10-K
2011 ANNUAL REPORT
FINANCIAL CONTENTS
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This report may contain forward-looking statements about Fifth Third Bancorp and/or the company as combined acquired entities within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, and Rule 175 promulgated thereunder, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 3b-6 promulgated thereunder, that involve inherent risks and uncertainties. This report may contain certain
forward-looking statements with respect to the financial condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future performance and business of Fifth Third Bancorp and/or the combined company including statements preceded by, followed by or that
include the words or phrases such as will likely result, may, are expected to, is anticipated, estimate, forecast, projected, intends to, or may include
other similar words or phrases such as believes, plans, trend, objective, continue, remain, or similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as will,
would, should, could, might, can, or similar verbs. There are a number of important factors that could cause future results to differ materially from historical performance and these
forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to: (1) general economic conditions and weakening in the economy, specifically the real estate market, either nationally or in the states in
which Fifth Third, one or more acquired entities and/or the combined company do business, are less favorable than expected; (2) deteriorating credit quality; (3) political developments, wars or other hostilities may disrupt or increase
volatility in securities markets or other economic conditions; (4) changes in the interest rate environment reduce interest margins; (5) prepayment speeds, loan origination and sale volumes, charge-offs and loan loss provisions;
(6) Fifth Thirds ability to maintain required capital levels and adequate sources of funding and liquidity; (7) maintaining capital requirements may limit Fifth Thirds operations and potential growth; (8) changes and
trends in capital markets; (9) problems encountered by larger or similar financial institutions may adversely affect the banking industry and/or Fifth Third; (10) competitive pressures among depository institutions increase significantly;
(11) effects of critical accounting policies and judgments; (12) changes in accounting policies or procedures as may be required by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) or other regulatory agencies; (13) legislative or
regulatory changes or actions, or significant litigation, adversely affect Fifth Third, one or more acquired entities and/or the combined company or the businesses in which Fifth Third, one or more acquired entities and/or the combined company are
engaged, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act); (14) ability to maintain favorable ratings from rating agencies; (15) fluctuation of Fifth Thirds stock price; (16) ability to
attract and retain key personnel; (17) ability to receive dividends from its subsidiaries; (18) potentially dilutive effect of future acquisitions on current shareholders ownership of Fifth Third; (19) effects of accounting or
financial results of one or more acquired entities; (20) difficulties from the separation of Vantiv Holding, LLC from Fifth Third; (21) loss of income from any sale or potential sale of businesses that could have an adverse effect on Fifth
Thirds earnings and future growth; (22) ability to secure confidential information through the use of computer systems and telecommunications networks; and (23) the impact of reputational risk created by these developments on such
matters as business generation and retention, funding and liquidity.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Fifth Third Bancorp provides the following list of acronyms as a tool for the reader. The acronyms identified below are used in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, the Consolidated Financial Statements and in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
|
ALCO: Asset Liability Management Committee
ALLL: Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses ARM: Adjustable Rate Mortgage ATM: Automated Teller
Machine BOLI: Bank Owned Life Insurance bps: Basis points CCAR: Comprehensive Capital Analysis and
Review CDC: Fifth Third Community Development Corporation
CFPB: United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau C&I: Commercial and Industrial CPP: Capital Purchase
Program CRA: Community Reinvestment Act DCF: Discounted Cash Flow DDAs: Demand Deposit Accounts
DIF: Deposit Insurance Fund ERISA: Employee Retirement Income Security Act ERM: Enterprise Risk
Management ERMC: Enterprise Risk Management Committee
EVE: Economic Value of Equity FASB: Financial Accounting Standards Board FDIC: Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation FHLB: Federal Home Loan Bank
FHLMC: Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation FICO: Fair Isaac Corporation (credit rating) FNMA: Federal National
Mortgage Association FRB: Federal Reserve Bank FTAM: Fifth Third Asset Management, Inc. FTE: Fully Taxable
Equivalent FTP: Funds Transfer Pricing FTPS: Fifth Third Processing Solutions, now Vantiv Holding, LLC FTS:
Fifth Third Securities GNMA: Government National Mortgage Association |
|
GSE: Government Sponsored Enterprise IFRS: International Financial Reporting Standards IPO: Initial
Public Offering IRC: Internal Revenue Code IRS: Internal Revenue Service LIBOR: London InterBank Offered
Rate LLC: Limited Liability Company LTV: Loan-to-Value MD&A: Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations MSR: Mortgage Servicing Right
NII: Net Interest Income NM: Not Meaningful NYSE: New York Stock Exchange
OCI: Other Comprehensive Income OREO: Other Real Estate Owned OTTI: Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment PMI: Private Mortgage Insurance RSAs: Restricted Stock Awards SARs: Stock Appreciation
Rights SEC: United States Securities and Exchange Commission
SCAP: Supervisory Capital Assessment Program TARP: Troubled Asset Relief Program TBA: To Be Announced
TDR: Troubled Debt Restructuring TLGP: Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program TSA: Transition Service
Agreement U.S. GAAP: Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
VIE: Variable Interest Entity VRDN: Variable Rate Demand Note |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following is MD&A of certain significant factors that have affected Fifth Third
Bancorps (the Bancorp or Fifth Third) financial condition and results of operations during the periods included in the Consolidated Financial Statements, which are a part of this filing. Reference to the Bancorp
incorporates the parent holding company and all consolidated subsidiaries.
TABLE 1: SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions, except for per share data) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income(a) |
|
$ |
3,575 |
|
|
|
3,622 |
|
|
|
3,373 |
|
|
|
3,536 |
|
|
|
3,033 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
4,782 |
|
|
|
2,946 |
|
|
|
2,467 |
|
Total revenue(a) |
|
|
6,030 |
|
|
|
6,351 |
|
|
|
8,155 |
|
|
|
6,482 |
|
|
|
5,500 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
|
|
4,560 |
|
|
|
628 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
3,758 |
|
|
|
3,855 |
|
|
|
3,826 |
|
|
|
4,564 |
|
|
|
3,311 |
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
(2,113 |
) |
|
|
1,076 |
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
(2,180 |
) |
|
|
1,075 |
|
Common Share Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share, basic |
|
$ |
1.20 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
1.99 |
|
Earnings per share, diluted |
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
1.98 |
|
Cash dividends per common share |
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
1.70 |
|
Book value per share |
|
|
13.92 |
|
|
|
13.06 |
|
|
|
12.44 |
|
|
|
13.57 |
|
|
|
17.18 |
|
Market value per share |
|
|
12.72 |
|
|
|
14.68 |
|
|
|
9.75 |
|
|
|
8.26 |
|
|
|
25.13 |
|
Financial Ratios (%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on assets |
|
|
1.15 |
% |
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
|
|
(1.85 |
) |
|
|
1.05 |
|
Return on average common equity |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
(23.0 |
) |
|
|
11.2 |
|
Dividend payout ratio |
|
|
23.3 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
NM |
|
|
|
85.4 |
|
Average equity as a percent of average assets |
|
|
11.41 |
|
|
|
12.22 |
|
|
|
11.36 |
|
|
|
8.78 |
|
|
|
9.35 |
|
Tangible common equity(b) |
|
|
8.68 |
|
|
|
7.04 |
|
|
|
6.45 |
|
|
|
4.23 |
|
|
|
6.14 |
|
Net interest margin(a) |
|
|
3.66 |
|
|
|
3.66 |
|
|
|
3.32 |
|
|
|
3.54 |
|
|
|
3.36 |
|
Efficiency(a) |
|
|
62.3 |
|
|
|
60.7 |
|
|
|
46.9 |
|
|
|
70.4 |
|
|
|
60.2 |
|
Credit Quality |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net losses charged off |
|
$ |
1,172 |
|
|
|
2,328 |
|
|
|
2,581 |
|
|
|
2,710 |
|
|
|
462 |
|
Net losses charged off as a percent of average loans and leases |
|
|
1.49 |
% |
|
|
3.02 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
3.23 |
|
|
|
0.61 |
|
ALLL as a percent of loans and leases |
|
|
2.78 |
|
|
|
3.88 |
|
|
|
4.88 |
|
|
|
3.31 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
Allowance for credit losses as a percent of loans and
leases(c) |
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
4.17 |
|
|
|
5.27 |
|
|
|
3.54 |
|
|
|
1.29 |
|
Nonperforming assets as a percent of loans, leases and other assets, including other real
estate owned(d) (e) |
|
|
2.23 |
|
|
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
4.22 |
|
|
|
2.38 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
Average Balances |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases, including held for sale |
|
$ |
80,214 |
|
|
|
79,232 |
|
|
|
83,391 |
|
|
|
85,835 |
|
|
|
78,348 |
|
Total securities and other short-term investments |
|
|
17,468 |
|
|
|
19,699 |
|
|
|
18,135 |
|
|
|
14,045 |
|
|
|
12,034 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
112,666 |
|
|
|
112,434 |
|
|
|
114,856 |
|
|
|
114,296 |
|
|
|
102,477 |
|
Transaction deposits(f) |
|
|
72,392 |
|
|
|
65,662 |
|
|
|
55,235 |
|
|
|
52,680 |
|
|
|
50,987 |
|
Core deposits(g) |
|
|
78,652 |
|
|
|
76,188 |
|
|
|
69,338 |
|
|
|
63,815 |
|
|
|
61,765 |
|
Wholesale funding(h) |
|
|
16,939 |
|
|
|
18,917 |
|
|
|
28,539 |
|
|
|
36,261 |
|
|
|
27,254 |
|
Bancorp shareholders equity |
|
|
12,851 |
|
|
|
13,737 |
|
|
|
13,053 |
|
|
|
10,038 |
|
|
|
9,583 |
|
Regulatory Capital Ratios (%) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier I capital |
|
|
11.91 |
% |
|
|
13.89 |
|
|
|
13.30 |
|
|
|
10.59 |
|
|
|
7.72 |
|
Total risk-based capital |
|
|
16.09 |
|
|
|
18.08 |
|
|
|
17.48 |
|
|
|
14.78 |
|
|
|
10.16 |
|
Tier I leverage |
|
|
11.10 |
|
|
|
12.79 |
|
|
|
12.34 |
|
|
|
10.27 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
Tier I common
equity(b) |
|
|
9.35 |
|
|
|
7.48 |
|
|
|
6.99 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
5.72 |
|
(a) |
Amounts presented on an FTE basis. The FTE adjustment for years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007 were $18, $18, $19, $22 and $24,
respectively. |
(b) |
The return on average tangible common equity, tangible common equity and Tier I common equity ratios are non-GAAP measures. For further information, see the Non-GAAP
Financial Measures section of the MD&A. |
(c) |
The allowance for credit losses is the sum of the ALLL and the reserve for unfunded commitments. |
(d) |
Excludes nonaccrual loans held for sale. |
(e) |
The Bancorp modified its nonaccrual policy in 2009 to exclude consumer TDR loans less than 90 days past due as they were performing in accordance with restructuring
terms. For comparability purposes, prior periods were adjusted to reflect this reclassification. |
(f) |
Includes demand, interest checking, savings, money market and foreign office deposits. |
(g) |
Includes transaction deposits plus other time deposits. |
(h) |
Includes certificates $100,000 and over, other deposits, federal funds purchased, short-term borrowings and long-term debt. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 2: QUARTERLY INFORMATION (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
For the three months ended ($ in millions, except per share data) |
|
12/31 |
|
|
9/30 |
|
|
6/30 |
|
|
3/31 |
|
|
12/31 |
|
|
9/30 |
|
|
6/30 |
|
|
3/31 |
|
Net interest income (FTE) |
|
$ |
920 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
884 |
|
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
916 |
|
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
901 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
590 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
827 |
|
|
|
620 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
993 |
|
|
|
946 |
|
|
|
901 |
|
|
|
918 |
|
|
|
987 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
956 |
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
Earnings per share, basic |
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.41 |
|
|
|
0.36 |
|
|
|
0.10 |
|
|
|
0.34 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.16 |
|
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
Earnings per share, diluted |
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
0.35 |
|
|
|
0.10 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
0.16 |
|
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
Fifth Third Bancorp is a diversified financial services company
headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. At December 31, 2011, the Bancorp had $117 billion in assets, operated 15 affiliates with 1,316 full-service Banking Centers, including 104 Bank Mart® locations open seven days a week inside select grocery stores, and 2,425 ATMs in 12 states throughout the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United States.
The Bancorp reports on four business segments: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer Lending and Investment Advisors. The Bancorp also has a 49% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC, formerly Fifth Third Processing Solutions, LLC.
This overview of MD&A highlights selected information in the financial results of the Bancorp and may not contain
all of the information that is important to you. For a more complete understanding of trends, events, commitments, uncertainties, liquidity, capital resources and critical accounting policies and estimates, you should carefully read this entire
document. Each of these items could have an impact on the Bancorps financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, see the Glossary of Terms in this report for a list of acronyms included as a tool for the reader of
this annual report on Form 10-K. The acronyms identified therein are used throughout this MD&A, as well as the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Bancorp believes that banking is first and foremost a relationship business where the strength of the competition
and challenges for growth can vary in every market. The Bancorp believes its affiliate operating model provides a competitive advantage by emphasizing individual relationships. Through its affiliate operating model, individual managers at all levels
within the affiliates are given the opportunity to tailor financial solutions for their customers.
The
Bancorps revenues are dependent on both net interest income and noninterest income. For the year ended December 31, 2011, net interest income, on a FTE basis, and noninterest income provided 59% and 41% of total revenue, respectively. The
Bancorp derives the majority of its revenues within the United States from customers domiciled in the United States. Revenue from foreign countries and external customers domiciled in foreign countries is immaterial to the Bancorps
Consolidated Financial Statements. Changes in interest rates, credit quality, economic trends and the capital markets are primary factors that drive the performance of the Bancorp. As discussed later in the Risk Management section, risk
identification, measurement, monitoring, control and reporting are important to the management of risk and to the financial performance and capital strength of the Bancorp.
Net interest income is the difference between interest income earned on assets such as loans, leases and securities, and
interest expense incurred on liabilities such as deposits, short-term borrowings and long-term debt. Net interest income is affected by the general level of interest rates, the relative level of short-term and long-term interest rates, changes in
interest rates and changes in the amount and composition of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. Generally, the rates of interest the Bancorp earns on its assets and pays on its liabilities are established for a period of time.
The change in market interest rates over time exposes the Bancorp to interest rate risk through potential adverse changes to net interest income and financial position. The Bancorp manages this risk by continually analyzing and adjusting the
composition of its assets and liabilities based on their payment streams and interest rates, the timing of their maturities and their sensitivity to changes in market interest rates. Additionally, in the ordinary course of business, the Bancorp
enters into certain derivative transactions as part of its overall strategy to manage its interest rate and prepayment risks. The Bancorp is also exposed to the risk of losses on its loan and lease portfolio, as a result of changing expected cash
flows caused by loan defaults and inadequate collateral due to a weakened economy within the Bancorps footprint.
Net interest income, net interest margin and the efficiency ratio are
presented in MD&A on a FTE basis. The FTE basis adjusts for the tax-favored status of income from certain loans and securities held by the Bancorp that are not taxable for federal income tax purposes. The Bancorp believes this presentation to be
the preferred industry measurement of net interest income as it provides a relevant comparison between taxable and non-taxable amounts.
Noninterest income is derived primarily from mortgage banking net revenue, service charges on deposits, corporate banking revenue, investment advisory revenue and card and processing revenue. Noninterest
expense is primarily driven by personnel costs, occupancy expenses, costs incurred in the origination of loans and leases and insurance premiums paid to the FDIC.
Common Stock and Senior Notes Offerings
On January 25, 2011,
the Bancorp raised $1.7 billion in new common equity through the issuance of 121,428,572 shares of common stock in an underwritten offering at an initial price of $14.00 per share. On January 24, 2011, the underwriters exercised their option to
purchase an additional 12,142,857 shares at the offering price of $14.00 per share. In connection with this exercise, the Bancorp entered into a forward sale agreement which resulted in a final net payment of 959,821 shares on February 4, 2011.
On January 25, 2011, the Bancorp issued $1.0 billion of Senior notes to third party investors, and
entered into a Supplemental Indenture dated January 25, 2011 with Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, which modifies the existing Indenture for Senior Debt Securities dated April 30, 2008 between the Bancorp and the Trustee. The
Supplemental Indenture and the Indenture define the rights of the Senior notes, which Senior notes are represented by Global Securities dated as of January 25, 2011. The Senior notes bear a fixed rate of interest of 3.625% per annum. The
notes are unsecured, senior obligations of the Bancorp. Payment of the full principal amount of the notes will be due upon maturity on January 25, 2016. The notes will not be subject to the redemption at the Bancorps option at any time
prior to maturity.
Repurchase of Outstanding TARP Preferred Stock
As further discussed in Note 23 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, on December 31, 2008, the Bancorp issued $3.4
billion of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series F, and related warrants to the U.S. Treasury under the U.S. Treasurys CPP.
On February 2, 2011, the Bancorp redeemed all 136,320 shares of its Series F Preferred Stock held by the U.S. Treasury. As discussed above, the net proceeds from the Bancorps January 2011
common stock and senior notes offerings and other funds were used to redeem the $3.4 billion of Series F Preferred Stock.
In connection with the redemption of the Series F preferred Stock, the Bancorp accelerated the accretion of the remaining issuance discount on the Series F Preferred Stock and recorded a corresponding
reduction in retained earnings of $153 million. This resulted in a one-time, noncash reduction in net income available to common shareholders and related basic and diluted earnings per share. Dividends of $15 million were paid on February 2,
2011 when the Series F Preferred Stock was redeemed. The Bancorp paid total dividends of $356 million to the U.S. Treasury while the Series F Preferred Stock was outstanding.
On March 16, 2011, the Bancorp repurchased the warrant issued to the U.S. Treasury in connection with the CPP
preferred stock investment at an agreed upon price of $280 million, which was recorded as a reduction to capital surplus in the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements. The warrant gave the U.S. Treasury the right to purchase 43,617,747
shares of the Bancorps common stock at $11.72 per share.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Redemption of Trust Preferred Securities
On March 18, 2011, the Bancorp announced that the FRB did not object to the Bancorps capital plan submitted under the
FRBs 2011 CCAR. Pursuant to this plan, during the second quarter of 2011 the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities, totalling $452 million, which related to the Fifth Third Capital Trust VII, First National Bankshares Statutory
Trust I and R&G Capital Trust II, LLT. During the third quarter of 2011, pursuant to the previously mentioned plan, the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities, totalling $40 million, which related to the R&G Crown Cap Trust IV
and First National Bankshares Statutory Trust II. During the fourth quarter of 2011, pursuant to the previously mentioned plan, the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities, totalling $25 million, which related to the RG Crown Cap Trust
I. As a result of these redemptions, the Bancorp recorded a $7 million gain on the extinguishment of this debt within other noninterest expense in the Bancorps Consolidated Statements of Income.
Legislative Developments
On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law. This act implements changes to the financial services industry and affects the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities
of financial institutions and their holding companies. The legislation establishes a CFPB responsible for implementing and enforcing compliance with consumer financial laws, changes the methodology for determining deposit insurance assessments,
gives the FRB the ability to regulate and limit interchange rates charged to merchants for
the use of debit cards, enacts new limitations on proprietary trading, broadens the scope of derivative instruments subject to regulation, requires on-going stress tests and the submission of
annual capital plans for certain organizations and requires changes to regulatory capital ratios. This act also calls for federal regulatory agencies to conduct multiple studies over the next several years in order to implement its provisions.
The Bancorp was impacted by a number of the components of the Dodd-Frank Act which were implemented during
2011. The CFPB began operations on July 21, 2011. The CFPB holds primary responsibility for regulating consumer protection by enforcing existing consumer laws, writing new consumer legislation, conducting bank examinations, monitoring and
reporting on markets, as well as collecting and tracking consumer complaints. The FRB final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Acts Durbin Amendment, which limits debit card interchange fees, was issued on July 21, 2011 for
transactions occurring after September 30, 2011. The final rule establishes a cap on the fees banks with more than $10 billion in assets can charge merchants for debit card transactions. The fee was set at $.21 per transaction plus an
additional 5 bps of the transaction amount and $.01 to cover fraud losses. The FRB repealed Regulation Q as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act on July 21, 2011. Regulation Q was implemented as part of the Glass-Steagall Act in the 1930s and
provided a prohibition against the payment of interest on demand deposits. While the total impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on Fifth Third is not currently known, the impact is expected to be substantial and may have an adverse impact on Fifth
Thirds financial performance and growth opportunities.
TABLE 3: CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions, except per share data) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Interest income (FTE) |
|
$ |
4,236 |
|
|
|
4,507 |
|
|
|
4,687 |
|
|
|
5,630 |
|
|
|
6,051 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
|
|
2,094 |
|
|
|
3,018 |
|
Net interest income (FTE) |
|
|
3,575 |
|
|
|
3,622 |
|
|
|
3,373 |
|
|
|
3,536 |
|
|
|
3,033 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
|
|
4,560 |
|
|
|
628 |
|
Net interest income (loss) after provision for loan and lease losses (FTE) |
|
|
3,152 |
|
|
|
2,084 |
|
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
(1,024 |
) |
|
|
2,405 |
|
Noninterest income |
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
4,782 |
|
|
|
2,946 |
|
|
|
2,467 |
|
Noninterest expense |
|
|
3,758 |
|
|
|
3,855 |
|
|
|
3,826 |
|
|
|
4,564 |
|
|
|
3,311 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes (FTE) |
|
|
1,849 |
|
|
|
958 |
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
(2,642 |
) |
|
|
1,561 |
|
Fully taxable equivalent adjustment |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Applicable income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(551 |
) |
|
|
461 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
(2,113 |
) |
|
|
1,076 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
(2,113 |
) |
|
|
1,076 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
(2,180 |
) |
|
|
1,075 |
|
Earnings per share |
|
$ |
1.20 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
1.99 |
|
Earnings per diluted share |
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
1.98 |
|
Cash dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
1.70 |
|
Earnings Summary
The Bancorps net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $1.1 billion, or $1.18 per
diluted share, which was net of $203 million in preferred stock dividends. The Bancorps net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $503 million, or $0.63 per diluted share, which was net of $250
million in preferred stock dividends. The preferred stock dividends during 2011 included $153 million in discount accretion resulting from the Bancorps repurchase of Series F preferred stock.
Net interest income was $3.6 billion for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. Net interest income in 2011
compared to the prior year was impacted by a 22 bps decrease in average yield on average interest earning assets offset by a 25 bps decrease in the average rate paid on interest bearing liabilities and a $3.2 billion decrease in average interest
bearing liabilities, coupled with a mix shift to lower cost deposits. Net interest margin was 3.66% for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Noninterest income decreased $274 million, or 10%, in 2011 compared to
2010 primarily as the result of $152 million litigation settlement related to one of the Bancorps BOLI policies during the third quarter of 2010, a $54 million decrease in service charges on deposits primarily due to the impact of Regulation E
and a $50 million decrease in mortgage banking net revenue primarily as the result of a decrease in origination fees and a decrease in gains on loan sales partially offset by an increase in net servicing revenue.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Noninterest expense decreased $97 million, or three percent, in 2011
compared to 2010 primarily due to a decrease of $59 million in the provision for representation and warranty claims related to residential mortgage loans sold to third parties; a decrease of $41 million in FDIC insurance and other taxes, a $22
million decrease from the change in the provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit, a $21 million decrease in intangible asset amortization and a $19 million decrease in professional service fees. This activity was partially offset by
a $64 million increase in total personnel costs (salaries, wages and incentives plus employee benefits).
Credit Summary
The Bancorp does not originate subprime mortgage loans and does not hold asset-backed securities backed by subprime
mortgage loans in its securities portfolio. However, the Bancorp has exposure to disruptions in the capital markets and weakened economic conditions. Throughout 2010 and 2011, the Bancorp continued to be affected by high unemployment rates,
weakened housing markets, particularly in the upper Midwest and Florida, and a challenging credit environment. Credit trends have improved, and as a result, the provision for loan and lease
losses decreased to $423 million in 2011 compared to $1.5 billion in 2010. In addition, net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased to 1.49% during 2011 compared to 3.02% during 2010. At December 31, 2011, nonperforming
assets as a percent of loans, leases and other assets, including OREO (excluding nonaccrual loans held for sale) decreased to 2.23%, compared to 2.79% at December 31, 2010. For further discussion on credit quality, see the Credit Risk
Management section in MD&A.
Capital Summary
The Bancorps capital ratios exceed the well-capitalized guidelines as defined by the Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System. As of December 31, 2011, the Tier I capital ratio was 11.91%, the Tier I leverage ratio was 11.10% and the total risk-based capital ratio was 16.09%.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
The Bancorp considers various measures when evaluating capital utilization and adequacy,
including the tangible equity ratio, tangible common equity ratio and Tier I common equity ratio, in addition to capital ratios defined by banking regulators. These calculations are intended to complement the capital ratios defined by banking
regulators for both absolute and comparative purposes. Because U.S. GAAP does not include capital ratio measures, the Bancorp believes there are no comparable U.S. GAAP financial measures to these ratios. These ratios are not formally defined by
U.S. GAAP or codified in the federal banking regulations and, therefore, are considered to be non-GAAP financial measures. Since analysts and banking regulators may assess the Bancorps capital adequacy using these ratios, the Bancorp believes
they are useful to provide investors the ability to assess its capital adequacy on the same basis.
The
Bancorp believes these non-GAAP measures are important because they reflect the level of capital available to
withstand unexpected market conditions. Additionally, presentation of these measures allows readers to compare certain aspects of the Bancorps capitalization to other organizations.
However, because there are no standardized definitions for these ratios, the Bancorps calculations may not be comparable with other organizations, and the usefulness of these measures to investors may be limited. As a result, the Bancorp
encourages readers to consider its Consolidated Financial Statements in their entirety and not to rely on any single financial measure.
Pre-provision net revenue is net interest income plus noninterest income minus noninterest expense and taxable equivalent adjustment. The Bancorp believes this measure is important because it provides a
ready view of the Bancorps earnings before the impact of provision expense.
The following table
reconciles non-GAAP financial measures to U.S. GAAP as of December 31:
TABLE 4:
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Income before income taxes (U.S. GAAP) |
|
$ |
1,831 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
Add: Provision expense (U.S. GAAP) |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
Pre-provision net revenue |
|
|
2,254 |
|
|
|
2,478 |
|
Net income available to common shareholders (U.S. GAAP) |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
Add: Intangible amortization, net of tax |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Tangible net income available to common shareholders |
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Total Bancorp shareholders equity (U.S. GAAP) |
|
$ |
13,201 |
|
|
|
14,051 |
|
Less: Preferred stock |
|
|
(398 |
) |
|
|
(3,654 |
) |
Goodwill |
|
|
(2,417 |
) |
|
|
(2,417 |
) |
Intangible assets |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
Tangible common equity, including unrealized gains / losses |
|
|
10,346 |
|
|
|
7,918 |
|
Less: Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
(470 |
) |
|
|
(314 |
) |
Tangible common equity, excluding unrealized gains / losses (1) |
|
|
9,876 |
|
|
|
7,604 |
|
Add: Preferred stock |
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
3,654 |
|
Tangible equity (2) |
|
|
10,274 |
|
|
|
11,258 |
|
Total assets (U.S. GAAP) |
|
$ |
116,967 |
|
|
|
111,007 |
|
Less: Goodwill |
|
|
(2,417 |
) |
|
|
(2,417 |
) |
Intangible assets |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income, before tax |
|
|
(723 |
) |
|
|
(483 |
) |
Tangible assets, excluding unrealized gains / losses (3) |
|
$ |
113,787 |
|
|
|
108,045 |
|
Total Bancorp shareholders equity (U.S. GAAP) |
|
$ |
13,201 |
|
|
|
14,051 |
|
Less: Goodwill and certain other intangibles |
|
|
(2,514 |
) |
|
|
(2,546 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
(470 |
) |
|
|
(314 |
) |
Add: Qualifying trust preferred securities |
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,763 |
|
Other |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Tier I capital |
|
|
12,503 |
|
|
|
13,965 |
|
Less: Preferred stock |
|
|
(398 |
) |
|
|
(3,654 |
) |
Qualifying trust preferred securities |
|
|
(2,248 |
) |
|
|
(2,763 |
) |
Qualified noncontrolling interest in consolidated subsidiaries |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Tier I common equity (4) |
|
$ |
9,807 |
|
|
|
7,518 |
|
Risk-weighted assets (5) (a) |
|
$ |
104,945 |
|
|
|
100,561 |
|
Ratios: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible equity (2) / (3) |
|
|
9.03 |
% |
|
|
10.42 |
|
Tangible common equity (1) / (3) |
|
|
8.68 |
% |
|
|
7.04 |
|
Tier I common equity (4) / (5) |
|
|
9.35 |
% |
|
|
7.48 |
|
(a) |
Under the banking agencies risk-based capital guidelines, assets and credit equivalent amounts of derivatives and off-balance sheet exposures are assigned to
broad risk categories. The aggregate dollar amount in each risk category is multiplied by the associated risk weight of the category. The resulting weighted values are added together, along with the measure for market risk, resulting in the
Bancorps total risk-weighted assets. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
RECENT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements provides a discussion of the
significant new accounting standards adopted by the Bancorp during 2011 and the expected impact of significant accounting standards issued, but not yet required to be adopted.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements are prepared in accordance with U.S.
GAAP. Certain accounting policies require management to exercise judgment in determining methodologies, economic assumptions and estimates that may materially affect the value of the Bancorps assets or liabilities and results of operations and
cash flows. The Bancorps critical accounting policies include the accounting for the ALLL, reserve for unfunded commitments, income taxes, valuation of servicing rights, fair value measurements and goodwill. No material changes were made to
the valuation techniques or models described below during the year ended December 31, 2011.
ALLL
The Bancorp disaggregates its portfolio loans and leases into portfolio segments for purposes of determining the ALLL.
The Bancorps portfolio segments include commercial, residential mortgage, and consumer. The Bancorp further disaggregates its portfolio segments into classes for purposes of monitoring and assessing credit quality based on certain risk
characteristics. Classes within the commercial portfolio segment include commercial and industrial, commercial mortgage owner-occupied, commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied, commercial construction, and commercial leasing. The residential mortgage
portfolio segment is also considered a class. Classes within the consumer segment include home equity, automobile, credit card, and other consumer loans and leases. For an analysis of the Bancorps ALLL by portfolio segment and credit quality
information by class, see Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Bancorp maintains
the ALLL to absorb probable loan and lease losses inherent in its portfolio segments. The ALLL is maintained at a level the Bancorp considers to be adequate and is based on ongoing quarterly assessments and evaluations of the collectability and
historical loss experience of loans and leases. Credit losses are charged and recoveries are credited to the ALLL. Provisions for loan and lease losses are based on the Bancorps review of the historical credit loss experience and such factors
that, in managements judgment, deserve consideration under existing economic conditions in estimating probable credit losses. In determining the appropriate level of the ALLL, the Bancorp estimates losses using a range derived from
base and conservative estimates. The Bancorps strategy for credit risk management includes a combination of conservative exposure limits significantly below legal lending limits and conservative underwriting,
documentation and collections standards. The strategy also emphasizes diversification on a geographic, industry and customer level, regular credit examinations and quarterly management reviews of large credit exposures and loans experiencing
deterioration of credit quality.
