
During third quarter 2014, Standard and Poor’s Ratings Services (S&P) revised their global criteria for rating bank hybrid capital instruments, in light of their expectations that regulatory changes would increase the likelihood that hybrid capital instruments could share the cost of rescuing a bank and lead to earlier loss absorption by such instruments than has occurred in the past. As a result of the new criteria, S&P downgraded the hybrid capital ratings for numerous firms globally, including ours, and, therefore, our hybrid capital ratings were lowered one notch. S&P is continuing its reassessment of whether to incorporate the likelihood of extraordinary government support into the ratings of certain bank holding companies, including the Parent, in light of regulatory developments related to the Title II Orderly Liquidation Authority of the Dodd-Frank Act that could make federal support less certain and predictable. S&P has not specified a timeframe for completion of their review. On October 7, 2014, Fitch Ratings affirmed all of our ratings. Both the Parent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. remain among the top-rated financial firms in the U.S.
See the “Risk Factors” section in our 2013 Form 10-K for additional information on the potential impact a credit rating downgrade would have on our liquidity and operations, as well as Note 12 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in this Report for information regarding additional collateral and funding obligations required for certain derivative instruments in the event our credit ratings were to fall below investment grade.
The credit ratings of the Parent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as of September 30, 2014, are presented in Table 50.
Table 50: Credit Ratings as of September 30, 2014
Wells Fargo & Company
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Short-term
Long-term
Senior debt
borrowings
Moody's
A2
P-1
Aa3
S&P
A+
A-1
AA-
A-1+
Fitch Ratings
F1+
AA
DBRS
R-1*
AA**
R-1**
* middle **high
On September 3, 2014, the FRB, OCC and FDIC issued a final rule that implements a quantitative liquidity requirement consistent with the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) established by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS). The rule requires banking institutions, such as Wells Fargo, to hold high-quality liquid assets, such as central bank reserves and government and corporate debt that can be converted easily and quickly into cash, in an amount equal to or greater than its projected net cash outflows during a 30-day stress period. The final LCR rule will be phased-in beginning January 1, 2015, and requires full compliance with a minimum 100% LCR by January 1, 2017. The FRB also recently finalized rules imposing enhanced liquidity management standards on large bank holding companies (BHC) such as Wells Fargo. We will continue to analyze these recently finalized rules and other regulatory proposals that may affect liquidity risk management to determine the level of operational or compliance impact to Wells Fargo. For additional information see the “Capital Management” and “Regulatory Reform” sections in this Report and in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Parent Under SEC rules, our Parent is classified as a “well-known seasoned issuer,” which allows it to file a registration statement that does not have a limit on issuance capacity. In May 2014, the Parent filed a registration statement with the SEC for the issuance of senior and subordinated notes, preferred stock and other securities. The Parent’s ability to issue debt and other securities under this registration statement is limited by the debt issuance authority granted by the Board. The Parent is currently authorized by the Board to issue $60 billion in outstanding short-term debt and $170 billion in outstanding long-term debt. At September 30, 2014, the Parent had available $42.5 billion in short-term debt issuance authority and $67.7 billion in long-term debt issuance authority. The Parent’s debt issuance authority granted by the Board includes short-term and long-term debt issued to affiliates.During the first nine months of 2014, the Parent issued $16.4 billion of senior notes, of which $11.4 billion were registered with the SEC. In addition, during the first nine months of 2014, the Parent issued $2.5 billion of subordinated notes, all of which were registered with the SEC. In addition, in October 2014, the Parent issued $1.6 billion of unregistered senior notes and $2.0 billion of registered subordinated notes.
The Parent’s proceeds from securities issued were used for general corporate purposes, and, unless otherwise specified in the applicable prospectus or prospectus supplement, we expect the proceeds from securities issued in the future will be used for the same purposes. Depending on market conditions, we may purchase our outstanding debt securities from time to time in privately negotiated or open market transactions, by tender offer, or otherwise.
Table 51 provides information regarding the Parent’s medium-term note (MTN) programs. The Parent may issue senior and subordinated debt securities under Series L & M, Series N & O, and the European and Australian programmes. Under Series K, the Parent may issue senior debt securities linked to one or more indices or bearing interest at a fixed or floating rate.
Table 51: Medium-Term Note (MTN) Programs
Debt
Available
Date
issuance
for
established
authority
MTN program:
Series L & M (1)
May 2012
25.0
0.9
Series N & O (1) (2)
May 2014
Series K (1) (3)
April 2010
21.9
European (4) (5)
December 2009
13.7
European (4) (6)
August 2013
10.0
9.3
Australian (4) (7)
June 2005
AUD
4.6
SEC registered.
The Parent can issue an indeterminate amount of debt securities, subject to the debt issuance authority granted by the Board described above.
As amended in April 2012.
Not registered with the SEC. May not be offered in the United States without applicable exemptions from registration.
As amended in April 2012, April 2013 and April 2014. For securities to be admitted to listing on the Official List of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority and to trade on the Regulated Market of the London Stock Exchange.
As amended in May 2014, for securities that will not be admitted to listing, trading and/or quotation by any stock exchange or quotation system, or will be admitted to listing, trading and/or quotation by a stock exchange or quotation system that is not considered to be a regulated market.
As amended in October 2005, March 2010 and September 2013.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is authorized by its board of directors to issue $100 billion in outstanding short-term debt and $125 billion in outstanding long-term debt. At September 30, 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. had available $100 billion in short-term debt issuance authority and $62.1 billion in long-term debt issuance authority. In March 2012, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. established a $100 billion bank note program under which, subject to any other debt outstanding under the limits described above, it may issue $50 billion in outstanding short-term senior notes and $50 billion in outstanding long-term senior or subordinated notes. During the first nine months of 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. issued $3.1 billion of senior notes under the bank note program. At September 30, 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. had remaining issuance capacity under the bank note program of $50 billion in short-term senior notes and $33.5 billion in long-term senior or subordinated notes. In addition, during the first nine months of 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. executed advances of $15.0 billion with the Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines and as of September 30, 2014, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. had outstanding advances of $34.1 billion across the Federal Home Loan Bank System.
Wells Fargo Canada CorporationIn February 2014, Wells Fargo Canada Corporation (WFCC), an indirect wholly owned Canadian
subsidiary of the Parent, qualified with the Canadian provincial securities commissions a base shelf prospectus for the distribution from time to time in Canada of up to CAD $7.0 billion in medium-term notes. At September 30, 2014, CAD $7.0 billion still remained available for future issuance under this prospectus. During the first nine months of 2014, WFCC issued CAD $1.3 billion in medium-term notes under a prior base shelf prospectus. All medium-term notes issued by WFCC are unconditionally guaranteed by the Parent.
Federal Home Loan Bank Membership The Federal Home Loan Banks (the FHLBs) are a group of cooperatives that lending institutions use to finance housing and economic development in local communities. We are a member of the FHLBs based in Dallas, Des Moines and San Francisco. Each member of the FHLBs is required to maintain a minimum investment in capital stock of the applicable FHLB. The board of directors of each FHLB can increase the minimum investment requirements in the event it has concluded that additional capital is required to allow it to meet its own regulatory capital requirements. Any increase in the minimum investment requirements outside of specified ranges requires the approval of the Federal Housing Finance Board. Because the extent of any obligation to increase our investment in any of the FHLBs depends entirely upon the occurrence of a future event, potential future payments to the FHLBs are not determinable.
59
Capital Management
We have an active program for managing capital through a comprehensive process for assessing the Company’s overall capital adequacy. Our objective is to maintain capital at an amount commensurate with our risk profile and risk tolerance objectives, and to meet both regulatory and market expectations. Our potential sources of capital primarily include retention of earnings net of dividends, as well as issuances of common and preferred stock. Retained earnings increased $11.1 billion from December 31, 2013, predominantly from Wells Fargo net income of $17.3 billion, less common and preferred stock dividends of $6.2 billion. During third quarter 2014, we issued 13.8 million shares of common stock.We also issued 32 million Depositary Shares, each representing 1/1000th interest in a share of the Company’s newly issued Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock, Series T, for an aggregate public offering price of $800 million. During third quarter 2014, we repurchased 29.2 million shares of common stock in open market transactions and from employee benefit plans, at a net cost of $1.5 billion, and 19.5 million shares of common stock in settlement of a$1.0 billion forward repurchase contract entered into in June 2014. We entered into a $1.0 billion forward repurchase contract in July 2014 with an unrelated third party that settled in October 2014 for 19.8 million shares.In addition, we entered into a $750 million forward repurchase contract in October 2014 with an unrelated third party that is expected to settle in first quarter 2015 for approximately 15.1 million shares. For additional information about our forward repurchase agreements, see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in this Report.
Regulatory Capital Guidelines
The Company and each of our insured depository institutions are subject to various regulatory capital adequacy requirements administered by the FRB and the OCC. Risk-based capital (RBC) guidelines establish a risk-adjusted ratio relating capital to different categories of assets and off-balance sheet exposures. At September 30, 2014, the Company and each of our insured depository institutions were “well-capitalized” under applicable regulatory capital adequacy guidelines. See Note 19 (Regulatory and Agency Capital Requirements) to Financial Statements in this Report for additional information.
The RBC guidelines, which have their roots in the 1988 capital accord of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) establishing international guidelines for determining regulatory capital, reflect broad credit risk considerations and market-related risks, but do not take into account other types of risk facing a financial services company. Our capital adequacy assessment process contemplates a wide range of risks that the Company is exposed to and also takes into consideration our performance under a variety of stressed economic conditions, as well as regulatory expectations and guidance, rating agency viewpoints and the view of capital markets participants.
The market risk capital rule, effective January 1, 2013, is reflected in the Company’s calculation of RWAs to address the market risks of significant trading activities. In December 2013, the FRB approved a final rule, effective April 1, 2014, revising the market risk capital rule to, among other things, conform to the FRB’s new capital framework finalized in July 2013 and discussed below. For additional information see the “Risk Management – Asset/Liability Management” section in this Report.
In 2007, federal banking regulators approved a final rule adopting revised international guidelines for determining regulatory capital known as “Basel II.” Basel II incorporates three pillars that address (a) capital adequacy, (b) supervisory review, which relates to the computation of capital and internal assessment processes, and (c) market discipline, through increased disclosure requirements. We entered the “parallel run phase” of Basel II in July 2012. During the “parallel run phase,” banking organizations must successfully complete an evaluation period under supervision from regulatory agencies in order to receive approval to calculate risk-based capital requirements under the Advanced Approach guidelines. The parallel run phase will continue until we receive regulatory approval to exit parallel reporting and subsequently begin publicly reporting our Advanced Approach regulatory capital results and related disclosures.
In December 2010, the BCBS finalized a set of further revised international guidelines for determining regulatory capital known as “Basel III.” These guidelines were developed in response to the 2008 financial crisis and were intended to address many of the weaknesses identified in the previous Basel standards, as well as in the banking sector that contributed to the crisis including excessive leverage, inadequate and low quality capital and insufficient liquidity buffers.
In July 2013, federal banking regulators approved final and interim final rules to implement the BCBS Basel III capital guidelines for U.S. banking organizations. These final capital rules, among other things:
· implement in the United States the Basel III regulatory capital reforms including those that revise the definition of capital, increase minimum capital ratios, and introduce a minimum Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio of 4.5% and a capital conservation buffer of 2.5% (for a total minimum CET1 ratio of 7.0%) and a potential countercyclical buffer of up to 2.5%, which would be imposed by regulators at their discretion if it is determined that a period of excessive credit growth is contributing to an increase in systemic risk;
· require a Tier 1 capital to average total consolidated assets ratio of 4% and introduce, for large and internationally active bank holding companies (BHCs), a Tier 1 supplementary leverage ratio of 3% that incorporates off-balance sheet exposures;
· revise Basel I rules for calculating RWA to enhance risk sensitivity under a standardized approach;
· modify the existing Basel II advanced approaches rules for calculating RWA to implement Basel III;
· deduct certain assets from CET1, such as deferred tax assets that could not be realized through net operating loss carry-backs, significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities, and MSRs, to the extent any one category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such items, in the aggregate, exceed 15% of CET1;
· eliminate the accumulated other comprehensive income or loss filter that applies under RBC rules over a five-year phase-in period beginning in 2014; and
· comply with the Dodd-Frank Act provision prohibiting the reliance on external credit ratings.
We were required to comply with the final Basel III capital rules beginning January 2014, with certain provisions subject to phase-in periods. The Basel III capital rules are scheduled to be fully phased in by January 1, 2022. Based on the final capital rules, we estimate that
Capital Management (continued)
our CET1 ratio under the final Basel III capital rules using the Advanced Approach (fully phased-in) exceeded the minimum of 7.0% by 347 basis points at September 30, 2014.
Consistent with the Collins Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act, banking organizations that have completed their parallel run process and have been approved by the FRB to use the Advanced Approach methodology to determine applicable minimum risk-weighted capital ratios and additional buffers, must use the higher of their RWA as calculated under (i) the Advanced Approach rules, and (ii) from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2014, the general approach under Basel III capital rules and, commencing on January 1, 2015, and thereafter, the risk weightings under the standardized approach.
In April 2014, federal banking regulators finalized a rule that enhances the supplementary leverage ratio requirements for large BHCs, like Wells Fargo, and their insured depository institutions. The rule, which becomes effective on January 1, 2018, will require a covered BHC to maintain a supplementary leverage ratio of at least 5% to avoid restrictions on capital distributions and discretionary bonus payments. The rule will also require that all of our insured depository institutions maintain a supplementary leverage ratio of 6% in order to be considered well capitalized. Based on our review, our current leverage levels would exceed the applicable requirements for the holding company and each of our insured depository institutions.Federal banking regulators, however, recently finalized additional changes to the supplementary leverage ratio requirements to implement revisions to the Basel III leverage framework finalized by the BCBS in January 2014. These additional changes, among other things, modify the methodology for including off-balance sheet items, including credit derivatives, repo-style transactions and lines of credit, in the denominator of the supplementary leverage ratio, and will become effective on January 1, 2018. In addition, as discussed in the “Risk Management – Asset/Liability Management – Liquidity and Funding” section in this Report, a final rule regarding the U.S. implementation of the Basel III LCR was issued by the FRB, OCC and FDIC in September 2014. The final rule is substantially similar to the BCBS proposal but differs in some respects that may be viewed as a stricter version of the LCR, such as including a more aggressive phase-in period.
The FRB has also indicated that it is in the process of considering new rules to address the amount of equity and unsecured debt a company must hold to facilitate its orderly liquidation and to address risks related to banking organizations that are substantially reliant on short-term wholesale funding. In addition, the FRB is developing rules to implement an additional CET1 capital surcharge on those U.S. banking organizations, such as the Company, that have been designated by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) as global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). The G-SIB surcharge would be in addition to the minimum Basel III 7.0% CET1 requirement and ranges from 1.0% to 3.5% of RWA, depending on the bank’s systemic importance, which would be determined under an indicator-based approach that considers five broad categories: cross-jurisdictional activity; size; inter-connectedness; substitutability/financial institution infrastructure; and complexity. The G-SIB surcharge is expected to be phased in beginning in January 2016 and become fully effective on January 1, 2019. The FSB, in an updated listing published in November 2013 based on year-end 2012 data, identified the Company as one of the 29 G-SIBs and provisionally determined that the Company’s surcharge would be 1.0%. The FSB is expected to update the list of G-SIBs and their required surcharges prior to implementation based on additional or future data.
Capital Planning and Stress Testing
Under the FRB’s capital plan rule, large BHCs are required to submit capital plans annually for review to determine if the FRB has any objections before making any capital distributions. The rule requires updates to capital plans in the event of material changes in a BHC’s risk profile, including as a result of any significant acquisitions.
Our 2014 CCAR, which was submitted on January 3, 2014, included a comprehensive capital plan supported by an assessment of expected uses and sources of capital over a given planning horizon under a range of expected and stress scenarios, similar to the process the FRB used to conduct the CCAR in 2013. As part of the 2014 CCAR, the FRB also generated a supervisory stress test, which assumed a sharp decline in the economy and significant decline in asset pricing using the information provided by the Company to estimate performance. The FRB reviewed the supervisory stress results both as required under the Dodd-Frank Act using a common set of capital actions for all large BHCs and by taking into account the Company’s proposed capital actions. The FRB published its supervisory stress test results as required under the Dodd-Frank Act on March 20, 2014. On March 26, 2014, the FRB notified us that it did not object to our capital plan included in the 2014 CCAR.
In addition to CCAR, federal banking regulators also require stress tests to evaluate whether an institution has sufficient capital to continue to operate during periods of adverse economic and financial conditions. These stress testing requirements set forth the timing and type of stress test activities large BHCs and banks must undertake as well as rules governing stress testing controls, oversight and disclosure requirements. The FRB recently finalized rules amending the existing capital plan and stress testing rules to modify the start date of capital plan and stress testing cycles and to limit a large BHC’s ability to make capital distributions to the extent its actual capital issuances were less than amounts indicated in its capital plan. As required under the FRB’s stress testing rule, we completed a mid-cycle stress test based on March 31, 2014, data and scenarios developed by the Company. We submitted the results of the mid-cycle stress test to the FRB in July 2014 anddisclosed a summary of the results in September 2014.
Securities Repurchases
From time to time the Board authorizes the Company to repurchase shares of our common stock. Although we announce when the Board authorizes share repurchases, we typically do not give any public notice before we repurchase our shares. Future stock repurchases may be private or open-market repurchases, including block transactions, accelerated or delayed block transactions, forward transactions, and similar transactions. Additionally, we may enter into plans to purchase stock that satisfy the conditions of Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Various factors determine the amount and timing of our share repurchases, including our capital requirements, the number of shares we expect to issue for employee benefit plans and acquisitions, market conditions (including the trading price of our stock), and regulatory and legal considerations, including the FRB’s response to our capital plan and to changes in our risk profile.
In October 2012, the Board authorized the repurchase of 200 million shares, which was completed by July 2014. The Board authorized the repurchase of an additional 350 million shares in March
2014.At September 30, 2014, we had remaining authority to repurchase approximately 302 million shares, subject to regulatory and legal conditions. For more information about share repurchases during 2014, see Part II, Item 2 in this Report.
Historically, our policy has been to repurchase shares under the “safe harbor” conditions of Rule 10b-18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 including a limitation on the daily volume of repurchases. Rule 10b-18 imposes an additional daily volume limitation on share repurchases during a pending merger or acquisition in which shares of our stock will constitute some or all of the consideration. Our management may determine that during a pending stock merger or acquisition when the safe harbor would otherwise be available, it is in our best interest to repurchase shares in excess of this additional daily volume limitation. In such cases, we intend to repurchase shares in compliance with the other conditions of the safe harbor, including the standing daily volume limitation that applies whether or not there is a pending stock merger or acquisition.
In connection with our participation in the Capital Purchase Program (CPP), a part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), we issued to the U.S. Treasury Department warrants to purchase 110,261,688 shares of our common stock with an exercise price of $34.01 per share expiring on October 28, 2018. The terms of the warrants require the exercise price to be adjusted under certain circumstances when the Company’s quarterly common stock dividend exceeds $0.34 per share, which occurred in second quarter 2014. Accordingly, with each quarterly common stock dividend above $0.34 per share, we must calculate whether an adjustment to the exercise price is required by the terms of the warrants, including whether certain minimum thresholds have been met to trigger an adjustment, and notify the holders of any such change. The Board authorized the repurchase by the Company of up to $1 billion of the warrants. At September 30, 2014, there were 39,108,764 warrants outstanding, exercisable at $33.996 per share, and $452 million of unused warrant repurchase authority. Depending on market conditions, we may purchase from time to time additional warrants in privately negotiated or open market transactions, by tender offer or otherwise.
Risk-Based Capital and Risk-Weighted Assets
Table 52 and Table 53 provide information regarding the composition of and change in our risk-based capital, respectively, under Basel I and Basel III (General Approach).
Table 52: Risk-Based Capital Components
Under Basel III
(General
Under
Approach) (1)
Basel I
183.0
171.0
Noncontrolling interests
(0.5)
(0.9)
Total Wells Fargo stockholders' equity
182.5
170.1
Adjustments:
Preferred stock
(18.0)
(15.2)
Cumulative other comprehensive income (2)
(2.5)
(1.4)
Goodwill and other intangible assets (2)(3)
(26.1)
(29.6)
Investment in certain subsidiaries and other
(0.4)
Common Equity Tier 1 (1)(4)
(A)
135.9
123.5
18.0
15.2
Qualifying hybrid securities and noncontrolling interests
2.0
Total Tier 1 capital
153.4
140.7
Long-term debt and other instruments qualifying as Tier 2
23.7
20.5
Qualifying allowance for credit losses
13.5
14.3
(0.1)
0.7
Total Tier 2 capital
37.1
35.5
Total qualifying capital
(B)
190.5
176.2
Basel III Risk-Weighted Assets (RWAs) (5):
Credit risk
1,171.8
Market risk
51.1
Basel I RWAs (5):
1,105.2
36.3
Total Basel III / Basel I RWAs
(C)
1,222.9
1,141.5
Capital Ratios:
Common Equity Tier 1 to total RWAs
(A)/(C)
10.82
Total capital to total RWAs
(B)/(C)
15.43
Basel III revises the definition of capital, increases minimum capital ratios, and introduces a minimum Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio. These changes are being fully phased in effective January 1, 2014, through the end of 2021 and the capital ratios will be determined using Basel III (General Approach) RWAs during 2014. See Table 55 in this section for a summary of changes in RWAs from December 31, 2013, to September 30, 2014.
Under transition provisions to Basel III, cumulative other comprehensive income (previously deducted under Basel I) is included in CET1 over a specified phase-in period. In addition, certain intangible assets includable in CET1 are phased out over a specified period.
Goodwill and other intangible assets are net of any associated deferred tax liabilities.
CET1 (formerly Tier 1 common equity under Basel I) is a non-GAAP financial measure that is used by investors, analysts and bank regulatory agencies to assess the capital position of financial services companies. Management reviews CET1 along with other measures of capital as part of its financial analyses and has included this non-GAAP financial information, and the corresponding reconciliation to total equity, because of current interest in such information on the part of market participants.
Under the regulatory guidelines for risk-based capital, on-balance sheet assets and credit equivalent amounts of derivatives and off-balance sheet items are assigned to one of several broad risk categories according to the obligor, or, if relevant, the guarantor or the nature of any collateral. The aggregate dollar amount in each risk category is then multiplied by the risk weight associated with that category. The resulting weighted values from each of the risk categories are aggregated for determining total RWAs.
Table 53: Analysis of Changes in Capital Under Basel III (General Approach)
Common Equity Tier 1 at December 31, 2013
16.4
Common stock dividends
(5.3)
Common stock issued, repurchased, and stock compensation-related items
(3.4)
Goodwill and other intangible assets (net of any associated deferred tax liabilities)
3.5
1.2
Change in Common Equity Tier 1
12.4
Common Equity Tier 1 at September 30, 2014
Tier 1 capital at December 31, 2013
Issuance of noncumulative perpetual preferred
2.8
Change in Tier 1 capital
12.7
Tier 1 capital at September 30, 2014
Tier 2 capital at December 31, 2013
Change in long-term debt and other instruments qualifying as Tier 2
3.2
Change in qualifying allowance for credit losses
(0.7)
Change in Tier 2 capital
1.6
Tier 2 capital at September 30, 2014
(A) + (B)
Table 54 presents information on the components of RWAs included within our regulatory capital ratios. RWAs prior to 2014 were determined under Basel I, and RWAs in 2014 reflect the transition to Basel III (General Approach).
Table 54: Basel III (General Approach) RWAs / Basel I RWAs
On-balance sheet RWAs
86,292
93,445
Securities financing transactions (1)
11,220
10,385
Loans (2)
709,383
680,953
110,729
91,788
Total on-balance sheet RWAs
968,741
912,910
Off-balance sheet RWAs
Commitments and guarantees (3)
217,493
199,197
9,599
10,545
27,034
18,862
Total off-balance sheet RWAs
254,126
228,604
1,222,867
1,141,514
Represents federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements.
Represents loans held for sale and loans held for investment.
Primarily includes financial standby letters of credit and other unused commitments.
Table 55 presents changes in RWAs for the first nine months of 2014. Effective January 1, 2014, we commenced transitioning RWAs from Basel I to Basel III (General Approach) under final rules adopted by federal banking regulators in July 2013.
Table 55: Analysis of Changes in RWAs
Basel I RWAs at December 31, 2013
Net change in on-balance sheet RWAs:
(7,153)
Securities financing transactions
835
28,430
14,778
18,941
Total change in on-balance sheet RWAs
55,831
Net change in off-balance sheet RWAs:
Commitments and guarantees
18,296
(946)
Total change in off-balance sheet RWAs
25,522
Total change in RWAs
81,353
Basel III (General Approach) RWAs at September 30, 2014
The increase in total RWAs from December 31, 2013, was primarily due to increased lending activity.
Table 56 provides information regarding our CET1 calculation as estimated under Basel III using the Advanced Approach, fully phased-in method.