The Bancorps methodology for determining the ALLL is based on
historical loss rates, current credit grades, specific allocation on loans modified in a TDR and impaired commercial credits above specified thresholds and other qualitative adjustments. Allowances on individual commercial loans, TDRs and historical
loss rates are reviewed quarterly and adjusted as necessary based on changing borrower and/or collateral conditions and actual collection and charge-off experience. An unallocated allowance is maintained to recognize the imprecision in estimating
and measuring losses when evaluating allowances for individual loans or pools of loans.
Larger commercial loans included within aggregate borrower relationship
balances exceeding $1 million that exhibit probable or observed credit weaknesses, as well as loans that have been modified in a TDR, are subject to individual review for impairment. The Bancorp considers the current value of collateral, credit
quality of any guarantees, the guarantors liquidity and willingness to cooperate, the loan structure, and other factors when evaluating whether an individual loan is impaired. Other factors may include the industry and geographic region of the
borrower, size and financial condition of the borrower, cash flow and leverage of the borrower, and the Bancorps evaluation of the borrowers management. When individual loans are impaired, allowances are determined based on
managements estimate of the borrowers ability to repay the loan given the availability of collateral and other sources of cash flow, as well as an evaluation of legal options available to the Bancorp. Allowances for impaired loans are
measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loans effective interest rate, fair value of the underlying collateral or readily observable secondary market values. The Bancorp evaluates the collectability
of both principal and interest when assessing the need for a loss accrual.
Historical credit loss rates are
applied to commercial loans that are not impaired or are impaired, but smaller than the established threshold of $1 million and thus not subject to specific allowance allocations. The loss rates are derived from a migration analysis, which tracks
the historical net charge-off experience sustained on loans according to their internal risk grade. The risk grading system utilized for allowance analysis purposes encompasses ten categories.
Homogenous loans and leases in the residential mortgage and consumer portfolio segments are not individually risk graded. Rather,
standard credit scoring systems and delinquency monitoring are used to assess credit risks, and allowances are established based on the expected net charge-offs. Loss rates are based on the trailing twelve month net charge-off history by loan
category. Historical loss rates may be adjusted for certain prescriptive and qualitative factors that, in managements judgment, are necessary to reflect losses inherent in the portfolio. Factors that management considers in the analysis
include the effects of the national and local economies; trends in the nature and volume of delinquencies, charge-offs and nonaccrual loans; changes in loan mix; credit score migration comparisons; asset quality trends; risk management and loan
administration; changes in the internal lending policies and credit standards; collection practices; and examination results from bank regulatory agencies and the Bancorps internal credit reviewers.
Loans acquired by the Bancorp through a purchase business combination are recorded at fair value as of the acquisition
date. The Bancorp does not carry over the acquired companys ALLL, nor does the Bancorp add to its existing ALLL as part of purchase accounting.
The Bancorps primary market areas for lending are the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United States. When evaluating the adequacy of allowances, consideration is given to these regional
geographic concentrations and the closely associated effect changing economic conditions have on the Bancorps customers.
Reserve for Unfunded Commitments
The reserve for unfunded commitments is maintained at a level believed by management to be sufficient to absorb estimated
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
probable losses related to unfunded credit facilities and is included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The determination of the adequacy of the reserve is based upon an
evaluation of the unfunded credit facilities, including an assessment of historical commitment utilization experience, credit risk grading and historical loss rates based on credit grade migration. This process takes into consideration the same risk
elements that are analyzed in the determination of the adequacy of the Bancorp ALLL, as discussed above. Net adjustments to the reserve for unfunded commitments are included in other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Income Taxes
The Bancorp estimates income tax expense based on amounts expected to be owed to the various tax jurisdictions in which the Bancorp conducts business. On a quarterly basis, management assesses the
reasonableness of its effective tax rate based upon its current estimate of the amount and components of net income, tax credits and the applicable statutory tax rates expected for the full year. The estimated income tax expense is recorded in the
Consolidated Statements of Income.
Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined using the
balance sheet method and are reported in other assets and accrued taxes, interest and expenses, respectively in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is based on the tax effects of the
differences between the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, and reflects enacted changes in tax rates and laws. Deferred tax assets are recognized to the extent they exist and are subject to a valuation allowance based on managements
judgment that realization is more-likely-than-not. This analysis is performed on a quarterly basis and includes an evaluation of all positive and negative evidence to determine whether realization is more-likely-than-not.
Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due to taxing jurisdictions and are reported in accrued taxes, interest
and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Bancorp evaluates and assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions after considering statutes, regulations, judicial precedent and other
information and maintains tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these relative risks and merits. Changes to the estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in tax rates, interpretations of tax laws, the status of
examinations being conducted by taxing authorities and changes to statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance that impact the relative risks of tax positions. These changes, when they occur, can affect deferred taxes and accrued taxes as well as the
current periods income tax expense and can be significant to the operating results of the Bancorp. For additional information on income taxes, see Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Valuation of Servicing Rights
When the Bancorp sells loans through either securitizations or individual loan sales in accordance with its investment policies, it often obtains servicing rights. Servicing rights resulting from loan
sales are initially recorded at fair value and subsequently amortized in proportion to, and over the period of, estimated net servicing income. Servicing rights are assessed for impairment monthly, based on fair value, with temporary impairment
recognized through a valuation allowance and permanent impairment recognized through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance. Key economic assumptions used in measuring any potential impairment of the servicing rights
include the prepayment speeds of the underlying loans, the weighted-average life, the discount rate, the weighted-average coupon and the weighted-average default rate, as applicable. The primary risk of material changes to the value of the servicing
rights resides in the potential volatility in the economic assumptions used, particularly the prepayment speeds. The Bancorp monitors risk and adjusts its valuation allowance as necessary to adequately reserve for impairment in the servicing
portfolio. For purposes of measuring impairment, the mortgage servicing rights are stratified into classes based on the financial asset type (fixed-rate vs. adjustable-rate) and interest rates. For additional information on servicing rights, see
Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Fair Value Measurements
The Bancorp measures certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which defines fair value as the
price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Valuation techniques the Bancorp uses to measure fair value include the market approach,
income approach and cost approach. The market approach uses prices or relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. The income approach involves discounting future amounts to a single
present amount and is based on current market expectations about those future amounts. The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of the asset.
U.S. GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair
value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). An instruments
categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the instruments fair value measurement. The three levels within the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:
Level 1 Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Bancorp
has the ability to access at the measurement date.
Level 2 Inputs other than quoted prices
included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include: quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets or
liabilities in markets that are not active; inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.
Level 3 Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability for which there is little, if any,
market activity at the measurement date. Unobservable inputs reflect the Bancorps own assumptions about what market participants would use to price the asset or liability. The inputs are developed based on the best information available in the
circumstances, which might include the Bancorps own financial data such as internally developed pricing models and discounted cash flow methodologies, as well as instruments for which the fair value determination requires significant
management judgment.
The Bancorps fair value measurements involve various valuation techniques and
models, which involve inputs that are observable, when available. Valuation techniques and parameters used for measuring assets and liabilities are reviewed and validated by the Bancorp on a quarterly basis. Additionally, the Bancorp monitors the
fair values of significant assets and liabilities using a variety of methods including the evaluation of pricing runs and exception reports based on certain analytical criteria, comparison to previous trades and overall review and assessments for
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
reasonableness. The following is a summary of valuation techniques utilized by the Bancorp for its significant assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
Available-for-sale and trading securities
Where quoted prices are available in an active market, securities are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Level 1 securities include government bonds and exchange traded equities. If
quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flows. Examples of such instruments, which are classified within Level 2 of the
valuation hierarchy, include agency and non-agency mortgage-backed securities, other asset-backed securities, obligations of U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds. Agency mortgage-backed securities, obligations of
U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds are generally valued using a market approach based on observable prices of securities with similar characteristics. Non-agency mortgage-backed securities and other asset-backed
securities are generally valued using an income approach based on discounted cash flows, incorporating prepayment speeds, performance of underlying collateral and specific tranche-level attributes. In certain cases where there is limited activity or
less transparency around inputs to the valuation, securities are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. Trading securities classified as Level 3 consist of auction rate securities. Due to the illiquidity in the market for these types
of securities, the Bancorp measures fair value using a discount rate based on the assumed holding period.
Residential mortgage loans held
for sale and held for investment
For residential mortgage loans held for sale, fair value is estimated based upon
mortgage-backed securities prices and spreads to those prices or, for certain ARM loans, discounted cash flow models that may incorporate the anticipated portfolio composition, credit spreads of asset-backed securities with similar collateral, and
market conditions. The anticipated portfolio composition includes the effect of interest rate spreads and discount rates due to loan characteristics such as the state in which the loan was originated, the loan amount and the ARM margin. Residential
mortgage loans held for sale that are valued based on mortgage-backed securities prices are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy as the valuation is based on external pricing for similar instruments. ARM loans classified as held for
sale are also classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy due to the use of observable inputs in the discounted cash flow model. These observable inputs include interest rate spreads from agency mortgage-backed securities market rates and
observable discount rates. For residential mortgage loans reclassified from held for sale to held for investment, the fair value estimation is based primarily on the underlying collateral values. Therefore, these loans are classified within Level 3
of the valuation hierarchy.
Derivatives
Exchange-traded derivatives valued using quoted prices and certain over-the-counter derivatives valued using active bids are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Most of the
Bancorps derivative contracts are valued using discounted cash flow or other models that incorporate current market interest rates, credit spreads assigned to the derivative counterparties, and other market parameters and, therefore, are
classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy. Such derivatives include basic and structured interest rate swaps and options. Derivatives that are valued based upon models with significant unobservable market parameters are classified within
Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. At December 31, 2011, derivatives classified as Level 3, which are valued using an option-pricing model containing unobservable inputs, consisted primarily of warrants and put rights associated with the sale
of Vantiv Holding, LLC and a total return swap associated with the Bancorps sale of its Visa, Inc. Class B shares. Level 3 derivatives also include interest rate lock commitments, which utilize internally generated loan closing rate
assumptions as a significant unobservable input in the valuation process.
In addition to the assets and
liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, the Bancorp measures servicing rights, certain loans and long-lived assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. Refer to Note 27 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further
information on fair value measurements.
Goodwill
Business combinations entered into by the Bancorp typically include the acquisition of goodwill. U.S. GAAP requires goodwill to be tested
for impairment at the Bancorps reporting unit level on an annual basis, which for the Bancorp is September 30, and more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that there may be impairment. The Bancorp has determined that its
segments qualify as reporting units under U.S. GAAP. Impairment exists when a reporting units carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value, which is determined through a two-step impairment test. The first step (Step 1) compares
the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step (Step 2) of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the impairment
loss amount, if any.
The fair value of a reporting unit is the price that would be received to sell the unit
as a whole in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Since none of the Bancorps reporting units are publicly traded, individual reporting unit fair value determinations cannot be directly correlated to the
Bancorps stock price. To determine the fair value of a reporting unit, the Bancorp employs an income-based approach, utilizing the reporting units forecasted cash flows (including a terminal value approach to estimate cash flows beyond
the final year of the forecast) and the reporting units estimated cost of equity as the discount rate. Additionally, the Bancorp determines its market capitalization based on the average of the closing price of the Bancorps stock during
the month including the measurement date, incorporating an additional control premium, and compares this market-based fair value measurement to the aggregate fair value of the Bancorps reporting units in order to corroborate the results of the
income approach.
When required to perform Step 2, the Bancorp compares the implied fair value of a reporting
units goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount exceeds the implied fair value, an impairment loss equal to that excess amount is recognized. An impairment loss recognized cannot exceed the carrying amount of
that goodwill and cannot be reversed even if the fair value of the reporting unit recovers.
During Step 2,
the Bancorp determines the implied fair value of goodwill for a reporting unit by assigning the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. The excess of the fair value of the reporting unit over the amounts assigned to its
assets and liabilities is the implied fair value of goodwill. This assignment process is only performed for purposes of testing goodwill for impairment. The Bancorp does not adjust the carrying values of recognized assets or liabilities (other than
goodwill, if appropriate), nor recognize previously unrecognized intangible assets in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a result of this assignment process. Refer to Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further
information regarding the Bancorps goodwill.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
RISK FACTORS
The risks listed below present risks that could have a material impact on the
Bancorps financial condition, the results of its operations, or its business.
RISKS RELATING TO ECONOMIC AND MARKET CONDITIONS
Weakness in the economy and in the real estate market, including specific weakness within Fifth Thirds
geographic footprint, has adversely affected Fifth Third and may continue to adversely affect Fifth Third.
If the
strength of the U.S. economy in general or the strength of the local economies in which Fifth Third conducts operations declines or does not improve in a reasonable time frame, this could result in, among other things, a deterioration in credit
quality or a reduced demand for credit, including a resultant effect on Fifth Thirds loan portfolio and ALLL and in the receipt of lower proceeds from the sale of loans and foreclosed properties. A significant portion of Fifth Thirds
residential mortgage and commercial real estate loan portfolios are comprised of borrowers in Michigan, Northern Ohio and Florida, which markets have been particularly adversely affected by job losses, declines in real estate value, declines in home
sale volumes, and declines in new home building. These factors could result in higher delinquencies, greater charge-offs and increased losses on the sale of foreclosed real estate in future periods, which could materially adversely affect Fifth
Thirds financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in interest rates could affect Fifth Thirds
income and cash flows.
Fifth Thirds income and cash flows depend to a great extent on the difference between the
interest rates earned on interest-earning assets such as loans and investment securities, and the interest rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowings. These rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond
Fifth Thirds control, including general economic conditions and the policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies (in particular, the FRB). Changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, will influence the
origination of loans, the prepayment speed of loans, the purchase of investments, the generation of deposits and the rates received on loans and investment securities and paid on deposits or other sources of funding. The impact of these changes may
be magnified if Fifth Third does not effectively manage the relative sensitivity of its assets and liabilities to changes in market interest rates. Fluctuations in these areas may adversely affect Fifth Third and its shareholders.
Changes and trends in the capital markets may affect Fifth Thirds income and cash flows.
Fifth Third enters into and maintains trading and investment positions in the capital markets on its own behalf and manages investment
positions on behalf of its customers. These investment positions include derivative financial instruments. The revenues and profits Fifth Third derives from managing proprietary and customer trading and investment positions are dependent on market
prices. Market changes and trends may result in a decline in investment advisory revenue or investment or trading losses that may materially affect Fifth Third. Losses on behalf of its customers could expose Fifth Third to litigation, credit risks
or loss of revenue from those customers. Additionally, substantial losses in Fifth Thirds trading and investment positions could lead to a loss with respect to those investments and may adversely affect cash flows and funding costs.
The removal or reduction in stimulus activities sponsored by the Federal Government
and its agents may have a negative impact on Fifth Thirds results and operations.
The Federal Government has
intervened in an unprecedented manner to stimulate economic growth. The expiration or rescission of any of these programs may have an adverse impact on Fifth Thirds operating results by increasing interest rates, increasing the cost of
funding, and reducing the demand for loan products, including mortgage loans.
Problems encountered by financial institutions larger than
or similar to Fifth Third could adversely affect financial markets generally and have indirect adverse effects on Fifth Third.
The commercial soundness of many financial institutions may be closely interrelated as a result of credit, trading, clearing or other relationships between the institutions. As a result, concerns about,
or a default or threatened default by, one institution could lead to significant market-wide liquidity and credit problems, losses or defaults by other institutions. This is sometimes referred to as systemic risk and may adversely affect
financial intermediaries, such as clearing agencies, clearing houses, banks, securities firms and exchanges, with which the Bancorp interacts on a daily basis, and therefore could adversely affect Fifth Third.
Fifth Thirds stock price is volatile.
Fifth Thirds stock price has been volatile in the past and several factors could cause the price to fluctuate substantially in the future. These factors include:
|
|
|
Actual or anticipated variations in earnings; |
|
|
|
Changes in analysts recommendations or projections; |
|
|
|
Fifth Thirds announcements of developments related to its businesses; |
|
|
|
Operating and stock performance of other companies deemed to be peers; |
|
|
|
Actions by government regulators; |
|
|
|
New technology used or services offered by traditional and non-traditional competitors |
|
|
|
News reports of trends, concerns and other issues related to the financial services industry |
|
|
|
Geopolitical conditions such as acts or threats of terrorism or military conflicts. |
The price for shares of Fifth Thirds common stock may fluctuate significantly in the future, and these fluctuations may be unrelated
to Fifth Thirds performance. General market price declines or market volatility in the future could adversely affect the price for shares of Fifth Thirds common stock, and the current market price of such shares may not be indicative of
future market prices.
RISKS RELATING TO FIFTH THIRDS GENERAL BUSINESS
Deteriorating credit quality, particularly in real estate loans, has adversely impacted Fifth Third and may continue to adversely
impact Fifth Third.
When Fifth Third lends money or commits to lend money the Bancorp incurs credit risk or the risk
of losses if borrowers do not repay their loans. The credit performance of the loan portfolios significantly affects the Bancorps financial results and condition. If the current economic environment were to deteriorate, more customers may have
difficulty in repaying their loans or other obligations which could result in a higher level of credit losses and reserves for credit losses. Fifth Third reserves for credit losses by
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
establishing reserves through a charge to earnings. The amount of these reserves is based on Fifth Thirds assessment of credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio (including unfunded
credit commitments). The process for determining the amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses and the reserve for unfunded commitments is critical to Fifth Thirds financial results and condition. It requires difficult, subjective and
complex judgments about the environment, including analysis of economic or market conditions that might impair the ability of borrowers to repay their loans.
Fifth Third might underestimate the credit losses inherent in its loan portfolio and have credit losses in excess of the amount reserved. Fifth Third might increase the reserve because of changing
economic conditions, including falling home prices or higher unemployment, or other factors such as changes in borrowers behavior. As an example, borrowers may strategically default, or discontinue making payments on their real
estate-secured loans if the value of the real estate is less than what they owe, even if they are still financially able to make the payments.
Fifth Third believes that both the allowance for loan and lease losses and reserve for unfunded commitments are adequate to cover inherent losses at December 31, 2011; however, there is no assurance
that they will be sufficient to cover future credit losses, especially if housing and employment conditions worsen. In the event of significant deterioration in economic conditions, Fifth Third may be required to build reserves in future periods,
which would reduce earnings.
For more information, refer to the Risk ManagementCredit Risk
Management, Critical Accounting PoliciesAllowance for Loan and Leases, and Reserve for Unfunded Commitments of the MD&A.
Fifth Third must maintain adequate sources of funding and liquidity.
Fifth Third must maintain adequate funding sources in the normal course of business to support its operations and fund outstanding
liabilities, as well as meet regulatory expectations. Fifth Third primarily relies on bank deposits to be a low cost and stable source of funding for the loans Fifth Third makes and the operations of Fifth Thirds business. Core customer
deposits, which include transaction deposits and other time deposits, have historically provided Fifth Third with a sizeable source of relatively stable and low-cost funds (average core deposits funded 71% of average total assets at
December 31, 2011). In addition to customer deposits, sources of liquidity include investments in the securities portfolio, Fifth Thirds ability to sell or securitize loans in secondary markets and to pledge loans to access secured
borrowing facilities through the FHLB and the FRB, and Fifth Thirds ability to raise funds in domestic and international money and capital markets.
Fifth Thirds liquidity and ability to fund and run the business could be materially adversely affected by a variety of conditions and factors, including financial and credit market
disruptions and volatility or a lack of market or customer confidence in financial markets in general similar to what occurred during the financial crisis in 2008 and early 2009, which may result in a loss of customer deposits or outflows of
cash or collateral and/or ability to access capital markets on favorable terms.
Other conditions and factors
that could materially adversely affect Fifth Thirds liquidity and funding include a lack of market or customer confidence in Fifth Third or negative news about Fifth Third or the financial services industry generally which also may result in a
loss of deposits and/or negatively affect the ability to access the capital markets; the loss of customer deposits to alternative investments; inability to sell or securitize loans or other assets, and reductions in one or more of Fifth Thirds
credit ratings. A reduced credit rating could adversely affect Fifth Thirds ability to borrow funds and raise the cost of borrowings substantially and
could cause creditors and business counterparties to raise collateral requirements or take
other actions that could adversely affect Fifth Thirds ability to raise capital. Many of the above conditions and factors may be caused by events over which Fifth Third has little or no control such as what occurred during the financial
crisis. While market conditions have stabilized and, in many cases, improved, there can be no assurance that significant disruption and volatility in the financial markets will not occur in the future.
Other material adverse effects could include a reduction in Fifth Thirds credit ratings resulting from a further
decrease in the probability of government support for large financial institutions such as Fifth Third assumed by the ratings agencies in their current credit ratings.
If Fifth Third is unable to continue to fund assets through customer bank deposits or access capital markets on
favorable terms or if Fifth Third suffers an increase in borrowing costs or otherwise fails to manage liquidity effectively, liquidity, operating margins, financial results and condition may be materially adversely affected. As Fifth Third did
during the financial crisis, it may also need to raise additional capital through the issuance of stock, which could dilute the ownership of existing stockholders, or reduce or even eliminate common stock dividends to preserve capital.
Fifth Third may have more credit risk and higher credit losses to the extent loans are concentrated by location of the borrower or collateral.
Fifth Thirds credit risk and credit losses can increase if its loans are concentrated to borrowers engaged in
the same or similar activities or to borrowers who as a group may be uniquely or disproportionately affected by economic or market conditions. Deterioration in economic conditions, housing conditions and real estate values in these states and
generally across the country could result in materially higher credit losses.
Bankruptcy laws may be changed to allow mortgage
cram-downs, or court-ordered modifications to mortgage loans including the reduction of principal balances.
Under current bankruptcy laws, courts cannot force a modification of mortgage and home equity loans secured by primary residences. In
response to the financial crises, legislation has been proposed to allow mortgage loan cram-downs, which would empower courts to modify the terms of mortgage and home equity loans including a reduction in the principal amount to reflect
lower underlying property values. This could result in writing down the balance of mortgage and home equity loans to reflect their lower loan values. There is also risk that home equity loans in a second lien position (i.e. behind a mortgage) could
experience significantly higher losses to the extent they became unsecured as a result of a cram-down. The availability of principal reductions or other modifications to mortgage loan terms could make bankruptcy a more attractive option for troubled
borrowers, leading to increased bankruptcy filings and accelerated defaults.
Fifth Third may be required to repurchase mortgage loans or
reimburse investors and others as a result of breaches in contractual representations and warranties.
Fifth Third
sells residential mortgage loans to various parties, including GSEs and other financial institutions that purchase mortgage loans for investment or private label securitization. Fifth Third may be required to repurchase mortgage loans, indemnify the
securitization trust, investor or insurer, or reimburse the securitization trust, investor or insurer for credit losses incurred on loans in the event of a breach of contractual representations or warranties that is not remedied within a period
(usually 90 days or less) after Fifth Third receives notice of the breach. Contracts for mortgage loan sales to the GSEs include various types of specific remedies and penalties that could be applied to inadequate
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
responses to repurchase requests. If economic conditions and the housing market do not
recover or future investor repurchase demand and success at appealing repurchase requests differ from past experience, Fifth Third could continue to have increased repurchase obligations and increased loss severity on repurchases, requiring material
additions to the repurchase reserve.
If Fifth Third does not adjust to rapid changes in the financial services industry, its financial
performance may suffer.
Fifth Thirds ability to deliver strong financial performance and returns on investment
to shareholders will depend in part on its ability to expand the scope of available financial services to meet the needs and demands of its customers. In addition to the challenge of competing against other banks in attracting and retaining
customers for traditional banking services, Fifth Thirds competitors also include securities dealers, brokers, mortgage bankers, investment advisors, specialty finance and insurance companies who seek to offer one-stop financial services that
may include services that banks have not been able or allowed to offer to their customers in the past or may not be currently able or allowed to offer. This increasingly competitive environment is primarily a result of changes in regulation, changes
in technology and product delivery systems, as well as the accelerating pace of consolidation among financial service providers.
If Fifth Third is unable to grow its deposits, it may be subject to paying higher funding costs.
The total amount that Fifth Third pays for funding costs is dependent, in part, on Fifth Thirds ability to grow its deposits. If
Fifth Third is unable to sufficiently grow its deposits, it may be subject to paying higher funding costs. Fifth Third competes with banks and other financial services companies for deposits. If competitors raise the rates they pay on deposits,
Fifth Thirds funding costs may increase, either because Fifth Third raises rates to avoid losing deposits or because Fifth Third loses deposits and must rely on more expensive sources of funding. Higher funding costs reduce our net interest
margin and net interest income. Fifth Thirds bank customers could take their money out of the bank and put it in alternative investments, causing Fifth Third to lose a lower cost source of funding. Checking and savings account balances and
other forms of customer deposits may decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff.
The Bancorps ability to receive dividends from its subsidiaries accounts for most of its revenue and could affect its liquidity and ability to pay dividends.
Fifth Third Bancorp is a separate and distinct legal entity from its subsidiaries. Fifth Third Bancorp typically receives substantially
all of its revenue from dividends from its subsidiaries. These dividends are the principal source of funds to pay dividends on Fifth Third Bancorps stock and interest and principal on its debt. Various federal and/or state laws and
regulations, as well as regulatory expectations, limit the amount of dividends that the Bancorps banking subsidiary and certain nonbank subsidiaries may pay. Also, Fifth Third Bancorps right to participate in a distribution of assets
upon a subsidiarys liquidation or reorganization is subject to the prior claims of that subsidiarys creditors. Limitations on the Bancorps ability to receive dividends from its subsidiaries could have a material adverse effect on
its liquidity and ability to pay dividends on stock or interest and principal on its debt.
The financial services industry is highly
competitive and creates competitive pressures that could adversely affect Fifth Thirds revenue and profitability.
The financial services industry in which Fifth Third operates is highly competitive. Fifth Third competes not only with commercial
banks, but also with insurance companies, mutual funds, hedge funds, and other companies
offering financial services in the U.S., globally and over the internet. Fifth Third competes on the basis of several factors, including capital, access to capital, revenue generation, products, services, transaction execution, innovation,
reputation and price. Over time, certain sectors of the financial services industry have become more concentrated, as institutions involved in a broad range of financial services have been acquired by or merged into other firms. These developments
could result in Fifth Thirds competitors gaining greater capital and other resources, such as a broader range of products and services and geographic diversity. Fifth Third may experience pricing pressures as a result of these factors and as
some of its competitors seek to increase market share by reducing prices.
Fifth Third and/or the holders of its securities could be
adversely affected by unfavorable ratings from rating agencies.
Fifth Thirds ability to access the capital
markets is important to its overall funding profile. This access is affected by the ratings assigned by rating agencies to Fifth Third, certain of its subsidiaries and particular classes of securities they issue. The interest rates that Fifth Third
pays on its securities are also influenced by, among other things, the credit ratings that it, its subsidiaries and/or its securities receive from recognized rating agencies. A downgrade to Fifth Third or its subsidiaries credit rating could
affect its ability to access the capital markets, increase its borrowing costs and negatively impact its profitability. A ratings downgrade to Fifth Third, its subsidiaries or their securities could also create obligations or liabilities to Fifth
Third under the terms of its outstanding securities that could increase Fifth Thirds costs or otherwise have a negative effect on its results of operations or financial condition. Additionally, a downgrade of the credit rating of any
particular security issued by Fifth Third or its subsidiaries could negatively affect the ability of the holders of that security to sell the securities and the prices at which any such securities may be sold.
Fifth Third could suffer if it fails to attract and retain skilled personnel.
Fifth Thirds success depends, in large part, on its ability to attract and retain key individuals. Competition for qualified
candidates in the activities and markets that Fifth Third serves is great and Fifth Third may not be able to hire these candidates and retain them. If Fifth Third is not able to hire or retain these key individuals, Fifth Third may be unable to
execute its business strategies and may suffer adverse consequences to its business, operations and financial condition.
In June 2010, the federal banking agencies issued joint guidance on executive compensation designed to help ensure that a banking organizations incentive compensation policies do not encourage
imprudent risk taking and are consistent with the safety and soundness of the organization. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires those agencies, along with the SEC, to adopt rules to require reporting of incentive compensation and to prohibit
certain compensation arrangements. The federal banking agencies and SEC proposed such rules in April 2011. If Fifth Third is unable to attract and retain qualified employees, or do so at rates necessary to maintain its competitive position, or if
compensation costs required to attract and retain employees become more expensive, Fifth Thirds performance, including its competitive position, could be materially adversely affected.
Fifth Thirds mortgage banking revenue can be volatile from quarter to quarter.
Fifth Third earns revenue from the fees it receives for originating mortgage loans and for servicing mortgage loans. When rates rise, the
demand for mortgage loans tends to fall, reducing the revenue Fifth Third receives from loan originations. At the same time,
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
revenue from MSRs can increase through increases in fair value. When rates fall, mortgage
originations tend to increase and the value of MSRs tends to decline, also with some offsetting revenue effect. Even though the origination of mortgage loans can act as a natural hedge, the hedge is not perfect, either in amount or
timing. For example, the negative effect on revenue from a decrease in the fair value of residential MSRs is immediate, but any offsetting revenue benefit from more originations and the MSRs relating to the new loans would accrue over time. It is
also possible that, because of the recession and deteriorating housing market, even if interest rates were to fall, mortgage originations may also fall or any increase in mortgage originations may not be enough to offset the decrease in the MSRs
value caused by the lower rates.
Fifth Third typically uses derivatives and other instruments to hedge its
mortgage banking interest rate risk. Fifth Third generally does not hedge all of its risks, and the fact that Fifth Third attempts to hedge any of the risks does not mean Fifth Third will be successful. Hedging is a complex process, requiring
sophisticated models and constant monitoring. Fifth Third may use hedging instruments tied to U.S. Treasury rates, LIBOR or Eurodollars that may not perfectly correlate with the value or income being hedged. Fifth Third could incur significant
losses from its hedging activities. There may be periods where Fifth Third elects not to use derivatives and other instruments to hedge mortgage banking interest rate risk.
Changes in interest rates could also reduce the value of MSRs.
Fifth Third acquires MSRs when it keeps the servicing rights after the sale or securitization of the loans that have been originated or
when it purchases the servicing rights to mortgage loans originated by other lenders. Fifth Third initially measures all residential MSRs at fair value and subsequently amortizes the MSRs in proportion to, and over the period of, estimated net
servicing income. Fair value is the present value of estimated future net servicing income, calculated based on a number of variables, including assumptions about the likelihood of prepayment by borrowers. Servicing rights are assessed for
impairment monthly, based on fair value, with temporary impairment recognized through a valuation allowance and permanent impairment recognized through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance.
Changes in interest rates can affect prepayment assumptions and thus fair value. When interest rates fall, borrowers are
usually more likely to prepay their mortgage loans by refinancing them at a lower rate. As the likelihood of
prepayment
increases, the fair value of MSRs can decrease. Each quarter Fifth Third evaluates the fair value of MSRs, and decreases in fair value below amortized cost reduce earnings in the period in which the decrease occurs.
The preparation of Fifth Thirds financial statements requires the use of estimates that may vary from actual results.
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make
significant estimates that affect the financial statements. Two of Fifth Thirds most critical estimates are the level of the ALLL and the valuation of MSRs. Due to the uncertainty of estimates involved, Fifth Third may have to significantly
increase the ALLL and/or sustain credit losses that are significantly higher than the provided allowance and could recognize a significant provision for impairment of its MSRs. If Fifth Thirds ALLL is not adequate, Fifth Thirds business,
financial condition, including its liquidity and capital, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Fifth Third regularly reviews its litigation reserves for adequacy considering its litigation risks and probability of incurring losses related to litigation. However, Fifth Third cannot be certain that
its current litigation reserves will be adequate over time to cover its losses in litigation due to higher than anticipated settlement costs, prolonged litigation, adverse judgments, or other factors that are largely outside of Fifth Thirds
control. If Fifth Thirds litigation
reserves are not adequate, Fifth Thirds business, financial condition, including its
liquidity and capital, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, in the future, Fifth Third may increase its litigation reserves, which could have a material adverse effect on its capital and results of
operations.
Changes in accounting standards could impact Fifth Thirds reported earnings and financial condition.
The accounting standard setters, including the FASB, the SEC and other regulatory bodies, periodically change the
financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of Fifth Thirds consolidated financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how Fifth Third records and reports its financial
condition and results of operations. In some cases, Fifth Third could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, which would result in the recasting of Fifth Thirds prior period financial statements.
Future acquisitions may dilute current shareholders ownership of Fifth Third and may cause Fifth Third to become more susceptible to adverse
economic events.
Future business acquisitions could be material to Fifth Third and it may issue additional shares of
stock to pay for those acquisitions, which would dilute current shareholders ownership interests. Acquisitions also could require Fifth Third to use substantial cash or other liquid assets or to incur debt. In those events, Fifth Third could
become more susceptible to economic downturns and competitive pressures.
Difficulties in combining the operations of acquired entities
with Fifth Thirds own operations may prevent Fifth Third from achieving the expected benefits from its acquisitions.
Inherent uncertainties exist when integrating the operations of an acquired entity. Fifth Third may not be able to fully achieve its strategic objectives and planned operating efficiencies in an
acquisition. In addition, the markets and industries in which Fifth Third and its potential acquisition targets operate are highly competitive. Fifth Third may lose customers or the customers of acquired entities as a result of an acquisition.
Future acquisition and integration activities may require Fifth Third to devote substantial time and resources and as a result Fifth Third may not be able to pursue other business opportunities.
After completing an acquisition, Fifth Third may find certain items are not accounted for properly in accordance with
financial accounting and reporting standards. Fifth Third may also not realize the expected benefits of the acquisition due to lower financial results pertaining to the acquired entity. For example, Fifth Third could experience higher charge offs
than originally anticipated related to the acquired loan portfolio.
Fifth Third may sell or consider selling one or more of its
businesses. Should it determine to sell such a business, it may not be able to generate gains on sale or related increase in shareholders equity commensurate with desirable levels. Moreover, if Fifth Third sold such businesses, the loss of
income could have an adverse effect on its earnings and future growth.
Fifth Third owns several non-strategic
businesses that are not significantly synergistic with its core financial services businesses. Fifth Third has, from time to time, considered the sale of such businesses. If it were to determine to sell such businesses, Fifth Third would be subject
to market forces that may make completion of a sale unsuccessful or may not be able to do so within a desirable time frame. If Fifth Third were to complete the sale of non-core businesses, it would suffer the loss of income from the sold
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
businesses, and such loss of income could have an adverse effect on its future earnings and
growth.
Fifth Third relies on its systems and certain service providers, and certain failures could materially adversely affect
operations.
Fifth Third collects, processes and stores sensitive consumer data by utilizing computer systems and
telecommunications networks operated by both Fifth Third and third party service providers. Fifth Third has security, backup and recovery systems in place, as well as a business continuity plan to ensure the system will not be inoperable. Fifth
Third also has security to prevent unauthorized access to the system. In addition, Fifth Third requires its third party service providers to maintain similar controls. However, Fifth Third cannot be certain that the measures will be successful. A
security breach in the system and loss of confidential information such as credit card numbers and related information could result in losing the customers confidence and thus the loss of their business as well as additional significant costs
for privacy monitoring activities.
Fifth Thirds necessary dependence upon automated systems to record
and process its transaction volume poses the risk that technical system flaws or employee errors, tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses and may be difficult to detect. Fifth Third may also be subject to disruptions of its
operating systems arising from events that are beyond its control (for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages). Fifth Third is further exposed to the risk that its third party service providers may be unable to fulfill
their contractual obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors as Fifth Third). These disruptions may interfere with service to Fifth Thirds customers and result in a financial loss or liability.
Fifth Third is exposed to operational and reputational risk.
Fifth Third is exposed to many types of operational risk, including reputational risk, legal and compliance risk, environmental risks from
its properties, the risk of fraud or theft by employees, customers or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by employees, operating system disruptions or operational errors.
Negative public opinion can result from Fifth Thirds actual or alleged conduct in activities, such as lending
practices, data security, corporate governance and acquisitions, and may damage Fifth Thirds reputation. Negative public opinion has been observed through the media coverage of public protests and in relation to banks participating in the U.S.
Treasurys TARP program, in which Fifth Third was a participant. Additionally, actions taken by government regulators and community organizations may also damage Fifth Thirds reputation. This negative public opinion can adversely affect
Fifth Thirds ability to attract and keep customers and can expose it to litigation and regulatory action.
The results of Vantiv
Holding, LLC could have a negative impact on Fifth Thirds operating results and financial condition.
During the
second quarter of 2009, Fifth Third sold an approximate 51% interest in its processing business, Vantiv Holding, LLC (formerly Fifth Third Processing Solutions) to Advent International. Based on Fifth Thirds current ownership share in Vantiv
Holding, LLC, of approximately 49%, Vantiv Holding, LLC is accounted for under the equity method and is not consolidated. Poor operating results of Vantiv Holding, LLC could negatively affect the operating results of Fifth Third. In connection with
the sale, Fifth Third provided Advent International with certain put rights that are exercisable in the event of three unlikely circumstances. The exercise of the put rights would result in Vantiv Holding, LLC becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of
Fifth Third. As a result, Vantiv Holding, LLC would be consolidated and would subject
Fifth Third to the risks inherent in integrating a business. Additionally, such a change in
the accounting treatment for Vantiv Holding, LLC may adversely impact Fifth Thirds capital. Fifth Third participates in a multi lender credit facility to Vantiv Holding, LLC and repayment of these loans is contingent on future cash flows to
Vantiv Holding, LLC.
Fifth Thirds interests in Vantiv Holding, LLC may change and the potential effects of those
changes are uncertain.
In November 2011, Vantiv Holding, LLC, through its affiliated entity, Vantiv Inc., filed a
registration statement with the SEC which contemplates an IPO of shares of Class A Common Stock of Vantiv Inc. The IPO contemplates a corporate reorganization of Vantiv Inc., which reorganization could substantially change Fifth Thirds
interests in Vantiv Holding, LLC. The potential effects on Fifth Third may include, without limitation, changes in (i) the Vantiv entities in which Fifth Third holds equity ownership, (ii) the type of equity interests owned by Fifth Third
in those entities, (iii) Fifth Thirds overall ownership percentage interests in those entities, due to any sale by Fifth Third of any of its existing equity interests in Vantiv Holding, LLC or its ownership percentage is diluted through
any sale of additional equity by Vantiv Holding, LLC in or in connection with the IPO, and (iv) Fifth Thirds voting and corporate governance rights. If Fifth Third sells any of its ownership interests in Vantiv Holding, LLC in connection
with the Vantiv Inc. IPO, the amount of such sales have not yet been determined and the price at which such sales would be effected cannot be determined unless and until the IPO is completed. Fifth Third cannot predict whether the Vantiv Inc. IPO
will be completed and/or the final terms and conditions thereof. Accordingly, the potential impacts on Fifth Third of a Vantiv Inc. IPO are uncertain.
Weather related events or other natural disasters may have an effect on the performance of Fifth Thirds loan portfolios, especially in its coastal markets, thereby adversely impacting its
results of operations.
Fifth Thirds footprint stretches from the upper Midwestern to lower Southeastern regions
of the United States. This area has experienced weather events including hurricanes and other natural disasters. The nature and level of these events and the impact of global climate change upon their frequency and severity cannot be predicted. If
large scale events occur, they may significantly impact its loan portfolios by damaging properties pledged as collateral as well as impairing its borrowers ability to repay their loans.
RISKS RELATED TO THE LEGAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT
As a regulated entity, the
Bancorp is subject to certain capital requirements that may limit its operations and potential growth.
The Bancorp is
a bank holding company and a financial holding company. As such, it is subject to the comprehensive, consolidated supervision and regulation of the FRB, including risk-based and leverage capital requirements. The Bancorp must maintain certain
risk-based and leverage capital ratios as required by its banking regulators and which can change depending upon general economic conditions and the Bancorps particular condition, risk profile and growth plans. Compliance with the capital
requirements, including leverage ratios, may limit operations that require the intensive use of capital and could adversely affect the Bancorps ability to expand or maintain present business levels.
The Bancorps banking subsidiary must remain well-capitalized, well-managed and maintain at least a
Satisfactory CRA rating for the Bancorp to retain its status as a financial holding company. Failure to meet these requirements could result in the FRB placing
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
limitations or conditions on the Bancorps activities (and the commencement of new
activities) and could ultimately result in the loss of financial holding company status. In addition, failure by the Bancorps banking subsidiary to meet applicable capital guidelines could subject the bank to a variety of enforcement remedies
available to the federal regulatory authorities. These include limitations on the ability to pay dividends, the issuance by the regulatory authority of a capital directive to increase capital, and the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC.
Fifth Thirds business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by new or changed regulations and
by the manner in which such regulations are applied by regulatory authorities.
Current economic conditions,
particularly in the financial markets, have resulted in government regulatory agencies placing increased focus on and scrutiny of the financial services industry. The U.S. government has intervened on an unprecedented scale, responding to what has
been commonly referred to as the financial crisis, by introducing various actions and passing legislations such as the Dodd Frank Act. Such programs and legislation subject Fifth Third and other financial institutions to restrictions, oversight
and/or costs that may have an impact on Fifth Thirds business, financial condition, results of operations or the price of its common stock.
New proposals for legislation and regulations continue to be introduced that could further substantially increase regulation of the financial services industry. Fifth Third cannot predict whether any
pending or future legislation will be adopted or the substance and impact of any such new legislation on Fifth Third. Additional regulation could affect Fifth Third in a substantial way and could have an adverse effect on its business, financial
condition and results of operations.
Fifth Third is subject to various regulatory requirements that limit its operations
and potential growth.
Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of insured
depository institutions and their holding companies, the FRB, the CFPB, and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions have the authority to compel or restrict certain actions by Fifth Third and its banking subsidiary. Fifth Third and its banking
subsidiary are subject to such supervisory authority and, more generally, must, in certain instances, obtain prior regulatory approval before engaging in certain activities or corporate decisions. There can be no assurance that such approvals, if
required, would be forthcoming or that such approvals would be granted in a timely manner. Failure to receive any such approval, if required, could limit or impair Fifth Thirds operations, restrict its growth and/or affect its dividend policy.
Such actions and activities subject to prior approval include, but are not limited to, increasing dividends paid by Fifth Third or its banking subsidiary, entering into a merger or acquisition transaction, acquiring or establishing new branches, and
entering into certain new businesses.
In addition, Fifth Third, as well as other financial institutions more
generally, have recently been subjected to increased scrutiny from regulatory authorities stemming from broader systemic regulatory concerns, including with respect to stress testing, capital levels, asset quality, provisioning and other prudential
matters, arising as a result of the recent financial crisis and efforts to ensure that financial institutions take steps to improve their risk management and prevent future crises.
In some cases, regulatory agencies may take supervisory actions that may not be publicly disclosed, which restrict or
limit a financial institution. Finally, as part of Fifth Thirds regular examination process, Fifth Thirds and its banking subsidiarys respective regulators may advise it and its banking subsidiary to operate under various
restrictions as a prudential matter. Such supervisory actions or restrictions, if and in whatever manner imposed, could have a
material adverse effect on Fifth Thirds business and results of operations and may not be publicly disclosed.
Fifth Third and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, investigations and proceedings by government and self-regulatory agencies which may
lead to adverse consequences.
Fifth Third and/or its affiliates are or may become involved from time to time in
information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the SEC, regarding their respective businesses. Such matters may result in material adverse
consequences, including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of Fifth Thirds SEC filings and/or financial statements, as applicable, and/or
determinations of material weaknesses in its disclosure controls and procedures. The SEC is investigating and has made several requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning issues which Fifth Third understands relate to accounting and
reporting matters involving certain of its commercial loans. This could lead to an enforcement proceeding by the SEC which, in turn, may result in one or more such material adverse consequences.
Deposit insurance premiums levied against Fifth Third may increase if the number of bank failures increase or the cost of resolving failed banks
increases.
The FDIC maintains a DIF to resolve the cost of bank failures. The DIF is funded by fees assessed on
insured depository institutions including Fifth Third. The magnitude and cost of resolving an increased number of bank failures have reduced the DIF. Future deposit premiums paid by Fifth Third depend on the level of the DIF and the magnitude and
cost of future bank failures. Fifth Third also may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC premiums because market developments have significantly depleted the DIF of the FDIC and reduced the ratio of reserves to insured deposits.
Legislative or regulatory compliance, changes or actions or significant litigation, could adversely impact Fifth Third or the businesses in which
Fifth Third is engaged.
Fifth Third is subject to extensive state and federal regulation, supervision and legislation
that govern almost all aspects of its operations and limit the businesses in which Fifth Third may engage. These laws and regulations may change from time to time and are primarily intended for the protection of consumers, depositors and the deposit
insurance funds. The impact of any changes to laws and regulations or other actions by regulatory agencies may negatively impact Fifth Third or its ability to increase the value of its business. Additionally, actions by regulatory agencies or
significant litigation against Fifth Third could cause it to devote significant time and resources to defending itself and may lead to penalties that materially affect Fifth Third and its shareholders. Future changes in the laws, including tax laws,
or regulations or their interpretations or enforcement may also be materially adverse to Fifth Third and its shareholders or may require Fifth Third to expend significant time and resources to comply with such requirements.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
On July 21, 2010 the President of the United States signed into law
the Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act will have material implications for Fifth Third and the entire financial services industry. Among other things it will or potentially could:
|
|
|
Result in Fifth Third being subject to enhanced oversight and scrutiny as a result of being a bank holding company with $50 billion or more in
consolidated assets; |
|
|
|
Result in the appointment of the FDIC as receiver of Fifth Third in an orderly liquidation proceeding, if the Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, upon
recommendation of two-thirds of
|
|
|
the FRB and the FDIC and in consultation with the President of the United States, finds Fifth Third to be in default or danger of default; |
|
|
|
Affect the levels of capital and liquidity with which Fifth Third must operate and how it plans capital and liquidity levels (including a phased-in
elimination of Fifth Thirds existing trust preferred securities as Tier 1 capital); |
|
|
|
Subject Fifth Third to new and/or higher fees paid to various regulatory entities, including but not limited to deposit insurance fees to the FDIC;
|
|
|
|
Impact Fifth Thirds ability to invest in certain types of entities or engage in certain activities; |
|
|
|
Impact a number of Fifth Thirds business and risk management strategies; |
|
|
|
Restrict the revenue that Fifth Third generates from certain businesses, including interchange fee revenue generated by Fifth Thirds debit and
credit card businesses; |
|
|
|
Subject Fifth Third to a new CFPB, which will have broad rule-making and enforcement authorities; and |
|
|
|
Subject Fifth Third to oversight and regulation by a new and different litigation and regulatory regime. |
As the Dodd-Frank Act requires that many studies be conducted and that hundreds of regulations be written in order to fully implement it,
the full impact of this legislation on Fifth Third, its business strategies and financial performance cannot be known at this time, and may not be known for a number of years. However, these impacts are expected to be substantial and some of them
are likely to adversely affect Fifth Third and its financial performance. The extent to which Fifth Third can adjust its strategies to offset such adverse impacts also is not known at this time.
Fifth Third and other financial institutions have been the subject of increased litigation which could result in legal liability and damage to its
reputation.
Fifth Third and certain of its directors and officers have been named from time to time as defendants in
various class actions and other litigation relating to Fifth Thirds business and activities. Past, present and future litigation have included or could include claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for
indeterminate amounts of damages. Fifth Third is also involved from time to time in other reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by governmental and self-regulatory agencies regarding its business. These matters also
could result in adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions or other relief. Like other large financial institutions and companies, Fifth Third is also subject to risk from potential employee misconduct, including non-compliance
with policies and improper use or disclosure of confidential information. Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against Fifth Third could materially adversely affect its business, financial condition or results of operations
and/or cause significant reputational harm to its business.
Fifth Thirds ability to pay or increase dividends on
its common stock or to repurchase its capital stock is restricted.
Fifth Thirds ability to pay dividends or
repurchase stock is subject to regulatory requirements and the need to meet regulatory expectations.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
STATEMENTS OF INCOME ANALYSIS
Net Interest Income
Net interest income is the interest earned on securities, loans and leases (including yield-related fees) and other interest-earning
assets less the interest paid for core deposits (includes transaction deposits and other time deposits) and wholesale funding (includes certificates of deposit $100,000 and over, other deposits, federal funds purchased, short-term borrowings and
long-term debt). The net interest margin is calculated by dividing net interest income by average interest-earning assets. Net interest rate spread is the difference between the average rate earned on interest-earning assets and the average rate
paid on interest-bearing liabilities. Net interest margin is typically greater than net interest rate spread due to the interest income earned on those assets that are funded by noninterest-bearing liabilities, or free funding, such as demand
deposits or shareholders equity.
Table 5 presents the components of net interest income, net interest
margin and net interest rate spread for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009. Nonaccrual loans and leases and loans held for sale have been included in the average loan and lease balances. Average outstanding securities balances are
based on amortized cost with any unrealized gains or losses on available-for-sale securities included in other assets. Table 6 provides the relative impact of changes in the balance sheet and changes in interest rates on net interest income.
Net interest income was $3.6 billion for each of the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. Included
within net interest income are amounts related to the accretion of discounts on acquired loans and deposits, primarily as a result of acquisitions in previous years, which increased net interest income by $40 million during 2011 and $68 million
during 2010. The original purchase accounting discounts reflected the high discount rates in the market at the time of the acquisitions; the total loan discounts are being accreted into net interest income over the remaining period to maturity of
the loans acquired. Based upon the remaining period to maturity, and excluding the impact of prepayments, the Bancorp anticipates recognizing approximately $15 million in additional net interest income during 2012 as a result of the amortization and
accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits.
For the year ended December 31,
2011, net interest income was adversely impacted by lower yields on both the commercial and consumer loan portfolios partially offset by an increase in average consumer loans and a decrease in interest expense compared to the year ended
December 31, 2010. Yields on the commercial and consumer loan portfolio decreased throughout 2011 as the result of low interest rates during the year. Average consumer loans increased primarily as the result of increases in average residential
mortgage loans and automobile loans partially offset by a decrease in home equity loans compared to the year ended December 31, 2010. The decrease in interest expense was primarily the result of a $3.2 billion decrease in average interest
bearing liabilities from the year ended
December 31, 2010, coupled with a continued mix shift to lower cost core deposits as well as the benefit of lower rates offered on savings account balances and other time deposits. The
decrease in average interest bearing liabilities was the result of migration from certificates of deposit into demand deposit accounts due to low interest rates during 2011. For the year ended December 31, 2011, the net interest rate spread
increased to 3.42% from 3.39% in 2010 as the benefit of a 25 bps decrease in rates on interest bearing liabilities was partially offset by a 22 bps decrease in yield on average interest earnings assets.
Net interest margin was 3.66% for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. Net interest margin was impacted by
the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans and deposits that resulted in an increase of 5 bps during 2011 compared to 7 bps during 2010. Exclusive of these amounts, net interest margin increased 2 bps for the year
ended December 31, 2011 compared to the prior year primarily as the result of the previously mentioned mix shift to lower cost core deposits during 2011, an increase in free funding balances and a decrease in average interest earnings assets
partially offset by the previously mentioned decrease on the yield of average loans and leases.
Total
average interest-earning assets decreased one percent for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the prior year primarily as the result of an 11% decrease in the average investment portfolio and a one percent decrease in average
commercial loans; partially offset by a four percent increase in average consumer loans. For more information on the Bancorps investment securities portfolio and loan and lease portfolio, see the Investment Securities and Loan and Lease
sections of MD&A.
Interest income from loans and leases decreased $207 million, or five percent,
compared to the year ended December 31, 2010 driven primarily by a 32 bps decrease in average loan yields partially offset by a four percent increase in average consumer loans. Yields across much of the loan and lease portfolio decreased as the
result of lower interest rates on newly originated loans and a decline in interest rates on automobile loans due to increased competition. Exclusive of the amortization and accretion of premiums and discounts on acquired loans, interest income from
loans and leases decreased $179 million compared to the year ended December 31, 2010. Interest income from investment securities and short-term investments decreased $64 million, or 10%, from the prior year primarily as the result of a $2.2
billion decrease in the average balance and a 16 bps decrease in the average yield of taxable securities.
Average core deposits increased $2.5 billion, or three percent, compared to the year ended December 31, 2010
primarily due to an increase in average demand deposits and average savings deposits partially offset by a decrease in average time deposits. The cost of average core deposits decreased to 36 bps for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to
61 bps from the prior year. This decrease was primarily the result of a mix shift to lower cost core deposits as a result of runoff of higher priced CDs combined with a 24 bps decrease in rates on average savings deposits and a 39 bps decrease in
rates on average time deposits compared to year ended December 31, 2010.
Interest expense on wholesale
funding for the year ended December 31, 2011 decreased $38 million, or nine percent, compared to the prior year, primarily as a result of a $2.0 billion decrease in the average balance partially offset by a 4 bps increase in the rate. Refer to
the Borrowings section of MD&A for additional information on the Bancorps changes in average borrowings. During the year ended December 31, 2011, wholesale funding represented 23% of interest bearing liabilities compared to 25% during
the prior year. For more information on the Bancorps interest rate risk management, including estimated earnings sensitivity to changes in market interest rates, see the Market Risk Management section of MD&A.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 5: CONSOLIDATED AVERAGE BALANCE SHEET AND ANALYSIS
OF NET INTEREST INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
Average Balance |
|
|
|
Revenue/ Cost |
|
|
|
Average Yield/Rate |
|
|
|
Average Balance |
|
|
|
Revenue/ Cost |
|
|
|
Average Yield/ Rate |
|
|
|
Volume |
|
|
|
Revenue/ Cost |
|
|
|
Average Yield/Rate |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-earning assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
28,546 |
|
|
$ |
1,240 |
|
|
|
4.34 |
% |
|
$ |
26,334 |
|
|
$ |
1,238 |
|
|
|
4.70 |
% |
|
$ |
27,556 |
|
|
$ |
1,162 |
|
|
|
4.22 |
% |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
10,447 |
|
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
3.99 |
|
|
|
11,585 |
|
|
|
476 |
|
|
|
4.11 |
|
|
|
12,511 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
Commercial construction |
|
|
1,740 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
3.06 |
|
|
|
3,066 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
2.90 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,341 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
3.99 |
|
|
|
3,343 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
4.40 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
4.24 |
|
Subtotal commercial |
|
|
44,074 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
4.18 |
|
|
|
44,328 |
|
|
|
1,954 |
|
|
|
4.41 |
|
|
|
48,248 |
|
|
|
1,991 |
|
|
|
4.13 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
11,318 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
4.45 |
|
|
|
9,868 |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
4.84 |
|
|
|
10,886 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
5.53 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
11,077 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
3.91 |
|
|
|
11,996 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
12,534 |
|
|
|
520 |
|
|
|
4.15 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,352 |
|
|
|
530 |
|
|
|
4.67 |
|
|
|
10,427 |
|
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
5.83 |
|
|
|
8,807 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
6.31 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,864 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
9.86 |
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
10.73 |
|
|
|
1,907 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
10.10 |
|
Other consumer loans/leases |
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
25.77 |
|
|
|
743 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
15.58 |
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
8.49 |
|
Subtotal consumer |
|
|
36,140 |
|
|
|
1,786 |
|
|
|
4.94 |
|
|
|
34,904 |
|
|
|
1,882 |
|
|
|
5.39 |
|
|
|
35,143 |
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
|
5.57 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
80,214 |
|
|
|
3,629 |
|
|
|
4.52 |
|
|
|
79,232 |
|
|
|
3,836 |
|
|
|
4.84 |
|
|
|
83,391 |
|
|
|
3,948 |
|
|
|
4.73 |
|
Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
15,334 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
3.89 |
|
|
|
16,054 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
4.05 |
|
|
|
16,861 |
|
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
4.28 |
|
Exempt from income taxes(a) |
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5.41 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3.92 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
7.19 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
2,031 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
3,328 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
1,035 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
Total interest-earning assets |
|
|
97,682 |
|
|
|
4,236 |
|
|
|
4.34 |
|
|
|
98,931 |
|
|
|
4,507 |
|
|
|
4.56 |
|
|
|
101,526 |
|
|
|
4,687 |
|
|
|
4.62 |
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
|
2,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,245 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
15,335 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(2,703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,583 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,265 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
112,666 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
112,434 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
114,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest checking |
|
$ |
18,707 |
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
% |
|
$ |
18,218 |
|
|
$ |
52 |
|
|
|
0.29 |
% |
|
$ |
15,070 |
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
% |
Savings |
|
|
21,652 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
0.31 |
|
|
|
19,612 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
16,875 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
Money market |
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
4,808 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
4,320 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
0.60 |
|
Foreign office deposits |
|
|
3,490 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
3,355 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0.35 |
|
|
|
2,108 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
0.45 |
|
Other time deposits |
|
|
6,260 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
2.23 |
|
|
|
10,526 |
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
2.62 |
|
|
|
14,103 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
3.33 |
|
Certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
1.97 |
|
|
|
6,083 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
2.06 |
|
|
|
10,367 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
2.70 |
|
Other deposits |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.13 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.11 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
2,777 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
1,635 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
|
|
6,463 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
0.64 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
10,154 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
|
|
|
10,902 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
2.65 |
|
|
|
11,035 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
2.89 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
72,202 |
|
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
0.92 |
|
|
|
75,436 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
|
|
81,015 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
|
|
1.62 |
|
Demand deposits |
|
|
23,389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
4,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,926 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
99,780 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101,803 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity |
|
|
12,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and equity |
|
$ |
112,666 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
112,434 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
114,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,575 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,622 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,373 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.66 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.66 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.32 |
% |
Net interest rate spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.00 |
|
Interest-bearing liabilities to interest-earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79.80 |
|
(a) The FTE adjustments included in the above table are $18 for the years ended
December 31, 2011 and 2010 and $19 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The federal statutory tax rate utilized was 35% for all periods presented.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 6: CHANGES IN NET INTEREST INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO
VOLUME AND YIELD/RATE (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 |
|
|
2011 Compared to 2010 |
|
|
|
2010 Compared to 2009 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
Volume |
|
|
|
Yield/Rate |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Volume |
|
|
|
Yield/Rate |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-earning assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
|
(98) |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
(53) |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
(45) |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
(59) |
|
|
|
(39) |
|
|
|
(30) |
|
|
|
(69) |
|
Commercial construction |
|
|
(42) |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(40) |
|
|
|
(46) |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(41) |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
(8) |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Subtotal commercial |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(124) |
|
|
|
(111) |
|
|
|
(146) |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
(37) |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
(42) |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(53) |
|
|
|
(71) |
|
|
|
(124) |
|
Home equity |
|
|
(34) |
|
|
|
(12) |
|
|
|
(46) |
|
|
|
(22) |
|
|
|
(19) |
|
|
|
(41) |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
(129) |
|
|
|
(78) |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
(45) |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
(16) |
|
|
|
(17) |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Other consumer loans/leases |
|
|
(41) |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(27) |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Subtotal consumer |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
(138) |
|
|
|
(96) |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
|
|
(66) |
|
|
|
(75) |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
(262) |
|
|
|
(207) |
|
|
|
(155) |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
(112) |
|
Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
|
(29) |
|
|
|
(25) |
|
|
|
(54) |
|
|
|
(34) |
|
|
|
(37) |
|
|
|
(71) |
|
Exempt from income taxes |
|
|
(10) |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(7) |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total interest-earning assets |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(284) |
|
|
|
(271) |
|
|
|
(178) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
(180) |
|
Total change in interest income |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
|
(284) |
|
|
|
(271) |
|
|
$ |
(178) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
(180) |
|
Liabilities and Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest checking |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Savings |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(51) |
|
|
|
(40) |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(38) |
|
|
|
(20) |
|
Money market |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(6) |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Foreign office deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Other time deposits |
|
|
(99) |
|
|
|
(37) |
|
|
|
(136) |
|
|
|
(105) |
|
|
|
(89) |
|
|
|
(194) |
|
Certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
(48) |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
|
|
(53) |
|
|
|
(98) |
|
|
|
(57) |
|
|
|
(155) |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21) |
|
|
|
(18) |
|
|
|
(39) |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
(21) |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
(25) |
|
|
|
(28) |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
(153) |
|
|
|
(71) |
|
|
|
(224) |
|
|
|
(195) |
|
|
|
(234) |
|
|
|
(429) |
|
Total change in interest expense |
|
|
(153) |
|
|
|
(71) |
|
|
|
(224) |
|
|
|
(195) |
|
|
|
(234) |
|
|
|
(429) |
|
Total change in net interest income |
|
$ |
166 |
|
|
|
(213) |
|
|
|
(47) |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
(a) Changes in interest not solely due to volume or yield/rate are allocated in proportion to the absolute dollar
amount of change in volume and yield/rate.
Provision for Loan and Lease Losses
The Bancorp provides as an expense an amount for probable loan and lease losses within the loan and lease portfolio that is based on
factors previously discussed in the Critical Accounting Policies section. The provision is recorded to bring the ALLL to a level deemed appropriate by the Bancorp to cover losses inherent in the portfolio. Actual credit losses on loans and leases
are charged against the ALLL. The amount of loans actually removed from the Consolidated Balance Sheets is referred to as charge-offs. Net charge-offs include current period charge-offs less recoveries on previously charged-off loans and leases.
The provision for loan and lease losses decreased to $423 million in 2011 compared to $1.5 billion in 2010.