Table 56: Common Equity Tier 1 Under Basel III (Advanced Approach, Fully Phased-In) (1)(2)
Common Equity Tier 1 (transition amount) under Basel III
Adjustments from transition amount to fully phased-in Basel III (3):
Cumulative other comprehensive income
2.5
(2.7)
Total adjustments
(0.2)
Common Equity Tier 1 (fully phased-in) under Basel III
135.7
Total RWAs anticipated under Basel III (4)
(D)
1,296.1
Common Equity Tier 1 to total RWAs anticipated under Basel III (Advanced Approach, fully phased-in)
(C)/(D)
10.47
CET1 is a non-GAAP financial measure that is used by investors, analysts and bank regulatory agencies to assess the capital position of financial services companies. Management reviews CET1 along with other measures of capital as part of its financial analyses and has included this non-GAAP financial information, and the corresponding reconciliation to total equity, because of current interest in such information on the part of market participants.
The Basel III CET1 and RWAs are estimated based on the Basel III capital rules adopted July 2, 2013, by the FRB. The rules establish a new comprehensive capital framework for U.S. banking organizations that implement the Basel III capital framework and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The rules are being fully phased in effective January 1, 2014, through the end of 2021.
Assumes cumulative other comprehensive income is fully phased in and certain other intangible assets are fully phased out under Basel III capital rules.
The final Basel III capital rules provide for two capital frameworks: the Standardized Approach intended to replace Basel I, and the Advanced Approach applicable to certain institutions. Under the final rules, we will be subject to the lower of our CET1 ratio calculated under the Standardized Approach and under the Advanced Approach in the assessment of our capital adequacy. While the amount of RWAs determined under the Standardized and Advanced Approaches has been converging, the amount of RWAs as of September 30, 2014, was based on the Advanced Approach, which was higher than RWAs under the Standardized Approach, and thus resulted in a lower CET1 ratio compared with the Standardized Approach. Basel III capital rules adopted by the Federal Reserve Board incorporate different classification of assets, with risk weights based on Wells Fargo's internal models, along with adjustments to address a combination of credit/counterparty, operational and market risks, and other Basel III elements.
Regulatory Reform
Since the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, the U.S. financial services industry has been subject to a significant increase in regulation and regulatory oversight initiatives. This increased regulation and oversight has substantially changed how most U.S. financial services companies conduct business and has increased their regulatory compliance costs.
The following supplements our discussion of the significant regulations and regulatory oversight initiatives that have affected or may affect our business contained in the “Regulatory Reform” and “Risk Factors” sections of our 2013 Form 10-K and the “Regulatory Reform” section of our 2014 First and Second Quarter Reports on Form 10-Q.
VOLCKER RULE The Volcker Rule, with limited exceptions, prohibits banking entities from engaging in proprietary trading or owning any interest in or sponsoring or having certain relationships with a hedge fund, a private equity fund or certain structured transactions that are deemed covered funds. On December 10, 2013, federal banking regulators, the SEC and CFTC (collectively, the “Volcker supervisory regulators”) jointly released a final rule to implement the Volcker Rule’s restrictions. Banking entities are not required to come into compliance with the Volcker Rule’s restrictions until July 21, 2015. Banking entities with $50 billion or more in trading assets and liabilities such as Wells Fargo, however, are required to report to the Volcker supervisory regulators certain trading metrics beginning June 30, 2014. Wells Fargo has begun submitting such metrics to the Volcker supervisory regulators. During the conformance period, banking entities are expected to engage in “good-faith” planning efforts, appropriate for their activities and investments, to enable them to conform all of their activities and investments to the Volcker Rule’s restrictions by no later than July 21, 2015. Limited further extensions of the compliance period may be granted at the discretion of the FRB. The FRB announced that it intends to exercise its authority to give banking entities two additional one-year extensions to conform their ownership interests in and sponsorships of certain collateralized loan obligations that meet the definition of covered fund under the rule. As a banking entity with more than $50 billion in consolidated assets, we will also be subject to enhanced compliance program requirements. At this time, we do not anticipate a material impact to our financial results from the rule as prohibited proprietary trading and covered fund investment activities are not significant to our financial results. Moreover, we already have reduced or exited certain businesses in anticipation of the rule’s compliance date and expect to have to make limited divestments in non-conforming funds as a result of the rule.
REGULATION OF SWAPS AND OTHER DERIVATIVES ACTIVITIES The Dodd-Frank Act established a comprehensive framework for regulating over-the-counter derivatives and authorized the CFTC and the SEC to regulate swaps and security-based swaps, respectively. The CFTC and SEC jointly adopted new rules and interpretations that established the compliance dates for many of their rules implementing the new regulatory framework, including provisional registration of our national bank subsidiary, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as a swap dealer, which occurred at the end of 2012. In addition, the CFTC has adopted final rules that, among other things, require extensive regulatory and public reporting of swaps, require certain swaps to be centrally cleared and traded on exchanges or other multilateral platforms, and require swap dealers to comply with comprehensive internal and external business conduct standards. Margin rules for swaps not centrally cleared have been proposed, and in September 2014 were re-proposed. If adopted as re-proposed, the margin and capital requirements for swaps not centrally cleared may significantly increase the cost of hedging in the over-the-counter market. These new rules, as well as others being considered by regulators in other jurisdictions, may negatively impact customer demand for over-the-counter derivatives.
CHANGES TO ABS MARKETS The Dodd-Frank Act requires sponsors of ABS to hold at least a 5% ownership stake in the ABS. Exemptions from the requirement include qualified residential mortgages (QRMs) and FHA/VA loans. In October 2014, federal regulatory agencies issued final rules to implement this credit risk retention requirement, which included an exemption for the GSE’s mortgage-backed securities. The final rules also aligned the definition of QRMs, which are exempt from the risk retention requirements, with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s definition of “qualified mortgage.” In addition, the final rules addressed the measures for complying with the risk retention requirement and continued to provide limited exemptions for qualifying commercial loans, qualifying commercial real estate loans, and qualifying automobile loans that meet certain requirements. We continue to evaluate the final rules and assess their impact on our ability to issue certain asset-backed securities or otherwise participate in various securitization transactions.
REGULATION OF INTERCHANGE TRANSACTION FEES (THE DURBIN AMENDMENT) On October 1, 2011, the FRB rule enacted to implement the Durbin Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act that limits debit card interchange transaction fees to those “reasonable” and “proportional” to the cost of the transaction became effective. The rule generally established that the maximum allowable interchange fee that an issuer may receive or charge for an electronic debit transaction is the sum of 21 cents per transaction and 5 basis points multiplied by the value of the transaction. On July 31, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the approach used by the FRB in setting the maximum allowable interchange transaction fee impermissibly included costs that were specifically excluded from consideration under the Durbin Amendment. The District Court’s decision maintained the current interchange transaction fee standards until the FRB drafted new regulations or interim standards. In August 2013, the FRB filed a notice of appeal of the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In September 2013, the Court of Appeals granted a joint motion for an expedited appeal, and the District Court’s order was stayed pending the appeal. In March 2014, the Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s decision, but did direct the FRB to provide further explanation regarding its treatment of the costs of monitoring transactions. The plaintiffs did not file a petition for rehearing with the Court of Appeals but have filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court has not yet acted on the petition.
Regulatory Reform (continued)
OCC HEIGHTENED STANDARDS In September 2014, the OCC finalized guidelines reflecting its risk management expectations for certain FDIC-insured national banks, including Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The guidelines become effective November 10, 2014, and require covered banks to establish and adhere to a written risk governance framework in order to manage and control their risk-taking activities. The guidelines also formalize roles and responsibilities for risk management practices within covered banks and create certain risk oversight responsibilities for their boards of directors.
Critical Accounting Policies
Our significant accounting policies (see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K) are fundamental to understanding our results of operations and financial condition because they require that we use estimates and assumptions that may affect the value of our assets or liabilities and financial results. Six of these policies are critical because they require management to make difficult, subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because it is likely that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions. These policies govern:
· the allowance for credit losses;
· PCI loans;
· the valuation of residential MSRs;
· liability for mortgage loan repurchase losses;
· the fair valuation of financial instruments; and
· income taxes.
Management has reviewed and approved these critical accounting policies and has discussed these policies with the Board’s Audit and Examination Committee. These policies are described further in the “Financial Review – Critical Accounting Policies” section and Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Current Accounting Developments
The following accounting pronouncements have been issued by the FASB but are not yet effective:
· Accounting Standards Update (ASU or Update) 2014-14 – Receivables – Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors (Subtopic 310-40): Classification of Certain Government-Guaranteed Mortgage Loans Upon Foreclosure;
· ASU 2014-13 – Consolidation (Topic 810): Measuring the Financial Assets and the Financial Liabilities of a Consolidated Collateralized Financing Entity;
· ASU 2014-12 – Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved After the Requisite Service Period;
· ASU 2014-11 – Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures;
· ASU 2014-09 – Revenue from Contracts With Customers (Topic 606);
· ASU 2014-08 – Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant, and Equipment (Topic 360): Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity; and
· ASU 2014-01 – Investments – Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects.
ASU 2014-14 requires government-guaranteed mortgage loans to be classified as other receivables upon foreclosure if the following criteria are met: (1) the loan has a government guarantee that is inseparable from the loan before foreclosure, (2) the creditor has the intent to convey the real estate property to the guarantor, plans to make a claim on the guarantee, and has the ability to recover under the claim, and (3) any claim amount determined based on the fair value of the underlying real estate is fixed at the time of foreclosure. The Update also requires the creditor to measure the other receivable based on the loan balance expected to be recovered from the guarantor. These changes are effective for us in first quarter 2015 with early adoption permitted. The guidance can be applied either prospectively or through modified retrospective transition with a cumulative-effect adjustment to the separate other receivable as of the beginning of the annual adoption period. This Update will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-13 provides a measurement alternative to companies that consolidate collateralized financing entities (CFEs), such as collateralized debt obligation and collateralized loan obligation structures. Under the new guidance, companies can measure both the financial assets and financial liabilities of a CFE using the more observable of the fair value of the financial assets or fair value of the financial liabilities, which eliminates income statement mismatches resulting from changes in fair value. If companies do not elect the measurement alternative, differences between the fair value of financial assets and fair value of financial liabilities should be recognized in earnings. These changes are effective for us in first quarter 2016 with early adoption permitted at the beginning of an annual period. The guidance can be applied either retrospectively to all relevant prior periods or by a modified retrospective approach with a cumulative-effect adjustment to equity as of the beginning of the annual period of adoption. We are evaluating the impact this Update will have on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-12 provides accounting guidance for employee share-based payment awards with specific performance targets. The Update clarifies that performance targets should be treated as performance conditions if the targets affect vesting and could be achieved after the requisite service period. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the cost attributable to service periods that employees have already completed. This Update is effective for us in first quarter 2016 with early adoption permitted. The guidance can be applied prospectively to awards granted or modified after the effective date or retrospectively to awards outstanding in the prior periods presented. This Update will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-11 changes the accounting for certain repurchase agreements and similar transactions and requires new disclosures. The Update eliminates the difference in accounting treatment for repurchase agreements that settle at the same time as transferred financial assets (repurchase-to-maturity transactions) and repurchase agreements that settle before the maturity of the transferred financial asset. Under the new guidance, repurchase-to-maturity transactions must be accounted for as secured borrowings and not as sales with forward agreements, as is required under current accounting. The Update also requires separate accounting treatment for repurchase financing arrangements where an agreement to transfer a financial asset is executed at the same time as a repurchase agreement with the same counterparty. Under such arrangements, the repurchase agreement is accounted for as a secured borrowing. The new disclosure requirements include expanded information about transfers accounted for as sales, such as the carrying amount of assets derecognized and the amount of gross proceeds received. In addition, new disclosures will be required for repurchase agreements, securities lending transactions, and repurchase-to-maturity transactions, including the remaining contractual maturity of the agreements, and discussion of the potential risks associated with the agreements and related collateral. The accounting changes are effective for us in first quarter 2015 with early adoption prohibited. The disclosures are required in first quarter 2015 for transfers accounted for as sales with the remaining disclosures required in second quarter 2015. This Update will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-09 modifies the guidance companies use to recognize revenue from contracts with customers for transfers of goods or services and transfers of nonfinancial assets, unless those contracts are within the scope of other standards. The Update requires that entities apply a specific method to recognize revenue reflecting the consideration expected from customers in exchange for the transfer of goods and services. The guidance also requires new qualitative and quantitative disclosures, including information about contract balances and performance obligations. Entities are also required to disclose significant judgments and changes in judgments for determining the
satisfaction of performance obligations. The Update is effective for us in first quarter 2017 with retrospective application to prior periods presented or retrospectively as a cumulative effect adjustment in the period of adoption. Early adoption is not permitted. We are evaluating the impact this Update will have on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-08 changes the definition and reporting requirements for discontinued operations. Under the new guidance, an entity’s disposal of a component or group of components must be reported in discontinued operations if the disposal is a strategic shift that has or will have a significant effect on the entity’s operations and financial results. Major strategic shifts include disposals of a significant geographic area or line of business. This guidance also requires new disclosures on discontinued operations, such as the income statement line items making up the pretax profit or loss of the discontinued operations and information on significant continuing involvement with discontinued operations. These changes are effective for us in first quarter 2015 with prospective application. Early adoption is permitted for disposals that have not been previously reported. This Update will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-01 amends the accounting guidance for investments in affordable housing projects that qualify for the low-income housing tax credit. The Update allows companies to make an accounting policy election to amortize the cost of its investments in proportion to the tax benefits received if certain criteria are met and present the amortization as a component of income tax expense. The new guidance is effective in first quarter 2015 with early adoption permitted. Additionally, the new accounting guidance requires incremental disclosures for all entities that invest in qualified affordable housing projects regardless of the policy election. We do not intend to adopt the accounting policy election permitted by the Update, and therefore, it will not affect our consolidated financial statements.
Forward-Looking Statements
This document contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In addition, we may make forward-looking statements in our other documents filed or furnished with the SEC, and our management may make forward-looking statements orally to analysts, investors, representatives of the media and others. Forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “seeks,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “target,” “projects,” “outlook,” “forecast,” “will,” “may,” “could,” “should,” “can” and similar references to future periods. In particular, forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements we make about: (i) the future operating or financial performance of the Company, including our outlook for future growth; (ii) our noninterest expense and efficiency ratio; (iii) future credit quality and performance, including our expectations regarding future loan losses and allowance releases; (iv) the appropriateness of the allowance for credit losses; (v) our expectations regarding net interest income and net interest margin; (vi) loan growth or the reduction or mitigation of risk in our loan portfolios; (vii) future capital levels and our estimated Common Equity Tier 1 ratio under Basel III capital standards; (viii) the performance of our mortgage business and any related exposures; (ix) the expected outcome and impact of legal, regulatory and legislative developments, as well as our expectations regarding compliance therewith; (x) future common stock dividends, common share repurchases and other uses of capital; (xi) our targeted range for return on assets and return on equity; (xii) the outcome of contingencies, such as legal proceedings; and (xiii) the Company’s plans, objectives and strategies.
Forward-looking statements are not based on historical facts but instead represent our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, the economy and other future conditions. Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict. Our actual results may differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. We caution you, therefore, against relying on any of these forward-looking statements. They are neither statements of historical fact nor guarantees or assurances of future performance. While there is no assurance that any list of risks and uncertainties or risk factors is complete, important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements include the following, without limitation:
· current and future economic and market conditions, including the effects of declines in housing prices, high unemployment rates, U.S. fiscal debt, budget and tax matters, and the overall slowdown in global economic growth;
· our capital and liquidity requirements (including under regulatory capital standards, such as the Basel III capital standards) and our ability to generate capital internally or raise capital on favorable terms;
· financial services reform and other current, pending or future legislation or regulation that could have a negative effect on our revenue and businesses, including the Dodd-Frank Act and other legislation and regulation relating to bank products and services;
· the extent of our success in our loan modification efforts, as well as the effects of regulatory requirements or guidance regarding loan modifications;
· the amount of mortgage loan repurchase demands that we receive and our ability to satisfy any such demands without having to repurchase loans related thereto or otherwise indemnify or reimburse third parties, and the credit quality of or losses on such repurchased mortgage loans;
· negative effects relating to our mortgage servicing and foreclosure practices, including our obligations under the settlement with the Department of Justice and other federal and state government entities, as well as changes in industry standards or practices, regulatory or judicial requirements, penalties or fines, increased servicing and other costs or obligations, including loan modification requirements, or delays or moratoriums on foreclosures;
· our ability to realize our efficiency ratio target as part of our expense management initiatives, including as a result of business and economic cyclicality, seasonality, changes in our business composition and operating environment, growth in our businesses and/or acquisitions, and unexpected expenses relating to, among other things, litigation and regulatory matters;
· the effect of the current low interest rate environment or changes in interest rates on our net interest income, net interest margin and our mortgage originations, mortgage servicing rights and mortgages held for sale;
· a recurrence of significant turbulence or disruption in the capital or financial markets, which could result in, among other things, reduced investor demand for mortgage loans, a reduction in the availability of funding or increased funding costs, and declines in asset values and/or recognition of other-than-temporary impairment on securities held in our investment securities portfolio;
· the effect of a fall in stock market prices on our investment banking business and our fee income from our brokerage, asset and wealth management businesses;
· reputational damage from negative publicity, protests, fines, penalties and other negative consequences from regulatory violations and legal actions;
· a failure in or breach of our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of our third party vendors or other service providers, including as a result of cyber attacks;
· the effect of changes in the level of checking or savings account deposits on our funding costs and net interest margin;
· fiscal and monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board; and
· the other risk factors and uncertainties described under “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.
In addition to the above factors, we also caution that the amount and timing of any future common stock dividends or repurchases will depend on the earnings, cash requirements and financial condition of the Company, market conditions, capital requirements (including under Basel capital standards), common stock issuance requirements, applicable law and regulations (including federal securities laws and federal banking regulations), and other factors deemed relevant by the Company’s Board of Directors, and may be subject to regulatory approval or conditions.
Forward-Looking Statements (continued)
For more information about factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations, refer to our reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the discussion under “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and available on its website at www.sec.gov.
Any forward-looking statement made by us speaks only as of the date on which it is made. Factors or events that could cause our actual results to differ may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for us to predict all of them. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by law.
Risk Factors
An investment in the Company involves risk, including the possibility that the value of the investment could fall substantially and that dividends or other distributions on the investment could be reduced or eliminated. For a discussion of risk factors that could adversely affect our financial results and condition, and the value of, and return on, an investment in the Company, we refer you to the “Risk Factors” section of our 2013 Form 10-K.
Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Company’s management evaluated the effectiveness, as of September 30, 2014, of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures. The Company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer participated in the evaluation. Based on this evaluation, the Company’s chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of September 30, 2014.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the Company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by the Company’s Board, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and includes those policies and procedures that:
· pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of assets of the Company;
· provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and
· provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. No change occurred during third quarter 2014 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Wells Fargo & Company and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statement of Income (Unaudited)
(in millions, except per share amounts)
Interest income
2,066
2,038
6,288
5,997
Mortgages held for sale
Loans held for sale
8,963
8,901
26,561
26,664
Other interest income
183
Total interest income
11,964
11,776
35,369
35,253
Interest expense
Other interest expense
Total interest expense
1,023
1,028
3,022
3,256
10,941
10,748
32,347
31,997
Provision for credit losses
Net interest income after provision for credit losses
10,573
10,673
31,437
30,051
Noninterest income
Trust and investment fees
Other fees
Mortgage banking
Net gains (losses) on debt securities (1)
Net gains from equity investments (2)
191
507
Total noninterest income
3,117
2,831
8,776
8,465
Total noninterest expense
Income before income tax expense
8,597
8,301
25,604
24,412
Income tax expense
2,642
2,618
7,788
7,901
Net income before noncontrolling interests
5,955
5,683
17,816
16,511
Less: Net income from noncontrolling interests
468
Less: Preferred stock dividends and other
261
909
Wells Fargo net income applicable to common stock
Per share information
Earnings per common share
2.93
(1) Total other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI) losses (reversal of losses) were $10 million and $(13) millionfor third quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively. Of total OTTI, losses of $15 million and $23 million were recognized in earnings, and reversal of losses of $(5) million and $(36) million were recognized as non-credit-related OTTI in other comprehensive income forthird quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively. Total OTTI losses (reversal of losses) were $(1) million and $36 million for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively. Of total OTTI, losses of $35 million and $128 million were recognized in earnings, and reversal of lossesof $(36) million and $(92) million were recognized as non-credit-related OTTI in other comprehensive income forthe first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(2) Includes OTTI losses of $40 millionand $37 million forthird quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $237 million and $121 million for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income (Unaudited)
Other comprehensive income (loss), before tax:
Investment securities:
Net unrealized gains (losses) arising during the period
3,866
(5,922)
Reclassification of net gains to net income
(114)
(1,205)
(197)
Derivatives and hedging activities:
222
Reclassification of net gains on cash flow hedges to net income
(127)
(69)
(225)
Defined benefit plans adjustments:
Net actuarial gains (losses) arising during the period
297
1,075
Amortization of net actuarial loss, settlements and other to net income
Foreign currency translation adjustments:
Reclassification of net (gains) losses to net income
Other comprehensive income (loss), before tax
(1,780)
2,553
(5,097)
Income tax (expense) benefit related to other comprehensive income
(265)
(1,087)
2,002
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax
(1,220)
758
1,466
(3,095)
Less: Other comprehensive income (loss) from noncontrolling interests
(221)
(266)
Wells Fargo other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax
(999)
492
1,732
(3,361)
Wells Fargo comprehensive income
4,730
19,080
12,907
Comprehensive income from noncontrolling interests
509
Total comprehensive income
4,735
6,441
19,282
13,416
Consolidated Balance Sheet
(in millions, except shares)
Assets
(Unaudited)
18,032
19,919
Federal funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements and other short-term investments
261,932
213,793
67,755
62,813
Available-for-sale, at fair value
Held-to-maturity, at cost (fair value $40,915 and $12,247)
Mortgages held for sale (includes $15,755 and $13,879 carried at fair value) (1)
20,178
16,763
Loans held for sale (includes $1 and $1 carried at fair value) (1)
9,292
Loans (includes $5,849 and $5,995 carried at fair value) (1)(2)
(12,681)
(14,502)
Net loans (2)
826,202
807,784
Mortgage servicing rights:
Measured at fair value
14,031
15,580
Amortized
1,229
Premises and equipment, net
8,768
9,156
Other assets (includes $1,964 and $1,386 carried at fair value) (1)
94,727
86,342
Total assets (2)(3)
1,523,502
Liabilities
Noninterest-bearing deposits
288,117
Interest-bearing deposits
816,834
791,060
Accrued expenses and other liabilities (2)
75,727
66,436
184,586
152,998
Total liabilities (2)(4)
1,453,865
1,352,494
Wells Fargo stockholders' equity:
19,379
16,267
Common stock – $1-2/3 par value, authorized 9,000,000,000 shares;
issued $5,481,811,474 and $5,481,811,474 shares
9,136
Additional paid-in capital
60,100
60,296
Retained earnings
103,494
92,361
3,118
Treasury stock – $266,802,983 and $224,648,769 shares
(11,206)
(8,104)
Unearned ESOP shares
(1,540)
(1,200)
170,142
866
171,008
Total liabilities and equity (2)
(1) Parenthetical amounts represent assets and liabilities for which we have elected the fair value option.
(2) Financial information for certain periods prior to 2014 was revised to reflect our determination that certain factoring arrangements did not qualify as loans. See Note 1 for more information.
(3) Our consolidated assets atSeptember 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, include the following assets of certain variable interest entities (VIEs) that can only be used to settle the liabilities of those VIEs: Cash and due from banks, $113 million and $165 million; Trading assets, $24million and $162 million; Investment Securities, $989 million and $1.4 billion; Mortgages held for sale, $0 million and $38 million; Net loans, $5.3 billion and $6.0 billion; Other assets, $293 million and $347 million, and Total assets, $6.7 billion and $8.1billion, respectively.
(4) Our consolidated liabilities at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, include the following VIE liabilities for which the VIE creditors do not have recourse to Wells Fargo: Short-term borrowings, $0 million and $29 million; Accrued expenses and other liabilities, $46million and $90 million; Long-term debt, $2.0 billion and $2.3 billion; and Total liabilities, $2.0billion and $2.4 billion, respectively.
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity (Unaudited)
Common stock
Shares
Amount
Balance January 1, 2013
10,558,865
12,883
5,266,314,176
Common stock issued
78,607,760
Common stock repurchased (1)
(94,144,984)
Preferred stock issued to ESOP
1,200,000
1,200
Preferred stock released by ESOP
Preferred stock converted to common shares
(883,752)
(884)
22,958,790
Preferred stock issued
94,000
2,350
Preferred stock dividends
Tax benefit from stock incentive compensation
Stock incentive compensation expense
Net change in deferred compensation and related plans
Net change
410,248
2,666
7,421,566
Balance September 30, 2013
10,969,113
15,549
5,273,735,742
Balance January 1, 2014
10,881,195
5,257,162,705
61,467,695
(121,567,010)
1,217,000
1,217
(905,065)
(905)
17,945,101
112,000
2,800
423,935
3,112
(42,154,214)
Balance September 30, 2014
11,305,130
5,215,008,491
(1) For the first nine months of 2014, includes $1.0 billion related to a private forward repurchase transaction entered into in third quarter 2014 that settled in fourth quarter 2014 for 19.8 million shares of common stock. For the first nine months of 2013, includes $400 million related to a private forward repurchase transaction entered into in third quarter 2013 that settled in fourth quarter 2013 for 9.6 million shares of common stock. See Note 1 for additional information.