The decrease in provision expense for 2011 compared to the prior year was due to decreases in nonperforming loans and leases, improved delinquency metrics in commercial and consumer loans and leases, and improvement in underlying loss trends. The
ALLL declined $749 million from $3.0 billion at December 31, 2010 to $2.3 billion at December 31, 2011. As of December 31, 2011, the ALLL as a percent of loans and leases decreased to 2.78%, compared to 3.88% at December 31,
2010.
Refer to the Credit Risk Management section of the MD&A as well as
Note 6 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more detailed information on the provision for loan and lease losses, including an analysis of loan portfolio composition, nonperforming assets, net charge-offs, and other factors
considered by the Bancorp in assessing the credit quality of the loan and lease portfolio and the ALLL.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Noninterest Income
Noninterest income decreased $274 million, or 10%, for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the year ended December 31,
2010. The components of noninterest income are as follows:
TABLE 7: NONINTEREST INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in
millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
$ |
597 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
553 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
520 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
632 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
579 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
382 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
431 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
826 |
|
Gain on sale of the processing business |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,758 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
Securities gains (losses), net |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
Securities gains, net, non-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
$ |
2,455 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
4,782 |
|
|
|
2,946 |
|
|
|
2,467 |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue
Mortgage banking net revenue decreased $50 million in 2011 compared to 2010. The components of mortgage banking net revenue are as
follows:
TABLE 8: COMPONENTS OF MORTGAGE BANKING NET REVENUE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Origination fees and gains on loan sales |
|
$ |
396 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
485 |
|
Net servicing revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross servicing fees |
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
Servicing rights amortization |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
(146 |
) |
Net valuation adjustments on servicing rights and free-standing derivatives entered into
to economically hedge MSR |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Net servicing revenue |
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
$ |
597 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
553 |
|
Origination fees and gains on loan sales decreased $94 million in 2011 compared to 2010
primarily as the result of a 26% decrease in the profit margin on sold residential mortgage loans due to a decrease in interest rates and an eight percent decrease in residential mortgage loan originations compared to 2010. Residential mortgage loan
originations decreased to $18.6 billion during 2011 compared to $20.3 billion during 2010. The decrease in originations is primarily due to a decrease in refinancing activity as many customers have taken advantage of the low interest rate
environment in prior years.
Net servicing revenue is comprised of gross servicing fees and related servicing
rights amortization as well as valuation adjustments on MSRs and mark-to-market adjustments on both settled and outstanding free-standing derivative financial instruments used to economically hedge the MSR portfolio. Net servicing revenue increased
$44 million in 2011 compared to 2010 driven primarily by an increase in valuation adjustments and gross servicing fees. The net valuation adjustment of $102 million during 2011 included $344 million in gains from derivatives economically hedging the
MSRs partially offset by $242 million in temporary impairment on the MSR portfolio. The gain in the net valuation adjustment is reflective of refinancing activity in recent years that has contributed to prepayments being less sensitive to lower
mortgage rates due to customers taking advantage of lower rates in earlier periods as well as the impact of tighter underwriting standards.
Additionally, the net MSR/hedge position has benefited from the positive carry of the hedge and the widening spread between mortgage and swap rates. Gross servicing fees increased $13 million in
2011 compared to 2010 as a result of an increase in the size of the Bancorps servicing portfolio. The Bancorps total residential loans serviced as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $70.6 billion and $63.2 billion, respectively, with
$57.1 billion and $54.2 billion, respectively, of residential mortgage loans serviced for others.
Servicing
rights are deemed impaired when a borrowers loan rate is distinctly higher than prevailing rates. Impairment
on
servicing rights is reversed when the prevailing rates return to a level commensurate with the borrowers loan rate. Further detail on the valuation of MSRs can be found in Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The Bancorp
maintains a non-qualifying hedging strategy to manage a portion of the risk associated with changes in the valuation on the MSR portfolio. See Note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the free-standing
derivatives used to economically hedge the MSR portfolio.
In addition to the derivative positions used to
economically hedge the MSR portfolio, the Bancorp acquires various securities as a component of its non-qualifying hedging strategy. Net gains on sales of these securities were $9 million and $14 million in 2011 and 2010, respectively, and were
recorded in securities gains, net, non-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights in the Bancorps Consolidated Statements of Income.
Service charges on deposits
Service charges on
deposits decreased $54 million in 2011 compared to 2010. Consumer deposit revenue decreased $59 million in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to the impact of Regulation E and new overdraft policies that resulted in a decrease in overdraft
occurrences. Regulation E became effective on July 1, 2010 for new accounts and August 15, 2010 for existing accounts. Regulation E is a FRB rule that prohibits financial institutions from charging consumers fees for paying overdrafts on
ATMs and one-time debit card transactions unless a consumer consents, or opts in, to the overdraft service for those types of transactions.
Commercial deposit revenue increased $5 million in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to an increase in commercial account relationships and a decrease in earnings credits paid on customer balances as
the result of a decrease in the crediting rate applied to balances. Commercial customers receive earnings credits to offset the fees charged for banking services on their deposit accounts such as account maintenance, lockbox, ACH transactions,
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
wire transfers and other ancillary corporate treasury management services. Earnings credits are based on the customers average balance in qualifying deposits multiplied by the crediting
rate. Qualifying deposits include demand deposits and interest-bearing checking accounts. The Bancorp has a standard crediting rate that is adjusted as necessary based on the competitive market conditions and changes in short-term interest rates.
Investment advisory revenue
Investment advisory revenue increased $14 million in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to improved market performance and sales force expansion that resulted in increased brokerage activity. As of
December 31, 2011, the Bancorp had approximately $282 billion in total assets under care and managed $24 billion in assets for individuals, corporations and not-for-profit organizations.
Corporate banking revenue
Corporate banking revenue decreased $14 million
in 2011 compared to 2010. The decrease from the prior year was primarily the result of decreases in institutional sales, syndication fees, lease remarketing fees and international income partially offset by an increase in business lending fees.
Card and processing revenue
Card and processing revenue decreased $8 million in 2011 compared to 2010. The decrease was the result of an increase in costs associated with redemption of cash based reward points and the impact of the
implementation of the Dodd-Frank Acts debit card interchange fee cap in the fourth quarter of 2011 partially offset by increased debit and credit card transaction volumes.
Other noninterest income
The major components of other noninterest income are as follows:
TABLE 9: COMPONENTS OF OTHER NONINTEREST INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended
December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating lease income |
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
Equity method income from interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
BOLI income (loss) |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Cardholder fees |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Net gain from warrant and put options associated with the processing business sale |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Gain on loan sales |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Consumer loan and lease fees |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Banking center income |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
TSA revenue |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Loss on sale of OREO |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(70 |
) |
Loss on swap associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. class B shares |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Gain on sale/redemption of Visa, Inc. ownership interests |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
Total other noninterest income |
|
$ |
250 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
Other noninterest income decreased $156 million in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due
to a $152 million litigation settlement related to one of the Bancorps BOLI policies in 2010. Excluding the impact of the litigation settlement, other noninterest income was relatively flat compared to 2010 as an increase of $64 million in
losses on the swap associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares, a decrease of $28 million in TSA revenue and a decrease of $14 million in the gains on loan sales were offset by increases of $34 million in gains on the valuation of warrants
and put options issued as part of the sale of the processing business, $31 million in equity method income from the Bancorps ownership interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC, $15 million in gains from private equity investments (recorded in the
other caption) and a $12 million reduction in losses from fair value adjustments on commercial loans designated as held for sale (recorded in the other caption). For additional information on the valuation of the swap
associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares and the valuation of warrants and put options associated with the sale of the processing business, see Note 27 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
As part of the sale of the processing business, in 2009, the Bancorp entered into a TSA with The processing business
that resulted in the Bancorp recognizing approximately $21 million and $49 million in revenue during 2011 and 2010, respectively, which were offset with expense from the servicing agreements recorded in noninterest expense.
TABLE 10: NONINTEREST EXPENSE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in
millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Salaries, wages and incentives |
|
$ |
1,478 |
|
|
|
1,430 |
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
|
|
1,337 |
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
Net occupancy expense |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Technology and communications |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Equipment expense |
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
965 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
1,224 |
|
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
$ |
3,758 |
|
|
|
3,855 |
|
|
|
3,826 |
|
|
|
4,564 |
|
|
|
3,311 |
|
Efficiency ratio |
|
|
62.3 |
% |
|
|
60.7 |
|
|
|
46.9 |
|
|
|
70.4 |
|
|
|
60.2 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Noninterest Expense
Total noninterest expense decreased $97 million, or three percent, in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to a decrease in other
noninterest expense, as discussed below, partially offset by an increase in total personnel costs (salaries, wages and incentives plus employee benefits) and card and processing expense. Total personnel costs increased $64 million, or four percent,
in 2011 compared to 2010 due to an increase in base and incentive compensation driven by investments in the sales force beginning in mid-2010 and an overall increase in the number of employees. Full time equivalent employees totalled 21,334 at
December 31, 2011 compared to 20,838 at December 31, 2010.
Card and processing expense increased
$12 million, or 11%, in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily as the result of growth in debit and credit card transactions. The major components of other noninterest expense are as follows:
TABLE 11: COMPONENTS OF OTHER NONINTEREST EXPENSE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31
($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
FDIC insurance and other taxes |
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Loan and lease |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
Losses and adjustments |
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Affordable housing investments impairment |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Professional service fees |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Travel |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Postal and courier |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Operating lease |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
OREO expense |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Recruitment and education |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Data processing |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Insurance |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Intangible asset amortization |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Supplies |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Visa litigation reserve |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
Provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
99 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
Total other noninterest expense |
|
$ |
1,224 |
|
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
Total other noninterest expense decreased $170 million, or 12%, in 2011 compared to 2010
primarily due to decreases in the provision for representation and warranty claims, recorded in losses and adjustments; FDIC insurance and other taxes, intangible asset amortization, professional service fees and an increase in the benefit from a
decrease in the reserve for unfunded commitments and letters of credit partially offset by losses in 2011 related to the termination of two cash flow hedges and an increase in litigation reserves associated with bankcard association membership, both
of which were recorded in the other caption.
The provision for representation and warranty
claims decreased $59 million in 2011 compared to 2010 primarily due to a decrease in demand requests during 2011 and a decrease in losses on repurchased loans compared to 2010. FDIC insurance and other taxes decreased $41 million in 2011 compared to
2010 due primarily to the FDICs implementation of amended regulations that revised the Federal Deposit Insurance Act effective April 1, 2011. The amended regulations modified the definition of an institutions deposit insurance
assessment base from domestic deposits to quarterly average total assets less quarterly average tangible equity as well as the assessment rate calculation; additionally 2010 included expenses due to the Bancorps participation in the
FDICs TLGP transaction account guarantee program, which was exited during the second quarter of 2010. The $21 million decrease in intangible asset amortization was primarily the result of the full amortization of certain intangible assets in
2010 and 2011. The decrease in
professional service fees of $19 million in 2011 compared to 2010 was primarily the result
of legal expenses incurred from the litigation settlement related to one of the Bancorps BOLI policies during the third quarter of 2010. The provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit was a benefit of $46 million in 2011 compared
to a benefit of $24 million during 2010. The benefit recorded in each period reflects lower estimates of inherent losses resulting from a decrease in delinquent loans as credit trends improved during 2011. The $20 million increase in the
other caption was primarily the result of $27 million in expenses on two cash flow hedge transactions that were terminated during the third quarter of 2011 and $14 million of expenses related to an increase in litigation reserves
associated with bankcard association membership during the fourth quarter of 2011 partially offset by an $8 million gain on the extinguishment of long term debt during 2011 compared to $17 million of losses on the extinguishment of long term debt
during 2010.
TSA related expenses decreased to approximately $21 million in 2011 from $49 million in 2010
due to Vantiv Holdings transition to their own supporting systems.
The Bancorp continues to focus on
efficiency initiatives as part of its core emphasis on operating leverage and expense control. The efficiency ratio (noninterest expense divided by the sum of net interest income (FTE) and noninterest income) was 62.3% for 2011 compared to 60.7% in
2010.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Applicable Income Taxes
The Bancorps income (loss) before income taxes, applicable income tax expense (benefit) and effective tax rate for each of the
periods indicated are shown in Table 12. Applicable income tax expense for all periods includes the benefit from tax-exempt income, tax-advantaged investments, certain gains on sales of leases that are exempt from federal taxation and tax credits,
partially offset by the effect of nondeductible expenses. The tax credits are associated with the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program established under Section 42 of the IRC, the New Markets Tax Credit program established under
Section 45D of the IRC, the Rehabilitation Investment Tax Credit program established under Section 47 of the IRC, and the Qualified Zone Academy Bond program established under Section 1397E of the IRC. The effective tax rate for the
year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily impacted by $135 million in tax credits and $26 million of non-cash charges relating to previously recognized tax benefits associated with stock-based compensation that will not be realized. The
effective tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2010 was primarily impacted by $133 million in tax credits, a $26 million reduction in income tax expense resulting from the settlement of certain uncertain tax positions with the IRS and $25
million of non-cash charges relating to previously recognized tax benefits associated with stock-based compensation that will not be realized. See Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on income taxes.
Deductibility of Executive Compensation
Certain sections of the IRC limit the deductibility of compensation paid to or earned by certain executive officers of a public company. This has historically limited the deductibility of certain
executive compensation to $1 million per executive
officer, and the Bancorps compensation philosophy has been to position pay to ensure deductibility. However, both the amount of the executive compensation that is deductible for certain
executive officers and the allowable compensation vehicles changed as a result of the Bancorps participation in TARP. In particular, the Bancorp was not permitted to deduct compensation earned by certain executive officers in excess of
$500,000 per executive officer as a result of the Bancorps participation in TARP. Therefore, a portion of the compensation earned by certain executive officers was not deductible by the Bancorp for the period in which the Bancorp participated
in TARP. Subsequent to ending its participation in TARP, certain limitations on the deductibility of executive compensation will continue to apply to some forms of compensation earned while under TARP. The Bancorps Compensation Committee
determined that the underlying executive compensation programs are appropriate and necessary to attract, retain and motivate senior executives, and that failing to meet these objectives creates more risk for the Bancorp and its value than the
financial impact of losing the tax deduction. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the total tax impact for non-deductible compensation was $2 million and $6 million, respectively.
The Bancorps income before income taxes, applicable income tax expense and effective tax rate are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 12: APPLICABLE INCOME TAXES |
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
$ |
1,831 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
(2,664 |
) |
|
|
1,537 |
|
Applicable income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(551 |
) |
|
|
461 |
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
29.1 |
% |
|
|
19.8 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
20.7 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
BUSINESS SEGMENT REVIEW
The Bancorp reports on four business segments: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer
Lending and Investment Advisors. Additional detailed financial information on each business segment is included in Note 30 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Results of the Bancorps business segments are presented based on its
management structure and management accounting practices. The structure and accounting practices are specific to the Bancorp; therefore, the financial results of the Bancorps business segments are not necessarily comparable with similar
information for other financial institutions. The Bancorp refines its methodologies from time to time as managements accounting practices are improved or businesses change.
On June 30, 2009, the Bancorp completed the sale of the processing business, which represented the sale of a
majority interest in the Bancorps merchant acquiring and financial institutions processing businesses. Financial data for the merchant acquiring and financial institutions processing businesses was originally reported in the former Processing
Solutions segment through June 30, 2009. As a result of the sale, the Bancorp no longer presents Processing Solutions as a segment and therefore, historical financial information for the merchant acquiring and financial institutions processing
businesses has been reclassified under General Corporate and Other for all periods presented. Interchange revenue previously recorded in the Processing Solutions segment and associated with cards currently included in Branch Banking is now included
in the Branch Banking segment for all periods presented. Additionally, the Bancorp retained its retail credit card and commercial multi-card service businesses, which were also originally reported in the former Processing Solutions segment through
June 30, 2009, and are included in the Branch Banking and Commercial Banking segments, respectively, for all periods presented. Revenue from the remaining ownership interest in the Processing Business is recorded in General Corporate and Other
as noninterest income.
The Bancorp manages interest rate risk centrally at the corporate level and employs a
FTP methodology at the business segment level. This methodology insulates the business segments from interest rate volatility, enabling them to focus on serving customers through loan originations and deposit taking. The FTP system assigns charge
rates and credit rates to classes of assets and liabilities, respectively, based on expected duration and the LIBOR swap curve. Matching duration allocates interest income and interest expense to each segment
so its resulting net interest income is insulated from interest rate risk. In a rising rate environment, the Bancorp benefits from the widening spread between deposit costs and wholesale funding
costs. However, the Bancorps FTP system credits this benefit to deposit-providing businesses, such as Branch Banking and Investment Advisors, on a duration-adjusted basis. The net impact of the FTP methodology is captured in General Corporate
and Other.
The Bancorp adjusts the FTP charge and credit rates as dictated by changes in interest rates for
various interest-earning assets and liabilities. The credit rate provided for DDAs is reviewed annually based upon the account type, its estimated duration and the corresponding fed funds, LIBOR or swap rate. The credit rates for DDAs were reset
January 1, 2011 to reflect the current market rates. These rates were significantly lower than those in place during 2010, thus net interest income for deposit providing businesses was negatively impacted during 2011.
The business segments are charged provision expense based on the actual net charge-offs experienced by the loans owned
by each segment. Provision expense attributable to loan growth and changes in factors in the ALLL are captured in General Corporate and Other. The financial results of the business segments include allocations for shared services and headquarters
expenses. Even with these allocations, the financial results are not necessarily indicative of the business segments financial condition and results of operations as if they existed as independent entities. Additionally, the business segments
form synergies by taking advantage of cross-sell opportunities and when funding operations, by accessing the capital markets as a collective unit. Net income by business segment is summarized in the following table.
TABLE 13: BUSINESS SEGMENT NET INCOME AVAILABLE TO COMMON SHAREHOLDERS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended
December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Banking |
|
$ |
441 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
Branch Banking |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Consumer Lending |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
Investment Advisors |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
General Corporate & Other |
|
|
591 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
437 |
|
Net income |
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net income attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Net income available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Commercial Banking
Commercial Banking offers credit intermediation, cash management and financial services to large and middle-market businesses and
government and professional customers. In addition to the traditional lending and depository offerings, Commercial Banking products and services include global cash management, foreign exchange and international trade finance, derivatives and
capital markets services, asset-based lending, real estate finance, public finance, commercial leasing and syndicated finance. The following table contains selected financial data for the Commercial Banking segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 14: COMMERCIAL BANKING |
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (FTE)(a) |
|
$ |
1,374 |
|
|
|
1,545 |
|
|
|
1,383 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
1,360 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, incentives and benefits |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
833 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
768 |
|
Income (loss) before taxes |
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
(328 |
) |
Applicable income tax expense
(benefit)(b) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
(227 |
) |
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
441 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
Average Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans |
|
$ |
38,384 |
|
|
|
38,304 |
|
|
|
41,341 |
|
Demand deposits |
|
|
13,130 |
|
|
|
10,872 |
|
|
|
8,581 |
|
Interest checking |
|
|
7,901 |
|
|
|
8,432 |
|
|
|
6,018 |
|
Savings and money market |
|
|
2,776 |
|
|
|
2,823 |
|
|
|
2,457 |
|
Certificates over $100,000 |
|
|
1,778 |
|
|
|
3,014 |
|
|
|
4,376 |
|
Foreign office deposits |
|
|
1,581 |
|
|
|
2,017 |
|
|
|
1,275 |
|
(a) |
Includes FTE adjustments of $17, $14, and $13 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively.
|
(b) |
Applicable income tax benefit for all periods includes the tax benefit from tax-exempt income and business tax credits, partially offset by the effect of certain
nondeductible expenses. Refer to the Applicable Income Taxes section of MD&A for additional information. |
Comparison of 2011 with 2010
Net income was $441 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to net income of $178 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. The increase in net income was primarily driven by
a decrease in the provision for loan and lease losses partially offset by lower net interest income and higher noninterest expense.
Net interest income decreased $171 million primarily due to declines in the FTP credits for DDAs and decreases in interest income. The decrease in interest income was driven primarily by a decline in
yields of 17 bps on average loans. Provision for loan and lease losses decreased $669 million. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased to 128 bps for 2011 compared to 302 bps for 2010 largely due net charge-offs on
commercial loans moved to held for sale during the third quarter of 2010 and as a result of improved credit trends across all commercial loan types.
Noninterest income was relatively flat from 2010 to 2011, as increases in other noninterest income and service charges on deposits were offset by a decrease in corporate banking revenue. The increase in
other noninterest income is primarily due to a $15 million increase in income on private equity investments. Service charges on deposits increased from 2010 primarily due to a decrease in earnings credits paid on customer balances. The decrease in
corporate banking revenue was primarily driven by decreases in international income, institutional sales, and syndication fees partially offset by an increase in business lending fees.
Noninterest expense increased $102 million from the prior year as a result of increases in salaries, incentives and
benefits and other noninterest expense. The increase in salaries, incentives and benefits of $26 million was primarily the result of increased incentive compensation due to improved production levels. FDIC insurance expense, which is recorded in
other noninterest expense, increased
$14 million due to a change in the methodology in determining FDIC insurance premiums to
one based on total assets less tangible equity as opposed to the previous method that was based on domestic deposits. The remaining increase in other noninterest expense was the result of higher corporate overhead allocations in 2011 compared to
2010.
Average commercial loans were flat compared to the prior year. Average commercial mortgage loans
decreased $1.0 billion as a result of tighter underwriting standards implemented in prior quarters in an effort to limit exposure to commercial real estate. Average commercial construction loans decreased $1.2 billion due to runoff as management
suspended new lending on non-owner occupied real estate in 2008. The decreases in average commercial mortgage and construction loans were offset by growth in average commercial and industrial loans, which increased $2.5 billion as a result of an
increase in new loan origination activity.
Average core deposits increased $1.2 billion compared to 2010.
The increase was primarily driven by strong growth in DDAs, which increased $2.3 billion compared to the prior year. The increase in DDAs was partially offset by decreases in interest bearing deposits of $1.0 billion as customers opted to maintain
their balances in more liquid accounts due to interest rates remaining near historical lows.
Comparison of 2010 with 2009
Commercial Banking realized net income of $178 million in 2010 compared to a net loss of $101 million in 2009. This
improvement was primarily due to an increase in net interest income and a decrease in provision for loan and lease losses. Net interest income increased $162 million primarily due to a mix shift from higher cost term deposits to lower cost deposit
products. This improvement was partially offset by the negative impact to net interest income of a decrease in average commercial loans during 2010 and a decrease
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
of $35 million in the accretion of discounts on loans associated with a previous acquisition.
Provision for loan and lease losses decreased $201 million from 2009. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased from 329 bps in 2009 to 302 bps in 2010 due to actions taken by the
Bancorp to address problem loans which resulted in significant net charge-offs recorded in 2009.
Noninterest
income increased $26 million from 2009 primarily as a result of $24 million increase in gains on private equity investments, included in other noninterest income, and a $5 million increase in card and processing revenue partially offset by a $7
million decrease in corporate banking revenue.
Noninterest expense increased $11 million compared to 2009 as
the increase in salaries, incentives and benefits was partially offset by the decrease in other noninterest expense. The decrease in other noninterest expense is due to a decrease in loan and lease expense as a result of lower loan demand during
2010, a decrease in collection related expenses and a decrease in FDIC expenses due to a special assessment in the second quarter of 2009.
Average commercial loans and leases decreased $3.0 billion compared to the prior year due to lower customer demand for new originations, lower utilization rates on corporate lines and tighter underwriting
standards. These impacts were partially offset by the consolidation of $724 million of commercial and industrial loans on January 1, 2010, which had a remaining balance of $372 million at December 31, 2010.
Average core deposits increased $5.8 billion, or 32%, compared to 2009 due to the migration of higher priced
certificates of deposit into transaction accounts, as well as the impact of historically low interest rates and excess customer liquidity.
Branch Banking
Branch Banking provides a full range of deposit and
loan and lease products to individuals and small businesses through 1,316 full-service Banking Centers. Branch Banking offers depository and loan products, such as checking and savings accounts, home equity loans and lines of credit, credit cards
and loans for automobiles and other personal financing needs, as well as products designed to meet the specific needs of small businesses, including cash management services. The following table contains selected financial data for the Branch
Banking segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 15: BRANCH BANKING |
|
For the years ended
December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
1,423 |
|
|
|
1,514 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
601 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
428 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, incentives and benefits |
|
|
583 |
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
Net occupancy and equipment expense |
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
|
|
579 |
|
Income before taxes |
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
Applicable income tax expense |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Average Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer loans |
|
$ |
14,151 |
|
|
|
13,125 |
|
|
|
13,278 |
|
Commercial loans |
|
|
4,621 |
|
|
|
4,815 |
|
|
|
5,337 |
|
Demand deposits |
|
|
8,408 |
|
|
|
7,006 |
|
|
|
6,363 |
|
Interest checking |
|
|
8,086 |
|
|
|
7,462 |
|
|
|
7,469 |
|
Savings and money market |
|
|
22,241 |
|
|
|
19,963 |
|
|
|
17,010 |
|
Other time and certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
7,778 |
|
|
|
12,712 |
|
|
|
16,995 |
|
Comparison of 2011 with 2010
Net income increased $1 million compared to 2010, driven by a decline in the provision for loan and lease losses offset by a decrease in
net interest income and noninterest income and an increase in noninterest expense. Net interest income decreased $91 million compared to the prior year. The primary drivers of the decline include decreases in the FTP credits for DDAs, lower yields
on average commercial and consumer loans, and a decline in average commercial loans. These decreases were partially offset by a favorable shift in the segments deposit mix towards lower cost transaction deposits resulting in declines in
interest expense of $193 million compared to 2010, and an increase in average consumer loans.
Provision for
loan and lease losses for 2011 decreased $162 million compared to the prior year. The decline in the provision was the result of improved credit trends across all consumer and commercial loan types. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and
leases decreased to 210 bps for 2011 compared to 313 bps for 2010. The decrease is the result of improved credit trends and tighter underwriting standards. In addition, the decrease is due to $24 million in charge-offs taken on $60 million of
commercial loans which were sold or moved to held for sale during the third quarter of 2010.
Noninterest
income decreased $48 million compared to the prior year. The decrease was primarily driven by lower service charges on deposits, which declined $60 million, primarily due to the implementation of Regulation E in the third quarter of 2010. The
decrease was partially offset by increased card and processing revenue caused by higher debit and credit card transaction volumes. Growth in processing revenue was partially offset by the impact of the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Acts
debit card interchange fee cap in the fourth quarter of 2011. Investment advisory revenue also increased due to improved market performance and sales force expansion.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Noninterest expense increased $23 million, primarily driven by increases
in salaries, incentives and benefits expense and card and processing expense partially offset by a decline in other noninterest expense. Salaries, incentives and benefits expenses increased $23 million due to an increase in base and incentive
compensation driven by investments in the sales force, as well as additional branch personnel. Card and processing expense increased $9 million due to increased costs associated with an increase in the redemption of points for debit and credit card
rewards. Other noninterest expense declined $21 million primarily due to a decrease in FDIC insurance expense.
Average consumer loans increased $1.0 billion in 2011 primarily due to increases in average residential mortgage loans
of $1.5 billion due to managements decision in the third quarter of 2010 to retain certain mortgage loans. The increases in average residential mortgage loans was partially offset by decreases in average home equity loans of $421 million due
to decreased customer demand and continued tighter underwriting standards. Average commercial loans decreased $194 million due to declines in commercial and industrial loans resulting from lower customer demand for new originations and continued
tighter underwriting standards applied to both originations and renewals.
Average core deposits increased by
$120 million compared to the prior year as the growth in transaction accounts due to excess customer liquidity and historically low interest rates outpaced runoff of higher priced certificates of deposit.
Comparison of 2010 with 2009
Net income decreased $142 million compared to 2009 driven by an increase in noninterest expense and a decrease in net interest income partially offset by a decrease in provision for loan and lease losses.
Net interest income decreased $63 million compared to 2009 as the impact of lower loan balances more than offset a favorable shift in the segments deposit mix towards lower cost transaction deposits.
Provision for loan and lease losses decreased $46 million from 2009. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and
leases decreased from 326 bps in 2009 to 313 bps in 2010 primarily due to improved credit trends and tighter underwriting standards.
Noninterest income decreased $17 million from 2009 primarily due to decreases in service charges on deposits, partially offset by increases in card and processing revenue and investment advisory revenue.
Noninterest expense increased $183 million from 2009 due to additional
personnel expenses, net occupancy and equipment expense, card and processing expense and other noninterest expense.
Average consumer loans decreased $153 million primarily due to a decrease in home equity loans due to decreased demand and tighter underwriting standards. Average commercial loans decreased $522 million
due to lower customer demand for new originations, lower utilization rates on corporate lines and tighter underwriting standards.
Average core deposits were relatively flat compared to 2009 as runoff of higher priced consumer certificates of deposit, included in other time deposits, was replaced with growth in transaction accounts
due to excess customer liquidity and low interest rates.
Consumer Lending
Consumer Lending includes the Bancorps mortgage, home equity, automobile and other indirect lending activities. Mortgage and home
equity lending activities include the origination, retention and servicing of mortgage and home equity loans or lines of credit, sales and securitizations of those loans, pools of loans or lines of credit, and all associated hedging activities.
Indirect lending activities include loans to consumers through mortgage brokers and automobile dealers. The following table contains selected financial data for the Consumer Lending segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 16: CONSUMER LENDING |
|
For the years ended
December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
343 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
476 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
569 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, incentives and benefits |
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
Income (loss) before taxes |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
32 |
|
Applicable income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
21 |
|
Average Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
$ |
9,348 |
|
|
|
9,384 |
|
|
|
10,650 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
995 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
10,665 |
|
|
|
9,713 |
|
|
|
8,024 |
|
Consumer leases |
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
629 |
|
Comparison of 2011 with 2010
Net income was $56 million in 2011 compared to a net loss of $26 million in 2010. The increase was driven by a decline in the provision for loan and lease losses, partially offset by decreases in
noninterest income and net interest income and an increase in noninterest expense. Net interest income decreased $62 million due to a decline in average loan balances for residential mortgage, home equity, and consumer leases as well as lower yields
on average residential mortgage and automobile loans, partially offset by favorable decreases in the FTP charge applied to the segment.
Provision for loan and lease losses decreased $308 million compared to the prior year, as delinquency metrics and underlying loss trends improved across all consumer loan types. Additionally, 2010
included charge-offs of $123 million on the sale of $228 million of portfolio loans. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased to 134 bps for 2011 compared to 305 bps for 2010.
Noninterest income decreased $40 million primarily due to decreases in mortgage banking net revenue of $34 million
driven by decreases in revenue associated with residential mortgage
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
origination activity. The decrease from 2010 was driven by declines in origination fees and gains on loan sales of $78 million due to decreased margins and lower origination volumes, partially
offset by an increase in net servicing revenue of $44 million. Net servicing revenue increased due to positive net valuation adjustments on MSRs and free-standing derivatives used to economically hedge MSRs and an increase in servicing fees as a
result of an increase in the size of the Bancorps servicing portfolio.
Noninterest expense increased
$80 million driven in part by increased FDIC insurance expense, as the methodology used to determine FDIC insurance premiums changed in 2011 from one based on domestic deposits to one based on total assets less tangible equity. Additional changes
were due to an increase of $41 million in the provision for representation and warranty claims related to residential mortgage loans sold to third parties and an increase of $21 million in losses on escrow advances to borrowers relating to bank
owned residential mortgages. The increase in the provision for representation and warranty claims was due to an increase in resolved claims in 2011 compared to 2010.
Average consumer loans and leases increased $558 million from the prior year. Average automobile loans increased $952
million due to a strategic focus to increase automobile lending throughout 2010 and 2011 through consistent and competitive pricing, disciplined sales execution, and enhanced customer service with our dealership network. This increase was partially
offset by declines across all other types of consumer loans. Average residential mortgage loans decreased $36 million as a result of the lower origination volumes discussed previously. Average home equity loans decreased $121 million due to
continued runoff in the discontinued brokered home equity product. Average consumer leases decreased $226 million due to runoff as the Bancorp discontinued this product in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Comparison of 2010 with 2009
Consumer Lending reported a net loss of $26 million in 2010 compared to net income of $21 million in 2009 due to a decrease in net interest income and an increase in noninterest expense partially offset
by an increase in noninterest income. Net interest income decreased $71 million from 2009 primarily due to a decrease in yields on average interest earning assets, which included the impact of a $23 million decrease in the accretion of discounts on
loans associated with a previous acquisition partially offset by a decrease in funding costs during 2010.
Provision for loan and lease losses increased $11 million from 2009 as an
increase in net charge-offs on residential mortgage loans was partially offset by decreased automobile loan and home equity net charge-offs. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased from 307 bps in 2009 to 305 bps in 2010.
Noninterest income increased $47 million, as the result of an increase in mortgage banking net revenue
partially offset by a decrease in other noninterest income. The increase in mortgage banking net revenue was driven by increases in net valuation adjustments on MSRs and MSR derivatives and increases in servicing fees due to an increase in loans
serviced for others. The decrease in other noninterest income was primarily due to decreases in securities gains related to mortgage servicing rights hedging activities.
Noninterest expense increased $37 million due to increases in salaries, incentives and benefits due to the continued
high levels of mortgage loan originations in 2010 and an increase in other noninterest expense as a result of an increase in the representation and warranty reserve partially offset by a decrease in loan and lease expense.
Average consumer loans were flat compared to 2009 as the increase in automobile loans was offset by decreases in all
other consumer loan and lease products.
Investment Advisors
Investment Advisors provides a full range of investment alternatives for individuals, companies and not-for-profit organizations.
Investment Advisors is made up of four main businesses: FTS, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bancorp; FTAM, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Bancorp; Fifth Third Private Bank; and Fifth Third Institutional Services. FTS offers
full service retail brokerage services to individual clients and broker dealer services to the institutional marketplace. FTAM provides asset management services and also advises the Bancorps proprietary family of mutual funds. Fifth Third
Private Bank offers holistic strategies to affluent clients in wealth planning, investing, insurance and wealth protection. Fifth Third Institutional Services provide advisory services for institutional clients including states and municipalities.
The following table contains selected financial data for the Investment Advisors segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 17: INVESTMENT ADVISORS |
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in
millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
113 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
315 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, incentives and benefits |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
Income before taxes |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Applicable income tax expense |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Average Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases |
|
$ |
2,037 |
|
|
|
2,574 |
|
|
|
3,112 |
|
Core deposits |
|
|
6,798 |
|
|
|
5,897 |
|
|
|
4,939 |
|
Comparison of 2011 with 2010
Net income decreased $5 million compared to 2010 primarily due to a decline in net interest income and an increase in noninterest expense
partially offset by a decrease in the provision for loan and lease losses and an increase in investment advisory revenue. Net interest income decreased $25 million from 2010 due to a decline in average loan and lease balances as well as declines in
yields of 29 bps on loans and leases.
Provision for loan and leases losses decreased $17 million from the
prior year. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
leases decreased to 132 bps compared to 171 bps for the prior year reflecting moderation of general economic conditions during 2011.
Noninterest income increased $17 million compared to 2010 primarily due to increases in investment advisory revenue. The
increase in investment advisory revenue was driven by an increase of $10 million in Private Bank income due to market performance and an increase of $7 million in securities and broker income due to continued expansion of the sales force and market
performance.
Noninterest expense increased $16 million compared to 2010 due to increases in salaries,
incentives and benefit expense resulting from the expansion of the sales force and compensation related to improved performance in investment advisory revenue related fees.
Average loans and leases decreased $537 million compared to the prior year. The decrease was primarily driven by
declines in home equity loans of $373 million due to tighter underwriting standards. Average core deposits increased $901 million compared to 2010 due to growth in interest checking and foreign deposits as customers have opted to maintain excess
funds in liquid transaction accounts as a result of interest rates remaining near historic lows.
Comparison of 2010 with
2009
Net income decreased $24 million compared to 2009 as a decrease in net interest income and an increase in
noninterest expense were partially offset by a decrease in provision for loan and lease losses and an increase in investment advisory revenue. Net interest income decreased $19 million from 2009 due to a decrease in average loans and leases
partially offset by an increase in the yield on interest earning assets.
Provision for loan and lease losses
decreased $13 million from 2009. Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased from 183 bps in 2009 to 171 bps in 2010 reflecting moderation of general economic conditions during 2010.
Noninterest income increased $20 million compared to 2009 due to an increase in investment advisory revenue partially
offset by a decrease in other noninterest income. Investment advisory revenue increased $31 million compared to 2009 due to increases in securities and broker income, private client service income and institutional income.
Noninterest expense increased $51 million compared to 2009 due to higher personnel expenses as a result of the expansion
of the sales force and compensation related to improved performance in investment advisory revenue related fees and due to an increase in expenses associated with the revenue sharing agreement between Investment Advisors and Branch Banking.
Average loans and leases decreased $538 million from 2009 primarily due to a decrease in commercial loans as
a result of a decrease in demand and a decrease in line utilization rates among the Bancorps high net worth customers due to excess liquidity. Average core deposits increased $958 million compared to 2009 primarily due to growth in interest
checking and foreign deposits.
General Corporate and Other
General Corporate and Other includes the unallocated portion of the investment securities portfolio, securities gains and losses, certain
non-core deposit funding, unassigned equity, provision expense in excess of net charge-offs or a benefit from the reduction of the ALLL, representation and warranty expense in excess of actual losses or a benefit from the reduction of representation
and warranty reserves, the payment of preferred stock dividends and certain support activities and other items not attributed to the business segments.
Comparison of 2011 with 2010
Results for 2011 and 2010 were
impacted by a benefit of $748 million and $789 million, respectively, due to reductions in the ALLL. The decrease in provision expense for both years was due to a decrease in nonperforming assets and improvement in delinquency metrics and underlying
loss trends. Net interest income increased from $16 million in 2010 to $321 million for 2011 due to a benefit in the FTP rate. The change in net income compared to the prior year was impacted by a $127 million benefit, net of expenses, from the
settlement of litigation associated with one of the Bancorps BOLI policies that was recorded in the third quarter of 2010. The results for 2011 were impacted by dividends on preferred stock of $203 million compared to $250 million in the prior
year. 2011 results included $153 million in preferred stock dividends as a result of the accelerated accretion of the remaining issuance discount on the Series F Preferred Stock that was repaid in the first quarter of 2011.
Comparison of 2010 with 2009
The results for 2010 were impacted by $789 million in income due to a reduction in the ALLL during 2010 compared to $967 million of provision expense recorded in excess of net charge-offs during 2009. The
decrease in provision expense was due to a decrease in nonperforming assets and improvement in credit trends as general economic conditions began to show signs of moderation. The 2010 results were also impacted by $152 million of noninterest income
recognized from the settlement of litigation associated with one of the Bancorps BOLI policies and $25 million of noninterest expense from related legal fees associated with the settlement. The results for 2009 were primarily impacted by a
$1.8 billion gain resulting from the sale of the processing business. Results for 2009 also included a $244 million gain on the sale of the Bancorps Visa, Inc. Class B shares, a $73 million benefit from the reversal of the Visa litigation
reserve, an $18 million benefit in noninterest income due to mark-to-market adjustments on warrants and put options related to the sale of the processing business and a $106 million tax benefit as a result of the Bancorps decision to surrender
one of its BOLI policies. These benefits were partially offset by a $54 million BOLI charge reflecting reserves recorded in the connection with the intent to surrender the policy. Additionally, the Bancorp recorded dividends on preferred stock of
$226 million during 2009 compared to $250 million during 2010.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
FOURTH QUARTER REVIEW
The Bancorps 2011 fourth quarter net income available to common shareholders was $305
million, or $0.33 per diluted share, compared to net income available to common shareholders of $373 million, or $0.40 per diluted share, for the third quarter of 2011 and net income available to common shareholders of $270 million, or $0.33 per
diluted share, for the fourth quarter of 2010. Fourth quarter 2011 earnings included a $54 million charge to noninterest income related to changes in the fair value of a swap liability that the Bancorp entered into in conjunction with its sale of
Visa, Inc Class B shares in 2009, a $30 million decrease in debit interchange revenue due to changes in debit interchange regulations and $10 million in positive valuation adjustments on puts and warrants associated with the sale of the processing
business. Third quarter 2011 results included $28 million of costs related to the termination of certain FHLB borrowings and hedging transactions and a $17 million reduction in other noninterest income related to the valuation of a total return swap
entered into as part of the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares. Fourth quarter 2010 earnings included the impact of a $17 million charge related to the early extinguishment of $1.0 billion in FHLB borrowings as well as $21 million in net investment
securities gains. Provision expense was $55 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, down from $87 million in the third quarter of 2011 and $166 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. Both the sequential decrease and the decline from the fourth
quarter of 2010 reflect improved credit trends, as evidenced by a decrease in net charge-offs and improvements in nonperforming assets and delinquent loans. The ALLL to loan and lease ratio was 2.78% as of December 31, 2011, compared to 3.08%
as of September 30, 2011 and 3.88% as of December 31, 2010.
Fourth quarter 2011 net interest
income of $920 million increased $18 million from the third quarter of 2011 and $1 million from the same period a year ago. The increase from the third quarter of 2011 was driven by both a decline in interest expense and an increase in interest
income. Interest expense declined $16 million from the third quarter of 2011, driven by lower deposit costs, including the $16 million impact of continued run-off of high-rate CDs and their replacement into lower yielding products. Interest income
increased $2 million from the third quarter of 2011 as an increase in average loans was partially offset by a decline in average securities and lower yields on average interest earning assets. Net interest income was flat in comparison to the fourth
quarter of 2010, largely due to lower loan and investment securities yields partially offset by higher average loan balances, run-off in higher-priced CDs, and mix shift to lower cost deposit products.
Fourth quarter 2011 noninterest income of $550 million decreased $115 million compared to the third quarter of 2011 and
$106 million compared to the fourth quarter of 2010. The sequential decline was driven by a $54 million reduction in income due to the increase in fair value of the liability related to the total return swap entered into as part of the 2009 sale of
Visa, Inc. Class B shares, as well as a $22 million decrease in mortgage banking net revenue. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2010, the decline was driven by decreases of $31 million in other noninterest income, $21 million in card and processing
fees and $16 million in securities gains, net. The fourth quarter of 2011 included a benefit of $10 million in mark-to-market adjustments on warrants and put options related to the sale of the processing business, compared to a benefit of $3 million
in the third quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2010.
Mortgage banking net revenue was $156 million
in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to $178 million in the third quarter of 2011 and $149 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. Fourth quarter originations were $7.1 billion, compared to $4.5 billion in the previous quarter and $7.4 billion in
the same quarter last year. These originations resulted in gains on mortgage loan sales of $152 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to $119 million in the third quarter of 2011 and $158 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. Gain
on sale margins declined from third quarter of 2011 and fourth quarter of 2010 levels, due to increased competition for originations as volumes slowed during the quarter. Also impacting mortgage
banking net revenue was net valuation adjustments on MSRs and MSR derivatives. In the fourth quarter of 2011 and 2010, losses on the Bancorps free-standing MSR derivatives exceeded impairment reversal recorded against the hedged MSRs. These
factors led to a net loss of $54 million on the net valuation adjustments on MSRs in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to a net zero and a net loss of $67 million in the third quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2010, respectively. A net
loss on non-qualifying hedges on MSR of $3 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 was included in noninterest income within the Consolidated Statements of Income, but shown separate from mortgage banking net revenue. Net gains on non-qualifying
hedges on mortgage servicing rights were $6 million and $14 million in the third quarter of 2011 and the fourth quarter of 2010, respectively.
Service charges on deposits of $136 million increased one percent sequentially and decreased three percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2010. Retail service charges were flat sequentially and
declined by seven percent from a year ago, largely driven by the impact of Regulation E. Commercial service charges increased two percent sequentially due to reductions in earnings credit rates and account growth and were flat when compared to the
same quarter last year.
Corporate banking revenue of $82 million decreased $5 million from the previous
quarter and decreased $21 million from the fourth quarter of 2010. The sequential decline was primarily driven by lower foreign exchange, interest rate derivative, and lease remarketing fees. The year-over-year decline was driven by these factors as
well as lower syndication fees and institutional sales revenue.
Investment advisory revenue of $90 million
decreased two percent sequentially and three percent from the fourth quarter of 2010. Sequential and year-over-year declines were driven by lower securities and brokerage revenue, institutional trust fees, and mutual fund fees partially offset by
higher private client service revenue.
Card and processing revenue of $60 million decreased $18 million
compared to the third quarter of 2011 and $20 million from the fourth quarter of 2010. Both decreases were driven by the impact of the recently enacted debit interchange legislation partially offset by increased transaction volumes and mitigation
activity in response to the debit interchange legislation.
The net gain on investment securities was $5
million in the fourth quarter of 2011 compared to a net gain of $26 million in the third quarter of 2011 and a net gain of $21 million in the fourth quarter of 2010.
Noninterest expense of $993 million increased $47 million sequentially and increased $6 million from the fourth quarter of 2010. Fourth quarter 2011 expenses included $14 million
of reserve related costs associated with bankcard association membership litigation and $5 million in other litigation reserve additions. Third quarter 2011 expenses included $28 million of costs related to the termination of certain FHLB borrowings
and hedging transactions, while fourth quarter 2010 results included $17 million of expenses related to the early termination of $1.0 billion in FHLB borrowings. Excluding these items, noninterest expense increased six percent from the third quarter
of 2011 and was flat compared with the fourth quarter of 2010, driven by increased mortgage fulfillment costs and $6 million of pension settlements.
Net charge-offs totaled $239 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to $262 million in the third quarter of 2011 and $356 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. The decreases in net charge-offs
from both periods reflects continued improvement in the credit quality of portfolio loans. Commercial net charge-offs were $113 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, compared to $136
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
million in the third quarter of 2011 and $173 million in the fourth quarter of 2010. Consumer net charge-offs were $126 million in the fourth quarter and third quarter of 2011 and $183 million in
the fourth quarter of 2010.
COMPARISON OF THE YEAR ENDED 2010 WITH 2009
Net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2010 was $503 million, or $0.63 per diluted share,
compared to net income available to common shareholders of $511 million, or $0.67 per diluted share, in 2009. Overall, $152 million of noninterest income from the settlement of litigation associated with one of the Bancorps BOLI policies as
well as an increase in mortgage banking net revenue and a decrease in the provision for loan and lease losses of $2.0 billion compared to 2009, were partially offset by decreases in noninterest income and card and processing revenue as well as $110
million of noninterest expense from charges to representation and warranty reserves related to residential mortgage loans sold to third parties. Results for 2009 also included a $106 million tax benefit as a result of the Bancorps decision to
surrender one of its BOLI policies and a $55 million income tax benefit from an agreement with the IRS to settle all of the Bancorps disputed leverage leases for all open years. These benefits were partially offset by a $54 million BOLI charge
reflecting reserves recorded in the connection with the intent to surrender the policy. While the Bancorp continued to be affected by rising unemployment rates, weakened housing markets, particularly in the upper Midwest and Florida, and a
challenging credit environment, credit trends began to show signs of stabilization in late 2009, which led to the decrease in provision expense from $3.5 billion at December 31, 2009 to $1.5 billion at December 31, 2010.
Net interest income increased to $3.6 billion, from $3.4 billion in 2009. The primary reason for the seven percent
increase in net interest income was a 39 bps increase in the net interest rate spread due to the runoff of higher priced term deposits in 2010 and the benefit of lower rates offered on new term deposits, as well as improved pricing on commercial
loans. These benefits were partially offset by a decrease in the accretion of purchase accounting adjustments related to the 2008 acquisition of First Charter, which were $68 million in 2010, compared to $136 million in 2009. Net interest margin was
3.66% in 2010, an increase of 34 bps from 2009.
Noninterest income decreased 43% to $2.7 billion in 2010
compared to $4.8 billion in 2009, driven primarily by the sale of the processing business in the second quarter of 2009, which resulted in a gain of $1.8 billion, as well as a $244 million gain related to the sale of the Bancorps Visa, Inc.
Class B shares in 2009. Mortgage banking net revenue increased $94 million as a result of strong net servicing revenue and higher margins on sold loans, partially offset by a decline in mortgage originations. Card and processing revenue decreased
49% due to the sale of the processing business in the second quarter of 2009. Service charges on deposits decreased $58 million primarily due to the impact of new overdraft regulation and policies which resulted in a decrease in overdraft
occurrences. Investment advisory revenue increased $35 million as the result of improved market performance and sales production that drove an increase in brokerage activity and assets under care. Corporate banking revenue decreased two percent
largely due to decreases in international income and lease remarketing fees, partially offset by growth in syndication and business lending fees.
Noninterest expense increased $29 million, or one percent, compared to 2009. Noninterest expense in 2010 included $25 million in legal fees associated with the settlement of claims with the insurance
carrier on one of the Bancorps BOLI policies while noninterest expense in 2009 included a $73 million reduction in the Visa litigation reserve as well as a $55 million FDIC special assessment charge. Total personnel costs increased $94
million, or six percent in 2010 compared to 2009, due primarily to investments in the sales force in 2010. In addition, charges to representation and
warranty reserves related to residential mortgage loans sold to third-parties totaled $110
million in 2010, compared to $31 million in 2009 due to a higher volume of repurchase demands. Partially offsetting these negative impacts was a $123 million decrease in the provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit due to lower
estimates of inherent losses as the result of a decrease in delinquent loans driven by moderation in economic conditions during 2010. In addition, card and processing expense decreased $85 million compared to 2009 due to the sale of the processing
business in the second quarter of 2009. Noninterest expense in 2010 and 2009 included $242 million and $269 million, respectively, of FDIC insurance and other taxes.
Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases decreased to 3.02% in 2010 compared to 3.20% in 2009. In the
third quarter of 2010, the Bancorp took significant actions to reduce credit risk. Residential mortgage loans in the Bancorps portfolio with a carrying value of $228 million were sold for $105 million, generating $123 million in net
charge-offs. Additionally, commercial loans with a carrying value prior to transfer of $961 million were transferred to held-for-sale, generating $387 million in net charge-offs. Including the impact of these actions, nonperforming assets as a
percent of loans, leases and other assets, including other real estate owned (excluding nonaccrual loans held for sale) decreased to 2.79% at December 31, 2010, from 4.22% at December 31, 2009.
The Bancorp took a number of actions to strengthen its capital position in 2009. On June 4, 2009, the Bancorp
completed an at-the-market offering resulting in the sale of $1 billion of its common shares at an average share price of $6.33. In addition, on June 17, 2009, the Bancorp completed its offer to exchange shares of its common stock and cash for
shares of its Series G convertible preferred stock. As a result, the Bancorp recognized an increase in net income available to common shareholders of $35 million based upon the difference in carrying value of the Series G preferred shares and the
fair value of the common shares and cash issued.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS
Loans and Leases
The Bancorp classifies its loans and leases based upon the primary purpose of the loan. Table 18 summarizes end of period loans and
leases, including loans held for sale and Table 19 summarizes average total loans and
leases, including loans held for sale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 18: COMPONENTS OF TOTAL LOANS AND LEASES (INCLUDES HELD FOR SALE) |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
30,828 |
|
|
|
27,275 |
|
|
|
25,687 |
|
|
|
29,220 |
|
|
|
26,079 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,214 |
|
|
|
10,992 |
|
|
|
11,936 |
|
|
|
12,731 |
|
|
|
11,967 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
2,111 |
|
|
|
3,871 |
|
|
|
5,335 |
|
|
|
5,561 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
3,535 |
|
|
|
3,666 |
|
|
|
3,737 |
|
Subtotal commercial |
|
|
45,610 |
|
|
|
43,756 |
|
|
|
45,029 |
|
|
|
50,952 |
|
|
|
47,344 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
13,474 |
|
|
|
10,857 |
|
|
|
9,846 |
|
|
|
10,292 |
|
|
|
11,433 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
12,174 |
|
|
|
12,752 |
|
|
|
11,874 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
|
|
8,995 |
|
|
|
8,594 |
|
|
|
11,183 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
1,811 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
702 |
|
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
|
1,157 |
|
Subtotal consumer |
|
|
38,362 |
|
|
|
35,951 |
|
|
|
33,817 |
|
|
|
34,643 |
|
|
|
37,238 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
83,972 |
|
|
|
79,707 |
|
|
|
78,846 |
|
|
|
85,595 |
|
|
|
84,582 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases (excludes loans held for sale) |
|
$ |
81,018 |
|
|
|
77,491 |
|
|
|
76,779 |
|
|
|
84,143 |
|
|
|
80,253 |
|
Total loans and leases, including loans held for sale, increased $4.3
billion, or five percent, from December 31, 2010. The increase in total loans and leases from December 31, 2010 was the result of a $1.9 billion, or four percent, increase in commercial loans and a $2.4 billion, or seven percent, increase
in consumer loans.
The increase of $1.9 billion in commercial loans and leases from 2010 was primarily due
to an increase in commercial and industrial loans partially offset by a decrease in commercial mortgage and commercial construction loans. Commercial and industrial loans increased $3.6 billion, or 13%, due to an increase in new loan origination
activity. Commercial mortgage loans decreased $778 million, or seven percent, and commercial construction loans decreased $1.1 billion, or 51%, from December 31, 2010 as the Bancorp experienced continued run-off in these loan categories. The
run-off activity was the result of managements decision to suspend new homebuilder and developer lending in 2007 and non-owner occupied real estate lending in 2008 combined with weak customer demand for owner-occupied commercial mortgage loans
and tighter underwriting standards.
Total consumer loans and leases increased $2.4 billion from 2010
primarily due to an increase in residential mortgage loans and automobile loans partially offset by a decrease in home equity loans
and other consumer loans and leases. The increase of $2.6 billion, or 24%, in residential
mortgage loans from December 31, 2010, was driven by a $1.7 billion increase in portfolio loans due to managements decision in the third quarter of 2010 and throughout 2011 to retain certain shorter term residential mortgage loans
originated through the Bancorps retail branches. Additionally, residential mortgage loans held for sale increased $901 million from December 31, 2010 due to an increase in refinancing activity in the fourth quarter of 2011 and the timing
of delivery of loans. Automobile loans increased $844 million, or eight percent, compared to December 31, 2010, due to strong origination volumes through consistent and competitive pricing, enhanced customer service with our dealership network
and disciplined sales execution. Home equity loans decreased $794 million, or seven percent, due to tighter underwriting standards implemented in 2010 and 2011 and decreased customer demand. Other consumer loans and leases, primarily made up of
automobile leases as well as student loans designated as held for sale, decreased $338 million, or 48%, compared to December 31, 2010 due to a decline in new originations driven by tighter underwriting standards implemented in 2010 and 2011 and
runoff due to the Bancorps decision to discontinue auto lease originations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 19: COMPONENTS OF AVERAGE TOTAL LOANS AND LEASES (INCLUDES HELD FOR SALE) |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
28,546 |
|
|
|
26,334 |
|
|
|
27,556 |
|
|
|
28,426 |
|
|
|
22,351 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,447 |
|
|
|
11,585 |
|
|
|
12,511 |
|
|
|
12,776 |
|
|
|
11,078 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,740 |
|
|
|
3,066 |
|
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
5,846 |
|
|
|
5,661 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,341 |
|
|
|
3,343 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
|
|
3,680 |
|
|
|
3,683 |
|
Subtotal commercial |
|
|
44,074 |
|
|
|
44,328 |
|
|
|
48,248 |
|
|
|
50,728 |
|
|
|
42,773 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
11,318 |
|
|
|
9,868 |
|
|
|
10,886 |
|
|
|
10,993 |
|
|
|
10,489 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
11,077 |
|
|
|
11,996 |
|
|
|
12,534 |
|
|
|
12,269 |
|
|
|
11,887 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,352 |
|
|
|
10,427 |
|
|
|
8,807 |
|
|
|
8,925 |
|
|
|
10,704 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,864 |
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
1,907 |
|
|
|
1,708 |
|
|
|
1,276 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
743 |
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
1,212 |
|
|
|
1,219 |
|
Subtotal consumer |
|
|
36,140 |
|
|
|
34,904 |
|
|
|
35,143 |
|
|
|
35,107 |
|
|
|
35,575 |
|
Total average loans and leases |
|
$ |
80,214 |
|
|
|
79,232 |
|
|
|
83,391 |
|
|
|
85,835 |
|
|
|
78,348 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases (excludes loans held for sale) |
|
$ |
78,533 |
|
|
|
77,045 |
|
|
|
80,681 |
|
|
|
83,895 |
|
|
|
76,033 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Average total commercial loans and leases decreased $254 million, or one percent, compared
to December 31, 2010. The decrease in average total commercial loans and leases was driven by a decrease in average commercial mortgage loans and average commercial construction loans, partially offset by an increase in average commercial and
industrial loans. Average commercial mortgage loans decreased $1.1 billion, or 10%, average commercial construction loans decreased $1.3 billion, or 43%, and average commercial and industrial loans increased $2.2 billion, or eight percent due to the
reasons previously discussed.
Average total consumer loans and leases increased $1.2 billion, or four
percent, compared to December 31, 2010. The increase in average total consumer loans and leases from December 2010 was driven by an increase in average residential mortgage loans and average automobile loans, partially offset by a decrease in
home equity loans and other consumer loans and leases. Average residential mortgage loans increased $1.5 billion, or 15%, average automobile loan balances increased $925 million, or nine percent, average home equity loans decreased $919 million, or
eight percent, and average other consumer loans and leases decreased $214 million, or 29%, from December 31, 2010 due to the reasons previously discussed.
Investment Securities
The Bancorp uses investment securities as a means of managing interest rate risk, providing liquidity support and providing collateral for
pledging purposes. As of December 31, 2011, total investment securities were $15.9 billion compared to $16.1 billion at December 31, 2010. See Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the Bancorps methodology for
both classifying investment securities and managements evaluation of securities in an unrealized loss position for OTTI.
At December 31, 2011, the Bancorps investment portfolio consisted primarily of AAA-rated available-for-sale securities. During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp
recognized $19 million and $3 million of OTTI on its investments securities portfolio, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2009, OTTI was immaterial to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Bancorp did not hold asset-backed securities backed by subprime mortgage loans in its investment portfolio.
Additionally, there was approximately $122 million of securities classified as below investment grade as of December 31, 2011, compared to $137 million as of December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 20: COMPONENTS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Available-for-sale and other: (amortized cost basis) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and Government agencies |
|
$ |
171 |
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
464 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
1,782 |
|
|
|
1,564 |
|
|
|
2,143 |
|
|
|
1,651 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
9,743 |
|
|
|
10,570 |
|
|
|
11,074 |
|
|
|
8,529 |
|
|
|
8,738 |
|
Other bonds, notes and
debentures(a) |
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
1,338 |
|
|
|
2,541 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
|
|
385 |
|
Other
securities(b) |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
1,417 |
|
|
|
1,248 |
|
|
|
1,045 |
|
Total available-for-sale and other securities |
|
$ |
14,614 |
|
|
|
14,919 |
|
|
|
17,879 |
|
|
|
12,550 |
|
|
|
10,821 |
|
Held-to-maturity: (amortized cost basis) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
320 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
|
351 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Total held-to-maturity |
|
$ |
322 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
355 |
|
Trading: (fair value) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable rate demand notes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
1,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other securities |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
Total trading |
|
$ |
177 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
355 |
|
|
|
1,191 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
(a) |
Other bonds, notes, and debentures consist of non-agency mortgage backed securities, certain other asset backed securities (primarily automobile and commercial loan
backed securities) and corporate bond securities. |
(b) |
Other securities consist of FHLB and FRB restricted stock holdings that are carried at par, FHLMC and FNMA preferred stock holdings and certain mutual fund holdings
and equity security holdings. |
As of December 31, 2011, available-for-sale securities on an amortized cost basis
decreased $305 million, or two percent, from December 31, 2010 due to a decrease in agency mortgage-backed securities, partially offset by an increase in U.S. government sponsored agencies securities and an increase in other bonds, notes and
debentures. Agency mortgage-backed securities decreased from 2010 as excess cash was invested in other short-term investments. The increase in both U.S. government sponsored agencies securities and other bonds, notes and debentures was primarily
driven by increased purchases of these instruments.
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, available-for-sale
securities were 14% of total interest-earning assets compared to 15% at December 31, 2010. The estimated weighted-average life of the debt securities in the available-for-sale portfolio was 3.6 years at December 31, 2011, compared to 4.4
years at December 31, 2010.
In addition, at December 31, 2011, the available-for-sale securities
portfolio had a weighted-average yield of 3.66%, compared to 4.24% at December 31, 2010.