Cumulative
Additional
other
Unearned
Wells Fargo
paid-in
Retained
comprehensive
Treasury
ESOP
stockholders'
Noncontrolling
earnings
income
stock
shares
equity
interests
59,802
77,679
5,650
(6,610)
(986)
157,554
1,357
158,911
(218)
2,372
2,380
(200)
(3,778)
(3,978)
(1,308)
962
884
720
(33)
2,317
(4,565)
(4,504)
(747)
585
(468)
(462)
386
10,946
(680)
(346)
9,611
9,902
60,188
88,625
2,289
(7,290)
(1,332)
1,648
(559)
(560)
(198)
1,975
(500)
(5,969)
(6,469)
(1,325)
(80)
985
905
(5,307)
(5,251)
(908)
682
(833)
(827)
(196)
11,133
(3,102)
(340)
12,339
(357)
11,982
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows (Unaudited)
Cash flows from operating activities:
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Changes in fair value of MSRs, MHFS and LHFS carried at fair value
(2,402)
Depreciation, amortization and accretion
1,933
2,508
Other net gains
(2,216)
(7,441)
Stock-based compensation
1,525
1,535
Excess tax benefits related to stock incentive compensation
(378)
(232)
Originations of MHFS
(109,288)
(274,293)
Proceeds from sales of and principal collected on mortgages originated for sale
89,626
265,249
Proceeds from sales of and principal collected on LHFS
206
373
Purchases of LHFS
(131)
(244)
Net change in:
12,246
39,133
Deferred income taxes
2,802
Accrued interest receivable
(215)
Accrued interest payable
Other assets
(7,182)
(2,962)
Other accrued expenses and liabilities
8,354
Net cash provided by operating activities
14,664
43,218
Cash flows from investing activities:
Federal funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements
and other short-term investments
(45,281)
(46,419)
Sales proceeds
2,575
2,591
Prepayments and maturities
28,509
40,476
Purchases
(24,539)
(78,368)
Paydowns and maturities
4,251
(33,049)
2,291
1,846
(2,408)
(2,552)
Loans originated by banking subsidiaries, net of principal collected
(42,805)
(27,957)
Proceeds from sales (including participations) of loans originated for
investment
13,926
5,894
Purchases (including participations) of loans
(3,998)
(10,022)
Principal collected on nonbank entities’ loans
9,577
16,202
Loans originated by nonbank entities
(9,489)
(13,949)
Net cash paid for acquisitions
(174)
Proceeds from sales of foreclosed assets and short sales
5,995
8,163
Net cash from purchases and sales of MSRs
(119)
Other, net
(537)
869
Net cash used by investing activities
(95,275)
(102,755)
Cash flows from financing activities:
51,448
39,036
7,542
(3,335)
Long-term debt:
Proceeds from issuance
38,362
44,483
Repayment
(9,872)
(18,727)
Preferred stock:
Cash dividends paid
(928)
(813)
Common stock:
1,376
1,935
Repurchased
(5,134)
(4,409)
232
Net change in noncontrolling interests
(846)
(207)
Net cash provided by financing activities
78,724
56,605
Net change in cash and due from banks
(1,887)
(2,932)
Cash and due from banks at beginning of period
21,860
Cash and due from banks at end of period
18,928
Supplemental cash flow disclosures:
Cash paid for interest
2,784
3,246
Cash paid for income taxes
6,254
5,543
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements. See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) for noncash activities.
See the Glossary of Acronyms at the end of this Report for terms used throughout the Financial Statements and related Notes.
Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Wells Fargo & Company is a diversified financial services company. We provide banking, insurance, trust and investments, mortgage banking, investment banking, retail banking, brokerage, and consumer and commercial finance through banking stores, the internet and other distribution channels to consumers, businesses and institutions in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and in foreign countries. When we refer to “Wells Fargo,” “the Company,” “we,” “our” or “us,” we mean Wells Fargo & Company and Subsidiaries (consolidated). Wells Fargo & Company (the Parent) is a financial holding company and a bank holding company.
Our accounting and reporting policies conform with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and practices in the financial services industry. For discussion of our significant accounting policies, see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 (2013 Form 10-K). There were no material changes to these policies in the first nine months of 2014. To prepare the financial statements in conformity with GAAP, management must make estimates based on assumptions about future economic and market conditions (for example, unemployment, market liquidity, real estate prices, etc.) that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and income and expenses during the reporting period and the related disclosures. Although our estimates contemplate current conditions and how we expect them to change in the future, it is reasonably possible that actual conditions could be worse than anticipated in those estimates, which could materially affect our results of operations and financial condition. Management has made significant estimates in several areas, including allowance for credit losses and purchased credit-impaired (PCI) loans (Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses)), valuations of residential mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) (Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) and Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities)) and financial instruments (Note 13 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities)), liability for mortgage loan repurchase losses (Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities)) and income taxes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
These unaudited interim financial statements reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair statement of the results for the periods presented. These adjustments are of a normal recurring nature, unless otherwise disclosed in this Form 10-Q. The results of operations in the interim financial statements do not necessarily indicate the results that may be expected for the full year. The interim financial information should be read in conjunction with our 2013 Form 10-K.
Accounting for Certain Factored Loan Receivable Arrangements
The Company determined that certain factoring arrangements previously included within commercial loans, which were recorded with a corresponding obligation in other liabilities, did not qualify as loan purchases under Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) Topic 860 (Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets) based on interpretations of the specific arrangements. Accordingly, we revised our commercial loan balances for year-end 2012 and each of the quarters in 2013 in order to present the Company’s lending trends on a comparable basis over this period. This revision, which resulted in a reduction to total commercial loans and a corresponding decrease to other liabilities, did not impact the Company’s consolidated net income or total cash flows. We reduced our commercial loans by $3.5 billion, $3.2 billion, $2.1 billion, $1.6 billion, and $1.2 billion at December 31, September 30, June 30 and March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively, which represented less than 1% of total commercial loans and less than 0.5% of our total loan portfolio. We also appropriately revised other affected financial information, including financial guarantees and financial ratios, to reflect this revision.
Accounting Standards Adopted in 2014
In first quarter 2014, we adopted the following new accounting guidance:
· Accounting Standards Update (ASU or Update) 2014-04, Receivables – Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors (Subtopic 310-40): Reclassification of Residential Real Estate Collateralized Consumer Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure;
· ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists; and
· ASU 2013-08, Financial Services – Investment Companies (Topic 946): Amendments to the Scope, Measurement and Disclosure Requirements.
ASU 2014-04 clarifies the timing of when a creditor is considered to have taken physical possession of residential real estate collateral for a consumer mortgage loan, resulting in the reclassification of the loan receivable to real estate owned. A creditor has taken physical possession of the property when either (1) the creditor obtains legal title through foreclosure, or (2) the borrower transfers all interests in the property to the creditor via a deed in lieu of foreclosure or a similar legal agreement. The Update also requires disclosure of the amount of foreclosed residential real estate property held by the creditor and the recorded investment in residential real estate mortgage loans that are in process of foreclosure. We adopted this guidance in first quarter 2014 with prospective application. Our adoption of this guidance did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements as this guidance was consistent with our prior practice. See Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses) for the new disclosures.
ASU 2013-11 eliminates diversity in practice as it provides guidance on financial statement presentation of an unrecognized tax benefit when a net operating loss (NOL) carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward exists. We adopted this guidance in first quarter 2014 with prospective application to all unrecognized tax benefits that exist at the effective date. This Update did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2013-08 amends the scope, measurement and disclosure requirements for investment companies. The Update changes criteria companies use to assess whether an entity is an investment company.
In addition, investment companies must measure noncontrolling ownership interests in other investment companies at fair value rather than using the equity method of accounting. This Update also requires new disclosures, including information about changes, if any, in an entity’s status as an investment company and information about financial support provided or contractually required to be provided by an investment company to any of its investees. We adopted this guidance in first quarter 2014. The Update did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements, as our existing practice complies with the requirements.
Private Share Repurchases
From time to time we enter into private forward repurchase transactions with unrelated third parties to complement our open-market common stock repurchase strategies, to allow us to manage our share repurchases in a manner consistent with our capital plans, currently submitted under the 2014 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR), and to provide an economic benefit to the Company.
Our payments to the counterparties for these contracts are recorded in permanent equity in the quarter paid and are not subject to re-measurement. The classification of the up-front payments as permanent equity assures that we have appropriate repurchase timing consistent with our 2014 capital plan, which contemplated a fixed dollar amount available per quarter for share repurchases pursuant to Federal Reserve Board (FRB) supervisory guidance. In return, the counterparty agrees to deliver a variable number of shares based on a per share discount to the volume-weighted average stock price over the contract period. There are no scenarios where the contracts would not either physically settle in shares or allow us to choose the settlement method. Our total number of outstanding shares of common stock is not reduced until settlement of the private share repurchase contract.
In July 2014, we entered into a $1.0 billion private forward repurchase contract with an unrelated third party. This contract settled in October 2014 for 19.8 million shares of common stock. At September 30, 2013, we had a $400 million private repurchase contract outstanding that settled in December 2013 for 9.6 million shares of common stock.
Supplemental Cash Flow Information Significant noncash activities are presented below.
Trading assets retained from securitization of MHFS
18,717
39,963
Transfers from loans to MHFS
9,035
6,199
Transfers from loans to LHFS
9,842
Transfers from loans to foreclosed assets (1)
3,228
3,195
(1) Includes $2.0 billion and $1.9 billion in transfers of government insured/guaranteed loans for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Nine months endedSeptember 30, 2013, has been revised to correct the previously reported amount.
Subsequent Events We have evaluated the effects of events that have occurred subsequent to September 30, 2014, and there have been no material events that would require recognition in our third quarter 2014 consolidated financial statements or disclosure in the Notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Note 2: Business Combinations
We regularly explore opportunities to acquire financial services companies and businesses. Generally, we do not make a public announcement about an acquisition opportunity until a definitive agreement has been signed. For information on additional contingent consideration related to acquisitions, which is considered to be a guarantee, see Note 10 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral).
In the first nine months of 2014, we completed one acquisition of a railcar and locomotive leasing business with combined total assets of $422 million. We had no pending business combinations as of September 30, 2014.
Note 3: Federal Funds Sold, Securities Purchased under Resale Agreements and Other Short-Term Investments
The following table provides the detail of federal funds sold, securities purchased under short-term resale agreements (generally less than one year) and other short-term investments. The majority of interest-earning deposits at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, were held at the Federal Reserve.
Federal funds sold and securities
purchased under resale agreements
34,515
25,801
Other short-term investments
2,563
1,743
We have classified securities purchased under long-term resale agreements (generally one year or more), which totaled $11.6billion and $10.1 billion at September 30, 2014 and December31, 2013, respectively, in loans. For additional information on the collateral we receive from other entities under resale agreements and securities borrowings, see the “Offsetting of Resale and Repurchase Agreements and Securities Borrowing and Lending Agreements” section of Note 10 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral).
Note 4: Investment Securities
The following table provides the amortized cost and fair value by major categories of available-for-sale securities, which are carried at fair value, and held-to-maturity debt securities, which are carried at amortized cost. The net unrealized gains (losses) for available-for-sale securities are reported on anafter‑tax basis as a component of cumulative OCI.
Gross
gains
losses
14,994
(212)
14,794
44,023
2,000
45,805
111,805
(1,670)
112,613
Residential
8,848
1,242
10,076
16,531
939
(55)
17,415
137,184
4,659
(1,739)
140,104
Corporate debt securities
15,550
845
16,314
Collateralized loan and other debt obligations (1)
21,520
499
(96)
21,923
6,434
359
6,776
Total debt securities
8,374
(2,363)
Perpetual preferred securities
1,625
1,711
Other marketable equity securities
521
824
Total marketable equity securities
675
(70)
9,049
(2,433)
28,887
28,938
123
5,770
5,855
1,404
4,574
4,597
(48)
9,254
(2,481)
6,592
(329)
42,171
1,092
(727)
42,536
119,303
1,902
(3,614)
117,591
11,060
1,433
(40)
12,453
17,689
1,173
(115)
18,747
148,052
4,508
(3,769)
148,791
20,391
976
(140)
21,227
19,610
642
20,159
9,232
(29)
9,629
7,661
(5,087)
1,703
(60)
1,865
336
1,188
1,520
1,410
(64)
9,071
(5,151)
6,304
6,205
6,042
(5,250)
(1) The available-for-sale portfolio includes collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) with a cost basis and fair value of $394 million and $557million, respectively, at September 30, 2014, and $509 million and $693 million, respectively, at December 31, 2013. The held-to-maturity portfolio only includes collateralized loan obligations.
(2) The “Other” category of available-for-sale securities predominantly includes asset-backed securities collateralized by credit cards, student loans, home equity loans and auto leases or loans and cash reserves. Included in the “Other” category of held-to-maturity securities are asset-backed securities collateralized by auto leases or loans and cash reserves with a cost basis and fair value of $3.5 billion each at September 30, 2014, and $4.3 billion each at December 31, 2013. Also included in the “Other” category of held-to-maturity securities are asset-backed securities collateralized by dealer floorplan loans with a cost basis and fair value of $1.1 billion each at September 30, 2014, and $1.7 billion each at December 31, 2013.
Note 4: Investment Securities (continued)
Gross Unrealized Losses and Fair Value
The following table shows the gross unrealized losses and fair value of securities in the investment securities portfolio by length of time that individual securities in each category had been in a continuous loss position. Debt securities on which we have taken credit-related OTTI write-downs are categorized as being “less than 12 months” or “12 months or more” in a continuous loss position based on the point in time that the fair value declined to below the cost basis and not the period of time since the credit-related OTTI write-down.
Less than 12 months
12 months or more
7,418
5,768
13,186
1,235
(206)
4,092
5,327
7,127
(1,642)
41,086
48,213
156
1,177
(50)
1,644
2,821
(39)
8,737
(1,700)
42,886
51,623
(65)
1,336
2,525
Collateralized loan and other debt obligations
4,653
3,793
8,446
424
316
740
(142)
23,656
(2,221)
58,191
81,847
628
724
783
(145)
23,811
(2,288)
58,819
82,630
9,768
606
10,374
(193)
34,185
93,004
5,786
(399)
9,238
(328)
4,120
13,358
(3,562)
67,045
(52)
1,132
68,177
2,128
(100)
4,155
(3,595)
70,415
3,391
73,806
2,542
2,970
7,202
7,545
(11)
1,690
365
2,055
(4,474)
96,873
(613)
8,647
105,520
732
(4,506)
97,331
(645)
8,955
106,286
6,153
(4,605)
103,484
112,439
We do not have the intent to sell any securities included in the previous table. For debt securities included in the table, we have concluded it is more likely than not that we will not be required to sell prior to recovery of the amortized cost basis. We have assessed each security with gross unrealized losses for credit impairment. For debt securities, we evaluate, where necessary, whether credit impairment exists by comparing the present value of the expected cash flows to the securities’ amortized cost basis. For equity securities, we consider numerous factors in determining whether impairment exists, including our intent and ability to hold the securities for a period of time sufficient to recover the cost basis of the securities.
For complete descriptions of the factors we consider when analyzing securities for impairment, see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) and Note 5 (Investment Securities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K. There have been no material changes to our methodologies for assessing impairment in the first nine months of 2014.
The following table shows the gross unrealized losses and fair value of debt and perpetual preferred investment securitiesby those rated investment grade and those rated less than investment grade, according to their lowest credit rating by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (S&P) or Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s). Credit ratings express opinions about the credit quality of a security. Securities rated investment grade, that is those rated BBB- or higher by S&P or Baa3 or higher by Moody’s, are generally considered by the rating agencies and market participants to be low credit risk. Conversely, securities rated below investment grade, labeled as “speculative grade” by the rating agencies, are considered to be distinctively higher credit risk than investment grade securities. We have also included securities not rated by S&P or Moody’s in the table below based on our internal credit grade of the securities (used for credit risk management purposes) equivalent to the credit rating assigned by major credit agencies. The unrealized losses and fair value of unrated securities categorized as investment grade based on internal credit grades were $14 million and $1.1 billion, respectively, at September 30, 2014, and $18 million and $1.9 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2013. If an internal credit grade was not assigned, we categorized the security as non-investment grade.
Investment grade
Non-investment grade
(181)
4,979
348
2,472
349
(1,691)
50,685
938
1,733
792
8,341
79,602
2,245
(2,289)
80,326
(2,337)
90,700
(671)
12,915
(56)
443
(46)
3,364
791
(3,662)
71,718
2,088
2,343
627
7,376
1,874
(4,849)
102,012
(238)
3,508
(4,909)
102,744
(5,008)
108,897
Contractual Maturities
The following table shows the remaining contractual maturities and contractual weighted-average yields (taxable-equivalent basis) of available-for-sale debt securities. The remaining contractual principal maturities for MBS do not consider prepayments. Remaining expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to prepay obligations before the underlying mortgages mature.
Remaining contractual maturity
After one year
After five years
Within one year
through five years
through ten years
After ten years
amount
Yield
Available-for-sale securities (1):
Securities of U.S. Treasury
and federal agencies
1.56
8,991
5,619
Securities of U.S. states and
political subdivisions
5.57
2,234
1.90
9,088
3,287
5.01
31,196
6.90
309
2.86
908
111,396
4.81
5.63
9,975
4.45
5.24
0.40
2.71
3.66
17,378
Total mortgage-backed
securities
2.92
138,749
4.67
1,824
7,613
4.51
5,556
5.42
1,321
Collateralized loan and
other debt obligations
1.74
929
0.68
7,912
13,057
1.93
1.84
1,719
2.47
1,019
3,990
1.67
Total available-for-sale
debt securities
4,316
28,671
24,416
3.01
188,313
0.54
701
5,493
1.71
5.30
4,915
3,151
5.19
26,569
6.89
3.33
7.14
398
116,236
4.31
113
5.43
12,340
18,636
5.26
2.78
1,128
147,212
4.18
6,136
2.06
7,255
4.22
6,528
5.80
1,308
5.77
1,100
7,750
11,269
1.89
1.80
906
1,243
1.64
4,503
1.73
12,084
20,384
2.75
25,293
190,861
3.97
Weighted-average yields displayed by maturity bucket are weighted based on fair value and predominantly represent contractual coupon rates without effect for any related hedging derivatives.
The following table shows the amortized cost and weighted-average yields of held-to-maturity debt securities by contractual maturity.
Held-to-maturity securities (1):
Amortized cost:
5.96
Federal agency mortgage-
backed securities
3.90
1.95
2,794
1,615
Total held-to-maturity
at amortized cost
2.36
30,502
7,297
4,468
1.87
1,379
1.98
Weighted-average yields displayed by maturity bucket are weighted based on amortized cost and predominantly represent contractual coupon rates.
The following table shows the fair value of held-to-maturity debt securities by contractual maturity.
Fair value:
2,807
30,563
7,380
Realized Gains and Losses
The following table shows the gross realized gains and losses on sales and OTTI write-downs related to the investment securities portfolio, which includes marketable equity securities, as well as net realized gains and losses on nonmarketable equity investments (see Note 6 (Other Assets)).
Quarter
Gross realized gains
1,220
Gross realized losses
OTTI write-downs
Net realized gains from investment securities
656
1,174
Net realized gains from nonmarketable equity investments
1,241
Net realized gains from debt securities and equity investments
965
2,415
803
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment
The following table shows the detail of total OTTI write-downs included in earnings for debt securities, marketable equity securities and nonmarketable equity investments.
OTTI write-downs included in earnings
Debt securities:
128
Equity securities:
Nonmarketable equity investments
235
Total OTTI write-downs included in earnings
272
249
Other-Than-Temporarily Impaired Debt Securities
The following table shows the detail of OTTI write-downs on debt securities included in earnings and the related changes in OCI for the same securities.
OTTI on debt securities
Recorded as part of gross realized losses:
Credit-related OTTI
Intent-to-sell OTTI
Total recorded as part of gross realized losses
Changes to OCI for losses (reversal of losses) in non-credit-related OTTI (1):
Residential mortgage-backed securities
Commercial mortgage-backed securities
(74)
Total changes to OCI for non-credit-related OTTI
(36)
(92)
Total OTTI losses (reversal of losses) recorded on debt securities
(1) Represents amounts recorded to OCI for impairment, due to factors other than credit, on debt securities that have also had credit-related OTTI write-downs during the period. Increases represent initial or subsequent non-credit-related OTTI on debt securities.Decreases represent partial to full reversal of impairment due to recoveries in the fair value of securities due to non-credit factors.
The following table presents a rollforward of the credit loss component recognized in earnings for debt securities we still own (referred to as “credit-impaired” debt securities). The credit loss component of the amortized cost represents the difference between the present value of expected future cash flows discounted using the security’s current effective interest rate and the amortized cost basis of the security prior to considering credit losses. OTTI recognized in earnings for credit-impaired debt securities is presented as additions and is classified into one of two components based upon whether the current period is the first time the debt security was credit-impaired (initial credit impairment) or if the debt security was previously credit-impaired (subsequent credit impairments). The credit loss component is reduced if we sell, intend to sell or believe we will be required to sell previously credit-impaired debt securities. Additionally, the credit loss component is reduced if we receive or expect to receive cash flows in excess of what we previously expected to receive over the remaining life of the credit-impaired debt security, the security matures or is fully written down.
Changes in the credit loss component of credit-impaired debt securities that were recognized in earnings and related to securities that we do not intend to sell are presented in the following table.
Credit loss component, beginning of period
1,107
1,218
1,171
1,289
Additions:
Initial credit impairments
Subsequent credit impairments
Total additions
For securities sold or matured
(84)
(30)
(141)
Due to change in intent to sell or requirement to sell available-for-sale securities
For recoveries of previous credit impairments (1)
(91)
(171)
(164)
Credit loss component, end of period
1,204
(1) Recoveries of previous credit impairments result from increases in expected cash flows subsequent to credit loss recognition. Such recoveries are reflected prospectively as interest yield adjustments using the effective interest method.
Note 5: Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses
The following table presents total loans outstanding by portfolio segment and class of financing receivable. Outstanding balances include a total net reduction of $4.6 billion and $6.4 billion at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, for unearned income, net deferred loan fees, and unamortized discounts and premiums.
(1) Substantially all of our foreign loan portfolio is commercial loans. Loans are classified as foreign primarily based on whether the borrower’s primary address is outside of the United States.
Loan Purchases, Sales, and Transfers
The following table summarizes the proceeds paid or received for purchases and sales of loans and transfers from loans held for investment to mortgages/loans held for sale at lower of cost or fair value. This loan activity primarily includes loans purchased and sales of whole loan or participating interests, whereby we receive or transfer a portion of a loan after origination. The table excludes PCI loans and loans recorded at fair value, including loans originated for sale because their loan activity normally does not impact the allowance for credit losses.
Purchases (1)
1,214
6,226
(1,270)
(1,310)
(1,177)
(1,201)
Transfers to MHFS/LHFS (1)
3,751
3,919
9,374
581
9,955
(4,869)
(4,984)
(4,989)
(470)
(5,459)
(73)
(9,776)
(9,849)
(213)
(1) The “Purchases” and “Transfers to MHFS/LHFS" categories exclude activity in government insured/guaranteed real estate 1-4 family first mortgage loans. As servicer, we are able to buy delinquent insured/guaranteed loans out of the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) pools. These loans have different risk characteristics from the rest of our consumer portfolio, whereby this activity does not impact the allowance for loan losses in the same manner because the loans are predominantly insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). On a net basis, such purchases net of transfers to MHFS were $807 million and $2.4 billion for the third quarter 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $1.0 billion and $5.2 billion for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Note 5: Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses (continued)
Commitments to Lend
A commitment to lend is a legally binding agreement to lend funds to a customer, usually at a stated interest rate, if funded, and for specific purposes and time periods. We generally require a fee to extend such commitments. Certain commitments are subject to loan agreements with covenants regarding the financial performance of the customer or borrowing base formulas on an ongoing basis that must be met before we are required to fund the commitment. We may reduce or cancel consumer commitments, including home equity lines and credit card lines, in accordance with the contracts and applicable law.
We may, as a representative for other lenders, advance funds or provide for the issuance of letters of credit under syndicated loan or letter of credit agreements. Any advances are generally repaid in less than a week and would normally require default of both the customer and another lender to expose us to loss. These temporary advance arrangements totaled approximately $91 billion at September 30, 2014 and $87 billion atDecember 31, 2013.
We issue commercial letters of credit to assist customers in purchasing goods or services, typically for international trade. At September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, we had $1.4 billion and $1.2 billion, respectively, of outstanding issued commercial letters of credit. We also originate multipurpose lending commitments under which borrowers have the option to draw on the facility for different purposes in one of several forms, including a standby letter of credit. See Note 10 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral) for additional information on standby letters of credit.
When we make commitments, we are exposed to credit risk. The maximum credit risk for these commitments will generally be lower than the contractual amount because a significant portion of these commitments are expected to expire without being used by the customer. In addition, we manage the potential risk in commitments to lend by limiting the total amount of commitments, both by individual customer and in total, by monitoring the size and maturity structure of these commitments and by applying the same credit standardsfor these commitments as for all of our credit activities.
For loans and commitments to lend, we generally require collateral or a guarantee. We may require various types of collateral, including commercial and consumer real estate, autos, other short-term liquid assets such as accounts receivable or inventory and long-lived assets, such as equipment and other business assets. Collateral requirements for each loan or commitment may vary based on the loan product and our assessment of a customer’s credit risk according to the specific credit underwriting, including credit terms and structure.
The contractual amount of our unfunded credit commitments, including unissued standby and commercial letters of credit, is summarized by portfolio segment and class of financing receivable in the following table. The table excludes standby and commercial letters of credit issued under the terms of our commitments and temporary advance commitments on behalf of other lenders.
257,488
238,962
5,436
14,213
12,593
17,233
12,216
294,370
269,681
32,048
32,908
45,829
47,668
86,915
78,961
23,929
24,213
188,721
183,750
Total unfunded
483,091
453,431
Allowance for Credit Losses
The allowance for credit losses consists of the allowance for loan losses and the allowance for unfunded credit commitments.Changes in the allowance for credit losses were:
13,834
16,618
Interest income on certain impaired loans (1)
(163)
(209)
Loan charge-offs:
(154)
(151)
(451)
(516)
(47)
(177)
(208)
(533)
(740)
(583)
(1,170)
(201)
(345)
(670)
(1,287)
(236)
(239)
(769)
(771)
(515)
(443)
(160)
(508)
(558)
(956)
(1,231)
(3,045)
(4,229)
Total loan charge-offs
(1,133)
(1,439)
(3,578)
(4,969)
Loan recoveries:
287
587
204
267
847
Total loan recoveries
464
1,368
1,423
Net loan charge-offs (2)
(668)
(975)
(2,210)
(3,546)
Allowances related to business combinations/other
15,647
Allowance for unfunded credit commitments
488
Allowance for credit losses (3)
Net loan charge-offs (annualized) as a percentage of average total loans (2)
0.36
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans (3)
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans (3)
(1) Certain impaired loans with anallowance calculated by discounting expected cash flows using the loan’s effective interest rate over the remaining life of the loan recognize reductions in the allowance as interest income.
(2) For PCI loans, charge-offs are only recorded to the extent that losses exceed the purchase accounting estimates.
(3) The allowance for credit losses includes $11 million and $22 million at September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, related to PCI loans acquired from Wachovia. Loans acquired from Wachovia are included in total loans net of related purchase accounting net write-downs.
The following table summarizes the activity in the allowance for credit losses by our commercial and consumer portfolio segments.
6,400
7,434
5,896
10,722
377
Interest income on certain impaired loans
Loan charge-offs
Loan recoveries
Net loan charge-offs
(692)
Allowance related to business combinations/other
6,409
7,072
5,923
9,724
337
429
1,517
(2,198)
(3,393)
The following table disaggregates our allowance for credit losses and recorded investment in loans by impairment methodology.
Recorded investment in loans
Collectively evaluated (1)
5,621
3,828
9,449
390,457
398,157
788,614
Individually evaluated (2)
3,241
4,021
21,866
26,033
PCI (3)
1,859
24,236
4,921
5,011
9,932
369,405
398,084
767,489
1,156
3,853
5,009
5,334
22,736
28,070
2,504
24,223
26,727
(1) Represents loans collectively evaluated for impairment in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 450-20,Loss Contingencies(formerly FAS 5), and pursuant to amendments by ASU 2010-20 regarding allowance for non-impaired loans.
(2) Represents loans individually evaluated for impairment in accordance with ASC 310-10, Receivables (formerly FAS 114), and pursuant to amendments by ASU 2010-20 regarding allowance for impaired loans.
(3) Represents the allowance and related loan carrying value determined in accordance with ASC 310-30, Receivables – Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality (formerly SOP 03-3) and pursuant to amendments by ASU 2010-20 regarding allowance for PCI loans.
We monitor credit quality by evaluating various attributes and utilize such information in our evaluation of the appropriateness of the allowance for credit losses. The following sections provide the credit quality indicators we most closely monitor. The credit quality indicators are generally based on information as of our financial statement date, with the exception of updated Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO) scores and updated loan-to-value (LTV)/combined LTV (CLTV), which are obtained at least quarterly. Generally, these indicators are updated in the second month of each quarter, with updates no older than June 30, 2014. See the “Purchased Credit-Impaired Loans” section of this Note for credit quality information on our PCI portfolio.
Commercial Credit Quality Indicators In addition to monitoring commercial loan concentration risk, we manage a consistent process for assessing commercial loan credit quality. Generally, commercial loans are subject to individual risk assessment using our internal borrower and collateral quality ratings. Our ratings are aligned to Pass and Criticized categories. The Criticized category
includes Special Mention, Substandard, and Doubtful categories which are defined by bank regulatory agencies.
The following table provides a breakdown of outstanding commercial loans by risk category. Of the $9.1 billion in criticized commercial real estate (CRE) loans at September 30, 2014, $1.9 billion has been placed on nonaccrual status and written down to net realizable collateral value. CRE loans have a high level ofmonitoring in place to manage these assets and mitigate loss exposure.
Real
and
estate
Lease
construction
financing
By risk category:
Pass
196,918
98,129
16,687
11,200
45,096
368,030
Criticized
15,206
8,106
1,851
26,594
Total commercial loans (excluding PCI)
212,124
106,235
17,643
46,947
394,624
Total commercial PCI loans (carrying value)
246
973
237
Total commercial loans
178,673
94,992
14,594
11,577
44,094
343,930
14,923
10,972
1,720
2,737
30,809
193,596
105,964
46,831
374,739
1,136
The following table provides past due information for commercial loans, which we monitor as part of our credit risk management practices.
By delinquency status:
Current-29 DPD and still accruing
211,140
104,279
17,319
11,622
46,908
391,268
30-89 DPD and still accruing
366
283
90+ DPD and still accruing
Nonaccrual loans
192,509
103,139
15,698
11,972
46,784
370,102
338
538
Consumer Credit Quality Indicators We have various classes of consumer loans that present unique risks. Loan delinquency, FICO credit scores and LTV for loan types are common credit quality indicators that we monitor and utilize in our evaluation of the appropriateness of the allowance for credit losses for the consumer portfolio segment.
Many of our loss estimation techniques used for the allowance for credit losses rely on delinquency-based models; therefore, delinquency is an important indicator of credit quality and the establishment of our allowance for credit losses. The following table provides the outstanding balances of our consumer portfolio by delinquency status.
revolving
credit and
card
installment
Current-29 DPD
205,905
59,293
27,619
54,105
34,347
381,269
30-59 DPD
2,505
400
4,123
60-89 DPD
1,088
230
1,774
90-119 DPD
557
118
980
120-179 DPD
180+ DPD
4,431
463
4,908
Government insured/guaranteed loans (1)
Total consumer loans (excluding PCI)
420,023
Total consumer PCI loans (carrying value)
Total consumer loans
193,361
64,194
26,203
49,699
31,866
365,323
4,477
1,157
144
186
1,035
747
5,024
5,518
30,737
10,696
41,433
234,397
420,820
24,100
(1) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA and student loans whose repayments are predominantly guaranteed by agencies on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP). Loans insured/guaranteed by the FHA/VA and 90+ DPD totaled $16.0 billion at September 30, 2014, compared with $20.8 billion at December 31, 2013. On June 30, 2014, we transferred all government guaranteed student loans to loans held for sale. Student loans 90+ DPD totaled $900 million at December 31, 2013.
Of the $6.9 billion of consumer loans not government insured/guaranteed that are 90 days or more past due at September 30, 2014, $855 million was accruing, compared with $7.7 billion past due and $902 million accruing at December 31, 2013.
Real estate 1-4 family first mortgage loans 180 days or more past due totaled $4.4 billion, or 1.8% of total first mortgages (excluding PCI), at September 30, 2014, compared with $5.0 billion, or 2.1%, at December 31, 2013.
The following table provides a breakdown of our consumer portfolio by updated FICO. We obtain FICO scores at loan origination and the scores are updated at least quarterly. The majority of our portfolio is underwritten with a FICO score of 680 and above. FICO is not available for certain loan types and may not be obtained if we deem it unnecessary due to strong collateral and other borrower attributes, primarily securities-based margin loans of $5.5 billion at September 30, 2014, and $5.0 billion at December 31, 2013.
By updated FICO:
< 600
11,679
3,934
2,416
8,510
859
27,398
600-639
8,277
2,887
2,354
6,311
20,851
640-679
14,403
5,494
4,442
9,414
36,042
680-719
24,620
9,267
5,670
9,877
4,304
53,738
720-759
35,610
12,626
5,907
7,341
5,793
67,277
760-799
80,488
18,128
4,843
7,169
7,452
118,080
800+
37,143
7,631
2,398
6,108
5,794
59,074
No FICO available
2,893
1,693
6,109
FICO not required
5,512
14,128
5,047
2,404
8,400
30,935
9,030
3,247
2,175
5,925
1,015
21,392
14,917
5,984
4,176
8,827
2,156
36,060
24,336
10,042
5,398
8,992
52,682
32,991
13,575
5,530
6,546
5,263
63,905
72,062
19,238
4,535
6,828
108,976
33,311
7,705
2,408
5,397
5,127
53,948
2,885
953
244
1,992
6,482
5,007
(1) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA and student loans whose repayments are predominantly guaranteed by agencies on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education under FFELP. On June 30, 2014, we transferred all government guaranteed student loans to loans held for sale.
LTV refers to the ratio comparing the loan’s unpaid principal balance to the property’s collateral value. CLTV refers to the combination of first mortgage and junior lien mortgage (including unused line amounts for credit line products) ratios. LTVs and CLTVs are updated quarterly using a cascade approach which first uses values provided by automated valuation models (AVMs) for the property. If an AVM is not available, then the value is estimated using the original appraised value adjusted by the change in Home Price Index (HPI) for the property location. If an HPI is not available, the original appraised value is used. The HPI value is normally the only method considered for high value properties, generally with an original value of $1 million or more, as the AVM values have proven less accurate for these properties.
The following table shows the most updated LTV and CLTV distribution of the real estate 1-4 family first and junior lien mortgage loan portfolios. We consider the trends in residential real estate markets as we monitor credit risk and establish our allowance for credit losses. In the event of a default, any loss should be limited to the portion of the loan amount in excess of the net realizable value of the underlying real estate collateral value. Certain loans do not have an LTV or CLTV primarily due to industry data availability and portfolios acquired from or serviced by other institutions.
by LTV
by CLTV
By LTV/CLTV:
0-60%
94,798
15,792
110,590
74,046
13,636
87,682
60.01-80%
82,796
17,727
100,523
80,187
17,154
97,341
80.01-100%
26,187
14,286
40,473
30,843
16,272
47,115
100.01-120% (1)
6,614
7,530
10,678
9,992
20,670
> 120% (1)
3,314
4,500
7,814
6,306
7,369
13,675
No LTV/CLTV available
903
2,307
2,968
Government insured/guaranteed loans (2)
300,188
(1) Reflects total loan balances with LTV/CLTV amounts in excess of 100%. In the event of default, the loss content would generally be limited to only the amount in excess of 100% LTV/CLTV.
(2) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA.
Nonaccrual Loans The following table provides loans on nonaccrual status. PCI loans are excluded from this table because they continue to earn interest from accretable yield, independent of performance in accordance with their contractual terms.
Real estate 1-4 family first mortgage (2)
(excluding PCI)
(1) Includes LHFS of $1 million at both September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
(2) Includes MHFS of $182 million at September 30, 2014 and $227 million at December 31, 2013.
LOANS IN PROCESS OF FORECLOSURE Our recorded investment in consumer mortgage loans collateralized by residential real estate property that are in process of foreclosure was $12.6 billion and $17.3 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, which included $6.8 billion and $10.0 billion, respectively, of loans that are government insured/guaranteed. We commence the foreclosure process on consumer real estate loans when a borrower becomes 120 days delinquent in accordance with Consumer Finance Protection Bureau Guidelines. Foreclosure procedures and timelines vary depending on whether the property address resides in a judicial or non-judicial state. Judicial states require the foreclosure to be processed through the state’s courts while non-judicial states are processed without court intervention. Foreclosure timelines vary according to state law.
LOANS 90 Days OR MORE Past Due and StillAccruing Certain loans 90 days or more past due as to interest or principal are still accruing, because they are (1) well-secured and in the process of collection or (2) real estate 1‑4 family mortgage loans or consumer loans exempt under regulatory rules from being classified as nonaccrual until later delinquency, usually 120 days past due. PCI loans of $4.0 billion at September 30, 2014, and $4.5 billion at December 31, 2013, are not included in these past due and still accruing loans even though they are 90 days or more contractually past due. These PCI loans are considered to be accruing because they continue to earn interest from accretable yield, independent of performance in accordance with their contractual terms.
The following table shows non-PCI loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing by class for loans not government insured/guaranteed.
Total (excluding PCI):
Less: FHA insured/guaranteed by the VA (1)(2)
Less: Student loans guaranteed
under the FFELP (3)
Total, not government
insured/guaranteed
By segment and class, not government
insured/guaranteed:
Real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgage (2)
(1) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA.
(2) Includes mortgage loans held for sale 90 days or more past due and still accruing.
(3) Represents loans whose repayments are predominantly guaranteed by agencies on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education under the FFELP. At the end of second quarter 2014, all government guaranteed student loans were transferred to loans held for sale.
Impaired Loans The table below summarizes key information for impaired loans. Our impaired loans predominantly include loans on nonaccrual status in the commercial portfolio segment and loans modified in a TDR, whether on accrual or nonaccrual status. These impaired loans generally have estimated losses which are included in the allowance for credit losses. We have impaired loans with no allowance for credit losses when loss content has been previously recognized through charge-offs and we do not anticipate additional charge-offs or losses, or certain loans are currently performing in accordance with their terms and for which no loss has been estimated. Impaired loans exclude PCI loans. The table below includes trial modifications that totaled $473 million at September 30, 2014, and $650 million at December 31, 2013.
For additional information on our impaired loans and allowance for credit losses, see Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Recorded investment
Impaired loans
Unpaid
with related
Related
Impaired
allowance for
credit losses
1,624
994
776
3,518
2,745
2,673
460
363
5,834
3,855
21,584
18,762
13,094
2,453
3,116
2,564
2,023
680
136
Total consumer (2)
25,310
15,574
Total impaired loans (excluding PCI)
31,144
19,430
2,016
1,274
4,269
3,375
3,264
819
615
7,346
4,947
22,450
19,500
13,896
3,026
3,130
2,582
2,092
681
245
26,300
16,541
33,646
21,488
(1) Excludes the unpaid principal balance for loans that have been fully charged off or otherwise have zero recorded investment.
(2) At September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, includes the recorded investment of $2.1 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively, of government insured/guaranteed loans that are predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA and generally do not have an allowance.
99
Commitments to lend additional funds on loans whose terms have been modified in a TDR amounted to $360 million and $407 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
The following tables provide the average recorded investment in impaired loans and the amount of interest income recognized on impaired loans by portfolio segment and class.
Recognized
recorded
interest
1,051
1,362
1,123
2,856
3,868
3,043
4,093
878
1,070
4,371
6,160
4,714
190
6,809
19,104
19,593
270
18,954
19,359
785
2,555
2,499
2,552
2,492
467
228
22,211
284
22,819
22,097
867
22,633
Total impaired loans
26,582
356
28,979
401
29,442
Interest income:
Cash basis of accounting
(1) Includes interest recognized on accruing TDRs, interest recognized related to certain impaired loans which have an allowance calculated using discounting, and amortization of purchase accounting adjustments related to certain impaired loans.
TROUBLED DEBT RESTRUCTURINGs (TDRs) When, for economic or legal reasons related to a borrower’s financial difficulties, we grant a concession for other than an insignificant period of time to a borrower that we would not otherwise consider, the related loan is classified as a TDR. We do not consider any loans modified through a loan resolution such as foreclosure or short sale to be a TDR.
We may require some consumer borrowers experiencing financial difficulty to make trial payments generally for a period of three to four months, according to the terms of a planned permanent modification, to determine if they can perform according to those terms. These arrangements represent trial modifications, which we classify and account for as TDRs. While loans are in trial payment programs, their original terms are not considered modified and they continue to advance through delinquency status and accrue interest according to their original terms. The planned modifications for these arrangements predominantly involve interest rate reductions or other interest rate concessions; however, the exact concession type and resulting financial effect are usually not finalized and do not take effect until the loan is permanently modified. The trial period terms are developed in accordance with our proprietary programs or the U.S. Treasury’s Making Home Affordable programs for real estate 1-4 family first lien (i.e. Home Affordable Modification Program – HAMP) and junior lien (i.e. Second Lien Modification Program – 2MP) mortgage loans.
At September 30, 2014, the loans in trial modification period were $149 million under HAMP, $35million under 2MP and $289 million under proprietary programs, compared with $253 million, $45 million and $352 million at December 31, 2013, respectively. Trial modifications with a recorded investment of $178 million at September 30, 2014, and $286 million at December 31, 2013, were accruing loans and $295 million and $364 million, respectively, were nonaccruing loans. Our experience is that substantially all of the mortgages that enter a trial payment period program are successful in completing the program requirements and are then permanently modified at the end of the trial period. Our allowance process considers the impact of those modifications that are probable to occur.
The following table summarizes our TDR modifications for the periods presented by primary modification type and includes the financial effects of these modifications. For those loans that modify more than once, the table reflects each modification that occurred during the period.
Primary modification type (1)
Financial effects of modifications
Weighted
Recorded
average
related to
rate
Charge-
interest rate
Principal (2)
reduction
concessions (3)
offs (4)
reduction (5)
185
234
387
452
1.25
3.23
11.59
8.46
5.22
Trial modifications (6)
293
248
1,187
1,566
3.30
Quarter ended September 30, 2013
345
1.65
142
715
2.60
271
259
832
2.80
10.15
8.98
5.40
1,620
298
1,689
2,479
741
Nine months ended September 30, 2014
687
898
193
1,837
1.33
306
2,060
2,830
649
11.33
8.87
(87)
508
524
2,247
3,279
3.82
519
3,880
1,096
Nine months ended September 30, 2013
5.09
1,113
1,373
262
2,243
2,686
2.99
1,016
2,928
4,841
2.63
335
546
138
7.39
4.95
1,307
3,437
5,720
2,033
1,021
1,705
5,680
8,406
3.22
2,431
Amounts represent the recorded investment in loans after recognizing the effects of the TDR, if any. TDRs may have multiple types of concessions, but are presented only once in the first modification type based on the order presented in the table above. The reported amounts include loans remodified of $464 million and $807 million, for quarters ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, and $1.6 billion and $2.4 billion for the nine months ended 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Principal modifications include principal forgiveness at the time of the modification, contingent principal forgiveness granted over the life of the loan based on borrower performance, and principal that has been legally separated and deferred to the end of the loan, with a zero percent contractual interest rate.
Other concessions include loan renewals, term extensions and other interest and noninterest adjustments, but exclude modifications that also forgive principal and/or reduce the contractual interest rate.
Charge-offs include write-downs of the investment in the loan in the period it is contractually modified. The amount of charge-off will differ from the modification terms if the loan has been charged down prior to the modification based on our policies. In addition, there may be cases where we have a charge-off/down with no legal principal modification. Modifications resulted in legally forgiving principal (actual, contingent or deferred) of $34 million and $87 million for the quarters ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, and $126 million and $316 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Reflects the effect of reduced interest rates on loans with principal or interest rate reduction primary modification type.
Trial modifications are granted a delay in payments due under the original terms during the trial payment period. However, these loans continue to advance through delinquency status and accrue interest according to their original terms. Any subsequent permanent modification generally includes interest rate related concessions; however, the exact concession type and resulting financial effect are usually not known until the loan is permanently modified. Trial modifications for the period are presented net of previously reported trial modifications that became permanent in the current period.
The table below summarizes permanent modification TDRs that have defaulted in the current period within 12 months of their permanent modification date. We are reporting these defaulted TDRs based on a payment default definition of 90 days past due for the commercial portfolio segment and 60 days past due for the consumer portfolio segment.
Recorded investment of defaults
447
319
614
483
Purchased Credit-Impaired Loans
Substantially all of our PCI loans were acquired from Wachovia on December 31, 2008. The following table presents PCI loans net of any remaining purchase accounting adjustments. Real estate 1-4 family first mortgage PCI loans are predominantly Pick-a-Pay loans.
4,580
5,803
6,462
39,214
40,093
Total PCI loans (carrying value)
58,797
Total PCI loans (unpaid principal balance)
34,320
38,229
98,182
Accretable Yield The excess of cash flows expected to be collected over the carrying value of PCI loans is referred to as the accretable yield and is recognized in interest income using an effective yield method over the remaining life of the loan, or pools of loans. The accretable yield is affected by:
· changes in interest rate indices for variable rate PCI loans – expected future cash flows are based on the variable rates in effect at the time of the regular evaluations of cash flows expected to be collected;
· changes in prepayment assumptions – prepayments affect the estimated life of PCI loans which may change the amount of interest income, and possibly principal, expected to be collected; and
· changes in the expected principal and interest payments over the estimated life – updates to expected cash flows are driven by the credit outlook and actions taken with borrowers. Changes in expected future cash flows from loan modifications are included in the regular evaluations of cash flows expected to be collected.
The change in the accretable yield related to PCI loans is presented in the following table.
10,447
Addition of accretable yield due to acquisitions
Accretion into interest income (1)
(11,184)
Accretion into noninterest income due to sales (2)
Reclassification from nonaccretable difference for loans with improving credit-related cash flows
6,325
Changes in expected cash flows that do not affect nonaccretable difference (3)
12,065
17,392
(1,183)
(35)
2,089
(284)
17,979
18,418
(446)
Includes accretable yield released as a result of settlements with borrowers, which is included in interest income.
Includes accretable yield released as a result of sales to third parties, which is included in noninterest income.
Represents changes in cash flows expected to be collected due to the impact of modifications, changes in prepayment assumptions, changes in interest rates on variable rate PCI loans and sales to third parties.
PCI Allowance Based on our regular evaluation of estimates of cash flows expected to be collected, we may establish an allowance for a PCI loan or pool of loans, with a charge to income though the provision for losses. The following table summarizes the changes in allowance for PCI loan losses.
Provision for loan losses
1,641
(1,615)
(103)
(1,718)
Provision (reversal of provision) for loan losses
Reversal of provision for loan losses
Recoveries (charge-offs)
Commercial PCI Credit Quality Indicators The following
table provides a breakdown of commercial PCI loans by risk category.
659
1,339
Total commercial PCI loans
The following table provides past due information for commercial PCI loans.
914
210
1,052
355
632
2,249
Consumer PCI Credit Quality Indicators Our consumer PCI loans were aggregated into several pools of loans at acquisition. Below, we have provided credit quality indicators based on the unpaid principal balance (adjusted for write-downs) of the individual loans included in the pool, but we have not allocated the remaining purchase accounting adjustments, which were established at a pool level. The following table provides the delinquency status of consumer PCI loans.
19,592
19,762
20,712
20,883
30-59 DPD and still accruing
2,041
2,048
2,185
2,193
60-89 DPD and still accruing
1,079
1,082
1,164
90-119 DPD and still accruing
446
120-179 DPD and still accruing
517
180+ DPD and still accruing
3,887
4,291
4,386
Total consumer PCI loans (adjusted unpaid principal balance)
27,403
27,673
29,326
29,610
The following table provides FICO scores for consumer PCI loans.
By FICO:
8,107
8,186
9,933
10,034
5,602
5,655
6,029
6,089
6,839
6,908
6,789
6,859
3,940
3,978
3,732
3,767
1,731
1,662
889
895
865
870
The following table shows the distribution of consumer PCI loans by LTV for real estate 1-4 family first mortgages and by CLTV for real estate 1-4 family junior lien mortgages.
2,501
2,533
11,277
11,345
8,541
8,583
8,070
8,162
10,366
10,454
2,691
2,738
4,677
4,744
1,262
3,232
3,286
Note 6: Other Assets
The components of other assets were:
Private equity
Equity method:
Total equity method
equity investments
Corporate/bank-owned life insurance
18,899
18,738
Accounts receivable
26,388
21,422
Interest receivable
5,236
Core deposit intangibles
Customer relationship and
other amortized intangibles
892
1,084
Residential real estate:
Government insured/guaranteed (3)
673
814
Non-residential real estate
1,018
Operating lease assets
2,503
2,047
Due from customers on acceptances
279
Other (4)
11,483
8,787
Total other assets
Represents nonmarketable equity investments for which we have elected the fair value option. See Note 13 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) for additional information.
These are foreclosed real estate resulting from government insured/guaranteed loans. Both principal and interest related to these foreclosed real estate assets are collectible because the loans were predominantly insured by the FHA or guaranteed by the VA.
Includes derivatives designated as hedging instruments, free-standing derivatives (economic hedges), and derivative loan commitments, which are carried at fair value. See Note 12 (Derivatives) for additional information.
Income (expense) related to nonmarketable equity investments was:
Net realized gains
from nonmarketable
(592)
(147)
326
Note 7: Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities
Involvement with SPEs
In the normal course of business, we enter into various types of on- and off-balance sheet transactions with special purpose entities (SPEs), which are corporations, trusts or partnerships that are established for a limited purpose. Generally, SPEs are formed in connection with securitization transactions and are considered variable interest entities (VIEs). For further description of our involvement with SPEs, see Note 8 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
We have segregated our involvement with VIEs between those VIEs which we consolidate, those which we do not consolidate and those for which we account for the transfers of financial assets as secured borrowings. Secured borrowings are transactions involving transfers of our financial assets to third parties that are accounted for as financings with the assets pledged as collateral. Accordingly, the transferred assets remain recognized on our balance sheet. Subsequent tables within this Note further segregate these transactions by structure type.