Information
presented in Table 21 is on a weighted-average life basis, anticipating future prepayments. Yield information is presented on an FTE basis and is computed using historical cost balances. Maturity and yield calculations for the total
available-for-sale portfolio exclude equity securities that have no stated yield or maturity. Total net unrealized gains on the available-for-sale securities portfolio were $748 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $495 million at
December 31, 2010. The increase in net unrealized gains was due to the Federal Reserves low interest rates causing an increase in investor demand for higher-coupon securities that offer a higher yield.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 21: CHARACTERISTICS OF AVAILABLE-FOR-SALE AND OTHER
SECURITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions)
|
|
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
Life (in years) |
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
Yield |
|
U.S. Treasury and Government agencies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average life of one year or less |
|
|
$170 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.71 |
% |
Average life 5 10 years |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
1.48 |
|
Total |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.71 |
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average life of one year or less |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
1.54 |
|
Average life 1 5 years |
|
|
1,107 |
|
|
|
1,208 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
3.35 |
|
Average life 5 10 years |
|
|
625 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
3.90 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,782 |
|
|
|
1,962 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
3.49 |
|
Obligations of states and political
subdivisions:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average life of one year or less |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
8.26 |
|
Average life 1 5 years |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
0.13 |
|
Average life 5 10 years |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
6.04 |
|
Average life greater than 10 years |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
4.39 |
|
Total |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
2.82 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average life of one year or less |
|
|
645 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
4.59 |
|
Average life 1 5 years |
|
|
8,759 |
|
|
|
9,254 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
3.91 |
|
Average life 5 10 years |
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
3.97 |
|
Total |
|
|
9,743 |
|
|
|
10,284 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
3.96 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average life of one year or less |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
2.46 |
|
Average life 1 5 years |
|
|
1,241 |
|
|
|
1,251 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
Average life 5 10 years |
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
2.61 |
|
Average life greater than 10 years |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
28.9 |
|
|
|
6.50 |
|
Total |
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
2.52 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available-for-sale and other securities |
|
|
$14,614 |
|
|
|
15,362 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
3.66 |
% |
(a) |
Taxable-equivalent yield adjustments included in the above table are 2.86%, 0.04%, 2.09%, 1.52% and 0.97% for securities with an average life of one year or less,
1-5 years, 5-10 years, greater than 10 years and in total, respectively. |
Trading securities decreased $117 million, or 40%, compared to December 31, 2010. The
decrease from December 31, 2010 was driven primarily by the sale of VRDNs during the first quarter of 2011, which were held by the Bancorp in its trading securities portfolio. These securities were purchased from the market through FTS who was
also the remarketing agent. Rates on these securities declined in 2010 and into 2011 and, as a result, the Bancorp continued to sell the VRDNs, replacing them with higher-yielding agency mortgage-backed securities classified as available-for-sale.
For more information on VRDNs, see Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Deposits
The Bancorps deposit balances represent an important source of funding and revenue growth opportunity. The Bancorp continues to
focus on core deposit growth in its retail and commercial franchises by improving customer satisfaction, building full relationships and offering competitive rates. Core deposits represented 71% and 70% of the Bancorps asset funding base at
December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
TABLE 22: DEPOSITS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Demand |
|
$ |
27,600 |
|
|
|
21,413 |
|
|
|
19,411 |
|
|
|
15,287 |
|
|
|
14,404 |
|
Interest checking |
|
|
20,392 |
|
|
|
18,560 |
|
|
|
19,935 |
|
|
|
14,222 |
|
|
|
15,254 |
|
Savings |
|
|
21,756 |
|
|
|
20,903 |
|
|
|
17,898 |
|
|
|
16,063 |
|
|
|
15,635 |
|
Money market |
|
|
4,989 |
|
|
|
5,035 |
|
|
|
4,431 |
|
|
|
4,689 |
|
|
|
6,521 |
|
Foreign office |
|
|
3,250 |
|
|
|
3,721 |
|
|
|
2,454 |
|
|
|
2,144 |
|
|
|
2,572 |
|
Transaction deposits |
|
|
77,987 |
|
|
|
69,632 |
|
|
|
64,129 |
|
|
|
52,405 |
|
|
|
54,386 |
|
Other time |
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
7,728 |
|
|
|
12,466 |
|
|
|
14,350 |
|
|
|
11,440 |
|
Core deposits |
|
|
82,625 |
|
|
|
77,360 |
|
|
|
76,595 |
|
|
|
66,755 |
|
|
|
65,826 |
|
Certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
3,039 |
|
|
|
4,287 |
|
|
|
7,700 |
|
|
|
11,851 |
|
|
|
6,738 |
|
Other |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2,881 |
|
Total deposits |
|
$ |
85,710 |
|
|
|
81,648 |
|
|
|
84,305 |
|
|
|
78,613 |
|
|
|
75,445 |
|
Core deposits increased $5.3 billion, or seven percent, compared to December 31, 2010,
driven by an increase of $8.4 billion, or 12%, in transaction deposits, partially offset by a decrease of $3.1 billion, or 40%, in other time deposits. Transaction deposits increased due to an increase in demand deposits, interest checking deposits,
and savings deposits,
partially offset by a decrease in foreign office deposits. Demand deposits increased $6.2 billion, or 29%, due to an increase in new accounts, growth from maturing certificates of deposits, and
commercial customers opting to hold money in demand deposit accounts rather than investing excess cash given
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
current market conditions. Interest checking deposits increased $1.8 billion, or 10%, primarily due to an increase in new accounts from the Preferred Checking Program introduced in February 2011
and growth from maturing certificates of deposits. Savings deposits increased $853 million, or four percent, primarily due to growth from maturing certificates of deposits and the impact of the relationship savings program. Other time deposits
decreased $3.1 billion, or 40%, compared to December 31, 2010, primarily as a result of continued runoff of certificates of deposits due to the low interest rate environment, as customers have opted to maintain balances in more liquid
transaction accounts.
Included in core deposits are foreign office deposits, which are primarily Eurodollar
sweep accounts from the
Bancorps commercial customers. These accounts bear interest rates at slightly higher than money market accounts and unlike repurchase agreements the Bancorp does not have to pledge
collateral. Foreign office deposits decreased $471 million, or 13%, from December 31, 2010 due to a reduction in sweep activity from commercial demand deposits.
The Bancorp uses certificates of deposit $100,000 and over, as a method to fund earning asset growth. At
December 31, 2011, certificates $100,000 and over decreased $1.2 billion, or 29%, compared to December 31, 2010 due to continued runoff from the low rate environment.
The following table presents average deposits for the twelve months ending December 31:
TABLE 23: AVERAGE DEPOSITS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Demand |
|
$ |
23,389 |
|
|
|
19,669 |
|
|
|
16,862 |
|
|
|
14,017 |
|
|
|
13,261 |
|
Interest checking |
|
|
18,707 |
|
|
|
18,218 |
|
|
|
15,070 |
|
|
|
14,191 |
|
|
|
14,820 |
|
Savings |
|
|
21,652 |
|
|
|
19,612 |
|
|
|
16,875 |
|
|
|
16,192 |
|
|
|
14,836 |
|
Money market |
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
4,808 |
|
|
|
4,320 |
|
|
|
6,127 |
|
|
|
6,308 |
|
Foreign office |
|
|
3,490 |
|
|
|
3,355 |
|
|
|
2,108 |
|
|
|
2,153 |
|
|
|
1,762 |
|
Transaction deposits |
|
|
72,392 |
|
|
|
65,662 |
|
|
|
55,235 |
|
|
|
52,680 |
|
|
|
50,987 |
|
Other time |
|
|
6,260 |
|
|
|
10,526 |
|
|
|
14,103 |
|
|
|
11,135 |
|
|
|
10,778 |
|
Core deposits |
|
|
78,652 |
|
|
|
76,188 |
|
|
|
69,338 |
|
|
|
63,815 |
|
|
|
61,765 |
|
Certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
6,083 |
|
|
|
10,367 |
|
|
|
9,531 |
|
|
|
6,466 |
|
Other |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
2,067 |
|
|
|
1,393 |
|
Total average deposits |
|
$ |
82,315 |
|
|
|
82,277 |
|
|
|
79,862 |
|
|
|
75,413 |
|
|
|
69,624 |
|
On an average basis, core deposits increased $2.5 billion, or three percent, compared to
December 31, 2010 due to increases in demand deposits of $3.7 billion, interest checking of $489 million and savings deposits of $2.0 billion, partially offset by a decrease in other time deposits of $4.3 billion.
This activity was the result of the migration of other time deposits and certificates of deposits greater than $100,000 into transaction accounts, due to the impact of historically low rates and
excess customer liquidity and the reasons discussed above.
Borrowings
Total borrowings increased $1.9 billion, or 16%, from December 31, 2010 due primarily to an increase in other
short-term borrowings. As of December 31, 2011, total borrowings as a percentage of interest-bearing liabilities was 19% compared to 16% at December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 24: BORROWINGS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
$ |
346 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
4,427 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
1,415 |
|
|
|
9,959 |
|
|
|
4,747 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
9,682 |
|
|
|
9,558 |
|
|
|
10,507 |
|
|
|
13,585 |
|
|
|
12,857 |
|
Total borrowings |
|
$ |
13,267 |
|
|
|
11,411 |
|
|
|
12,104 |
|
|
|
23,831 |
|
|
|
22,031 |
|
Other short-term borrowings increased $1.7 billion, or 106%, from December 31, 2010
driven by an increase of $1.5 billion in short-term FHLB borrowings due to the runoff of certificates of deposits greater than $100,000. Long-term debt increased $124 million, or one percent, from December 31, 2010 due to the issuance of $1.0
billion in senior notes during the first quarter of 2011 and a $375 million increase in structured repurchase agreements. The increase in long-term debt was partially offset by the redemption of $519 million of certain trust preferred securities
during 2011, the redemption of a $500 million long-term FHLB advance during the third quarter
of 2011, and pay-downs related to previously consummated home equity and auto loan securitizations. In addition the Bancorp purchased $85 million of outstanding home equity securitization debt
from the market in 2011 which was accounted for as an extinguishment of debt. For further information on the Bancorps previous securitization activity refer to Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. During 2011, the
Bancorp recorded an $8 million gain on extinguishment of long-term debt within other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 25: AVERAGE BORROWINGS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
$ |
345 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
2,975 |
|
|
|
3,646 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
2,777 |
|
|
|
1,635 |
|
|
|
6,463 |
|
|
|
7,785 |
|
|
|
3,244 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
10,154 |
|
|
|
10,902 |
|
|
|
11,035 |
|
|
|
13,903 |
|
|
|
12,505 |
|
Total average borrowings |
|
$ |
13,276 |
|
|
|
12,828 |
|
|
|
18,015 |
|
|
|
24,663 |
|
|
|
19,395 |
|
Average total borrowings increased $448 million, or three percent, compared to
December 31, 2010, primarily due to an increase in average other short-term borrowings, partially offset by a decrease in average long-term debt. Average other short-term borrowings increased $1.1 billion, or 70%, due to the previously
mentioned increase in short-term FHLB borrowings. Average long-term debt decreased $748 million, or seven percent, due to a decrease of $1.0 billion in average long-term FHLB borrowings.
Information on the average rates paid on borrowings is discussed in the net interest income section of the MD&A. In
addition, refer to the Liquidity Risk Management section for a discussion on the role of borrowings in the Bancorps liquidity management.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
RISK MANAGEMENT
Managing risk is an essential component of successfully operating a financial services
company. The Bancorps risk management approach includes processes for identifying, assessing, managing, monitoring and reporting risks. The ERM division, led by the Bancorps Chief Risk Officer, and the Bancorp Credit division, led by the
Bancorps Chief Credit Officer, ensure the consistency and adequacy of the Bancorps risk management approach within the structure of the Bancorps affiliate operating model. In addition, the Internal Audit division provides an
independent assessment of the Bancorps internal control structure and related systems and processes.
The assumption of risk requires robust and active risk management practices that comprise an integrated and
comprehensive set of activities, measures and strategies that apply to the entire organization. The Bancorp has established a Risk Appetite Framework that provides the foundations of corporate risk capacity, risk appetite and risk tolerances. The
Bancorps risk capacity is represented by its available financial resources. Risk capacity sets an absolute limit on risk-assumption in the Bancorps annual and strategic plans. The Bancorp understands that not all financial resources may
persist as viable loss buffers over time. Further, consideration must be given to planned or foreseeable events that would reduce risk capacity. Those factors take the form of capacity adjustments to arrive at an Operating Risk Capacity. Operating
Risk Capacity represents the operating risk level the Bancorp can assume while maintaining its solvency standard. The Bancorps policy currently discounts its Operating Risk Capacity by a minimum of five percent to provide a buffer; as a
result, the Bancorps risk appetite is limited by policy to, at most, 95% of its Operating Risk Capacity.
Economic capital is the amount of unencumbered financial resources required to support the Bancorps risks. The
Bancorp measures economic capital under the assumption that it expects to maintain debt ratings at strong investment grade levels over time. The Bancorps capital policies require that the Operating Risk Capacity less the aforementioned buffer
exceed the calculated economic capital required in its business.
Risk appetite is the aggregate amount of
risk the Bancorp is willing to accept in pursuit of its strategic and financial objectives. By establishing boundaries around risk taking and business decisions, and by incorporating the needs and goals of its shareholders, regulators, rating
agencies and customers, the Bancorps risk appetite is aligned with its priorities and goals. Risk tolerance is the maximum amount of risk applicable to each of the eight specific risk categories included in its Enterprise Risk Management
Framework. This is expressed primarily in qualitative terms. The Bancorps risk appetite and risk tolerances are supported by risk targets and risk limits. Those limits are used to monitor the amount of risk assumed at a granular level.
The risks faced by the Bancorp include, but are not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational,
regulatory compliance, legal, reputational and strategic. Each of these risks is managed through the Bancorps risk program which includes the following key functions:
|
|
|
Enterprise Risk Management Programs is responsible for developing and overseeing the implementation of risk programs and reporting that facilitate a
broad integrated view of risk. The department also leads the continual fostering of a strong risk management culture and the framework, policies and committees that support effective risk governance, including the oversight of Sarbanes-Oxley
compliance; |
|
|
|
Commercial Credit Risk Management provides safety and soundness within an independent portfolio management
|
|
|
framework that supports the Bancorps commercial loan growth strategies and underwriting practices, ensuring portfolio optimization and appropriate risk controls;
|
|
|
|
Risk Strategies and Reporting is responsible for quantitative analysis needed to support the commercial dual rating methodology, ALLL methodology
and analytics needed to assess credit risk and develop mitigation strategies related to that risk. The department also provides oversight, reporting and monitoring of commercial underwriting and credit administration processes. The Risk Strategies
and Reporting department is also responsible for the economic capital program; |
|
|
|
Consumer Credit Risk Management provides safety and soundness within an independent management framework that supports the Bancorps consumer
loan growth strategies, ensuring portfolio optimization, appropriate risk controls and oversight, reporting, and monitoring of underwriting and credit administration processes; |
|
|
|
Operational Risk Management works with affiliates and lines of business to maintain processes to monitor and manage all aspects of operational risk,
including ensuring consistency in application of operational risk programs; |
|
|
|
Bank Protection oversees and manages fraud prevention and detection and provides investigative and recovery services for the Bancorp;
|
|
|
|
Capital Markets Risk Management is responsible for instituting, monitoring, and reporting appropriate trading limits, monitoring liquidity, interest
rate risk and risk tolerances within Treasury, Mortgage, and Capital Markets groups and utilizing a value at risk model for Bancorp market risk exposure; |
|
|
|
Regulatory Compliance Risk Management ensures that processes are in place to monitor and comply with federal and state banking regulations,
including fiduciary compliance processes. The function also has the responsibility for maintenance of an enterprise-wide compliance framework; and |
|
|
|
The ERM division creates and maintains other functions, committees or processes as are necessary to effectively manage risk throughout the Bancorp.
|
Risk management oversight and governance is provided by the Risk and Compliance
Committee of the Board of Directors and through multiple management committees whose membership includes a broad cross-section of line-of-business, affiliate and support representatives. The Risk and Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors
consists of five outside directors and has the responsibility for the oversight of risk management for the Bancorp, as well as for the Bancorps overall aggregate risk profile. The Risk and Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors has
approved the formation of key management governance committees that are responsible for evaluating risks and controls. The primary committee responsible for the oversight of risk management is the ERMC. Committees accountable to the ERMC, which
support the core risk programs, are the Corporate Credit Committee, the Operational Risk Committee, the Management Compliance Committee, the Asset/Liability Committee and the Enterprise Marketing Committee. Other committees accountable to the ERMC
oversee the ALLL, capital and community reinvestment act/fair lending functions. There are also new products and initiatives processes applicable to every line of business to ensure an appropriate standard readiness assessment is performed before
launching a new product or initiative. Significant risk policies approved by the management governance committees are also reviewed and
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
approved by the Risk and Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors.
Finally, Credit Risk Review is an independent function responsible for evaluating the sufficiency of underwriting, documentation and approval processes for consumer and commercial credits, the accuracy of
risk grades assigned to commercial credit exposure, appropriate accounting for charge-offs, and nonaccrual status and specific reserves. Credit Risk Review reports directly to the Risk and Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors and
administratively to the Director of Internal Audit.
CREDIT RISK MANAGEMENT
The objective of the Bancorps credit risk management strategy is to quantify and manage credit risk on an aggregate portfolio basis,
as well as to limit the risk of loss resulting from an individual
customer default. The Bancorps credit risk management
strategy is based on three core principles: conservatism, diversification and monitoring. The Bancorp believes that effective credit risk management begins with conservative lending practices. These practices include conservative exposure and
counterparty limits and conservative underwriting, documentation and collection standards. The Bancorps credit risk management strategy also emphasizes diversification on a geographic, industry and customer level as well as regular credit
examinations and timely management reviews of large credit exposures and credits experiencing deterioration of credit quality. Credit officers with the authority to extend credit are delegated specific authority amounts, the utilization of which is
closely monitored. Underwriting activities are centrally managed, and ERM manages the policy and the authority delegation process directly. The Credit Risk Review function provides objective assessments of the quality of underwriting and
documentation, the accuracy of risk grades and the charge-off, nonaccrual and reserve analysis
process. The Bancorps credit review process and overall assessment of the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses is based on quarterly assessments of the probable estimated losses
inherent in the loan and lease portfolio. The Bancorp uses these assessments to promptly identify potential problem loans or leases within the portfolio, maintain an adequate reserve and take any necessary charge-offs. Fifth Third defines potential
problem loans as those rated substandard that do not meet the definition of a nonperforming asset or a restructured loan. See Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the Bancorps credit grade
categories, which are derived from standard regulatory rating definitions. The following tables provide a summary of potential problem loans as of December 31:
TABLE 26: POTENTIAL PROBLEM LOANS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Carrying Value |
|
|
Unpaid Principal Balance |
|
|
Exposure |
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
1,376 |
|
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
|
1,744 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
1,215 |
|
|
|
1,216 |
|
|
|
1,223 |
|
Commercial construction |
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,863 |
|
|
|
2,865 |
|
|
|
3,258 |
|
TABLE 27: POTENTIAL PROBLEM LOANS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Carrying Value |
|
|
Unpaid Principal Balance |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial |
|
$ |
1,984 |
|
|
|
1,985 |
|
|
|
2,687 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
1,559 |
|
|
|
1,570 |
|
Commercial construction |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,943 |
|
|
|
3,946 |
|
|
|
4,729 |
|
In addition to the individual review of larger commercial loans that exhibit probable or
observed credit weaknesses, the commercial credit review process includes the use of two risk grading systems. The risk grading system currently utilized for reserve analysis purposes encompasses ten categories. The Bancorp also maintains a dual
risk rating system that provides for thirteen probabilities of default grade categories and an additional six grade categories for estimating losses given an event of default. The probability of default and loss given default evaluations are not
separated in the ten-grade risk rating system. The Bancorp has completed significant validation and testing of the dual risk rating system and will make a decision on the implementation of the dual risk rating model for purposes of determining the
Bancorps ALLL once the FASB has issued a final standard regarding previously proposed methodology changes to the determination of credit impairment as outlined in the Accounting for Financial Instruments and Revisions to the Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities Exposure Draft and Supplementary Document dated May 2010 and January 2011, respectively. Scoring systems, various analytical tools
and delinquency monitoring are used to assess the credit risk in the Bancorps homogenous consumer and small business loan portfolios.
Overview
General economic conditions started to improve during 2010 and were mixed in 2011. Geographically, the Bancorp continues to experience the most stress in Michigan and Florida due to the decline in real
estate values. Real estate value deterioration, as measured by the Home Price Index, was most prevalent in Florida due to past real estate price appreciation and related over-development, and in Michigan due in part to cutbacks in automobile
manufacturing and the states economic downturn. Among commercial portfolios, the homebuilder, residential developer and portions of the remaining non-owner occupied commercial real estate portfolios continue to remain under stress.
Among consumer portfolios, residential mortgage and brokered home equity portfolios exhibited the most stress.
Management suspended homebuilder and developer lending in the fourth quarter of 2007 and new commercial non-owner occupied real estate lending in the
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
second quarter of 2008, discontinued the origination of brokered home equity products at the end of 2007 and tightened underwriting standards across both the commercial and consumer loan product
offerings. Since the fourth quarter of 2008, in an effort to reduce loan exposure to the real estate and construction industries, the Bancorp has sold certain consumer loans and sold or transferred to held for sale certain commercial loans.
Throughout 2010 and 2011, the Bancorp continued to aggressively engage in other loss mitigation strategies such as reducing credit commitments, restructuring certain commercial and consumer loans, tightening underwriting standards on commercial
loans and across the consumer loan portfolio, as well as utilizing expanded commercial and consumer loan workout teams. In the financial services industry, there has been heightened focus on foreclosure activity and processes. Fifth Third actively
works with borrowers experiencing difficulties and has regularly modified or provided forbearance to borrowers where a workable solution could be found. Foreclosure is a last resort, and the Bancorp undertakes foreclosures only when it believes they
are necessary and appropriate and are careful to ensure that customer and loan data are accurate. Reviews of the Bancorps foreclosure process and procedures conducted last year did not reveal any material deficiencies. These reviews were
expanded and extended in 2011 to improve our processes as additional aspects of the industrys foreclosure practices have come under intensified scrutiny and criticism. These reviews are completed and the Bancorp may determine to amend its
processes and procedures as a result of these reviews. While any impact to the Bancorp that ultimately results from continued reviews cannot yet be determined, management currently believes that such impact will not materially adversely affect the
Bancorps results of operations, liquidity or capital resources. Additionally, banking regulatory agencies and other federal and state governmental authorities have continued to review the foreclosure process of mortgage servicers such as Fifth
Third beyond the initial examinations of the largest mortgage servicers they conducted last year and earlier this year. These ongoing reviews could subject Fifth Third and other mortgage servicers to sanctions, civil money penalties and/or
requirements to undertake remedial measures.
Commercial Portfolio
The Bancorps credit risk management strategy includes minimizing concentrations of risk through diversification. The Bancorp has
commercial loan concentration limits based on industry, lines of business within the commercial segment, geography and credit product type.
The risk within the commercial loan and lease portfolio is managed
and monitored through an underwriting process utilizing detailed origination policies, continuous loan level reviews, monitoring of industry concentration and product type limits and continuous portfolio risk management reporting. The origination
policies for commercial real estate outline the risks and underwriting requirements for owner and non-owner occupied and construction lending. Included in the policies are maturity and amortization terms, maximum LTVs, minimum debt service coverage
ratios, construction loan monitoring procedures, appraisal requirements, pre-leasing requirements (as applicable) and sensitivity and pro-forma analysis requirements. The Bancorp requires a valuation of real estate collateral, which may include
third-party appraisals, be performed at the time of origination and renewal in accordance with regulatory requirements and on an as needed basis when market conditions justify. Although the Bancorp does not back test these collateral value
assumptions, the Bancorp maintains an appraisal review department to order and review third-party appraisals in accordance with regulatory requirements. Collateral values on criticized assets with relationships exceeding $1 million are reviewed
quarterly to assess the appropriateness of the value ascribed in the assessment of charge-offs and specific reserves. In addition, the Bancorp applies incremental valuation haircuts to older appraisals that relate to collateral dependent loans,
which can currently be up to 25-40% of the appraised value based on the type of collateral. These incremental valuation haircuts generally reflect the age of the most recent appraisal as well as collateral type. Trends in collateral values, such as
home price indices and recent asset dispositions, are monitored in order to determine whether adjustments to the appraisal haircuts are warranted. Other factors such as local market conditions or location may also be considered as necessary.
The Bancorp assesses all real estate and non-real estate collateral securing a loan and considers all cross
collateralized loans in the calculation of the LTV ratio. The following table provides detail on the most recent LTV ratios for commercial mortgage loans greater than $1 million, excluding impaired commercial mortgage loans individually evaluated.
The Bancorp does not typically aggregate the LTV ratios for commercial mortgage loans less than $1 million.
TABLE 28: COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE LOANS OUTSTANDING BY LTV, LOANS GREATER THAN $1 MILLION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
LTV > 100% |
|
|
LTV 80-100% |
|
|
LTV
£ 80% |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
$ |
528 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
2,353 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
2,164 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,212 |
|
|
|
1,153 |
|
|
|
4,517 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table provides detail on
commercial loan and leases by industry classification (as defined by the North American Industry Classification System), by loan size and by state, illustrating the diversity and granularity of the Bancorps commercial loans and leases.
TABLE 29: COMMERCIAL LOAN AND LEASE PORTFOLIO (EXCLUDING LOANS HELD FOR SALE)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
By industry: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing |
|
$ |
9,020 |
|
|
|
17,065 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
$ |
7,202 |
|
|
|
14,979 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
Real estate |
|
|
6,274 |
|
|
|
7,060 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
8,295 |
|
|
|
9,532 |
|
|
|
378 |
|
Financial services and insurance |
|
|
4,596 |
|
|
|
9,975 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
3,830 |
|
|
|
8,184 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
Business services |
|
|
3,898 |
|
|
|
5,976 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
3,314 |
|
|
|
5,379 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Wholesale trade |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
6,796 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
2,926 |
|
|
|
5,689 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Healthcare |
|
|
3,477 |
|
|
|
5,179 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
3,402 |
|
|
|
5,421 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Retail trade |
|
|
2,639 |
|
|
|
5,548 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
2,548 |
|
|
|
5,377 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Transportation and warehousing |
|
|
2,304 |
|
|
|
3,152 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
|
|
2,566 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Construction |
|
|
2,226 |
|
|
|
3,470 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
2,789 |
|
|
|
4,124 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
Mining |
|
|
1,157 |
|
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Communication and information |
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
2,117 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,004 |
|
|
|
1,668 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Accommodation and food |
|
|
1,127 |
|
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Other services |
|
|
998 |
|
|
|
1,503 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
1,062 |
|
|
|
1,473 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Entertainment and recreation |
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
1,228 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
788 |
|
|
|
1,012 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Public administration |
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
616 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Utilities |
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
1,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
Individuals |
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
512 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
690 |
|
|
|
830 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Agribusiness |
|
|
425 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
621 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
Other |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
45,472 |
|
|
|
76,418 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
$ |
43,462 |
|
|
|
72,341 |
|
|
|
1,214 |
|
By loan size: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than $200,000 |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
$200,000 to $1 million |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
$1 million to $5 million |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
$5 million to $10 million |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
$10 million to $25 million |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Greater than $25 million |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
By state: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Florida |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Tennessee |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
All other states |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The Bancorp has identified certain categories of loans which it believes represent a higher
level of risk compared to the rest
of the Bancorps loan portfolio, due to economic or market conditions within the Bancorps key lending areas.
The following table
provides analysis of each of the categories of loans (excluding loans held for sale) by state as of December 31, 2011 and 2010.
TABLE
30: NON-OWNER OCCUPIED COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in
millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
1,958 |
|
|
|
2,125 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Florida |
|
|
713 |
|
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
All other states |
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,731 |
|
|
|
6,138 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
TABLE 31: NON-OWNER OCCUPIED COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
2,332 |
|
|
|
2,565 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
1,809 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
Florida |
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
All other states |
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,060 |
|
|
|
7,730 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
625 |
|
TABLE 32: HOME BUILDER AND DEVELOPER (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
166 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Florida |
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
All other states |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
512 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
(a) |
Home Builder and Developer loans, exclusive of commercial and industrial loans with an outstanding balance of $136 and a total exposure of
$222 are also included in Table 30: Non-Owner Occupied Commercial Real Estate. |
TABLE 33: HOME
BUILDER AND DEVELOPER (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Florida |
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
All other states |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
699 |
|
|
|
984 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
(a) |
Home Builder and Developer loans, exclusive of commercial and industrial loans with an outstanding balance of $134 and a total exposure of $319 are also included in
Table 31: Non-Owner Occupied Commercial Real Estate. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Consumer Portfolio
The Bancorps consumer portfolio is materially comprised of three categories of loans: residential mortgage, home equity, and
automobile. The Bancorp has identified certain categories within these loan types which it believes represent a higher level of risk compared to the rest of the consumer loan portfolio due to high loan amount to collateral value. The Bancorp does
not update LTV ratios for the consumer portfolio subsequent to origination except as part of the charge-off process for real estate secured loans.
Residential Mortgage Portfolio
The Bancorp manages credit risk in
the mortgage portfolio through conservative underwriting and documentation standards and geographic and product diversification. The Bancorp may also package and sell loans in the portfolio or may purchase mortgage insurance for the loans sold in
order to mitigate credit risk.
The Bancorp does not originate mortgage loans that permit customers to defer
principal payments or make payments that are less than the accruing interest. The Bancorp originates both
fixed and adjustable rate residential mortgage loans. Resets of rates on adjustable rate mortgages are not expected to have a material impact on credit costs in the current interest rate
environment, as approximately $1.2 billion of adjustable rate residential mortgage loans will have rate resets during the next twelve months, with approximately three percent of those resets expected to experience an increase in monthly payments in
comparison to the monthly payment at the time of origination.
Certain residential mortgage products have
contractual features that may increase credit exposure to the Bancorp in the event of a decline in housing values. These types of mortgage products offered by the Bancorp include loans with high LTV ratios, multiple loans on the same collateral that
when combined result in an LTV greater than 80% and interest-only loans. The Bancorp monitors residential mortgage loans with greater than 80% LTV ratio and no mortgage insurance as it believes these loans represent a higher level of risk. The
following table provides an analysis of the residential mortgage portfolio loans outstanding, excluding held for sale, by LTV at origination:
TABLE 34: RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE
PORTFOLIO LOANS BY LTV AT ORIGINATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average LTVs |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average LTVs |
|
LTV £ 80 % |
|
$ |
7,876 |
|
|
|
66.6 |
% |
|
|
6,419 |
|
|
|
68.0 |
% |
LTV > 80%, with mortgage insurance |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
92.7 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
93.0 |
|
LTV > 80%, no mortgage insurance |
|
|
1,766 |
|
|
|
95.6 |
|
|
|
1,666 |
|
|
|
95.4 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,672 |
|
|
|
73.9 |
% |
|
|
8,956 |
|
|
|
75.5 |
% |
The following tables provide analysis of the residential mortgage portfolio loans outstanding, excluding
held for sale, with a greater than 80% LTV ratio and no mortgage insurance as of December 31, 2011 and 2010:
TABLE 35: RESIDENTIAL
MORTGAGE PORTFOLIO LOANS, LTV GREATER THAN 80%, NO MORTGAGE INSURANCE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
600 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Florida |
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
All other states |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,766 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
TABLE 36: RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LOANS OUTSTANDING, LTV GREATER THAN 80%, NO MORTGAGE INSURANCE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
569 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Florida |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
All other states |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,666 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Home Equity Portfolio
The Bancorps home equity portfolio is primarily comprised of home equity lines of credit. The home equity line of credit offered by
the Bancorp is a revolving facility with a 20-year term, minimum payments of interest only and a balloon payment of principal at maturity.