The classifications of assets and liabilities in our balance sheet associated with our transactions with VIEs follow:
Transfers that
VIEs that we
VIEs
we account
do not
that we
for as secured
consolidate
Cash
1,310
1,537
Investment securities (1)
17,493
989
6,316
24,798
6,938
5,287
5,478
17,703
Mortgage servicing rights
13,347
6,799
45,522
6,706
12,075
64,303
4,168
Accrued expenses and other liabilities
2,836
2,012
5,192
Total liabilities
2,067
9,362
14,265
Net assets
42,686
4,638
2,713
50,037
1,561
18,795
8,976
29,123
7,652
6,058
6,021
19,731
14,859
6,151
110
6,608
48,663
8,122
15,307
72,092
7,871
7,900
3,464
3,566
2,356
5,673
8,029
2,484
13,547
19,495
45,199
5,633
1,760
52,592
(1) Excludes certain debt securities related to loans serviced for the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC) and GNMA.
(2) Includes the following VIE liabilities at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, with recourse to the general credit of Wells Fargo: Accrued expenses and other liabilities, $9 million at each date; and Long-term debt, $9 million and $29 million.
Transactions with Unconsolidated VIEs
Our transactions with VIEs include securitizations of residential mortgage loans, CRE loans, student loans, auto loans and leases and dealer floorplan loans; investment and financing activities involving collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) backed by asset-backed and CRE securities, collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) backed by corporate loans, and other types of structured financing. We have various forms of involvement with VIEs, including holding senior or subordinated interests, entering into liquidity arrangements, credit default swaps and other derivative contracts. Involvements with these
unconsolidated VIEs are recorded on our balance sheet primarily in trading assets, investment securities, loans, MSRs, other assets and other liabilities, as appropriate.
The following tables provide a summary of unconsolidated VIEs with which we have significant continuing involvement, but we are not the primary beneficiary. We do not consider our continuing involvement in an unconsolidated VIE to be significant when it relates to third-party sponsored VIEs for which we were not the transferor (unless we are servicer and have other significant forms of involvement) or if we were the sponsor but do not have any other significant continuing involvement.
Significant continuing involvement includes transactions where we were the sponsor or transferor and have other significant forms of involvement. Sponsorship includes transactions with unconsolidated VIEs where we solely or materially participated in the initial design or structuring of the entity or marketing of the transaction to investors. When we transfer assets to a VIE and account for the transfer as a sale, we are considered the transferor. We consider investments in securities (other than those held temporarily in trading), loans, guarantees, liquidity agreements, written options and servicing of collateral to be other forms of involvement that may be significant. We have excluded certain transactions with unconsolidated VIEs from the balances presented in the following table where we have determined that our continuing involvement is not significant due to the temporary nature and size of our variable interests, because we were not the transferor or because we were not involved in the design of the unconsolidated VIEs.
Carrying value - asset (liability)
Debt and
commitments
VIE
Servicing
interests (1)
guarantees
Residential mortgage loan
securitizations:
Conforming (2)
1,286,731
2,841
12,890
(620)
15,111
Other/nonconforming
33,222
1,727
1,939
Commercial mortgage securitizations
162,431
8,565
Collateralized debt obligations:
4,828
Loans (3)
5,590
5,465
Asset-based finance structures
7,894
5,365
5,302
Tax credit structures
20,543
(1,995)
4,778
Collateralized loan obligations
1,746
Investment funds
3,040
11,962
763
1,537,987
31,777
(2,742)
Maximum exposure to loss
exposure
Conforming
2,610
18,341
2,295
8,589
294
1,007
6,435
503
7,276
4,792
50,502
(continued on following page)
Note 7: Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities (continued)
(continued from previous page)
Residential mortgage loan securitizations:
1,314,285
2,721
14,253
(745)
16,229
38,330
1,739
1,971
170,088
7,627
325
8,161
6,730
(130)
5,888
11,415
6,857
23,112
6,455
(2,213)
4,242
4,382
10,343
(189)
699
1,588,170
33,299
344
(3,303)
2,287
19,261
8,274
381
1,665
8,606
626
7,081
188
1,249
798
5,432
54,388
(1) Includes total equity interests of $7.1 billion and $6.9 billion at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively.Also includes debt interests in the form of both loans and securities. Excludes certain debt securities held related to loans serviced for FNMA, FHLMC and GNMA.
(2) Excludes assets and related liabilities with a recorded carrying value on our balance sheet of $1.7 billion and $2.1 billion at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, for certain delinquent loans that are eligible for repurchase primarily from GNMA loan securitizations. The recorded carrying value represents the amount that would be payable if the Company was to exercise the repurchase option. The carrying amounts are excluded from the table because the loans eligible for repurchase do not represent interests in the VIEs.
(3) Represents senior loans to trusts that are collateralized by asset-backed securities. The trusts invest primarily in senior tranches from a diversified pool of primarily U.S. asset securitizations, of which all are current and 71% and 72% were rated as investment grade by the primary rating agencies at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively. These senior loans are accounted for at amortized cost and are subject to the Company’s allowance and credit charge-off policies.
(4) Includes structured financing and credit-linked note structures. Also contains investments in auction rate securities (ARS) issued by VIEs that we do not sponsor and, accordingly, are unable to obtain the total assets of the entity.
In the two preceding tables, “Total VIE assets” represents the remaining principal balance of assets held by unconsolidated VIEs using the most current information available. For VIEs that obtain exposure to assets synthetically through derivative instruments, the remaining notional amount of the derivative is included in the asset balance. “Carrying value” is the amount in our consolidated balance sheet related to our involvement with the unconsolidated VIEs. “Maximum exposure to loss” from our involvement with off-balance sheet entities, which is a required disclosure under GAAP, is determined as the carrying value of our involvement with off-balance sheet (unconsolidated) VIEs plus the remaining undrawn liquidity and lending commitments, the notional amount of net written derivative contracts, and generally the notional amount of, or stressed loss estimate for, other commitments and guarantees. It represents estimated loss that would be incurred under severe, hypothetical circumstances, for which we believe the possibility is extremely remote, such as where the value of our interests and any associated collateral declines to zero, without any consideration of recovery or offset from any economic hedges. Accordingly, this required disclosure is not an indication of expected loss.
For complete descriptions of our types of transactions with unconsolidated VIEs with which we have a significant continuing involvement, but we are not the primary beneficiary, see Note 8 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
OTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH VIEs Auction rate securities (ARS) are debt instruments with long-term maturities, which re-price more frequently, and preferred equities with no maturity. At September 30, 2014, we held in our available-for-sale securities portfolio $573 million of ARS issued by VIEs compared with $653 million at December 31, 2013. We acquired the ARS pursuant to agreements entered into in 2008 and 2009.
We do not consolidate the VIEs that issued the ARS because we do not have power over the activities of the VIEs.
TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES VIEs that we wholly own issue debt securities or preferred equity to third party investors. All of the proceeds of the issuance are invested in debt securities or preferred equity that we issue to the VIEs. The VIEs’ operations and cash flows relate only to the issuance, administration and repayment of the securities held by third parties. We do not consolidate these VIEs because the sole assets of the VIEs are receivables from us, even though we own all of the voting equity shares of the VIEs, have fully guaranteed the obligations of the VIEs and may have the right to redeem the third party securities under certain circumstances. In our consolidated balance sheet at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, we reported the debt securities issued to the VIEs as long-term junior subordinated debt with a carrying value of $2.0 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively, and the preferred equity securities issued to the VIEs as preferred stock with a carrying value of $2.5 billion at both dates. These amounts are in addition to the involvements in these VIEs included in the preceding table.
Securitization Activity Related to Unconsolidated VIEs
We use VIEs to securitize consumer and CRE loans and other types of financial assets. We typically retain the servicing rights from these sales and may continue to hold other beneficial interests in the VIEs. We may also provide liquidity to investors in the beneficial interests and credit enhancements in the form of standby letters of credit. Through these securitizations we may be exposed to liability under limited amounts of recourse as well as standard representations and warranties we make to purchasers and issuers. The following table presents the cash flows with our securitization trusts that were involved in transfers accounted for as sales.
Mortgage
financial
Sales proceeds from securitizations
45,466
86,423
Fees from servicing rights retained
Cash flows from other interests held (1)
470
1,014
Purchases of delinquent assets
Servicing advances, net of repayments
122,910
308,016
2,987
3,178
1,861
(156)
Cash flows from other interests held include principal and interest payments received on retained bonds and excess cash flows received on interest-only strips.
In the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, we recognized net gains of $55 million and $152 million, respectively, from transfers accounted for as sales of financial assets in securitizations, compared with $28 million and $138 million, respectively, in the same periods of 2013. These net gains primarily relate to commercial mortgage securitizations and residential mortgage securitizations where the loans were not already carried at fair value.
Sales with continuing involvement during the thirdquarter and first nine months of 2014 and 2013 predominantly related to securitizations of residential mortgages that are sold to the government-sponsored entities (GSEs), including FNMA, FHLMC and GNMA (conforming residential mortgage securitizations). During the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, we transferred $40.9 billion and $111.4 billion respectively, in fair value of conforming residential mortgages to unconsolidated VIEs and recorded the transfers as sales, compared with $84.4 billion and $296.3 billion, respectively in the same periods of 2013. Substantially all of these transfers did not result in a gain or loss because the loans were already carried at fair value. In connection with all of these transfers, in the first nine months of 2014 we recorded a $900 million servicing asset, measured at fair value using a Level 3 measurement technique, and a $34 million liability for repurchase losses which reflects management’s estimate of probable losses related to various representations and warranties for the loans transferred, initially measured at fair value. In the first nine months of 2013, we recorded a$2.9 billion servicing asset and a $127 million liability.
We used the following key weighted-average assumptions to measure residential mortgage servicing rights at the date of securitization:
Residential mortgage
servicing rights
Prepayment speed (1)
12.1
9.6
Discount rate
7.7
7.5
Cost to service ($ per loan) (2)
11.2
7.6
7.2
268
(1) The prepayment speed assumption for residential mortgage servicing rights includes a blend of prepayment speeds and default rates. Prepayment speed assumptions are influenced by mortgage interest rate inputs as well as our estimation of drivers of borrower behavior.
(2) Includes costs to service and unreimbursed foreclosure costs, which can vary period to period depending on the mix of modified government-guaranteed loans sold to GNMA.
During the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, we transferred $2.2 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively, in fair value of commercial mortgages to unconsolidated VIEs and recorded the transfers as sales, compared with $1.1 billion and $4.3 billion in the same periods of 2013, respectively. These transfers resulted in gains of $30 million and $71 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, because the loans were carried at lower of cost or market value (LOCOM), compared with gains of $29 million and $129 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2013. In connection with these transfers, inthe first nine months of 2014 we recorded a servicing asset of $12 million, initially measured at fair value using a Level 3 measurement technique, and securities available-for-sale of $100 million, classified as Level 2. In the first nine months of 2013, we recorded a servicing asset of $14 million, using a Level 3 measurement technique, and available-for-sale securities of $54 million, classified as Level 2.
The following table provides key economic assumptions and the sensitivity of the current fair value of residential mortgage servicing rights and other retained interests to immediate adverse changes in those assumptions. “Other interests held” relate predominantly to residential and commercial mortgage loan securitizations. Residential mortgage-backed securities retained in securitizations issued through GSEs, such as FNMA, FHLMC and GNMA, are excluded from the table because these securities have a remote risk of credit loss due to the GSE guarantee. These securities also have economic characteristics similar to GSE mortgage-backed securities that we purchase, which are not included in the table. Subordinated interests include only those bonds whose credit rating was below AAA by a major rating agency at issuance. Senior interests include only those bonds whose credit rating was AAA by a major rating agency at issuance. The information presented excludes trading positions held in inventory.
Other interests held
Interest-
Commercial (2)
servicing
only
Subordinated
Senior
($ in millions, except cost to service amounts)
rights (1)
strips
bonds
Fair value of interests held at September 30, 2014
553
Expected weighted-average life (in years)
6.0
3.9
5.5
6.3
Key economic assumptions:
Prepayment speed assumption (3)
11.5
11.3
7.1
Decrease in fair value from:
10% adverse change
25% adverse change
Discount rate assumption
7.8
18.7
4.0
4.8
3.1
100 basis point increase
200 basis point increase
1,351
Cost to service assumption ($ per loan)
620
1,551
Credit loss assumption
0.4
4.3
10% higher losses
25% higher losses
Fair value of interests held at December 31, 2013
6.4
3.8
5.9
3.6
10.7
6.7
864
2,065
18.3
4.4
4.5
840
636
1,591
14.2
(1) See narrative following this table for a discussion of commercial mortgage servicing rights.
(2) Prepayment speed assumptions do not significantly impact the value of commercial mortgage securitization bonds as the underlying commercial mortgage loans experience significantly lower prepayments due to certain contractual restrictions, impacting the borrower’s ability to prepay the mortgage.
(3) The prepayment speed assumption for residential mortgage servicing rights includes a blend of prepayment speeds and default rates. Prepayment speed assumptions are influenced by mortgage interest rate inputs as well as our estimation of drivers of borrower behavior.
In addition to residential mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) included in the previous table, we have a small portfolio of commercial MSRs with a fair value of $1.6 billion at both September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013. The nature of our commercial MSRs, which are carried at LOCOM, is different from our residential MSRs. Prepayment activity on serviced loans does not significantly impact the value of commercial MSRs because, unlike residential mortgages, commercial mortgages experience significantly lower prepayments due to certain contractual restrictions, impacting the borrower’s ability to prepay the mortgage. Additionally, for our commercial MSR portfolio, we are typically master/primary servicer, but not the special servicer, who is separately responsible for the servicing and workout of delinquent and foreclosed loans. It is the special servicer, similar to our role as servicer of residential mortgage loans, who is affected by higher servicing and foreclosure costs due to an increase in delinquent and foreclosed loans. Accordingly, prepayment speeds and costs to service are not key assumptions for commercial MSRs as they do not significantly impact the valuation. The primary economic driver impacting the fair value of our commercial MSRs is forward interest rates, which are derived from market observable yield curves used to price capital markets instruments. Market interest rates most significantly affect interest earned on custodial deposit balances. The sensitivity of the current fair value to an immediate adverse 25% change in the assumption about interest earned on deposit balances at September 30, 2014, and December 31,2013, results in a decrease in fair value of $194 million and $175 million, respectively. See Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities) for further information on our commercial MSRs.
The sensitivities in the preceding paragraph and table are hypothetical and caution should be exercised when relying on this data. Changes in value based on variations in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in the assumption to the change in value may not be linear. Also, the effect of a variation in a particular assumption on the value of the other interests held is calculated independently without changing any other assumptions. In reality, changes in one factor may result in changes in others (for example, changes in prepayment speed estimates could result in changes in the credit losses), which might magnify or counteract the sensitivities.
The following table presents information about the principal balances of off-balance sheet securitized loans, including residential mortgages sold to FNMA, FHLMC, GNMA and securitizations where servicing is our only form of continuing involvement. Delinquent loans include loans 90 days or more past due and loans in bankruptcy, regardless of delinquency status. In securitizations where servicing is our only form of continuing involvement, we would only experience a loss if required to repurchase a delinquent loan due to a breach in representations and warranties associated with our loan sale or servicing contracts.
Net charge-offs
Delinquent loans
117,065
119,346
7,780
8,808
582
1,276,366
1,313,298
16,438
17,009
654
1,647
1,790
1,278,014
1,315,089
16,516
17,108
Total off-balance sheet securitized loans (1)
1,395,079
1,434,435
24,296
25,916
932
1,119
(1) At September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, the table includes total loans of $1.3 trillion at both dates and delinquent loans of $13.8 billion and $14.0 billion, respectively for FNMA, FHLMC and GNMA. Net charge-offs exclude loans sold to FNMA, FHLMC and GNMA as we do not service or manage the underlying real estate upon foreclosure and, as such, do not have access to net charge-off information.
Transactions with Consolidated VIEs and Secured Borrowings
The following table presents a summary of transfers of financial assets accounted for as secured borrowings and involvements with consolidated VIEs. “Consolidated assets” are presented using GAAP measurement methods, which may include fair value, credit impairment or other adjustments, and therefore in some instances will differ from “Total VIE assets.” For VIEs that obtain exposure synthetically through derivative instruments, the remaining notional amount of the derivative is included in “Total VIE assets.” On the consolidated balance sheet, we separately disclose the consolidated assets of certain VIEs that can only be used to settle the liabilities of those VIEs.
Carrying value
Third
party
liabilities
Secured borrowings:
Municipal tender option bond securitizations
7,616
6,580
(4,170)
2,410
Commercial real estate loans
(117)
Residential mortgage securitizations
4,940
5,190
(5,076)
Total secured borrowings
12,861
(9,363)
2,712
Consolidated VIEs:
Nonconforming residential
mortgage loan securitizations
5,913
5,276
(1,886)
3,390
Structured asset finance
988
986
(159)
Total consolidated VIEs
7,354
(2,067)
Total secured borrowings and consolidated VIEs
20,215
18,781
(11,430)
7,350
11,626
9,210
(7,874)
486
(277)
5,337
5,611
(5,396)
17,449
(13,547)
6,770
6,018
(2,214)
3,804
1,536
(182)
8,944
(2,484)
26,393
23,429
(16,031)
7,393
In addition to the transactions included in the previous table, at both September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, we had approximately $6.0 billion of private placement debt financing issued through a consolidated VIE. The issuance is classified as long-term debt in our consolidated financial statements. At September 30, 2014, we pledged approximately $6.5 billion in loans (principal and interest eligible to be capitalized), $275 million in available-for-sale securities and no cash and cash equivalents to collateralize the VIE’s borrowings, compared with $6.6 billion, $160 million and $180 million, respectively, at December 31, 2013. These assets were not transferred to the VIE, and accordingly we have excluded the VIE from the previous table.
For complete descriptions of our accounting for transfers accounted for as secured borrowings and involvements with consolidated VIEs see Note 8 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Note 8: Mortgage Banking Activities
Mortgage banking activities, included in the Community Banking and Wholesale Banking operating segments, consist of residential and commercial mortgage originations, sale activity and servicing.
We apply the amortization method to commercial MSRs and apply the fair value method to residential MSRs. The changes in MSRs measured using the fair value method were:
Fair value, beginning of period
13,900
14,185
11,538
Servicing from securitizations or asset transfers
340
2,949
Net additions
2,366
Changes in fair value:
Due to changes in valuation model inputs or assumptions:
Mortgage interest rates (1)
(1,134)
Servicing and foreclosure costs (2)
Discount rates (3)
Prepayment estimates and other (4)
(240)
(725)
Net changes in valuation model inputs or assumptions
(1,023)
Other changes in fair value (5)
(425)
(1,426)
(1,818)
Total changes in fair value
(638)
(2,449)
597
Fair value, end of period
14,501
(1) Includes prepayment speed changes as well as other valuation changes due to changes in mortgage interest rates (such as changes in estimated interest earned on custodial deposit balances).
(2) Includes costs to service and unreimbursed foreclosure costs.
(3) Reflects discount rate assumption change, excluding portion attributable to changes in mortgage interest rates.
(4) Represents changes driven by other valuation model inputs or assumptions including prepayment speed estimation changes and other assumption updates. Prepayment speed estimation changes are influenced by observed changes in borrower behavior that occur independent of interest rate changes.
(5) Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.
The changes in amortized MSRs were:
1,196
1,176
1,160
Amortization
(187)
Balance, end of period (1)
Fair value of amortized MSRs (2):
Beginning of period
1,577
1,533
1,575
1,400
End of period
(1) Commercial amortized MSRs are evaluated for impairment purposes by the following risk strata: agency (GSEs) and non-agency. There was no valuation allowance recorded for the periods presented on the commercial amortized MSRs.
(2) Represent commercial amortized MSRs.
We present the components of our managed servicing portfolio in the following table at unpaid principal balance for loans serviced and subserviced for others and at book value for owned loans serviced.
Residential mortgage servicing:
Serviced for others
1,430
1,485
Owned loans serviced
Subserviced for others
Total residential servicing
1,777
1,829
Commercial mortgage servicing:
440
Total commercial servicing
554
Total managed servicing portfolio
2,331
2,362
Total serviced for others
1,870
Ratio of MSRs to related loans serviced for others
0.88
The components of mortgage banking noninterest income were:
Servicing income, net:
Servicing fees:
Contractually specified servicing fees
1,058
1,108
3,217
3,335
Late charges
Ancillary fees
Unreimbursed direct servicing costs (1)
(262)
(289)
(494)
(774)
Net servicing fees
919
2,993
Changes in fair value of MSRs carried at fair value:
Due to changes in valuation model inputs or assumptions (2)
Other changes in fair value (3)
Total changes in fair value of MSRs carried at fair value
Net derivative gains (losses) from economic hedges (4)
(2,192)
Total servicing income, net
Total mortgage banking noninterest income
Market-related valuation changes to MSRs, net of hedge results (2) + (4)
1,152
(1) Primarily associated with foreclosure expenses and unreimbursed interest advances to investors.
(2) Refer to the changes in fair value of MSRs table in this Note for more detail.
(3) Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.
(4) Represents results from free-standing derivatives (economic hedges) used to hedge the risk of changes in fair value of MSRs. See Note 12 (Derivatives) – Free-Standing Derivatives for additional discussion and detail.
The table below summarizes the changes in our liability for mortgage loan repurchase losses. This liability is in “Accrued expenses and other liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheet and the provision for repurchase losses reduces net gains on mortgage loan origination/sales activities in “Mortgage banking” in our consolidated income statement.
Because of the uncertainty in the various estimates underlying the mortgage repurchase liability, there is a range of losses in excess of the recorded mortgage repurchase liability that is reasonably possible. The estimate of the range of possible loss for representations and warranties does not represent a probable loss, and is based on currently available information, significant judgment, and a number of assumptions that are subject to change. The high end of this range of reasonably possible losses in excess of our recorded liability was $984 million at September30, 2014, and was determined based upon modifying the assumptions (particularly to assume significant changes in investor repurchase demand practices) utilized in our best estimate of probable loss to reflect what we believe to be the high end of reasonably possible adverse assumptions.
Provision for
repurchase losses:
(1) Results from changes in investor demand, mortgage insurer practices, credit and the financial stability of correspondent lenders.
Note 9: Intangible Assets
The gross carrying value of intangible assets and accumulated amortization was:
Accumulated
amortization
Amortized intangible assets (1):
MSRs (2)
2,825
(1,601)
2,639
(1,410)
12,834
(8,995)
(8,160)
Customer relationship and other intangibles
(2,259)
3,145
(2,061)
Total amortized intangible assets
18,810
(12,855)
18,618
(11,631)
6,987
Unamortized intangible assets:
MSRs (carried at fair value) (2)
Trademark
(1) Excludes fully amortized intangible assets.
(2) See Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities) for additional information on MSRs.
The following table provides the current yearand estimated future amortization expense for amortized intangible assets. We based our projections of amortization expense shown below on existing asset balances at September 30, 2014. Future amortization expense may vary from these projections.
Customer
relationship
deposit
and other
MSRs
intangibles
Nine months ended September 30, 2014 (actual)
Estimate for the remainder of 2014
Estimate for year ended December 31,
1,479
1,323
851
1,197
769
1,074
2019
For our goodwill impairment analysis, we allocate all of the goodwill to the individual operating segments. We identify reporting units that are one level below an operating segment (referred to as a component), and distinguish these reporting units based on how the segments and components are managed, taking into consideration the economic characteristics, nature of the products and customers of the components. At the time we acquire a business, we allocate goodwill to applicable reporting units based on their relative fair value, and if we have a significant business reorganization, we may reallocate the goodwill. See Note 18 (Operating Segments) for further information on management reporting.
The following table shows the allocation of goodwill to our reportable operating segments for purposes of goodwill impairment testing.
Wealth,
Community
Wholesale
Brokerage and
Banking
Retirement
December 31, 2012 and September 30, 2013
17,922
7,344
Reduction in goodwill related to divested businesses
Goodwill from business combinations
17,914
7,420
Note 10: Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral
Guarantees are contracts that contingently require us to make payments to a guaranteed party based on an event or a change in an underlying asset, liability, rate or index. Guarantees are generally in the form of standby letters of credit, securities lending and other indemnifications, written put options, recourse obligations, and other types of arrangements. For complete descriptions of our guarantees, see Note 14 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K. The following table shows carrying value, maximum exposure to loss on our guarantees and the related non-investment grade amounts.
Expires after
Expires in
three years
Expires
after five
or less
grade
Standby letters of credit (1)
16,878
10,543
5,808
33,998
8,659
Securities lending and
other indemnifications (2)
5,949
5,988
Written put options (3)
6,962
5,046
3,029
2,991
18,028
6,351
Loans and MHFS sold with recourse (4)
837
5,182
6,661
3,753
Factoring guarantees (5)
2,207
Other guarantees
1,877
2,021
Total guarantees
26,190
16,222
9,723
16,768
68,903
21,068
16,907
11,628
5,308
34,837
9,512
3,199
3,220
907
4,775
2,967
3,521
2,725
13,988
4,311
849
5,014
6,397
3,674
2,915
Other guarantees (6)
971
24,747
15,127
9,712
12,903
62,489
20,550
(1) Total maximum exposure to loss includes direct pay letters of credit (DPLCs) of $15.9 billion and $16.8 billion atSeptember 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. We issue DPLCs to provide credit enhancements for certain bond issuances. Beneficiaries (bond trustees) may draw upon these instruments to make scheduled principal and interest payments, redeem all outstanding bonds because a default event has occurred, or for other reasons as permitted by the agreement. We also originate multipurpose lending commitments under which borrowers have the option to draw on the facility in one of several forms, including as a standby letter of credit. Total maximum exposure to loss includes the portion of these facilities for which we have issued standby letters of credit under the commitments.
(2) Includes $247 million and $337 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, in debt and equity securities lent from participating institutional client portfolios to third-party borrowers. Also includes indemnifications provided to certain third-party clearing agents. Outstanding customer obligations under these arrangements were $887 million and $769 million with related collateral of $5.8 billion and $3.7 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. Estimated maximum exposure to loss was $5.7 billion and $2.9 billion as of the same periods, respectively.
(3) Written put options, which are in the form of derivatives, are also included in the derivative disclosures in Note 12 (Derivatives).
(4) Represent recourse provided, predominantly to the GSEs, on loans sold under various programs and arrangements. Under these arrangements, we repurchased $5 million and $10 million respectively, of loans associated with these agreements in the third quarter and first nine months of 2014, and $8 million and $26 million in the same periods of 2013, respectively.
(5) Consists of guarantees made under certain factoring arrangements to purchase trade receivables from third parties, generally upon their request, if receivable debtors default on their payment obligations. See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) for additional information.
(6) Includes amounts for liquidity agreements and contingent consideration that were previously reported separately.
“Maximum exposure to loss” and “Non-investment grade” are required disclosures under GAAP. Non-investment grade represents those guarantees on which we have a higher risk of being required to perform under the terms of the guarantee. If the underlying assets under the guarantee are non-investment grade (that is, an external rating that is below investment grade or an internal credit default grade that is equivalent to a below investment grade external rating), we consider the risk of performance to be high. Internal credit default grades are determined based upon the same credit policies that we use to evaluate the risk of payment or performance when making loans and other extensions of credit. These credit policies are further described in Note 5 (Loans and Allowance for Credit Losses).
Maximum exposure to loss represents the estimated loss that would be incurred under an assumed hypothetical circumstance, despite what we believe is its extremely remote possibility, where the value of our interests and any associated collateral declines to zero. Maximum exposure to loss estimates in the table above do not reflect economic hedges or collateral we could use to offset or recover losses we may incur under our guarantee agreements. Accordingly, this required disclosure is not an indication of expected loss. We believe the carrying value, which is either fair value for derivative-related products or the allowance for lending-related commitments, is more representative of our exposure to loss than maximum exposure to loss.
Pledged Assets
As part of our liquidity management strategy, we pledge assets to secure trust and public deposits, borrowings and letters of credit from the FHLB and FRB, securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repurchase agreements), and for other purposes as required or permitted by law or insurance statutory requirements. The types of collateral we pledge include securities issued by federal agencies, GSEs, domestic and foreign companies and various commercial and consumer loans. The following table provides the total carrying amount of pledged assets by asset type, of which substantially all are pursuant to agreements that do not permit the secured party to sell or repledge the collateral. The table excludes pledgedconsolidated VIE assets of $6.7 billion and $8.1 billion at September30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, which can only be used to settle the liabilities of those entities. The table also excludes $12.1 billion and $15.3 billion in assets pledged in transactions accounted for as secured borrowings at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. See Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) for additional information on consolidated VIE assets and secured borrowings.
Trading assets and other (1)
50,493
30,288
Investment securities (2)
89,807
85,468
419,386
381,597
Total pledged assets
559,686
497,353
Represent assets pledged to collateralize repurchase agreements and other securities financings. Balance includes $50.4 billion and $29.0 billion at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, under agreements that permit the secured parties to sell or repledge the collateral.
Includes $6.9 billion and $8.7 billion in collateral for repurchase agreements at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, which are pledged under agreements that do not permit the secured parties to sell or repledge the collateral. Also includes $248 million in collateral pledged under repurchase agreements at September 30, 2014, that permit the secured parties to sell or repledge the collateral.
Represent loans carried at amortized cost, which are pledged under agreements that do not permit the secured parties to sell or repledge the collateral. Amounts exclude $1.7 billion and $2.1 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, of pledged loans recorded on our balance sheet representing certain delinquent loans that are eligible for repurchase primarily from GNMA loan securitizations. See Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) for additional information.
Note 10: Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral (continued)
Offsetting of Resale and Repurchase Agreements and Securities Borrowing and Lending Agreements
The table below presents resale and repurchase agreements subject to master repurchase agreements (MRA) and securities borrowing and lending agreements subject to master securities lending agreements (MSLA). We account for transactions subject to these agreements as collateralized financings and those with a single counterparty are presented net on our balance sheet, provided certain criteria are met that permit balance sheet netting. Most transactions subject to these agreements do not meet those criteria and thus are not eligible for balance sheet netting.
Collateral we pledged consists of non-cash instruments, such as securities or loans, and is not netted on the balance sheet against the related collateralized liability. Collateral we received includes securities or loans and is not recognized on our balance sheet. Collateral received or pledged may be increased or decreased over time to maintain certain contractual thresholds as the assets underlying each arrangement fluctuate in value. Generally, these agreements require collateral to exceed the asset or liability recognized on the balance sheet. The following table includes the amount of collateral pledged or received related to exposures subject to enforceable MRAs or MSLAs. While these agreements are typically over-collateralized, U.S. GAAP requires disclosure in this table to limit the amount of such collateral to the amount of the related recognized asset or liability for each counterparty.
In addition to the amounts included in the table below, we also have balance sheet netting related to derivatives that is disclosed within Note 12 (Derivatives).
Assets:
Resale and securities borrowing agreements
Gross amounts recognized
55,685
38,635
Gross amounts offset in consolidated balance sheet (1)
(9,708)
(2,817)
Net amounts in consolidated balance sheet (2)
45,977
35,818
Collateral not recognized in consolidated balance sheet (3)
(45,924)
(35,768)
Net amount (4)
Liabilities:
Repurchase and securities lending agreements
57,219
38,032
Net amounts in consolidated balance sheet (5)
47,511
35,215
Collateral pledged but not netted in consolidated balance sheet (6)
(47,033)
(34,770)
Net amount (7)
478
Represents recognized amount of resale and repurchase agreements with counterparties subject to enforceable MRAs or MSLAs that have been offset in the consolidated balance sheet.
At September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, includes $34.4 billion and $25.7 billion, respectively, classified on our consolidated balance sheet in Federal funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements and other short-term investments and $11.6 billion and $10.1 billion, respectively, in Loans.
Represents the fair value of collateral we have received under enforceable MRAs or MSLAs, limited for table presentation purposes to the amount of the recognized asset due from each counterparty. At September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have received total collateral with a fair value of $62.0 billion and $43.3 billion, respectively, all of which, we have the right to sell or repledge. These amounts include securities we have sold or repledged to others with a fair value of $39.6 billion at September 30, 2014 and $23.8 billion at December 31, 2013.
Represents the amount of our exposure that is not collateralized and/or is not subject to an enforceable MRA or MSLA.
Amount is classified in Short-term borrowings on our consolidated balance sheet.
Represents the fair value of collateral we have pledged, related to enforceable MRAs or MSLAs, limited for table presentation purposes to the amount of the recognized liability owed to each counterparty. At September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we have pledged total collateral with a fair value of $57.6 billion and $39.0 billion, respectively, of which, the counterparty does not have the right to sell or repledge $7.2 billion as of September 30, 2014 and $10.0 billion as of December 31, 2013.
Represents the amount of our exposure that is not covered by pledged collateral and/or is not subject to an enforceable MRA or MSLA.
Note 11: Legal Actions
The following supplements our discussion of certain matters previously reported in Note 15 (Legal Actions) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K and Note 11 (Legal Actions) to Financial Statements in our 2014 first and second quarter Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for events occurring during third quarter 2014.
FHA INSURANCE LITIGATION On October 9, 2012, the United States filed a complaint, captioned United States of America v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint makes claims with respect to Wells Fargo’s Federal Housing Administration (FHA) lending program for the period 2001 to 2010. The complaint alleges, among other allegations, that Wells Fargo improperly certified certain FHA mortgage loans for United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) insurance that did not qualify for the program, and thereforeWells Fargo should not have received insurance proceeds from HUD when some of the loans later defaulted. The complaint further alleges Wells Fargo knew some of the mortgages did not qualify for insurance and did not disclose the deficiencies to HUD before making insurance claims. On December 1, 2012, Wells Fargo filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking to enforce a release of Wells Fargo given by the United States, which was denied on February 12, 2013. On April 11, 2013, Wells Fargo appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Court affirmed the denial of Wells Fargo’s motion on June 20, 2014. Wells Fargo is in discussions with the United States about a possible resolution.
MARYLAND MORTGAGE LENDING LITIGATION On December 26, 2007, a class action complaint captioned Denise Minter, et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The complaint alleges that Wells Fargo and others violated provisions of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and other laws by conducting mortgage lending business improperly through a general partnership, Prosperity Mortgage Company. The complaint asserts that Prosperity Mortgage Company was not a legitimate affiliated business and instead operated to conceal Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s role in the loans at issue. A plaintiff class of borrowers who received a mortgage loan from Prosperity Mortgage Company that was funded by Prosperity Mortgage Company's line of credit with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. from 1993 to May 31, 2012, had been certified. Prior to trial, the Court narrowed the class action to borrowers who were referred to Prosperity Mortgage Company by Wells Fargo's partner and whose loans were transferred to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. from 1993 to May 31, 2012. On May 6, 2013, the case went to trial. On June 6, 2013, the jury returned a verdict in favor of all defendants, including Wells Fargo. The plaintiffs appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury verdict on August 5, 2014 and the case is now concluded.
On July 8, 2008, a class action complaint captioned Stacey and Bradley Petry, et al., v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., was filed. The complaint alleges that Wells Fargo and others violated the Maryland Finder’s Fee Act in the closing of mortgage loans in Maryland. On March 13, 2013, the Court held the plaintiff class did not have sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, which was previously set for March 18, 2013. On June 20, 2013, the Court entered judgment in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs appealed. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment in favor of the defendants on July 10, 2014. No further appeal has been taken and the case is now concluded.
ORDER OF POSTING LITIGATION A series of putative class actions have been filed against Wachovia Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as well as many other banks, challenging the high to low order in which the banks post debit card transactions to consumer deposit accounts. There are currently several such cases pending against Wells Fargo Bank (including the Wachovia Bank cases to which Wells Fargo succeeded), most of which have been consolidated in multi-district litigation proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The bank defendants moved to compel these cases to arbitration under recent Supreme Court authority. On November 22, 2011, the Judge denied the motion. The bank defendants appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. On October 26, 2012, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the District Court’s denial of the motion. Wells Fargo renewed its motion to compel arbitration with respect to the unnamed putative class members. On April 8, 2013, the District Court denied the motion. Wells Fargo has appealed the decision to the Eleventh Circuit.
On August 10, 2010, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order in Gutierrez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., a case that was not consolidated in the multi-district proceedings, enjoining the bank’s use of the high to low posting method for debit card transactions with respect to the plaintiff class of California depositors, directing the bank to establish a different posting methodology and ordering remediation of approximately $203 million. On October 26, 2010, a final judgment was entered in Gutierrez. On October 28, 2010, Wells Fargo appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On December 26, 2012, the Ninth Circuit reversed the order requiring Wells Fargo to change its order of posting and vacated the portion of the order granting remediation of approximately $203 million on the grounds of federal pre-emption. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s finding that Wells Fargo violated a California state law prohibition on fraudulent representations and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. On August 5, 2013, the District Court entered a judgment against Wells Fargo in the approximate amount of $203 million, together with post-judgment interest thereon from October 25, 2010, and, effective as of July 15, 2013, enjoined Wells Fargo from making or disseminating additional misrepresentations about its order of posting of transactions. On August 7, 2013, Wells Fargo appealed the judgment to the Ninth Circuit. On October 29, 2014, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s judgment against Wells Fargo for approximately $203 million, but limited the injunction to debit card transactions. Wells Fargo is presently considering its options.
SECURITIES LENDING LITIGATION Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is involved in five separate pending actions brought by securities lending customers of Wells Fargo and Wachovia Bank in various courts. In general, each of the cases alleges that Wells Fargo violated fiduciary and contractual duties by investing collateral for loaned securities in investments that suffered losses. One of the cases, filed on March 27, 2012, is composed of a class of Wells Fargo securities lending
Note 11: Legal Actions (continued)
customers in a case captioned City of Farmington Hills Employees Retirement System v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The class action was pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. On April 12, 2014, the parties reached a settlement. The Court granted final approval of the settlement on August 14, 2014.
OUTLOOK When establishing a liability for contingent litigation losses, the Company determines a range of potential losses for each matter that is both probable and estimable, and records the amount it considers to be the best estimate within the range. The high end of the range of reasonably possible potential litigation losses in excess of the Company’s liability for probable and estimable losses was approximately $950 million as of September 30, 2014. For these matters and others where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible but not probable, there may be a range of possible losses in excess of the established liability that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, Wells Fargo believes that the eventual outcome of the actions against Wells Fargo and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on Wells Fargo’s consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of those matters, if unfavorable, may be material to Wells Fargo’s results of operations for any particular period.
Note 12: Derivatives
We primarily use derivatives to manage exposure to market risk,including interest rate risk, credit risk and foreign currency risk, and to assist customers with their risk management objectives. We designate derivatives either as hedging instruments in a qualifying hedge accounting relationship (fair value or cash flow hedge) or as free-standing derivatives. Free-standing derivatives include economic hedges that do not qualify for hedge accounting and derivatives held for customer accommodation or othertrading purposes. For more information on our derivative activities, see Note 16 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
The following table presents the total notional or contractual amounts and fair values for our derivatives. Derivative transactions can be measured in terms of the notional amount, but this amount is not recorded on the balance sheet and is not, when viewed in isolation, a meaningful measure of the risk profile of the instruments. The notional amount is generally not exchanged, but is used only as the basis on which interest and other payments are determined. Derivatives designated as qualifying hedge contractsand free-standing derivatives (economic hedges) are recorded on the balance sheet at fair value in other assets or other liabilities. Customer accommodation, trading and other free-standing derivatives are recorded on the balance sheet at fair value in trading assets, other assets or other liabilities.
Notional or
Fair value
contractual
Asset
Liability
derivatives
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
Interest rate contracts (1)
136,015
4,636
2,099
100,412
4,315
Foreign exchange contracts (1)
26,510
857
1,066
26,483
1,091
Total derivatives designated as
qualifying hedging instruments
5,406
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
Free-standing derivatives (economic hedges):
Interest rate contracts (2)
228,343
220,577
595
Equity contracts
3,273
Foreign exchange contracts
17,850
10,064
Other derivatives
2,058
2,160
Subtotal
1,145
978
1,154
Customer accommodation, trading and other
free-standing derivatives:
Interest rate contracts
4,162,398
39,623
40,562
4,030,068
50,936
53,113
Commodity contracts
99,599
96,889
2,603
147,924
8,764
6,874
96,379
7,475
7,588
235,290
4,518
4,460
164,160
3,731
3,626
Credit contracts - protection sold
14,207
1,073
19,501
1,532
Credit contracts - protection purchased
17,848
23,314
1,147
56,548
55,759
66,316
68,830
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
57,693
56,309
67,294
69,984
Total derivatives before netting
63,186
59,474
72,700
73,359
Netting (3)
(48,187)
(46,864)
(56,894)
(63,739)
14,999
12,610
15,806
9,620
(1) Notional amounts presented exclude $1.9 billion of interest rate contracts at both September 30, 2014 and December 31,2013, for certain derivatives that are combined for designation as a hedge on a single instrument. The notional amount for foreign exchange contracts at September 30, 2014, excludes $1.2 billion for certain derivatives that are combined for designation as a hedge on a single instrument.
(2) Includes free-standing derivatives (economic hedges) used to hedge the risk of changes in the fair value of residential MSRs, MHFS, loans, derivative loan commitments and other interests held.
(3) Represents balance sheet netting of derivative asset and liability balances, and related cash collateral. See the next table in this Note for further information.
Note 12: Derivatives (continued)
The following table provides information on the gross fair values of derivative assets and liabilities, the balance sheet netting adjustments and the resulting net fair value amount recorded on our balance sheet, as well as the non-cash collateral associated with such arrangements. We execute substantially all of our derivative transactions under master netting arrangements. We reflect all derivative balances and related cash collateral subject to enforceable master netting arrangements on a net basis within the balance sheet. The “Gross amounts recognized” column in the following table include $50.1 billion and $53.7 billion of gross derivative assets and liabilities, respectively, at September 30, 2014, and $59.8 billion and $66.1 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2013, with counterparties subject to enforceable master netting arrangements that are carried on the balance sheet net of offsetting amounts. The remaining gross derivative assets and liabilities of $13.1 billion and $5.8 billion, respectively, at September 30, 2014 and $12.9 billion and $7.3 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2013, include those with counterparties subject to master netting arrangements for which we have not assessed the enforceability because they are with counterparties where we do not currently have positions to offset, those subject to master netting arrangements where we have not been able to confirm the enforceability and those not subject to master netting arrangements. As such,we do not net derivative balances or collateral within the balance sheet for these counterparties.
We determine the balance sheet netting adjustments based on the terms specified within each master netting arrangement. We disclose the balance sheet netting amounts within the column titled “Gross amounts offset in consolidated balance sheet.” Balance sheet netting adjustments are determined at the counterparty level for which there may be multiple contract types. For disclosure purposes, we allocate these adjustments to the contract type for each counterparty proportionally based upon the “Gross amounts recognized” by counterparty. As a result, the net amounts disclosed by contract type may not represent the actual exposure upon settlement of the contracts.
Balance sheet netting does not include non-cash collateral that we pledge. For disclosure purposes, we present these amounts in the column titled “Gross amounts not offset in consolidated balance sheet (Disclosure-only netting)” within the table. We determine and allocate the Disclosure-only netting amounts in the same manner as balance sheet netting amounts.
The “Net amounts” column within the following table represents the aggregate of our net exposure to each counterparty after considering the balance sheet and Disclosure-only netting adjustments. We manage derivative exposure by monitoring the credit risk associated with each counterparty using counterparty specific credit risk limits, using master netting arrangements and obtaining collateral. Derivative contracts executed in over-the-counter markets include bilateral contractual arrangements that are not cleared through a central clearing organization but are typically subject to master netting arrangements. The percentage of our bilateral derivative transactions outstanding at period end in such markets, based on gross fair value, is provided within the following table. Other derivative contracts executed in over-the-counter or exchange-traded markets are settled through a central clearing organization and are excluded from this percentage. In addition to the netting amounts included in the table, we also have balance sheet netting related to resale and repurchase agreements that are disclosed within Note 10 (Guarantees, Pledged Assets and Collateral).
Gross amounts
not offset in
offset in
Net amounts in
consolidated
Percent
balance sheet
traded in
amounts
(Disclosure-only
over-the-counter
recognized
sheet (1)
sheet (2)
netting) (3)
market (4)
Derivative assets
44,517
(38,421)
6,096
(627)
5,469
(749)
1,826
1,754
9,143
(3,541)
(254)
5,348
5,882
(4,507)
1,375
1,335
Credit contracts-protection sold
Credit contracts-protection purchased
(778)
Other contracts
Total derivative assets
(994)
Derivative liabilities
43,016
(37,601)
5,415
(4,156)
1,259
(923)
1,652
6,935
(3,304)
3,631
(525)
3,106
5,634
(4,056)
1,578
(137)
1,441
(807)
(223)
(173)
Total derivative liabilities
(5,100)
7,510
55,846
(48,271)
7,575
(1,101)
6,474
(659)
2,014
1,942
7,824
(3,254)
4,570
4,331
(3,567)
1,276
1,267
(302)
(841)
(1,454)
14,352
56,538
(53,902)
2,636
(482)
2,154
(952)
1,651
1,640
7,794
(3,502)
4,292
(3,652)
(1,432)
(299)
(617)
9,003
Represents amounts with counterparties subject to enforceable master netting arrangements that have been offset in the consolidated balance sheet, including related cash collateral and portfolio level counterparty valuation adjustments. Counterparty valuation adjustments were $247 million and $236 million related to derivative assets and $60 million and $67 million related to derivative liabilities as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. Cash collateral totaled $5.1 billion and $3.9 billion, netted against derivative assets and liabilities, respectively, at September 30, 2014, and $4.3 billion and $11.3 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2013.
Net derivative assets of $10.7 billion and $14.4 billion are classified in Trading assets as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. $4.3 billion and $1.4 billion are classified in Other assets in the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. Net derivative liabilities are classified in Accrued expenses and other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet.
Represents non-cash collateral pledged and received against derivative assets and liabilities with the same counterparty that are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements. U.S. GAAP does not permit netting of such non-cash collateral balances in the consolidated balance sheet but requires disclosure of these amounts.
Represents derivatives executed in over-the-counter markets not settled through a central clearing organization. Over-the-counter percentages are calculated based on gross amounts recognized as of the respective balance sheet date. The remaining percentage represents derivatives settled through a central clearing organization, which are executed in either over-the-counter or exchange-traded markets.
Fair Value Hedges
We use derivatives to hedge against changes in fair value of certain financial instruments, including available-for-sale debt securities, mortgages held for sale, and long-term debt. For more information on fair value hedges, see Note 16 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
The following table shows the net gains (losses) recognized in the income statement related to derivatives in fair value hedging relationships.The entire derivative gain or loss is included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness for all fair value hedge relationships, except for those involving foreign-currency denominated available-for-sale securities and long-term debt hedged with foreign currency forward derivatives for which the time value component of the derivative gain or loss related to the changes in the difference between the spot and forward price is excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
Total net
contracts hedging:
(losses)
Available-
Mortgages
on fair
for-sale
held for
sale
debt
hedges
Net interest income (expense) recognized on derivatives
Gains (losses) recorded in noninterest income
Recognized on derivatives
(1,274)
(989)
Recognized on hedged item
(286)
1,305
Net recognized on fair value hedges (ineffective portion) (1)
315
(273)
(678)
(274)
(536)
1,046
(973)
1,801
(860)
947
(1,530)
(271)
(416)
1,205
984
(2,800)
(693)
(2,050)
(1,352)
2,613
1,836
(214)
(1) Both the third quarter and first nine months of 2014 included $0 million and the third quarter and first nine months of 2013 included $(1) million and $(5) million, respectively, of the time value component recognized as net interest income (expense) on forward derivatives hedging foreign currency available-for-sale securities and long-term debt that were excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
Cash Flow Hedges
We use derivatives to hedge certain financial instruments against future interest rate increases and to limit the variability of cash flows on certain financial instruments due to changes in the benchmark interest rate. For more information on cash flow hedges, see Note 16 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Based upon current interest rates, we estimate that $601 million (pre tax) of deferred net gains on derivatives in OCI at September 30, 2014, will be reclassified into net interest income during the next twelve months. Future changes to interest rates may significantly change actual amounts reclassified to earnings. We are hedging our exposure to the variability of future cash flows for all forecasted transactions for a maximum of 7 years for both hedges of floating-rate debt and floating-rate commercial loans.
The following table shows the net gains (losses) recognized related to derivatives in cash flow hedging relationships.
ended September 30,
Gains (losses) (pre tax) recognized in OCI on derivatives
Gains (pre tax) reclassified from cumulative OCI into net income (1)
225
Gains (losses) (pre tax) recognized in noninterest income for hedge ineffectiveness (2)
(1) See Note 17 (Other Comprehensive Income) for detail on components of net income.
(2) None of the change in value of the derivatives was excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
Free-Standing Derivatives
We use free-standing derivatives (economic hedges) to hedge the risk of changes in the fair value of certain residential MHFS, certain loans held for investment, residential MSRs measured at fair value, derivative loan commitments and other interests held. The resulting gain or loss on these economic hedges is reflected in mortgage banking noninterest income, net gains (losses) from equity investments and other noninterest income.
The derivatives used to hedge MSRs measured at fair value, resulted in net derivative gains of $17 million and $2.2 billion in third quarter and first nine months of 2014, respectively, and net derivative gains of $239 million and net losses of $2.2 billion in third quarter and first nine months of 2013, respectively, which are included in mortgage banking noninterest income. The aggregate fair value of these derivatives was a net asset of $28 million at September 30, 2014 and a net liability of $531 million at December 31, 2013. The change in fair value of these derivatives for each period end is due to changes in the underlying market indices and interest rates as well as the purchase and sale of derivative financial instruments throughout the period as part of our dynamic MSR risk management process.
Interest rate lock commitments for residential mortgage loans that we intend to sell are considered free-standing derivatives. The aggregate fair value of derivative loan commitments on the balance sheet was a net asset of $67 million and a net liability of $26 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, and is included in the caption “Interest rate contracts” under “Customer accommodation, trading and other free-standing derivatives” in the first table in this Note.
For more information on free-standing derivatives, see Note 16 (Derivatives) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
The following table shows the net gains recognized in the income statement related to derivatives not designated as hedging instruments.