The ALLL provides coverage for probable and estimable losses in the home equity portfolio. The allowance attributable to the portion of the home equity portfolio that has not been restructured in a TDR is
determined on a single homogenous pool basis reflecting the Bancorps belief that the credit risk characteristics of this portfolio are of sufficient similarity such that additional portfolio segmentation is not necessary for determining the
probable credit losses in the home equity portfolio. The modeled loss factor for the home equity portfolio is based on the trailing twelve month historical loss rate, as adjusted for certain prescriptive loss rate factors and certain qualitative
adjustment factors to reflect risks associated with current conditions and trends. The prescriptive loss rate factors include adjustments for delinquency trends, LTV trends, refreshed FICO score trends and product mix. The qualitative factors
include adjustments for credit administration and portfolio management, credit policy and underwriting and the national and local economy. The Bancorp considers home price index trends when determining the national and local economy qualitative
factor.
The home equity portfolio is managed in two primary categories: loans outstanding with a LTV greater
than 80% and those loans with a LTV 80% or less based upon appraisals at origination. The carrying value of the greater than 80% LTV home equity loans and 80% or less LTV home equity loans were $4.0 billion and $6.7 billion, respectively, as of
December 31, 2011. Of the total $10.7 billion of outstanding home equity loans:
|
|
|
82% reside within the Bancorps Midwest footprint of Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois |
|
|
|
31% are in first lien positions and 69% are in second lien positions at December 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
For approximately 1/3 of the home equity portfolio in a second lien position, the first lien is either owned or serviced by the Bancorp
|
|
|
|
Over 90% of non-delinquent borrowers made at least one payment greater than the minimum payment during the year ended December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
The portfolio had an average refreshed FICO score of 734 at December 31, 2011 and 2010. |
The Bancorp actively manages lines of credit and makes reductions in lending limits when it believes it is necessary
based on FICO score deterioration and property devaluation. The Bancorp does not routinely obtain appraisals on performing loans to update LTV ratios after origination. However, the Bancorp monitors the local housing markets by reviewing various
home price indices and incorporates the impact of the changing market conditions in its on-going credit monitoring processes. For second lien home equity loans, the Bancorp is unable to track the performance of the first lien loans if it does not
service the first lien loan, but instead monitors the refreshed FICO scores as part of its assessment of the home equity portfolio. The following table provides an analysis of home equity loans outstanding disaggregated based upon refreshed FICO
score:
TABLE 37: HOME EQUITY LOANS
OUTSTANDING BY REFRESHED FICO SCORE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
December 31, 2011 |
|
|
% of Total |
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
% of Total |
|
First Liens: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FICO < 620 |
|
$ |
214 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
FICO 621-719 |
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
690 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
FICO > 720 |
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
2,533 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Total First Liens |
|
|
3,323 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
3,453 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Second Liens: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FICO < 620 |
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
921 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
FICO 621-719 |
|
|
1,929 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
FICO > 720 |
|
|
4,717 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
5,182 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Total Second Liens |
|
|
7,396 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
8,060 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,719 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
The Bancorp believes that home equity loans with a greater than 80% combined LTV ratio present a higher
level of risk. The following table provides an analysis of the home equity loans outstanding in a first and second lien position by LTV at origination:
TABLE 38: HOME EQUITY LOANS OUTSTANDING BY LTV AT ORIGINATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average
LTVs |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average
LTVs |
|
First Liens: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LTV £ 80 % |
|
$ |
2,800 |
|
|
|
54.9 |
% |
|
|
2,903 |
|
|
|
55.1 |
% |
LTV > 80% |
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
89.2 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
89.4 |
|
Total First Liens |
|
|
3,323 |
|
|
|
60.4 |
|
|
|
3,453 |
|
|
|
60.6 |
|
Second Liens; |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LTV £ 80 % |
|
|
3,882 |
|
|
|
67.3 |
|
|
|
4,044 |
|
|
|
67.3 |
|
LTV > 80% |
|
|
3,514 |
|
|
|
91.8 |
|
|
|
4,016 |
|
|
|
92.0 |
|
Total Second Liens |
|
|
7,396 |
|
|
|
81.0 |
|
|
|
8,060 |
|
|
|
81.4 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,719 |
|
|
|
74.0 |
% |
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
74.6 |
% |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following tables provide analysis of home
equity loans by state with LTV greater than 80% as of December 31, 2011 and 2010.
TABLE 39: HOME EQUITY LOANS OUTSTANDING WITH LTV
GREATER THAN 80%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
1,393 |
|
|
|
2,083 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
884 |
|
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Florida |
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
All other states |
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,037 |
|
|
|
5,741 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
TABLE 40: HOME EQUITY LOANS OUTSTANDING WITH LTV GREATER THAN 80%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
1,576 |
|
|
|
2,288 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
998 |
|
|
|
1,317 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
614 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Florida |
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
All other states |
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
|
6,305 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
Automobile Portfolio
The automobile portfolio is characterized by direct and indirect lending products to consumers. As of December 31, 2011, 49% of the
automobile loan portfolio is comprised of new automobiles. It is a common practice to advance on automobile loans an amount in excess of the automobile value
due to the inclusion of taxes, title, and other fees paid at closing. The Bancorp monitors its exposure to these higher risk loans. The following table provides an analysis of automobile loans
outstanding by LTV at origination:
TABLE 41: AUTOMOBILE LOANS
OUTSTANDING WITH LTV AT ORIGINATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average LTVs |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Weighted Average LTVs |
|
LTV £ 100 % |
|
$ |
7,805 |
|
|
|
81.7 |
% |
|
|
6,853 |
|
|
|
81.8 |
% |
LTV > 100% |
|
|
4,022 |
|
|
|
111.5 |
|
|
|
4,130 |
|
|
|
112.8 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
11,827 |
|
|
|
92.1 |
% |
|
|
10,983 |
|
|
|
93.8 |
% |
The following tables provide analysis of the Bancorps automobile loans with a LTV at origination
greater than 100% as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
TABLE 42: AUTOMOBILE LOANS OUTSTANDING WITH LTV GREATER THAN 100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
425 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Florida |
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
All other states |
|
|
2,530 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,022 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TABLE 43: AUTOMOBILE LOANS OUTSTANDING WITH LTV GREATER THAN 100% |
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
By State: |
|
Outstanding |
|
|
90 Days Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Net Charge-offs |
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
447 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Florida |
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
All other states |
|
|
2,451 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,130 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
European Exposure
The Bancorp has no direct sovereign exposure to any European nation as of December 31, 2011. In providing services to our customers,
the Bancorp routinely enters into financial transactions with foreign domiciled and U.S. subsidiaries of foreign businesses as well as foreign financial institutions. These financial transactions are in the form of loans, loan commitments, letters
of credit, derivatives and securities. The Bancorps risk appetite for foreign country exposure is managed by having established country exposure limits. The Bancorps total exposure to European domiciled or owned businesses and European
financial institutions was $2.2 billion and funded exposure was $1.4 billion as of December 31, 2011.
Additionally, the Bancorp was within its established country exposure limits for all
European countries.
Certain European countries have been experiencing increased levels of stress throughout
2011 including Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain. The Bancorps total exposure to businesses domiciled or owned by companies and financial institutions in these countries was approximately $138 million and funded exposure was $72
million as of December 31, 2011. The following table provides detail about the Bancorps exposure to all European domiciled and owned businesses and financial institutions as of December 31, 2011:
TABLE 44: EUROPEAN EXPOSURE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereigns |
|
|
Financial Institutions |
|
|
Non-Financial Institutions |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Funded |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Funded |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Funded |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Funded |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure |
|
|
Exposure (a) |
|
|
Exposure |
|
Peripheral Europe(b) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Other Eurozone (c) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
1,106 |
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
Total Eurozone |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
1,242 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
1,355 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
Other Europe (d) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
801 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
861 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Total Europe |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
2,043 |
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
1,408 |
|
(a) |
Total exposure includes funded and unfunded commitments, net of collateral; funded exposure excludes unfunded exposure. |
(b) |
Peripheral Europe includes Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain. |
(c) |
Eurozone includes countries participating in the European common currency (Euro). |
(d) |
Other Europe includes European countries not part of the Euro (primarily the United Kingdom and Switzerland). |
Analysis of Nonperforming Assets
Nonperforming assets include nonaccrual loans and leases for which ultimate collectability of the full amount of the principal and/or
interest is uncertain; restructured commercial and credit card loans which have not yet met the requirements to be classified as a performing asset; restructured consumer loans which are 90 days past due based on the restructured terms unless the
loan is both well-secured and in the process of collection; and certain other assets, including OREO and other repossessed property. A summary of nonperforming assets is included in Table 45. Residential mortgage loans are typically placed on
nonaccrual status when principal and interest payments have become past due 150 days unless such loans are both well secured and in the process of collection. Residential mortgage loans may stay on nonperforming status for an extended time as the
foreclosure process typically lasts longer than 180 days. Typically, home equity loans and leases are reported on nonaccrual status if principal or interest has been in default for 180 days or more unless the loan is both well secured and in the
process of collection. Automobile and other consumer loans and leases that have been modified in a TDR and subsequently become past due 90 days are placed on nonaccrual status. Credit card loans that have been modified in a TDR are classified as
nonaccrual unless such loans have a sustained repayment performance of six months or greater and the Bancorp is reasonably assured of repayment in accordance with the restructured terms. Well secured loans are collateralized by perfected security
interests in real and/or personal property for which the Bancorp estimates proceeds from sale would be sufficient to recover the outstanding principal and accrued interest balance of the loan and pay all costs to sell the collateral. The Bancorp
considers a loan in the process of collection if collection efforts or legal action is proceeding and the Bancorp expects to collect funds sufficient to bring the loan current or recover the entire outstanding principal and accrued interest balance.
When a loan is placed on nonaccrual status, the accrual of interest, amortization of loan premiums, accretion of loan discounts and amortization or accretion of deferred net loan fees or costs are discontinued and previously accrued, but unpaid
interest is reversed. Commercial loans on nonaccrual status are reviewed for impairment at least quarterly. If the principal or a portion of the principal is deemed a loss, the loss amount is charged off to the ALLL.
Total nonperforming assets, including loans held for sale, were $2.0
billion at December 31 2011 compared to $2.5 billion at December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2011, $138 million of nonaccrual loans, consisting primarily of real estate secured loans, were held for sale, compared to $294 million at
December 31, 2010.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total loans, leases and other
assets, including OREO and nonaccrual loans held for sale as of December 31, 2011 were 2.32%, compared to 3.08% as of December 31, 2010. Excluding nonaccrual loans held for sale, nonperforming assets as a percentage of total loans, leases
and other assets, including OREO was 2.23% as of December 31, 2011, compared to 2.79% as of December 31, 2010. The composition of nonaccrual loans and leases continues to be concentrated in real estate as 69% of nonaccrual loans and leases
were secured by real estate as of December 31, 2011 compared to 66% as of December 31, 2010.
Commercial nonperforming loans and leases were $1.2 billion at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $312 million from
December 31, 2010, due to the impact of loss mitigation actions and moderation in general economic conditions. Excluding commercial nonperforming loans and leases held for sale, commercial nonperforming loans and leases at December 2011
decreased $156 million compared to December 31, 2010. The decrease from December 31, 2010 was due to a continued decrease in new nonaccruals and an increase in paydowns and payoffs in 2011 due to improved delinquency metrics and an
improvement in underlying loss trends. The Bancorp transferred commercial loans with a carrying balance of $961 million, prior to transfer, to held for sale during the third quarter of 2010, of which $694 million were nonperforming. At
December 31, 2011, the remaining carrying balance of these loans was $67 million.
Consumer
nonperforming loans and leases were $380 million at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $86 million from December 31, 2010. The decrease was mainly due to a $83 million decrease in other consumer loans and leases due primarily to charge-offs
taken on certain consumer loans acquired during the fourth quarter of 2010 as the result of a foreclosure on a commercial loan collateralized by individual consumer loans. These loans were fully charged off as of December 31, 2011. Home equity
nonaccrual levels remain modest as the Bancorp continues to fully charge-off a high proportion of the severely delinquent loans at 180 days past due. Geography continues to be a large driver of nonaccrual activity as Florida properties represent
approximately 16% and 8% of residential mortgage and home equity balances, respectively, but represent 45% and 16% of nonaccrual loans for each category. Consumer restructured loans on accrual status totaled $1.6 billion at December 31, 2011
and 2010. As of December 31, 2011, redefault rates, defined as 30 days delinquent, on restructured residential mortgage were 29% and home equity loans and credit card loans were each 16%.
OREO and other repossessed property was $378 million at December 31,
2011, compared to $494 million at December 31, 2010. The decrease from December 31, 2010 was due to the sale of large OREO properties and improvements in general economic conditions during 2011. The Bancorp recognized $171 million and $264
million in losses on the sale or write-down of OREO properties in 2011 and 2010, respectively. These losses are primarily reflective of the continued stress in the Michigan and Florida markets for commercial real estate and residential mortgage
loans as Michigan and Florida represented 16% and 26%, respectively, of total OREO losses in 2011 compared with 12% and 14%, respectively, in 2010. Properties in Michigan and Florida accounted for 42% of foreclosed real estate at December 31,
2011, compared to 49% at December 31, 2010.
In 2011 and 2010, approximately $125 million and $206
million, respectively, of interest income would have been recorded if the nonaccrual and renegotiated loans and leases on nonaccrual status had been current in accordance with their original terms. Although these values help demonstrate the costs of
carrying nonaccrual credits, the Bancorp does not expect to recover the full amount of interest as nonaccrual loans and leases are generally carried below their principal balance.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 45: SUMMARY OF NONPERFORMING ASSETS AND DELINQUENT
LOANS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Nonaccrual loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans (a) |
|
$ |
408 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
646 |
|
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases(a) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Restructured loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans(b) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Home equity(b) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Automobile loans(b) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Credit card |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total nonperforming loans and leases |
|
|
1,438 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
|
|
2,947 |
|
|
|
1,776 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
OREO and other repossessed property |
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
Total nonperforming assets |
|
|
1,816 |
|
|
|
2,174 |
|
|
|
3,244 |
|
|
|
2,006 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
Nonaccrual loans held for sale |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total nonperforming assets including loans held for sale |
|
$ |
1,954 |
|
|
|
2,468 |
|
|
|
3,468 |
|
|
|
2,479 |
|
|
|
1,027 |
|
Loans and leases 90 days past due and accruing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(d) |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Credit card and other |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total loans and leases 90 days past due and accruing |
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
Nonperforming assets as a percent of portfolio loans, leases and other assets, including OREO(c) |
|
|
2.23 |
% |
|
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
4.22 |
|
|
|
2.38 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses as a percent of nonperforming assets(b) |
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
(a) |
For 2010, nonaccrual loans and leases reflect a reclassification of $84 million in nonperforming loans from commercial and industrial loans to other consumer loans
and leases which occurred after the Bancorps Form 8-K was filed on January 19, 2011. This reclassification was primarily a result of the determination that consumer loans obtained in the foreclosure of a commercial loan were more
appropriately categorized as other consumer loans and leases in accordance with regulatory guidance. |
(b) |
During 2009, the Bancorp modified its consumer nonaccrual policy to exclude TDR loans that were less than 90 days past due because they were performing in accordance
with the restructured terms. For comparability purposes, prior periods were adjusted to reflect this reclassification. |
(c) |
Excludes nonaccrual loans held for sale. |
(d) |
Information for all periods presented excludes advances made pursuant to servicing agreements to GNMA mortgage loan pools whose repayments are insured by the Federal
Housing Administration or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. As of December 31, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, and 2007 these advances were $309, $279, $130, $40, and $25, respectively. The
Bancorp recognized immaterial credit losses for the year ended December 31, 2011 and $2 million for 2010 due to claim denials and curtailments associated with these advances. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following table provides a rollforward of
portfolio nonperforming loans and leases, by portfolio segment:
TABLE 46: ROLLFORWARD OF PORTFOLIO NONPERFORMING LOANS AND LEASES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Total |
|
Beginning Balance |
|
$ |
1,214 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
Transfers to nonperforming |
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
1,927 |
|
Transfers to performing |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(153 |
) |
Transfers to performing (restructured) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(170 |
) |
Transfers from held for sale |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Transfers to held for sale |
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
Loans sold from portfolio |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
Loan paydowns/payoffs |
|
|
(425 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(523 |
) |
Transfers to other real estate owned |
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(189 |
) |
Charge-offs |
|
|
(554 |
) |
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(342 |
) |
|
|
(1,002 |
) |
Draws/other extensions of credit |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Ending Balance |
|
$ |
1,058 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
1,438 |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning Balance |
|
$ |
2,392 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
2,947 |
|
Transfers to nonperforming |
|
|
1,666 |
|
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
2,841 |
|
Transfers to performing |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
Transfers to performing (restructured) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(140 |
) |
Transfers to held for sale |
|
|
(386 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(591 |
) |
Loans sold from portfolio |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
Loan paydowns/payoffs |
|
|
(773 |
) |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(903 |
) |
Transfers to other real estate owned |
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
(163 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(454 |
) |
Charge-offs |
|
|
(1,364 |
) |
|
|
(176 |
) |
|
|
(358 |
) |
|
|
(1,898 |
) |
Draws/other extensions of credit |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Ending Balance |
|
$ |
1,214 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
Troubled Debt Restructurings
If a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty, the Bancorp may consider, in certain circumstances, modifying the terms of their loan
to maximize collection of amounts due. Typically, these modifications reduce the loan interest rate, extend the loan term, or in limited circumstances, reduce the principal balance of the loan. These modifications are classified as TDRs.
At the time of modification, the Bancorp maintains certain consumer loan TDRs (including residential mortgage
loans, home equity loans, and other consumer loans) on accrual status, provided there is reasonable assurance of repayment and performance according to the modified terms based upon a current,
well-documented credit evaluation. Commercial loan TDRs and credit card TDRs are classified as nonaccrual loans and are typically returned to accrual status upon a six month period of sustained performance under the restructured terms. The following
table summarizes TDRs by loan type and delinquency status.
TABLE 47: PERFORMING AND
NONPERFORMING TDRs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Current |
|
|
30-89 Days Past Due |
|
|
90 Days or More Past Due |
|
|
Nonaccrual |
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
388 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
$ |
550 |
|
Residential mortgages(a) |
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
1,258 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Other consumer |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,820 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
$ |
2,382 |
|
(a) |
Information includes advances made pursuant to servicing agreements for GNMA mortgage pools whose repayments are insured by the Federal Housing Administration or
guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. As of December 31, 2011, these advances represented $64 of current loans, $16 of 30-89 days past due loans and $46 of 90 days or more past due loans. |
Analysis of Net Loan Charge-offs
Net charge-offs were 149 bps and 302 bps of average loans and leases for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Table 48 provides a summary of credit loss experience and net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans and leases outstanding by loan category.
The ratio of commercial loan and lease net charge-offs to average commercial loans and leases decreased to 126 bps during 2011 compared to 310 bps in 2010,
as a result of decreases in net charge-offs of $810 million. Decreases in net charge-offs were realized across all commercial loan types and were primarily due to improvements in general economic conditions and previous actions taken by the Bancorp
to address problem loans. Actions taken by the Bancorp include suspending homebuilder and developer lending in 2007 and non-owner occupied commercial real estate lending in 2008 and tightened underwriting standards across all commercial loan product
offerings. In addition, the Bancorp implemented other loss mitigation strategies that included the previously mentioned sale of troubled loans during the third quarter of 2010. Net charge-offs for 2011 related to non-owner occupied commercial real
estate were $211 million compared to $625 million in 2010. Net charge-offs related to non-owner occupied commercial real estate are recorded in the commercial mortgage loans and commercial construction loans captions in Table 48. Net charge-offs on
these loans represented 38% of total commercial loan and lease net charge-offs in 2011 and 46% in 2010.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The ratio of consumer loan and lease net charge-offs to average consumer
loans and leases decreased to 179 bps in 2011 compared to 292 bps in 2010. Residential mortgage loan net charge-offs, which typically involve partial charge-offs based upon appraised values of underlying collateral, decreased $266 million from the
prior year as a result of improvements in delinquencies and a decrease in the average loss recorded per charge-off. Additionally, the prior year included $123 million in net charge-offs that were recorded on residential mortgage portfolio loans sold
during the third quarter of 2010. The Bancorps Florida and Michigan markets accounted for 58% and 72% of net charge-offs on residential mortgage loans in the portfolio in 2011 and 2010, respectively. Fifth Third expects the composition of the
residential mortgage portfolio to improve as it continues to retain high quality, shorter duration residential mortgage loans that are originated through its branch network as a low-cost, refinance product of conforming residential mortgage loans.
Home equity net charge-offs decreased $44 million compared to the prior year, primarily due to decreases in
net charge-offs in the Michigan market and reduced net charge-offs of brokered home equity products. Management responded to the performance of the brokered home equity portfolio by eliminating this channel of origination in 2007. In addition,
management actively manages lines of credit and makes reductions in lending limits when it believes it is necessary based on FICO score deterioration and property devaluation.
Automobile loan net charge-offs decreased $35 million compared to 2010,
due to the origination of high credit quality loans as a result of tighter underwriting standards and higher resale on automobiles sold at auction.
Credit card net charge-offs decreased $57 million from 2010 reflecting improving delinquency trends, aggressive line management, and stabilization in unemployment levels. The Bancorp utilizes a
risk-adjusted pricing methodology to ensure adequate compensation is received for those products that have higher credit costs.
Other consumer loan net charge-offs increased $56 million compared to 2010 due to charge-offs associated with certain consumer loans that were acquired during the fourth quarter of 2010 when the Bancorp
foreclosed on a commercial loan that was collateralized by individual consumer loans. These loans were fully charged off as of December 31, 2011.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 48: SUMMARY OF CREDIT LOSS EXPERIENCE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Losses charged off: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
(314 |
) |
|
|
(631 |
) |
|
|
(768 |
) |
|
|
(667 |
) |
|
|
(121 |
) |
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
|
(436 |
) |
|
|
(618 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
(265 |
) |
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
|
(750 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
Commercial leases |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(441 |
) |
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
(234 |
) |
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
(330 |
) |
|
|
(212 |
) |
|
|
(106 |
) |
Automobile loans |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
(189 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
Credit card |
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
(164 |
) |
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Total losses |
|
|
(1,314 |
) |
|
|
(2,485 |
) |
|
|
(2,719 |
) |
|
|
(2,791 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
Recoveries of losses previously charged off: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total recoveries |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Net losses charged off: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
(586 |
) |
|
|
(718 |
) |
|
|
(649 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
(195 |
) |
|
|
(524 |
) |
|
|
(422 |
) |
|
|
(613 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(252 |
) |
|
|
(416 |
) |
|
|
(748 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
Commercial leases |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
(173 |
) |
|
|
(439 |
) |
|
|
(357 |
) |
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
Home equity |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
(264 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
Automobile loans |
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
Credit card |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Total net losses charged off |
|
$ |
(1,172 |
) |
|
|
(2,328 |
) |
|
|
(2,581 |
) |
|
|
(2,710 |
) |
|
|
(462 |
) |
Net charge-offs as a percent of average loans and leases (excluding held for sale): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
0.97 |
% |
|
|
2.23 |
|
|
|
2.61 |
|
|
|
2.31 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
1.89 |
|
|
|
4.58 |
|
|
|
3.43 |
|
|
|
4.80 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
4.96 |
|
|
|
8.48 |
|
|
|
9.24 |
|
|
|
12.80 |
|
|
|
0.51 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
(0.08 |
) |
|
|
0.05 |
|
|
|
0.22 |
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
0.01 |
|
Total commercial loans |
|
|
1.26 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
|
3.99 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
5.49 |
|
|
|
4.15 |
|
|
|
2.47 |
|
|
|
0.48 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
1.97 |
|
|
|
2.20 |
|
|
|
2.57 |
|
|
|
1.67 |
|
|
|
0.82 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
0.47 |
|
|
|
0.85 |
|
|
|
1.68 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
|
|
0.83 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
5.19 |
|
|
|
8.28 |
|
|
|
8.87 |
|
|
|
5.51 |
|
|
|
3.55 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
15.29 |
|
|
|
2.58 |
|
|
|
2.14 |
|
|
|
2.10 |
|
|
|
0.83 |
|
Total consumer loans and leases |
|
|
1.79 |
|
|
|
2.92 |
|
|
|
3.10 |
|
|
|
2.08 |
|
|
|
0.84 |
|
Total net losses charged off |
|
|
1.49 |
% |
|
|
3.02 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
|
|
3.23 |
|
|
|
0.61 |
|
Allowance for Credit Losses
The allowance for credit losses is comprised of the ALLL and the reserve for unfunded commitments. The ALLL provides coverage for probable
and estimable losses in the loan and lease portfolio. The Bancorp evaluates the ALLL each quarter to determine its adequacy to cover inherent losses. Several factors are taken into consideration in the determination of the overall ALLL, including an
unallocated component. These factors include, but are not limited to, the overall risk profile of the loan and lease portfolios, net charge-off experience, the extent of impaired loans and leases, the level of nonaccrual loans and leases, the level
of 90 days past due loans and leases and the overall percentage level of the ALLL. The Bancorp also considers overall asset quality trends, credit administration and portfolio management practices, risk identification practices, credit policy and
underwriting practices, overall portfolio growth, portfolio concentrations and current national and local economic conditions that might impact the
portfolio. See the Critical Accounting Policies section for more information.
The ALLL attributable to the portion of the residential and consumer loan and lease portfolio that has not been restructured is determined on a pooled basis with the segmentation being based on the
similarity of credit risk characteristics. Loss factors for real estate backed consumer loans are developed for each pool based on the trailing twelve month historical loss rate, as adjusted for certain prescriptive loss rate factors and certain
qualitative adjustment factors. The prescriptive loss rate factors and qualitative adjustments are designed to reflect risks associated with current conditions and trends which are not believed to be fully reflected in the trailing twelve month
historical loss rate. For real estate backed consumer loans, the prescriptive loss rate factors include adjustments for delinquency trends, LTV trends, refreshed FICO score trends and product mix, and the qualitative factors include adjustments for
credit administration and portfolio management practices, credit policy and underwriting practices and the national and local
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
economy. The Bancorp considers home price index trends in its footprint when determining the national and local economy qualitative factor. The Bancorp also considers the volatility of collateral
valuation trends when determining the unallocated component of the ALLL.
TABLE 49: CHANGES IN ALLOWANCE FOR
CREDIT LOSSES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
ALLL: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
3,004 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
Impact of change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses charged off |
|
|
(1,314 |
) |
|
|
(2,485 |
) |
|
|
(2,719 |
) |
|
|
(2,791 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
Recoveries of losses previously charged off |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
|
|
4,560 |
|
|
|
628 |
|
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
2,255 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
Reserve for unfunded commitments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
227 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Impact of change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
181 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
In 2011, the Bancorp did not substantively change any material aspect of its overall
approach in the determination of the ALLL and there have been no material changes in assumptions or estimation techniques as compared to prior periods that impacted the determination of the current period allowance. In addition to the ALLL, the
Bancorp maintains a reserve for unfunded commitments recorded in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The methodology used to determine the adequacy of this reserve is similar to the Bancorps methodology for determining the
ALLL. The provision for unfunded commitments is included in other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Certain inherent, but unconfirmed losses are probable within the loan and lease portfolio. The Bancorps current methodology for determining the level of losses is based on historical loss rates,
current credit grades, specific allocation on impaired commercial credits above specified thresholds and other qualitative adjustments. Due to the heavy reliance on realized historical losses and the credit grade rating process, the model-derived
required reserves tend to slightly lag behind the deterioration in the portfolio, in a stable or deteriorating credit environment, and tend not to be as responsive when improved conditions have presented themselves. Given these model limitations,
the qualitative adjustment factors may be incremental or decremental to the quantitative model results.
An
unallocated component to the ALLL is maintained to recognize the imprecision in estimating and measuring loss. The unallocated allowance as a percent of total portfolio loans and leases at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was 0.17% and 0.19%,
respectively. The unallocated allowance increased from five percent at December 31, 2010 to six percent of the total allowance for December 31, 2011. The increase in the unallocated allowance as a percentage of the total allowance was
driven by additional sustained market volatility in the U.S. markets that has provided indications that loss events may be occurring at a rate greater than the rate captured within the Bancorps model.
As shown in Table 50, the ALLL as a percent of the total loan and lease
portfolio was 2.78% at December 31, 2011, compared to 3.88% at December 31, 2010. The ALLL was $2.3 billion as of December 31, 2011, compared to $3.0 billion at December 31, 2010. The decrease is reflective of a number of factors
including decreases in nonperforming loans and leases, improved delinquency metrics in commercial and consumer loans and leases and improvement in underlying loss trends.
The Bancorps determination of the ALLL for commercial loans is sensitive to the risk grades it assigns to these
loans. In the event that 10% of commercial loans in each risk category would experience a downgrade of one risk category, the allowance for commercial loans would increase by approximately $132 million at December 31, 2011. In addition, the
Bancorps determination of the allowance for residential and consumer loans is sensitive to changes in estimated loss rates. In the event that estimated loss rates would increase by 10%, the allowance for residential and consumer loans would
increase by approximately $59 million at December 31, 2011. As several qualitative and quantitative factors are considered in determining the ALLL, these sensitivity analyses do not necessarily reflect the nature and extent of future changes in
the ALLL. They are intended to provide insights into the impact of adverse changes to risk grades and estimated loss rates and do not imply any expectation of future deterioration in the risk ratings or loss rates. Given current processes employed
by the Bancorp, management believes the risk grades and estimated loss rates currently assigned are appropriate.
The Bancorp continually reviews its credit administration and loan and lease portfolio and makes changes based on the performance of its products. As previously discussed, management discontinued the
origination of brokered home equity products at the end of 2007, suspended homebuilder lending in 2007 and new commercial non-owner occupied real estate lending in 2008, and tightened underwriting standards across both the commercial and consumer
loan product offerings.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 50: ATTRIBUTION OF ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN AND LEASE
LOSSES TO PORTFOLIO LOANS AND LEASES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Allowance attributed to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
929 |
|
|
|
1,123 |
|
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Total ALLL |
|
$ |
2,255 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
30,783 |
|
|
|
27,191 |
|
|
|
25,683 |
|
|
|
29,197 |
|
|
|
24,813 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,138 |
|
|
|
10,845 |
|
|
|
11,803 |
|
|
|
12,502 |
|
|
|
11,862 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,020 |
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
|
|
3,784 |
|
|
|
5,114 |
|
|
|
5,561 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
3,535 |
|
|
|
3,666 |
|
|
|
3,737 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
10,672 |
|
|
|
8,956 |
|
|
|
8,035 |
|
|
|
9,385 |
|
|
|
10,540 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
12,174 |
|
|
|
12,752 |
|
|
|
11,874 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
|
|
8,995 |
|
|
|
8,594 |
|
|
|
9,201 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
1,811 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
1,122 |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
$ |
81,018 |
|
|
|
77,491 |
|
|
|
76,779 |
|
|
|
84,143 |
|
|
|
80,253 |
|
Attributed allowance as a percent of respective portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
3.02 |
% |
|
|
4.13 |
|
|
|
4.99 |
|
|
|
2.82 |
|
|
|
1.09 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
6.22 |
|
|
|
2.90 |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
7.55 |
|
|
|
7.71 |
|
|
|
10.04 |
|
|
|
4.93 |
|
|
|
1.77 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
2.27 |
|
|
|
3.29 |
|
|
|
3.42 |
|
|
|
1.66 |
|
|
|
0.72 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
3.46 |
|
|
|
4.67 |
|
|
|
4.13 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
1.82 |
|
|
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
2.41 |
|
|
|
2.27 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
0.36 |
|
|
|
0.66 |
|
|
|
1.41 |
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
5.36 |
|
|
|
8.33 |
|
|
|
10.00 |
|
|
|
8.17 |
|
|
|
4.34 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
8.66 |
|
|
|
5.64 |
|
|
|
2.94 |
|
|
|
1.86 |
|
Unallocated (as a percent of total portfolio loans and leases) |
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.06 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
|
2.78 |
% |
|
|
3.88 |
|
|
|
4.88 |
|
|
|
3.31 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
MARKET RISK MANAGEMENT
Market risk arises from the potential for market fluctuations in interest rates, foreign exchange rates and equity prices that may result in potential reductions in net income. Interest rate risk, a
component of market risk, is the exposure to adverse changes in net interest income or financial position due to changes in interest rates. Management considers interest rate risk a prominent market risk in terms of its potential impact on earnings.