Net gains (losses) recognized on free-standing derivatives (economic hedges):
Recognized in noninterest income:
Mortgage banking (1)
926
Equity contracts (3)
(88)
Foreign exchange contracts (2)
530
482
Credit contracts (2)
1,312
1,631
Net gains (losses) recognized on customer accommodation, trading
and other free-standing derivatives:
Mortgage banking (4)
930
(696)
Other (5)
(724)
568
Commodity contracts (5)
Equity contracts (5)
(505)
(410)
Foreign exchange contracts (5)
484
Credit contracts (5)
Net gains recognized related to derivatives not designated
as hedging instruments
696
1,713
1,822
(1) Predominantly mortgage banking noninterest income including gains (losses) on the derivatives used as economic hedges of MSRs measured at fair value, interest rate lock commitments and mortgages held for sale.
(2) Predominantly included in other noninterest income.
(3) Predominantly included in net gains (losses) from equity investments in noninterest income.
(4) Predominantly mortgage banking noninterest income including gains (losses) on interest rate lock commitments.
(5) Predominantly included in net gains from trading activities in noninterest income.
Credit Derivatives
We use credit derivatives primarily to assist customers with their risk management objectives. We may also use credit derivatives in structured product transactions or liquidity agreements written to special purpose vehicles. The maximum exposure of sold credit derivatives is managed through posted collateral, purchased credit derivatives and similar products in order to achieve our desired credit risk profile. This credit risk management provides an ability to recover a significant portion of any amounts that would be paid under the sold credit derivatives. We would be required to perform under the noted credit derivatives in the event of default by the referenced obligors. Events of default include events such as bankruptcy, capital restructuring or lack of principal and/or interest payment. In certain cases, other triggers may exist, such as the credit downgrade of the referenced obligors or the inability of the special purpose vehicle for which we have provided liquidity to obtain funding.
The following table provides details of sold and purchased credit derivatives.
Notional amount
Protection
sold -
purchased
non-
with
protection
identical
sold
Range of
liability
sold (A)
underlyings (B)
(A) - (B)
maturities
Credit default swaps on:
Corporate bonds
7,887
5,090
2,797
3,585
2014-2021
Structured products
746
2017-2052
Credit protection on:
Default swap index
1,812
2014-2019
Commercial mortgage-
backed securities index
257
2047-2063
Asset-backed securities index
2045-2046
2,235
5,121
2014-2025
Total credit derivatives
7,764
7,878
6,329
9,970
10,947
5,237
6,493
4,454
1,553
1,245
894
2016-2052
3,270
2,471
2014-2018
Commercial mortgage-backed securities index (1)
1,106
535
2049-2052
Asset-backed securities index (1)
2,570
2,567
5,451
9,441
10,397
9,104
12,917
Amounts previously reported for "Protection sold - non-investment grade" have been revised to reflect a corrected determination of the investment grade status of sold credit protection.
Protection sold represents the estimated maximum exposure to loss that would be incurred under an assumed hypothetical circumstance, where the value of our interests and any associated collateral declines to zero, without any consideration of recovery or offset from any economic hedges. We believe this hypothetical circumstance to be an extremely remote possibility and accordingly, this required disclosure is not an indication of expected loss. The amounts under non-investment grade represent the notional amounts of those credit derivatives on which we have a higher risk of being required to perform under the terms of the credit derivative and are a function of the underlying assets.
We consider the risk of performance to be high if the underlying assets under the credit derivative have an external rating that is below investment grade or an internal credit default grade that is equivalent thereto. We believe the net protection sold, which is representative of the net notional amount of protection sold and purchased with identical underlyings, in combination with other protection purchased, is more representative of our exposure to loss than either non-investment grade or protection sold. Other protection purchased represents additional protection, which may offset the exposure to loss for protection sold, that was not purchased with an identical underlying of the protection sold.
Credit-Risk Contingent Features
Certain of our derivative contracts contain provisions whereby if the credit rating of our debt were to be downgraded by certain major credit rating agencies, the counterparty could demand additional collateral or require termination or replacement of derivative instruments in a net liability position. The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with such credit-risk-related contingent features that are in a net liability position was $11.3 billion at September 30, 2014, and $14.3 billion at December 31, 2013, for which we posted $9.0 billion and$12.2 billion, respectively, in collateral in the normal course of business. If the credit rating of our debt had been downgraded below investment grade, which is the credit-risk-related contingent feature that if triggered requires the maximum amount of collateral to be posted, on September 30, 2014, or December 31, 2013, we would have been required to post additional collateral of $2.3 billion or $2.5billion, respectively, or potentially settle the contract in an amount equal to its fair value.
Counterparty Credit Risk
By using derivatives, we are exposed to counterparty credit risk if counterparties to the derivative contracts do not perform as expected. If a counterparty fails to perform, our counterparty credit risk is equal to the amount reported as a derivative asset on our balance sheet. The amounts reported as a derivative asset are derivative contracts in a gain position, and to the extent subject to legally enforceable master netting arrangements, net of derivatives in a loss position with the same counterparty and cash collateral received. We minimize counterparty credit risk through credit approvals, limits, monitoring procedures, executing master netting arrangements and obtaining collateral, where appropriate. To the extent the master netting arrangements and other criteria meet the applicable requirements, including determining the legal enforceability of the arrangement, it is our policy to present derivative balances and related cash collateral amounts net on the balance sheet. We incorporate credit valuation adjustments (CVA) to reflect counterparty credit risk and our own credit risk in determining the fair value of our derivatives. Such adjustments, which consider the effects of enforceable master netting agreements and collateral arrangements, reflect market-based views of the credit quality of each counterparty. Our CVA calculation is determined based on observed credit spreads in the credit default swap market and indices indicative of the credit quality of the counterparties to our derivatives.
Note 13: Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities
We use fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain assets and liabilities and to determine fair value disclosures. Assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis are presented in the recurring table in this Note. From time to time, we may be required to record at fair value other assets on a nonrecurring basis, such as certain residential and commercial MHFS, certain LHFS, loans held for investment and certain other assets. These nonrecurring fair value adjustments typically involve application of lower-of-cost-or-market accounting or write-downs of individual assets.
See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K for discussion of how we determine fair value. For descriptions of the valuation methodologies we use for assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring or nonrecurring basis and for estimating fair value for financial instruments not recorded at fair value, see Note 17 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Fair Value Hierarchy We group our assets and liabilities measured at fair value in three levels based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value. These levels are:
· Level 1 – Valuation is based upon quoted prices for identical instruments traded in active markets.
· Level 2 – Valuation is based upon quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, and model-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market.
· Level 3 – Valuation is generated from techniques that use significant assumptions not observable in the market. These unobservable assumptions reflect estimates of assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability. Valuation techniques include use of option pricing models, discounted cash flow models and similar techniques.
Fair Value Measurements from Brokers or Third Party Pricing Services
For certain assets and liabilities, we obtain fair value measurements from brokers or third party pricing services and record the unadjusted fair value in our financial statements. The detail by level is shown in the table below. Fair value measurements obtained from brokers or third party pricing services that we have adjusted to determine the fair value recorded in our financial statements are not included in the following table.
Brokers
Third party pricing services
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Trading assets (excluding derivatives)
5,815
43,153
Mortgage-backed securities
139,808
Other debt securities (1)
40,383
578
991
229,159
9,013
229,732
Derivatives (trading and other assets)
289
Derivatives (liabilities)
(292)
1,804
5,723
39,257
148,074
722
44,681
2,158
237,735
238,365
(418)
Includes corporate debt securities, collateralized loan and other debt obligations, asset-backed securities, and other debt securities.
Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
The following two tables present the balances of assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on a recurring basis.
Netting
9,653
3,670
13,323
2,189
2,196
590
9,178
9,217
16,479
16,482
Asset-backed securities
850
Equity securities
10,127
10,163
Total trading securities (2)
19,780
32,499
624
52,903
Other trading assets
2,805
4,127
Total trading assets (excluding derivatives)
22,585
33,775
670
57,030
10,045
17,304
139,962
15,973
Collateralized loan and other debt obligations (4)
20,734
Asset-backed securities:
Auto loans and leases
Home equity loans
734
Other asset-backed securities
4,283
Total asset-backed securities
6,737
9,063
230,723
5,930
Perpetual preferred securities (5)
1,270
10,333
231,320
6,598
13,472
15,755
5,849
Mortgage servicing rights (residential)
Derivative assets:
44,142
2,565
3,713
4,334
5,831
Credit contracts
532
1,068
Other derivative contracts
Total derivative assets (7)
3,801
57,404
1,981
2,061
Total assets recorded at fair value
36,719
335,972
33,473
357,977
Derivative liabilities:
(42,768)
(224)
(43,016)
(2,565)
(2,575)
(924)
(4,775)
(1,236)
(6,935)
(5,592)
(5,634)
(541)
(1,288)
46,864
Total derivative liabilities (7)
(990)
(56,241)
(2,243)
(12,610)
Short sale liabilities:
(7,511)
(1,750)
(9,261)
(4,803)
(2,030)
(2,033)
Other securities
Total short sale liabilities
(9,541)
(6,591)
(16,137)
Other liabilities (excluding derivatives)
Total liabilities recorded at fair value
(10,531)
(62,832)
(2,277)
(28,776)
(1) Includes collateralized debt obligations of $1 million.
(2) Net gains (losses) from trading activities recognized in the income statement for the first nine months of 2014 and 2013 include $90 million and $(215)million in net unrealized gains (losses) on trading securities held at September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(3) Balances consist of securities that are mostly investment grade based on ratings received from the ratings agencies or internal credit grades categorized as investment grade if external ratings are not available. The securities are classified as Level 3 due to limited market activity.
(4) Includes collateralized debt obligations of $557 million.
(5) Perpetual preferred securities include ARS and corporate preferred securities. See Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) for additional information.
(6) Represents balance sheet netting of derivative asset and liability balances and related cash collateral. See Note 12 (Derivatives) for additional information.
(7) Derivative assets and derivative liabilities include contracts qualifying for hedge accounting, economic hedges, and derivatives included in trading assets and trading liabilities, respectively.
Note 13: Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities (continued)
3,669
11,970
2,043
2,082
541
753
7,052
7,105
14,608
14,609
487
609
5,908
6,008
14,209
28,158
43,136
2,694
2,487
5,235
16,903
30,645
48,371
39,322
3,214
12,389
18,609
148,589
20,833
281
18,739
1,420
513
843
6,577
1,657
8,234
7,441
2,149
9,590
240,686
7,266
729
1,511
2,019
637
2,689
241,323
7,995
11,505
2,374
13,879
55,466
2,667
1,522
4,221
2,081
4,789
782
1,501
1,602
67,925
3,173
1,503
21,194
351,671
37,171
353,142
(56,128)
(384)
(56,538)
(2,587)
(2,603)
(449)
(5,218)
(2,127)
(7,794)
(75)
(4,432)
(4,508)
(806)
(1,094)
(1,900)
63,739
(550)
(69,171)
(3,638)
(9,620)
(4,311)
(2,063)
(6,374)
(4,683)
(1,788)
(1,836)
(95)
(6,099)
(6,913)
(13,012)
(6,649)
(76,084)
(3,677)
(22,671)
(1) Includes collateralized debt obligations of $2 million.
(2) Net gains from trading activities recognized in the income statement for the year ended December 31, 2013, include $(29) million in net unrealized losses on trading securities held at December 31, 2013.
(4) Includes collateralized debt obligations of $693 million.
Changes in Fair Value Levels
We monitor the availability of observable market data to assess the appropriate classification of financial instruments within the fair value hierarchy and transfer between Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 accordingly. Observable market data includes but is not limited to quoted prices and market transactions. Changes in economic conditions or market liquidity generally will drive changes in availability of observable market data. Changes in availability of observable market data, which also may result in changing the valuation technique used, are generally the cause of transfers between Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3.
Transfers into and out of Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 for the periods presented are provided within the following table. The amounts reported as transfers represent the fair value as of the beginning of the quarter in which the transfer occurred.
Transfers Between Fair Value Levels
In
Out
Available-for-sale securities
Net derivative assets and liabilities (2)
(83)
Total transfers
(241)
(188)
(136)
323
(315)
(270)
(49)
(596)
596
Trading assets (excluding derivatives) (3)
(247)
(237)
Available-for-sale securities (3)
10,853
(94)
(10,853)
(255)
255
(316)
139
11,667
(11,421)
(1) All transfers in and out of Level 3 are disclosed within the recurring Level 3 rollforward table in this Note.
(2) Consists of net derivative liabilities that were transferred from Level 3 to Level 2 due to increased observable market data. Also includes net derivative liabilities that were transferred from Level 2 to Level 3 in conjunction with a change in our valuation technique from an internal model with significant observable inputs to an internal model with significant unobservable inputs.
(3) For the first nine months of 2013, consists of $202 million of collateralized loan obligations classified as trading assets and $10.6 billion classified as available-for-sale securities that we transferred from Level 3 to Level 2 in first quarter 2013 as a result of increased observable market data in the valuation of such instruments.
The changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, are summarized as follows:
Net unrealized
Total net gains
Purchases,
gains (losses)
(losses) included in
sales,
included in
issuances
income related
Balance,
compre-
Transfers
to assets and
beginning
hensive
settlements,
into
out of
end of
liabilities held
of period
net (1)
period
at period end
(excluding derivatives):
(109)
Total trading securities
756
(133)
Total trading assets
(excluding derivatives)
805
3,169
(226)
1,326
(158)
1,295
1,567
6,523
(322)
700
equity securities
7,223
(341)
2,396
5,926
Mortgage servicing rights (residential) (7)
Net derivative assets and liabilities:
(234)
(122)
Total derivative contracts
2,005
Short sale liabilities
(45)
(1) See next page for detail.
(2) Represents only net gains (losses) that are due to changes in economic conditions and management’s estimates of fair value and excludes changes due to the collection/realization of cash flows over time.
(3) Included in net gains (losses) from trading activities and other noninterest income in the income statement.
(4) Included in net gains (losses) from debt securities in the income statement.
(5) Included in net gains (losses) from equity investments in the income statement.
(6) Included in mortgage banking and other noninterest income in the income statement.
(7) For more information on the changes in mortgage servicing rights, see Note 8 (Mortgage Banking Activities).
(8) Included in mortgage banking, trading activities, equity investments and other noninterest income in the income statement.
The following table presents gross purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related to the changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
Issuances
Settlements
(376)
(428)
(242)
(534)
(121)
The changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the quarter ended September 30, 2013, are summarized as follows:
667
779
3,759
3,643
3,227
3,386
4,872
5,174
2,948
3,211
7,820
8,385
15,341
15,924
788
16,129
456
16,664
2,641
2,433
5,860
5,805
(561)
224
591
254
(799)
(383)
1,038
The following table presents gross purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related to the changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the quarter ended September 30, 2013.
425
(565)
(71)
750
(955)
(461)
1,246
(1,416)
1,462
703
(1,678)
(1,693)
600
(269)
777
The changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the first nine months of 2014 are summarized as follows:
(54)
(66)
(251)
(301)
(321)
(1,199)
(1,245)
(170)
1,078
(375)
(465)
1,178
(995)
(8) Included in mortgage banking,trading activities, equity investments and other noninterest income in the income statement.
141
The following table presents gross purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related to the changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the first nine months of 2014.
718
(797)
(938)
806
(939)
(553)
(403)
(738)
(202)
(1,939)
(1,981)
(423)
(82)
(987)
The changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the first nine months of 2013 are summarized as follows:
742
987
(165)
1,063
(176)
274
13,188
710
(10,613)
5,921
(720)
3,283
9,255
(876)
26,645
794
27,439
(787)
2,365
(759)
(1,150)
474
(649)
(786)
945
(8) Included in mortgage banking, trading activities and other noninterest income in the income statement.
The following table presents gross purchases, sales, issuances and settlements related to the changes in Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the first nine months of 2013.
(134)
691
(760)
(420)
1,330
(1,460)
726
(464)
1,102
(2,635)
781
(1,914)
2,120
1,594
(4,549)
3,109
2,320
(5,320)
(5,347)
(572)
(473)
(258)
The following table provides quantitative information about the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of substantially all of our Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for which we use an internal model.
The significant unobservable inputs for Level 3 assets and liabilities that are valued using fair values obtained from third party vendors are not included in the table, as the specific inputs applied are not provided by the vendor. In addition, the table excludes the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs for certain classes of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured using an internal model that we consider, both individually and in the aggregate, insignificant relative to our overall Level 3 assets and liabilities. We made this determination based upon an evaluation of each class which considered the magnitude of the positions, nature of the unobservable inputs and potential for significant changes in fair value due to changes in those inputs. For information on how changes in significant unobservable inputs affect the fair values of Level 3 assets and liabilities, see Note 17 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Fair Value
Significant
Valuation Technique(s)
Unobservable Input
Inputs
Average (1)
Trading and available-for-sale securities:
political subdivisions:
Government, healthcare and
other revenue bonds
Discounted cash flow
0.3
6.1
Vendor priced
Auction rate securities and other municipal bonds
1.3
8.8
4.1
Weighted average life
13.4
yrs
Collateralized loan and other debt obligations (2)
618
Market comparable pricing
Comparability adjustment
(14.5)
20.3
2.6
1,054
0.5
Other asset-backed securities:
Diversified payment rights (3)
1.1
Other commercial and consumer
21.5
4.9
1.4
15.3
Marketable equity securities: perpetual
preferred
8.2
6.8
1.0
15.0
12.0
Mortgages held for sale (residential)
2,190
Default rate
14.9
Loss severity
26.3
19.5
Prepayment rate
(55.0)
(6.0)
(40.0)
0.0
100.0
11.1
Utilization rate
Cost to service per loan (7)
$ 86
15.9
Prepayment rate (8)
20.9
Net derivative assets and (liabilities):
50.0
Interest rate contracts: derivative loan
Fall-out factor
99.0
24.6
Initial-value servicing
(35.6)
102.5
bps
48.0
Conversion factor
(14.3)
(11.3)
0.8
Option model
Correlation factor
95.0
72.5
Volatility factor
8.1
75.6
26.9
(34.6)
34.7
Credit spread
49.3
Other assets: nonmarketable equity investments
(23.6)
(7.1)
(18.1)
Insignificant Level 3 assets,
net of liabilities
Total level 3 assets, net of liabilities
(1) Weighted averages are calculated using outstanding unpaid principal balance for cash instruments such as loans and securities, and notional amounts for derivative instruments.
(2) Includes $558 million of collateralized debt obligations.
(3) Securities backed by specified sources of current and future receivables generated from foreign originators.
(4) Consists primarily of investments in asset-backed securities that are revolving in nature, in which the timing of advances and repayments of principal are uncertain.
(5) Consists of auction rate preferred equity securities with no maturity date that are callable by the issuer.
(6) Consists predominantly of reverse mortgage loans securitized with GNMA which were accounted for as secured borrowing transactions.
(7) The high end of the range of inputs is for servicing modified loans. For non-modified loans the range is $86 - $281.
(8) Includes a blend of prepayment speeds and expected defaults. Prepayment speeds are influenced by mortgage interest rates as well as our estimation of drivers of borrower behavior.
(9) Represents the aggregate amount of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis that are individually and in the aggregate insignificant. The amount includes corporate debt securities, mortgage-backed securities, other marketable equity securities, other liabilities and certain net derivative assets and liabilities, such as commodity contracts, foreign exchange contracts and other derivative contracts.
(10) Consists of total Level 3 assets of $33.5 billion and total Level 3 liabilities of $2.3 billion, before netting of derivative balances.
2,739
Auction rate securities and other municipal
12.3
13.0
Collateralized loan and other debt obligations(2)
612
(12.0)
23.3
8.5
1,349
0.6
1.5
Diversified payment rights(3)
757
4.7
3.0
21.2
2.2
8.3
7.4
12.2
7.9
32.5
9.9
5.4
2.4
3.3
37.8
773
19.4
16.5
5.0
44.9
15.6
21.8
(21.5)
81.6
32.6
(18.4)
(14.1)
1.8
(245)
87.6
72.2
81.2
25.4
(31.3)
30.4
10.5
47.4
(30.6)
(5.4)
(21.9)
33,494
(2) Includes $695 million of collateralized debt obligations.
(7) The high end of the range of inputs is for servicing modified loans. For non-modified loans the range is $86 - $302.
(9) Represents the aggregate amount of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis that are individually and in the aggregate insignificant. The amount includes corporate debt securities, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities backed by home equity loans, other marketable equity securities, other assets, other liabilities and certain net derivative assets and liabilities, such as commodity contracts, foreign exchange contracts and other derivative contracts.
(10) Consists of total Level 3 assets of $37.2 billion and total Level 3 liabilities of $3.7 billion, before netting of derivative balances.
The valuation techniques used for our Level 3 assets and liabilities, as presented in the previous table, are described as follows:
· Discounted cash flow - Discounted cash flow valuation techniques generally consist of developing an estimate of future cash flows that are expected to occur over the life of an instrument and then discounting those cash flows at a rate of return that results in the fair value amount.
· Option model - Option model valuation techniques are generally used for instruments in which the holder has a contingent right or obligation based on the occurrence of a future event, such as the price of a referenced asset going above or below a predetermined strike price. Option models estimate the likelihood of the specified event occurring by incorporating assumptions such as volatility estimates, price of the underlying instrument and expected rate of return.
· Market comparable pricing - Market comparable pricing valuation techniques are used to determine the fair value of certain instruments by incorporating known inputs, such as recent transaction prices, pending transactions, or prices of other similar investments that require significant adjustment to reflect differences in instrument characteristics.
· Vendor-priced – Prices obtained from third party pricing vendors or brokers that are used to record the fair value of the asset or liability, of which the related valuation technique and significant unobservable inputs are not provided.
Significant unobservable inputs presented in the previous table are those we consider significant to the fair value of the Level 3 asset or liability. We consider unobservable inputs to be significant, if by their exclusion, the fair value of the Level 3 asset or liability would be impacted by a predetermined percentage change or based on qualitative factors, such as nature of the instrument, type of valuation technique used, and the significance of the unobservable inputs relative to other inputs used within the valuation. Following is a description of the significant unobservable inputs provided in the table.
· Comparability adjustment – is an adjustment made to observed market data, such as a transaction price in order to reflect dissimilarities in underlying collateral, issuer, rating, or other factors used within a market valuation approach, expressed as a percentage of an observed price.
· Conversion Factor – is the risk-adjusted rate in which a particular instrument may be exchanged for another instrument upon settlement, expressed as a percentage change from a specified rate.
· Correlation factor - is the likelihood of one instrument changing in price relative to another based on an established relationship expressed as a percentage of relative change in price over a period over time.
· Cost to service - is the expected cost per loan of servicing a portfolio of loans, which includes estimates for unreimbursed expenses (including delinquency and foreclosure costs) that may occur as a result of servicing such loan portfolios.
· Credit spread – is the portion of the interest rate in excess of a benchmark interest rate, such as OIS, LIBOR or U.S. Treasury rates, that when applied to an investment captures changes in the obligor’s creditworthiness.
· Default rate – is an estimate of the likelihood of not collecting contractual amounts owed expressed as a constant default rate (CDR).
· Discount rate – is a rate of return used to present value the future expected cash flow to arrive at the fair value of an instrument. The discount rate consists of a benchmark rate component and a risk premium component. The benchmark rate component, for example, OIS, LIBOR or U.S. Treasury rates, is generally observable within the market and is necessary to appropriately reflect the time value of money. The risk premium component reflects the amount of compensation market participants require due to the uncertainty inherent in the instruments’ cash flows resulting from risks such as credit and liquidity.
· Fall-out factor - is the expected percentage of loans associated with our interest rate lock commitment portfolio that are likely of not funding.
· Initial-value servicing - is the estimated value of the underlying loan, including the value attributable to the embedded servicing right, expressed in basis points of outstanding unpaid principal balance.
· Loss severity – is the percentage of contractual cash flows lost in the event of a default.
· Prepayment rate – is the estimated rate at which forecasted prepayments of principal of the related loan or debt instrument are expected to occur, expressed as a constant prepayment rate (CPR).
· Utilization rate – is the estimated rate in which incremental portions of existing reverse mortgage credit lines are expected to be drawn by borrowers, expressed as an annualized rate.
· Volatility factor – is the extent of change in price an item is estimated to fluctuate over a specified period of time expressed as a percentage of relative change in price over a period over time.
· Weighted average life – is the weighted average number of years an investment is expected to remain outstanding based on its expected cash flows reflecting the estimated date the issuer will call or extend the maturity of the instrument or otherwise reflecting an estimate of the timing of an instrument’s cash flows whose timing is not contractually fixed.
147
Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
We may be required, from time to time, to measure certain assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis in accordance with GAAP. These adjustments to fair value usually result from application of LOCOM accounting or write-downs of individual assets. The following table provides the fair value hierarchy and carrying amount of all assets that were still held as of September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, and for which a nonrecurring fair value adjustment was recorded during the periods presented.
Mortgages held for sale (LOCOM) (1)
1,116
3,305
1,126
414
1,764
1,770
3,697
Total loans (2)
1,968
1,974
4,104
4,111
Other assets (3)
1,185
(1) Mostly real estate 1-4 family first mortgage loans.
(2) Represents carrying value of loans for which adjustments are based on the appraised value of the collateral.
(3) Includes the fair value of foreclosed real estate, other collateral owned and nonmarketable equity investments.
The following table presents the increase (decrease) in value of certain assets for which a nonrecurring fair value adjustment has been recognized during the periods presented.
Mortgages held for sale (LOCOM)
(90)
Consumer (1)
(1,093)
(1,803)
(1,959)
Other assets (2)
(1,408)
(2,164)
(1) Represents write-downs of loans based on the appraised value of the collateral.
(2) Includes the losses on foreclosed real estate and other collateral owned that were measured at fair value subsequent to their initial classification as foreclosed assets. Also includes impairment losses on nonmarketable equity investments.
The table below provides quantitative information about the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of substantially all of our Level 3 assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis for which we use an internal model.
We have excluded from the table classes of Level 3 assets and liabilities measured using an internal model that we consider, both individually and in the aggregate, insignificant relative to our overall Level 3 nonrecurring measurements. We made this determination based upon an evaluation of each class which considered the magnitude of the positions, nature of the unobservable inputs and potential for significant changes in fair value due to changes in those inputs.
Range
Valuation Technique(s) (1)
Unobservable Inputs (1)
of inputs
Average (2)
Residential mortgages
held for sale (LOCOM)
1.9
11.9
8.4
30.6
66.6
Other assets: private equity
fund investments (4)
Insignificant level 3 assets
10.9
48.2
5.2
67.2
505
(1) Refer to the narrative following the recurring quantitative Level 3 table of this Note for a definition of the valuation technique(s) and significant unobservable inputs.
(2) For residential MHFS, weighted averages are calculated using outstanding unpaid principal balance of the loans.
(3) Consists of approximately $1.0 billion and $825 million government insured/guaranteed loans purchased from GNMA-guaranteed mortgage securitizations, at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively and $79 million and $68 million of other mortgage loans which are not government insured/guaranteed at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
(4) Represents a single investment. For additional information, see the “Alternative Investments” section in this Note.
(5) Applies only to non-government insured/guaranteed loans.
(6) Includes the impact on prepayment rate of expected defaults for the government insured/guaranteed loans, which affects the frequency and timing of early resolution of loans.
Alternative Investments
The following table summarizes our investments in various types of funds for which we use net asset values (NAVs) per share as a practical expedient to measure fair value on recurring and nonrecurring bases. The investments are included in trading assets, available-for-sale securities, and other assets. The table excludes those investments that are probable of being sold at an amount different from the funds’ NAVs.
Redemption
Unfunded
notice
frequency
Offshore funds
Daily - Quarterly
1 - 180 days
Hedge funds
Monthly - Quarterly
45-90 days
Private equity funds (1)(2)
1,406
Venture capital funds (2)
Total (3)
Monthly - Semi Annually
5 - 95 days
1,496
1,869
N/A - Not applicable
(1) Excludes a private equity fund investment of $192 million and $505 million at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively, for which we recorded nonrecurring fair value adjustmentsduring the periods then ended. This investment is probable of being sold for an amount different from the fund’s NAV; therefore, the investment’s fair value has been estimated using recent transaction information. This investment is subject to the Volcker Rule, which includes provisions that restrict banking entities from owning interests in certain types of funds.
(2) Includes certain investments subject to the Volcker Rule that we may have to divest.
(3) September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, include $1.4 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively, of fair value for nonmarketable equity investments carried at cost for which we use NAVs as a practical expedient to determine nonrecurring fair value adjustments. The fair values of investments that had nonrecurring fair value adjustments were $45 million and $88 million at September 30, 2014, and December 31, 2013, respectively.
Offshore funds primarily invest in foreign mutual funds. Redemption restrictions are in place for these investments with a fair value of $55 million and $144 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31,2013, respectively, due to lock-up provisions that will remain in effect until February 2017.
Private equity funds invest in equity and debt securities issued by private and publicly-held companies in connection with leveraged buyouts, recapitalizations and expansion opportunities. Substantially all of these investments do not allow redemptions. Alternatively, we receive distributions as the underlying assets of the funds liquidate, which we expect to occur over the next 6 years.
Venture capital funds invest in domestic and foreign companies in a variety of industries, including information technology, financial services and healthcare. These investments can never be redeemed with the funds. Instead, we receive distributions as the underlying assets of the fund liquidate, which we expect to occur over the next 5 years.
Fair Value Option
We elect the fair value option to account for certain financial instruments. For more information, including the basis for the elections, see Note 17 (Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
The following table reflects differences between the fair value carrying amount of certain assets and liabilities for which we have elected the fair value option and the contractual aggregate unpaid principal amount at maturity.
less
Aggregate
aggregate
Mortgages held for sale:
15,547
13,966
Loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing
Loans held for sale:
5,577
5,674
Other assets (1)
n/a
(199)
(1) Consists of nonmarketable equity investments carried at fair value. See Note 6 (Other Assets) for more information.
(2) Represents collateralized, non-recourse debt securities issued by certain of our consolidated securitization VIEs that are held by third party investors. To the extent cash flows from the underlying collateral are not sufficient to pay the unpaid principal amount of the debt, those third party investors absorb losses.
The assets and liabilities accounted for under the fair value option are initially measured at fair value. Gains and losses from initial measurement and subsequent changes in fair value are recognized in earnings. The changes in fair value related to initial measurement and subsequent changes in fair value included in earnings for these assets and liabilities measured at fair value are shownbelow by income statement line item.
Net gains
banking
from
noninterest
trading
activities
Other interests held (1)
1,565
1,805
(175)
Consists of retained interests in securitizations and changes in fair value of letters of credit.
For performing loans, instrument-specific credit risk gains or losses were derived principally by determining the change in fair value of the loans due to changes in the observable or implied credit spread. Credit spread is the market yield on the loans less the relevant risk-free benchmark interest rate. For nonperforming loans, we attribute all changes in fair value to instrument-specific credit risk. The following table shows the estimated gains and losses from earnings attributable to instrument-specific credit risk related to assets accounted for under the fair value option.
Gains (losses) attributable to instrument-specific credit risk:
Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The table below is a summary of fair value estimates for financial instruments, excluding financial instruments recorded at fair value on a recurring basis, as they are included within the Assets and Liabilities Recorded at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis table included earlier in this Note. The carrying amounts in the following table are recorded on the balance sheet under the indicated captions.
We have not included assets and liabilities that are not financial instruments in our disclosure, such as the value of the long-term relationships with our deposit, credit card and trust customers, amortized MSRs, premises and equipment, goodwill and other intangibles, deferred taxes and other liabilities. The total of the fair value calculations presented does not represent, and should not be construed to represent, the underlying value of the Company.
Estimated fair value
Carrying amount
Financial assets
Cash and due from banks (1)
Federal funds sold, securities purchased under resale
agreements and other short-term investments (1)
8,464
253,468
Held-to-maturity securities
Mortgages held for sale (2)
4,423
Loans held for sale (2)
9,291
9,423
Loans, net (3)
808,845
61,013
756,402
817,415
Nonmarketable equity investments (cost method)
8,630
Financial liabilities
1,094,013
36,723
1,130,736
Short-term borrowings (1)
Long-term debt (4)
184,577
176,392
10,795
187,187
5,160
208,633
2,884
2,009
2,902
789,850
58,350
736,551
794,901
8,635
1,037,448
42,079
1,079,527
152,987
144,984
10,879
155,863
(1) Amounts consist of financial instruments in which carrying value approximates fair value.
(2) Balance reflects MHFS and LHFS, as applicable, other than those MHFS and LHFS for which election of the fair value option was made.
(3) Loans exclude balances for which the fair value option was elected and also exclude lease financing with a carrying amount of $11.7 billion and $12.0 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
(4) The carrying amount and fair value exclude obligations under capital leases of $9 million and $11 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
Loan commitments, standby letters of credit and commercial and similar letters of credit are not included in the table above. A reasonable estimate of the fair value of these instruments is the carrying value of deferred fees plus the related allowance, which totaled $918 million and $597 million at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
Note 14: Preferred Stock
We are authorized to issue 20 million shares of preferred stock and 4 million shares of preference stock, both without par value. Preferred shares outstanding rank senior to common shares both as to dividends and liquidation preference but have no general voting rights. We have not issued any preference shares under this authorization. If issued, preference shares would be limited to one vote per share. Our total authorized, issued and outstanding preferred stock is presented in the following two tables along with the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock.
Liquidation
preference
authorized
per share
and designated
DEP Shares
Dividend Equalization Preferred Shares (DEP)
97,000
Series G
7.25% Class A Preferred Stock
15,000
50,000
Series H
Floating Class A Preferred Stock
20,000
Series I
100,000
25,010
Series J
8.00% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
1,000
2,300,000
Series K
7.98% Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
3,500,000
Series L
7.50% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Class A Preferred Stock
4,025,000
Series N
5.20% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
25,000
30,000
Series O
5.125% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
27,600
Series P
5.25% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
26,400
Series Q
5.85% Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
69,000
Series R
6.625% Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
34,500
Series S
5.900% Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
80,000
Series T
6.00% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
32,200
Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock (1)
1,417,599
1,105,664
11,764,309
11,340,174
(1) See the ESOP Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock section of this Note for additional information about the liquidation preference for the ESOP Cumulative Preferred Stock.
Note 14: Preferred Stock (continued)
issued and
Par
outstanding
Discount
96,546
Series I (1)
Series J (1)
2,150,375
2,150
1,995
Series K (1)
3,352,000
3,352
2,876
476
Series L (1)
3,968,000
3,968
3,200
768
Series N (1)
Series O (1)
26,000
Series P (1)
625
Series Q (1)
1,725
Series R (1)
33,600
Series S (1)
Series T (1)
6.000% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock
32,000
Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
1,105
20,778
17,666
(1) Preferred shares qualify as Tier 1 capital.
In April 2014, we issued 2 million Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock, Series S, for an aggregate public offering price of $2.0 billion.
In July 2014, we issued 32 million Depositary Shares, each representing a 1/1,000th interest in a share of Non-Cumulative Perpetual Class A Preferred Stock, Series T, for an aggregate public offering price of $800 million.
See Note 7 (Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities) for additional information on our trust preferred securities. We do not have a commitment to issue Series G or H preferred stock.
ESOP Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock All shares of our ESOP Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock (ESOP Preferred Stock) were issued to a trustee acting on behalf of the Wells Fargo & Company 401(k) Plan (the 401(k) Plan). Dividends on the ESOP Preferred Stock are cumulative from the date of initial issuance and are payable quarterly at annual rates based upon the year of issuance. Each share of ESOP Preferred Stock released from the unallocated reserve of the 401(k) Plan is converted into shares of our common stock based on the stated value of the ESOP Preferred Stock and the then current market price of our common stock. The ESOP Preferred Stock is also convertible at the option of the holder at any time, unless previously redeemed. We have the option to redeem the ESOP Preferred Stock at any time, in whole or in part, at a redemption price per share equal to the higher of (a) $1,000 per share plus accrued and unpaid dividends or (b) the fair market value, as defined in the Certificates of Designation for the ESOP Preferred Stock.
Shares issued and outstanding
Adjustable dividend rate
Minimum
Maximum
ESOP Preferred Stock
$1,000 liquidation preference per share
460,101
8.70
9.70
300,000
349,788
300
8.50
9.50
2012
198,604
217,404
10.00
11.00
2011
217,263
241,263
9.00
2010
151,011
171,011
10.50
47,409
57,819
11.50
2007
29,568
39,248
10.75
11.75
2006
12,859
21,139
2005
7,992
9.75
Total ESOP Preferred Stock (1)
Unearned ESOP shares (2)
(1) At September 30, 2014 and December 31,2013, additional paid-in capital included $123 million and $95 million, respectively, related to ESOP preferred stock.
(2) We recorded a corresponding charge to unearned ESOP shares in connection with the issuance of the ESOP Preferred Stock. The unearned ESOP shares are reduced as shares of the ESOP Preferred Stock are committed to be released.
Note 15: Employee Benefits
We sponsor a noncontributory qualified defined benefit retirement plan, the Wells Fargo & Company Cash Balance Plan (Cash Balance Plan), which covers eligible employees of Wells Fargo. Benefits accrued under the Cash Balance Plan were frozen effective July 1, 2009.
The net periodic benefit cost was:
Pension benefits
Qualified
qualified
benefits
Service cost
Interest cost
Expected return on plan assets
(166)
Amortization of net actuarial loss (gain)
Amortization of prior service credit
Settlement
Net periodic benefit cost (income)
(472)
(507)
We recognize settlement losses for our Cash Balance Plan based on an assessment of whether our estimated lump sum payments related to the Cash Balance Plan will, in aggregate for the year, exceed the sum of its annual service and interest cost (threshold). As of September 30, 2014, it was not considered probable that lump sum payments will exceed this threshold in 2014. In 2013, lump sum payments exceeded this threshold. Settlement losses of $27 million during third quarter 2013 and $95 million as of September 30, 2013 were recognized, representing the pro rata portion of the net loss remaining in cumulative other comprehensive income based on the percentage reduction in the Cash Balance Plan’s projected benefit obligation. A remeasurement of the Cash Balance liability and related plan assets occurs at the end of each quarter in which settlement losses are recognized.
Note 16: Earnings Per Common Share
The table below shows earnings per common share and diluted earnings per common share and reconciles the numerator and denominator of both earnings per common share calculations. See Note 1 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) for discussion of private share repurchases and the Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity.
Less:
Preferred stock dividends and other
Wells Fargo net income applicable to common stock (numerator)
Average common shares outstanding (denominator)
Per share
Add:
Stock options
32.3
34.0
33.4
Restricted share rights
38.9
44.5
41.4
43.9
Warrants
13.3
Diluted average common shares outstanding (denominator)
The following table presents any outstanding options and warrants to purchase shares of common stock that were anti-dilutive (the exercise price was higher than the weighted-average market price), and therefore not included in the calculation of diluted earnings per common share.
Weighted-average shares
Options
10.2
Note 17: Other Comprehensive Income
The components of other comprehensive income (OCI), reclassifications to net income by income statement line item, and the related tax effects were:
Before
Tax
Net of
tax
effect
Net unrealized gains (losses)
arising during the period
260
(684)
643
(1,569)
2,297
(3,591)
Reclassification of net (gains) losses to:
Interest income on investment
securities (1)
Net (gains) losses on debt securities
(253)
(407)
(767)
Subtotal reclassifications
to net income
250
(411)
(750)
(123)
(1,095)
2,661
(1,114)
1,547
(6,119)
2,405
(3,714)
Interest income on loans
(387)
(337)
Interest expense on long-term debt
Salaries expense
(217)
(161)
(76)
(126)
(235)
Net actuarial gains (losses) arising
during the period
(405)
Reclassification of amounts to net
periodic benefit costs (2):
Amortization of net actuarial loss
Settlements and other
Subtotal reclassifications to
net periodic benefit costs
(488)
808
Net unrealized gains (losses) arising
Other comprehensive income (loss)
Less: Other comprehensive income (loss) from
noncontrolling interests, net of tax
Wells Fargo other comprehensive
income (loss), net of tax
Represents unrealized gains amortized over the remaining lives of securities that were transferred from the available-for-sale portfolio to the held-to-maturity portfolio.
These items are included in the computation of net periodic benefit cost, which is recorded in employee benefits expense (see Note 15 (Employee Benefits) for additional details).
Cumulative OCI balances were:
Defined
benefit
currency
Investment
hedging
plans
translation
adjustments
5,025
(1,037)
4,117
Net unrealized losses
Amounts reclassified from accumulated
other comprehensive income
Less: Other comprehensive loss from
noncontrolling interests
4,151
(1,026)
3,177
(1,595)
1,797
Less: Other comprehensive income from
3,483
(1,373)
2,338
(1,053)
2,393
(927)
7,462
(2,181)
(2,958)
Note 18: Operating Segments
We have three reportable operating segments: Community Banking; Wholesale Banking; and Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement. The results for these operating segments are based on our management accounting process, for which there is no comprehensive, authoritative guidance equivalent to GAAP for financial accounting. The management accounting process measures the performance of the operating segments based on our management structure and is not necessarily comparable with similar information for other financial services companies. We define our operating segments by product type and customer segment. If the management structure and/or the allocation process changes, allocations, transfers and assignments may change. For a complete description of our operating segments, including the underlying management accounting process, see Note 24 (Operating Segments) to Financial Statements in our 2013 Form 10-K.
Brokerage
Net interest income (2)
7,472
7,244
3,007
3,059
790
(304)
5,356
5,000
2,895
2,812
2,763
2,558
(742)
Income (loss) before income
tax expense (benefit)
5,312
4,944
2,931
888
(300)
Income tax expense (benefit)
1,609
1,505
Net income (loss) before
3,703
3,439
1,913
1,979
Less: Net income (loss) from
Net income (loss) (3)
Average assets
950.2
836.6
553.0
498.1
188.8
180.8
(74.1)
(68.5)
1,617.9
1,447.0
22,133
21,614
8,851
9,165
2,333
2,118
(970)
(900)
15,894
16,471
8,577
8,927
8,238
7,647
(2,152)
(1,927)
16,019
14,170
7,987
9,054
1,970
(935)
(782)
4,805
4,426
2,376
(355)
(297)
11,214
9,744
6,030
1,571
1,222
920.5
819.2
534.4
496.9
189.0
179.4
(74.3)
(69.7)
1,569.6
1,425.8
(1) Includes corporate items not specific to a business segment and the elimination of certain items that are included in more than one business segment, substantially all of which represents products and services for wealth management customers provided in Community Banking stores.
(2) Net interest income is the difference between interest earned on assets and the cost of liabilities to fund those assets. Interest earned includes actual interest earned on segment assets and, if the segment has excess liabilities, interest credits for providing funding to other segments. The cost of liabilities includes interest expense on segment liabilities and, if the segment does not have enough liabilities to fund its assets, a funding charge based on the cost of excess liabilities from another segment.
(3) Represents segment net income (loss) for Community Banking; Wholesale Banking; and Wealth, Brokerage and Retirement segments and Wells Fargo net income for the consolidated company.
Note 19: Regulatory and Agency Capital Requirements
The Company and each of its subsidiary banks are subject to regulatory capital adequacy requirements promulgated by federal bank regulatory agencies. The Federal Reserve establishes capital requirements, including well capitalized standards, for the consolidated financial holding company, and the OCC has similar requirements for the Company’s national banks, including Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (the Bank).
The following table presents regulatory capital information for Wells Fargo & Company and the Bank. Information presented for September 30, 2014, reflects the transition to Basel III capital requirements from previous regulatory capital adequacy guidelines under Basel I effective in 2013. Among other matters, Basel III revises the definition of capital, and changes are being phased-in effective January 1, 2014, through the end of 2021, with regulatory capital ratios determined using Basel III General Approach risk-weighted assets during 2014. Under the Basel III (General Approach), at September 30, 2014, the Company’s Common Equity Tier 1 capital was $135.9 billion, or 11.11% of risk-weighted assets, and the Bank’s Common Equity Tier 1 capital was $120.0 billion, or 10.69% of risk-weighted assets.
We do not consolidate our wholly-owned trust (the Trust) formed solely to issue trust preferred and preferred purchase securities (the Securities). Securities issued by the Trust includable in Tier 2 capital were $2.1 billion at September 30, 2014. During the first nine months of 2014, we did not redeem any trust preferred securities. Under the new Basel III capital requirements, our remaining trust preferred and preferred purchase securities will begin amortizing in 2016 and will no longer count as Tier 2 capital in 2022.
The Bank is an approved seller/servicer of mortgage loans and is required to maintain minimum levels of shareholders’ equity, as specified by various agencies, including the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, GNMA, FHLMC and FNMA. At September 30, 2014, the Bank met these requirements. Other subsidiaries, including the Company’s insurance and broker-dealer subsidiaries, are also subject to various minimum capital levels, as defined by applicable industry regulations. The minimum capital levels for these subsidiaries, and related restrictions, are not significant to our consolidated operations.
Basel III
Approach)
Well-
capitalized
(in billions, except ratios)
ratios (1)
Regulatory capital:
Tier 1
120.0
110.0
144.7
136.4
Risk-weighted
1,122.8
1,057.3
Adjusted average (2)
1,591.4
1,466.7
1,440.5
1,324.0
Regulatory capital ratios:
12.33
10.69
10.40
6.00
4.00
12.88
12.90
8.00
Tier 1 leverage (2)
9.60
8.33
8.31
5.00
(1) As defined by the regulations issued by the Federal Reserve, OCC and FDIC.
(2) The leverage ratio consists of Tier 1 capital divided by quarterly average total assets, excluding goodwill and certain other items. The minimum leverage ratio guideline is 3% for banking organizations that do not anticipate significant growth and that have well-diversified risk, excellent asset quality, high liquidity, good earnings, effective management and monitoring of market risk and, in general, are considered top-rated, strong banking organizations.
Glossary of Acronyms
Asset-backed security
HAMP
Home Affordability Modification Program
HPI
Home Price Index
ALCO
Asset/Liability Management Committee
HUD
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
ARM
Adjustable-rate mortgage
LCR
Liquidity Coverage Ratio
ARS
Auction rate security
LHFS
ASC
Accounting Standards Codification
LIBOR
London Interbank Offered Rate
ASU
Accounting Standards Update
LIHTC
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
AVM
Automated valuation model
LOCOM
Lower of cost or market value
BCBS
Basel Committee on Bank Supervision
Loan-to-value
BHC
Bank holding company
MBS
Mortgage-backed security
CCAR
Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review
MHA
Making Home Affordable programs
CDO
Collateralized debt obligation
MHFS
CDS
Credit default swaps
MSR
Mortgage servicing right
CET1
Common Equity Tier 1
MTN
Medium-term note
CLO
Collateralized loan obligation
NAV
Net asset value
CLTV
Combined loan-to-value
NPA
Nonperforming asset
OCC
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
CPP
Capital Purchase Program
OCI
Other comprehensive income
CRE
Commercial real estate
OTC
Over-the-counter
DOJ
U.S. Department of Justice
OTTI
Other-than-temporary impairment
DPD
Days past due
PCI Loans
Purchased credit-impaired loans
Employee Stock Ownership Plan
PTPP
Pre-tax pre-provision profit
FAS
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
RBC
Risk-based capital
FASB
Financial Accounting Standards Board
FDIC
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
ROA
Wells Fargo net income to average total assets
FFELP
Federal Family Education Loan Program
ROE
FHA
Federal Housing Administration
to average Wells Fargo common stockholders' equity
FHLB
Federal Home Loan Bank
Risk-weighted assets
FHLMC
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
SEC
Securities and Exchange Commission
FICO
Fair Isaac Corporation (credit rating)
Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services
FNMA
Federal National Mortgage Association
SPE
Special purpose entity
FRB
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
TARP
Troubled Asset Relief Program
FSB
Financial Stability Board
TDR
Troubled debt restructuring
GAAP
Generally accepted accounting principles
VA
Department of Veterans Affairs
GNMA
Government National Mortgage Association
VaR
Value-at-Risk
GSE
Government-sponsored entity
Variable interest entity
G-SIB
Globally systemic important bank
WFCC
Wells Fargo Canada Corporation
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Information in response to this item can be found in Note 11 (Legal Actions) to Financial Statements in this Report which information is incorporated by reference into this item.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Information in response to this item can be found under the “Financial Review – Risk Factors” section in this Report which information is incorporated by reference into this item.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
The following table shows Company repurchases of its common stock for each calendar month in the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
Maximum number of
Total number
shares that may yet
of shares
Weighted-average
be purchased under
Calendar month
repurchased (1)
price paid per share
the authorizations
July (2)
32,031,505
51.31
318,597,894
August
11,802,749
50.52
306,795,145
September
4,835,188
51.79
301,959,957
48,669,442
All shares were repurchased under an authorization covering up to 200 million shares of common stock approved by the Board of Directors and publicly announced by the Company on October 23, 2012, or an authorization covering up to an additional 350 million shares of common stock approved by the Board of Directors and publicly announced by the Company on March 26, 2014. Unless modified or revoked by the Board, these authorizations do not expire.
Includes a private repurchase transaction of 19,485,087 shares at a weighted-average price per share of $51.32.
The following table shows Company repurchases of the warrants for each calendar month in the quarter ended September 30, 2014.
Maximum dollar value
of warrants
Average price
of warrants that
paid per warrant
may yet be purchased
July
451,944,402
Warrants are purchased under the authorization covering up to $1 billion in warrants approved by the Board of Directors (ratified and approved on June 22, 2010). Unless modified or revoked by the Board, this authorization does not expire.
Item 6. Exhibits
A list of exhibits to this Form 10-Q is set forth on the Exhibit Index immediately preceding such exhibits and is incorporated herein by reference.
The Company’s SEC file number is 001-2979. On and before November 2, 1998, the Company filed documents with the SEC under the name Norwest Corporation. The former Wells Fargo & Company filed documents under SEC file number 001-6214.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Dated: November 5, 2014 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY
By: /s/ RICHARD D. LEVY
Richard D. Levy
Executive Vice President and Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT INDEX
Exhibit
Number
Description
Location
3(a)
Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended and in effect on the date hereof.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3(a) to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2014.
3(b)
By-Laws.
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed January 28, 2011.
4(a)
See Exhibits 3(a) and 3(b).
4(b)
The Company agrees to furnish upon request to the Commission a copy of each instrument defining the rights of holders of senior and subordinated debt of the Company.
12(a)
Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges:
Filed herewith.
Including interest
on deposits
8.47
8.29
8.58
7.82
Excluding interest
10.88
11.17
10.65
12(b)
Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Dividends:
5.97
6.18
6.14
5.95
7.00
7.57
7.26
7.38
31(a)
Certification of principal executive officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31(b)
Certification of principal financial officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32(a)
Certification of Periodic Financial Report by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.
Furnished herewith.
32(b)
Certification of Periodic Financial Report by Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350.
XBRL Instance Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document