Interest rate risk can occur for any one or more of the following reasons:
|
|
|
Assets and liabilities may mature or reprice at different times; |
|
|
|
Short-term and long-term market interest rates may change by different amounts; or |
|
|
|
The expected maturity of various assets or liabilities may shorten or lengthen as interest rates change. |
In addition to the direct impact of interest rate changes on net interest income, interest rates can indirectly impact earnings through
their effect on loan demand, credit losses, mortgage originations, the value of servicing rights and other sources of the Bancorps earnings. Stability of the Bancorps net income is largely dependent upon the effective management of
interest rate risk. Management continually reviews the Bancorps balance sheet composition and earnings flows and models the interest rate risk, and possible actions to reduce this risk, given numerous possible future interest rate scenarios.
Net Interest Income Simulation Model
The Bancorp utilizes a variety of measurement techniques to identify and manage its interest rate risk, including the use of an NII
simulation model to analyze the sensitivity of net interest income to changing interest rates. The model is based on contractual and assumed cash flows and repricing characteristics for all of the Bancorps financial instruments and
incorporates market-based assumptions regarding the effect of changing interest rates on the prepayment rates of certain assets and liabilities. The model also includes senior managements projections of the future volume and pricing of each of
the product lines offered by the Bancorp as well as other pertinent assumptions. Actual results may differ from these simulated results due to timing, magnitude and frequency of interest rate changes as well as changes in market conditions and
management strategies.
The Bancorps Executive ALCO, which includes senior management representatives
and is accountable to the Enterprise Risk Management Committee, monitors and manages interest rate risk within Board approved policy limits. In addition to the risk management activities of ALCO, the Bancorp has a Market Risk Management function as
part of ERM that provides independent oversight of market risk activities. The Bancorps interest rate risk exposure is currently evaluated by measuring the anticipated change in net interest income over 12-month and 24-month horizons assuming
a 100 bps parallel ramped increase and a 200 bps parallel ramped increase in interest rates. The Fed Funds interest rate, targeted by the Federal Reserve at a range of 0% to 0.25%, is currently set at a level that would be negative in parallel
ramped
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
decrease scenarios; therefore, those scenarios were omitted from the interest rate risk analyses at December 31, 2011. In accordance with the current policy, the rate movements are assumed
to occur over one year and are sustained thereafter.
At December 31, 2011, the Bancorps interest rate risk profile
reflects a neutral position in year one and slight asset sensitivity in year two. The following table shows the Bancorps estimated net interest income sensitivity profile and ALCO policy limits as of December 31:
TABLE 51: ESTIMATED NII SENSITIVITY
PROFILE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent Change in NII (FTE) |
|
|
Percent Change in NII (FTE) |
|
|
ALCO Policy Limits |
|
Change in Interest Rates (bps) |
|
12 Months |
|
|
13 to 24 Months |
|
|
12 Months |
|
|
13 to 24 Months |
|
|
12 Months |
|
|
13 to 24 Months |
|
+ 200 |
|
|
0.35 |
% |
|
|
5.61 |
|
|
|
1.02 |
% |
|
|
4.99 |
|
|
|
(5.00 |
) |
|
|
(7.00 |
) |
+ 100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.64 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
|
|
2.73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 12 months net interest income at risk reported as of December 31, 2011 for the
+200 and +100 basis point scenarios shows a modest decline in asset sensitivity compared with December 31, 2010. The primary factors contributing to this change are an increase in fixed-rate loans partially offset by growth in deposits.
Economic Value of Equity
The Bancorp also utilizes EVE as a measurement tool in managing interest rate risk. Whereas the net interest income simulation model highlights exposures over a relatively short time horizon, the EVE
analysis incorporates all cash flows over the estimated remaining life of all balance sheet and derivative positions. The EVE of the balance sheet, at a point in time, is
defined as the discounted present value of asset and net derivative cash flows less the discounted value of liability cash flows. The sensitivity of EVE to changes in the level of interest rates
is a measure of longer-term interest rate risk. EVE values only the current balance sheet and does not incorporate the growth assumptions used in the earnings simulation model. As with the earnings simulation model, assumptions about the timing and
variability of existing balance sheet cash flows are critical in the EVE analysis. Particularly important are assumptions driving prepayments and the expected changes in balances and pricing of transaction deposit portfolios. The following table
shows the Bancorps EVE sensitivity profile as of December 31:
TABLE 52: ESTIMATED EVE SENSITIVITY
PROFILE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
Change in Interest Rates (bps) |
|
Change in EVE |
|
|
Change in EVE |
|
|
ALCO Policy Limits |
|
+ 200 |
|
|
1.37 |
% |
|
|
(1.62 |
)% |
|
|
(15.00 |
)% |
+ 100 |
|
|
1.22 |
|
|
|
(0.50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
+ 25 |
|
|
0.32 |
|
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
|
|
|
|
- 25 |
|
|
(0.25 |
) |
|
|
(0.13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
The EVE at risk profile suggests slight asset sensitivity from market
rate increases through the +200 bps scenario. The EVE at risk reported at December 31, 2011 for the +200 basis points scenario shows a change to a modest asset sensitive position compared to December 31, 2010. The primary factors
contributing to the change are the decline in market interest rates over the course of 2011 and growth in core deposits, partially offset by the impact of the increase in fixed-rate loans.
While an instantaneous shift in interest rates is used in this analysis to provide an estimate of exposure, the Bancorp
believes that a gradual shift in interest rates would have a much more modest impact. Since EVE measures the discounted present value of cash flows over the estimated lives of instruments, the change in EVE does not directly correlate to the degree
that earnings would be impacted over a shorter time horizon (e.g., the current fiscal year). Further, EVE does not take into account factors such as future balance sheet growth, changes in product mix, changes in yield curve relationships and
changing product spreads that could mitigate the adverse impact of changes in interest rates. The NII simulation and EVE analyses do not necessarily include certain actions that management may undertake to manage this risk in response to anticipated
changes in interest rates.
The Bancorp regularly evaluates its exposures to LIBOR and Prime basis risks,
nonparallel shifts in the yield curve and embedded options risk. In addition, the impact on NII and EVE of extreme changes in interest rates is modeled, wherein the Bancorp employs the use of yield curve shocks and environment-specific scenarios.
Use of Derivatives to Manage Interest Rate Risk
An integral component of the Bancorps interest rate risk management strategy is its use of derivative instruments to minimize
significant fluctuations in earnings caused by changes in market interest rates. Examples of derivative instruments that the Bancorp may use as part of its interest rate risk management strategy include interest rate swaps, interest rate floors,
interest rate caps, forward contracts, principal only swaps, options, swaptions and TBAs.
As part of
its overall risk management strategy relative to its mortgage banking activity, the Bancorp enters into forward contracts accounted for as free-standing derivatives to economically hedge interest rate lock commitments that are also considered
free-standing derivatives. Additionally, the Bancorp economically hedges its exposure to mortgage loans held for sale through the use of forward contracts and mortgage options.
The Bancorp also establishes derivative contracts with major financial institutions to economically hedge significant
exposures assumed in commercial customer accommodation derivative contracts. Generally, these contracts have similar terms in order to protect the Bancorp from market volatility. Credit risk arises from the possible inability of counterparties to
meet the terms of their contracts, which the Bancorp minimizes through collateral arrangements, approvals, limits and monitoring procedures. For further information including the notional amount and fair values of these derivatives, see Note 13 of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Portfolio Loans and Leases and Interest Rate Risk
Although the Bancorps portfolio loans and leases contain both fixed and floating/adjustable rate products, the rates of interest
earned by the Bancorp on the outstanding balances are generally established for a period of time. The interest rate sensitivity of loans and leases is directly related to the length of
time the rate earned is established. Table 53 summarizes the expected principal cash flows of the Bancorps portfolio loans and leases as of December 31, 2011. Additionally, Table 54
displays a summary of expected principal cash flows occurring after one year for both fixed and floating/adjustable rate loans, as of December 31, 2011.
TABLE 53: PORTFOLIO LOAN AND LEASE
CONTRACTUAL MATURITIES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Less than 1 year |
|
|
1-5 years |
|
|
Over 5 years |
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
9,439 |
|
|
|
19,199 |
|
|
|
2,145 |
|
|
|
30,783 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
4,412 |
|
|
|
4,652 |
|
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
10,138 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
534 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
1,020 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
575 |
|
|
|
1,498 |
|
|
|
1,458 |
|
|
|
3,531 |
|
Subtotalcommercial loans and
leases |
|
|
14,960 |
|
|
|
25,639 |
|
|
|
4,873 |
|
|
|
45,472 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
4,787 |
|
|
|
4,385 |
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
10,672 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
1,494 |
|
|
|
3,171 |
|
|
|
6,054 |
|
|
|
10,719 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
6,700 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
11,827 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
1,422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,978 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
Subtotalconsumer loans and
leases |
|
|
12,015 |
|
|
|
15,749 |
|
|
|
7,782 |
|
|
|
35,546 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
26,975 |
|
|
|
41,388 |
|
|
|
12,655 |
|
|
|
81,018 |
|
TABLE 54: PORTFOLIO LOAN AND LEASE PRINCIPAL CASH FLOWS OCCURING AFTER ONE YEAR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Fixed |
|
|
Floating or Adjustable |
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
3,683 |
|
|
|
17,661 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
1,823 |
|
|
|
3,903 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
2,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotalcommercial loans and leases |
|
|
8,643 |
|
|
|
21,869 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
3,835 |
|
|
|
2,050 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
8,158 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
6,868 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Subtotalconsumer loans and leases |
|
|
12,441 |
|
|
|
11,090 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
21,084 |
|
|
|
32,959 |
|
Residential Mortgage Servicing Rights and Interest Rate Risk
The net carrying amount of the residential MSR portfolio was $681 million and $822 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010,
respectively. The value of servicing rights can fluctuate sharply depending on changes in interest rates and other factors. Generally, as interest rates decline and loans are prepaid to take advantage of refinancing, the total value of existing
servicing rights declines because no further servicing fees are collected on repaid loans. The Bancorp maintains a non-qualifying hedging strategy relative to its mortgage banking activity in order to manage a portion of the risk associated with
changes in the value of its MSR portfolio as a result of changing interest rates.
Mortgage rates decreased
during both 2011 and 2010. These decreases caused modeled prepayment speeds to increase, which led to $242 million in temporary impairment on servicing rights during the year ended 2011, compared to $36 million in temporary impairment in 2010.
Servicing rights are deemed temporarily impaired when a borrowers loan rate is distinctly higher than prevailing rates. Temporary impairment on servicing rights is reversed when the prevailing rates return to a level commensurate with the
borrowers loan rate. Offsetting the mortgage servicing rights valuation, the Bancorp recognized net gains of $354 million and $123 million on its non-qualifying hedging strategy for the years ended 2011 and 2010, respectively. The net gains
include net gains from the sale of securities related to the Bancorps non-qualifying hedging strategy of $9 million and $14 million for 2011 and 2010, respectively. During the fourth quarter of 2011, the Bancorp assessed the composition of its
MSR portfolio, the cost of hedging and the anticipated effectiveness of the hedges given the economic environment. Based on this review, the Bancorp adjusted its MSR hedging strategy to exclude the hedging of MSRs related to certain mortgage
loans originated in 2008 and prior, representing approximately 25% of the carrying value of the MSR portfolio as of December 31, 2011. The prepayment behavior of these loans is expected to be less sensitive to changes in interest rates as
borrower credit characteristics and home price values have a greater impact based on changes in the market and underwriting environment. Thus, the predictive power of traditional prepayment models on these loans may not be reliable, which reduces
the effectiveness of interest rate based hedge strategies. The Bancorp is exposed to prepayment risk on these loans in the event borrowers refinance at higher than expected levels due to government intervention or other factors. The Bancorp
continues to monitor the performance of these MSRs and may decide to hedge this portion of the MSR portfolio in future periods. See Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion on servicing rights and the
instruments used to hedge interest rate risk on MSRs.
Foreign Currency Risk
The Bancorp may enter into foreign exchange derivative contracts to economically hedge certain foreign denominated loans. The derivatives
are classified as free-standing instruments with the revaluation gain or loss being recorded in other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The balance of the Bancorps foreign denominated loans at December 31, 2011
and
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
2010 was approximately $374 million and $283 million, respectively. The Bancorp also enters into foreign exchange contracts for the benefit of commercial customers involved in international trade
to hedge their exposure to foreign currency fluctuations. The Bancorp has internal controls in place to help ensure excessive risk is not being taken in providing this service to customers. These controls include an independent determination of
currency volatility and credit equivalent exposure on these contracts, counterparty credit approvals and country limits.
LIQUIDITY RISK
MANAGEMENT
The goal of liquidity management is to provide adequate funds to meet changes in loan and lease demand,
unexpected levels of deposit withdrawals and other contractual obligations. Mitigating liquidity risk is accomplished by maintaining liquid assets in the form of investment securities, maintaining sufficient unused borrowing capacity in the debt
markets and delivering consistent growth in core deposits. A summary of certain obligations and commitments to make future payments under contracts is included in Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Bancorp maintains a contingency funding plan that assesses the liquidity needs under various scenarios of market
conditions, asset growth and credit rating downgrades. The plan includes liquidity stress testing which measures various sources and uses of funds under the different scenarios. The contingency plan provides for ongoing monitoring of unused
borrowing capacity and available sources of contingent liquidity to prepare for unexpected liquidity needs and to cover unanticipated events that could affect liquidity.
Sources of Funds
The Bancorps primary sources of funds relate
to cash flows from loan and lease repayments, payments from securities related to sales and maturities, the sale or securitization of loans and leases and funds generated by core deposits, in addition to the use of public and private debt offerings.
Projected contractual maturities from loan and lease repayments are included in Table 53 of the Market Risk
Management section of MD&A. Of the $15.4 billion of securities in the Bancorps available-for-sale portfolio at December 31, 2011, $4.4 billion in principal and interest is expected to be received in the next 12 months and an
additional $3.0 billion is expected to be received in the next 13 to 24 months. For further information on the Bancorps securities portfolio, see the Securities section of MD&A.
Asset-driven liquidity is provided by the Bancorps ability to sell or securitize loan and lease assets. In order
to reduce the exposure to interest rate fluctuations and to manage liquidity, the Bancorp has developed securitization and sale procedures for several types of interest-sensitive assets. A majority of the long-term, fixed-rate single-family
residential mortgage loans underwritten according to FHLMC or FNMA guidelines are sold for cash upon origination. Additional assets such as residential mortgages, certain commercial loans, home equity loans, automobile loans and other consumer loans
are also
capable of being securitized or sold. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp sold loans totaling $15.2 billion and $18.2 billion, respectively. For further information
on the transfer of financial assets, see Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Core
deposits have historically provided the Bancorp with a sizeable source of relatively stable and low cost funds. The Bancorps average core deposits and shareholders equity funded 81% of its average total assets during 2011, compared to
80% in 2010. In addition to core deposit funding, the Bancorp also accesses a variety of other short-term and long-term funding sources, which include the use of the FHLB system.
Certificates of deposit carrying a balance of $100,000 or more and deposits in the Bancorps foreign branch located
in the Cayman Islands are wholesale funding tools utilized to fund asset growth. Management does not rely on any one source of liquidity and manages availability in response to changing balance sheet needs.
The Bancorp has approximately $7.2 billion of unsecured long-term debt outstanding as of December 31, 2011.
Long-term debt with a principal balance of $8 million will mature during 2012. As of December 31, 2011, $6.1 billion of debt or other securities were available for issuance under the current Bancorps Board of Directors
authorizations and the Bancorp is authorized to file any necessary registration statements with the SEC to permit ready access to the public securities markets; however, access to these markets may depend on market conditions. The Bancorp also has
$19.0 billion of funding available for issuance through private offerings of debt securities pursuant to its bank note program and currently has approximately $31.0 billion of borrowing capacity available through secured borrowing sources including
the FHLB and FRB.
On January 25, 2011, the Bancorp raised $1.7 billion in new common equity through the
issuance of 121,428,572 shares of common stock in an underwritten offering at an initial price of $14.00 per share. Additionally, on January 25, 2011, the Bancorp sold $1.0 billion in aggregate principal amount of 3.625% Senior Notes due
January 25, 2016. Notes 16 and 23 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements provide additional information regarding the Senior Notes and common equity offerings, respectively.
Credit Ratings
The cost and availability of financing to the Bancorp are impacted by its credit ratings. A downgrade to the Bancorps credit ratings could affect its ability to access the credit markets and
increase its borrowing costs, thereby adversely impacting the Bancorps financial condition and liquidity. Key factors in maintaining high credit ratings include a stable and diverse earnings stream, strong credit quality, strong capital ratios
and diverse funding sources, in addition to disciplined liquidity monitoring procedures.
The Bancorps
senior debt credit ratings are summarized in Table 55. The ratings reflect the ratings agencies view on the Bancorps capacity to meet financial commitments. * Additional information on senior debt credit ratings is as follows:
|
|
|
Moodys Baa1 rating is considered a medium-grade obligation and is the fourth highest ranking within its overall classification
system; |
|
|
|
Standard & Poors BBB rating indicates the obligors capacity to meet its financial commitment is adequate and is the
fourth highest ranking within its overall classification system; |
|
|
|
Fitch Ratings A- rating is considered high credit quality and is the third highest ranking within its overall classification
system; and |
|
|
|
DBRS Ltd.s A (low) rating is considered satisfactory credit quality and is the third highest ranking within its overall
classification system. |
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
TABLE 55: AGENCY RATINGS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of February 29, 2012 |
|
Moodys |
|
Standard and Poors |
|
Fitch |
|
DBRS |
Fifth Third Bancorp: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term |
|
No rating |
|
A-2 |
|
F1 |
|
R-1L |
Senior debt |
|
Baa1 |
|
BBB |
|
A |
|
AL |
Subordinated debt |
|
Baa2 |
|
BBB- |
|
BBB+ |
|
BBBH |
Fifth Third Bank: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term |
|
P-2 |
|
A-2 |
|
F1 |
|
R-1L |
Long-term deposit |
|
A3 |
|
No rating |
|
A |
|
A |
Senior debt |
|
A3 |
|
BBB+ |
|
A |
|
A |
Subordinated debt |
|
Baa1 |
|
BBB |
|
BBB+ |
|
A (low) |
* As an investor, you should be aware that a security rating is not a
recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities, that it may be subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization and that each rating should be evaluated independently of any other rating.
CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
Management regularly reviews the Bancorps capital position to help ensure it is appropriately positioned under various operating
environments. The Bancorp has established a Capital Committee, which is responsible for all capital related decisions. The Capital Committee makes recommendations to management involving capital actions. These recommendations are reviewed and
approved by the Enterprise Risk Management Committee.
2011 Capital Actions
On January 25, 2011, the Bancorp raised $1.7 billion in new common equity through the issuance of 121,428,572
shares of common stock in an underwritten offering at an initial price of $14.00 per share. On January 24, 2011, the underwriters exercised their option to purchase an additional 12,142,857 shares at the offering price of $14.00 per share. In
connection with this exercise, the Bancorp elected that all such additional shares be sold and the Bancorp entered into a forward sale agreement which resulted in a final net payment of 959,821 shares on February 4, 2011.
On February 2, 2011, the Bancorp redeemed all 136,320 shares of its Series F Preferred Stock held by the U.S.
Treasury totaling $3.4 billion. The Bancorp used the net proceeds from the common stock and senior notes offerings previously discussed and other funds to redeem the Series F Preferred Stock. In connection with the redemption of the Series F
Preferred Stock, the Bancorp accelerated the accretion of the
remaining issuance discount on the Series F Preferred Stock and recorded a corresponding reduction in retained earnings of $153 million. In addition, dividends of $15 million were paid on
February 2, 2011 when the Series F Preferred Stock was redeemed.
On March 16, 2011, the Bancorp
repurchased the warrant issued to the U.S. Treasury under the CPP for $280 million, which was recorded as a reduction to capital surplus in the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
On March 18, 2011, the Bancorp announced that the FRB did not object to the Bancorps capital plan submitted
under the FRB 2011 CCAR. Pursuant to this plan, in the second quarter of 2011, the Bancorp redeemed $452 million of certain trust preferred securities, at par, classified as long-term debt. The trust preferred securities redeemed related to the
Fifth Third Capital Trust VII, First National Bankshares Statutory Trust I and R&G Capital Trust II, LLT. As a result of these redemptions the Bancorp recorded a $6 million gain on the extinguishment within other noninterest expense in the
Consolidated Statements of Income. The trust preferred securities were a component of Tier I capital: however, these securities are being phased out of Tier I capital by the Dodd-Frank Act as discussed below.
Pursuant to the Bancorps capital plan discussed above, the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities on
September 19, 2011, totaling $40 million, which related to the R&G Crown Cap Trust IV and First National Bankshares Statutory Trust II. As a result of the redemption the Bancorp recorded a $1 million gain on the extinguishment within other
noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. In addition, on October 24, 2011 the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities totaling $25 million, which related to the R&G Crown Cap Trust I.
TABLE 56: CAPITAL RATIOS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Average equity as a percent of average assets |
|
|
11.41 |
% |
|
|
12.22 |
|
|
|
11.36 |
|
|
|
8.78 |
|
|
|
9.35 |
|
Tangible equity as a percent of tangible assets
(a) |
|
|
9.03 |
|
|
|
10.42 |
|
|
|
9.71 |
|
|
|
7.86 |
|
|
|
6.14 |
|
Tangible common equity as a percent of tangible assets
(a) |
|
|
8.68 |
|
|
|
7.04 |
|
|
|
6.45 |
|
|
|
4.23 |
|
|
|
6.14 |
|
Tier I capital |
|
$ |
12,503 |
|
|
|
13,965 |
|
|
|
13,428 |
|
|
|
11,924 |
|
|
|
8,924 |
|
Total risk-based capital |
|
|
16,885 |
|
|
|
18,178 |
|
|
|
17,648 |
|
|
|
16,646 |
|
|
|
11,733 |
|
Risk-weighted assets (b) |
|
|
104,945 |
|
|
|
100,561 |
|
|
|
100,933 |
|
|
|
112,622 |
|
|
|
115,529 |
|
Regulatory capital ratios: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier I capital |
|
|
11.91 |
% |
|
|
13.89 |
|
|
|
13.30 |
|
|
|
10.59 |
|
|
|
7.72 |
|
Total risk-based capital |
|
|
16.09 |
|
|
|
18.08 |
|
|
|
17.48 |
|
|
|
14.78 |
|
|
|
10.16 |
|
Tier I leverage |
|
|
11.10 |
|
|
|
12.79 |
|
|
|
12.34 |
|
|
|
10.27 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
Tier I common equity (a) |
|
|
9.35 |
|
|
|
7.48 |
|
|
|
6.99 |
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
|
5.72 |
|
a) |
For further information on these ratios, see the Non-GAAP Financial Measures section of the MD&A. |
b) |
Under the banking agencies risk-based capital guidelines, assets and credit equivalent amounts of derivatives and off-balance sheet exposures are assigned to
broad risk categories. The aggregate dollar amount in each risk category is multiplied by the associated risk weight of the category. The resulting weighted values are added together resulting in the Bancorps total risk-weighted assets.
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Capital Ratios
The U.S banking agencies established quantitative measures that assign risk weightings to assets and off-balance sheet items and also
define and set minimum regulatory capital requirements. The U.S. banking agencies define well capitalized ratios for Tier I and total risk-based capital as 6% and 10%, respectively. The Bancorp exceeded these well-capitalized
ratios for all periods presented.
The Basel II advanced approach framework was finalized by U.S. banking
agencies in 2007. Core banks, defined as those with consolidated total assets in excess of $250 billion or on balance sheet foreign exposures of $10 billion were required to adopt the advanced approach effective April 1, 2008. The Bancorp is
not subject to the requirements of Basel II.
The 19 large bank holding companies assessed under SCAP were
required to demonstrate that they met the 4% Tier I common equity ratio threshold for the period evaluated in the SCAP. The Bancorp exceeded this threshold for all periods presented. The Bancorps Tier I common equity ratio was 9.35% as of
December 31, 2011, compared to 7.48% as of December 31, 2010. The Bancorp manages the adequacy of its capital, including Tier I common equity, by conducting ongoing internal stress tests and ensuring the results are properly considered in
capital planning. It is the intent of the Bancorps capital planning process to ensure that the Bancorps capital positions remain in excess of well-capitalized standards and any other regulatory requirements.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires more stringent prudential standards, including capital and liquidity requirements, for
larger institutions. It addresses the quality of capital components by limiting the degree to which certain hybrid instruments can be included. The Dodd-Frank Act will phase out the inclusion of certain trust preferred securities as a component of
Tier I capital beginning January 1, 2013. At December 31, 2011, the Bancorps Tier I capital included $2.2 billion of trust preferred securities representing approximately 214 bps of risk-weighted assets.
In December of 2010 and revised in June of 2011, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued Basel III, a global
regulatory framework, to enhance the international capital standards. It imposes a stricter definition of capital, with greater reliance on common equity and sets higher minimum capital requirements. It creates a new capital measure, Tier I common
equity, which proposes changes to the current calculation of the Tier I common equity ratio by the Bancorp and several other financial institutions. The U.S. banking agencies are in the process of developing rules to implement the new capital
standards as part of the Collins Amendment within the Dodd-Frank Act. Management believes that the Bancorps capital levels will continue to exceed U.S. well-capitalized standards, including the adoption of U.S. rules that
incorporate changes under Basel III, to the extent applicable.
The FRB provided final rules of the 2012 CCAR on November 22, 2011.
The CCAR requires the 19 largest Bank Holding Companies submit a capital plan to the FRB by January 9, 2012. The mandatory elements of the capital plan are an assessment of the expected use and sources of capital over the planning horizon, a
description of all planned capital actions over the planning horizon, a discussion of any expected changes to the Bancorps business plan that are likely to have a material impact on its capital adequacy or liquidity, a detailed description of
the Bancorps process for assessing capital adequacy and the Bancorps capital policy.
The
FRBs review of the capital plan will assess the comprehensiveness of the capital plan, the reasonableness of the assumptions and the analysis underlying the capital plan and a review of the robustness of the capital adequacy process, the
capital policy and the Bancorps ability to maintain capital above the minimum regulatory capital ratio and above a tier 1 common ratio of 5 percent on a pro forma basis under expected and stressful conditions throughout the planning horizon.
Following the FRBs assessment of the capital plan, it will either object or provide a notice of non-objection to the submitted capital plan by March 15, 2012.
Dividend Policy and Stock Repurchase Program
The Bancorps
common stock dividend policy and stock repurchase program reflect its earnings outlook, desired payout ratios, the need to maintain adequate capital levels, the ability of its subsidiaries to pay dividends, the need to comply with safe and sound
banking practices as well as meet regulatory requirements and expectations. The Bancorp received a notice of non-objection to its dividend distribution proposal within its capital plan submitted to the FRB pursuant to the 2011 CCAR. The Bancorp
declared dividends per common share of $0.28 and $0.04 during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The Bancorp submitted a capital plan to the FRB on January 9, 2012 in accordance with the requirements of the 2012 CCAR. Following the FRBs assessment of the capital plan, it will object or
provide notice of non-objection to the submitted capital plan by March 15, 2012.
The Bancorps
repurchase of common stock for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009 is shown in the table below. The Bancorps Board of Directors had previously authorized management to purchase 30 million shares of the Bancorps
common stock through the open market or in any private transaction. The amounts below reflect the remaining shares from the Boards authorized program as of the dates presented.
TABLE 57: SHARE REPURCHASES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Shares authorized for repurchase at January 1 |
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
Additional authorizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share repurchases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares authorized for repurchase at December 31 |
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
Average price paid per share |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
(a) |
Excludes 1,164,254, 333,808 and 265,802 shares repurchased during 2011, 2010, and 2009, respectively, in connection with various employee
compensation plans. These repurchases are not included in the calculation for average price paid and do not count against the maximum number of shares that may yet be repurchased under the Board of Directors authorization.
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
In the ordinary course of business, the Bancorp enters into financial transactions to
extend credit and various forms of commitments and guarantees that may be considered off-balance sheet arrangements. These transactions involve varying elements of market, credit and liquidity risk. Refer to Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional information. A discussion of these transactions is as follows:
Residential Mortgage
Loan Sales
Conforming residential mortgage loans sold to unrelated third parties are generally sold with
representation and warranty recourse provisions. Such provisions include the loans compliance with applicable loan criteria, including certain documentation standards per agreements with unrelated third parties. Additional reasons for the
Bancorp having to repurchase the loans include appraisal standards with the collateral, fraud related to the loan application and the rescission of mortgage insurance. Under these provisions, the Bancorp is required to repurchase any previously sold
loan for which the representation or warranty of the Bancorp proves to be inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp maintained reserves related to these loans sold with the representation and warranty
recourse provisions totalling $55 million and $85 million, respectively, included in other liabilities in the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets. For further information on residential mortgage loans sold with representation and warranty
recourse provisions, see Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
During 2011 and 2010,
the Bancorp paid $63 million and $47 million, respectively, in the form of make whole payments and repurchased $122 million and $83 million, respectively, in outstanding principal of loans to satisfy investor demands. Total repurchase demand
requests during 2011 and 2010 were $350 million and $365 million, respectively. Total outstanding repurchase demand inventory was $66 million at December 31, 2011 compared to $162 million at December 31, 2010.
The Bancorp sold certain residential mortgage loans in the secondary market with credit recourse. In the event of any
customer default, pursuant to the credit recourse provided, the Bancorp is required to reimburse the third party. The maximum amount of credit risk in the event of non-performance by the underlying borrowers is equivalent to the total outstanding
balance. In the event of non-performance, the Bancorp has rights to the underlying collateral value securing the loan. At December 31, 2011 the outstanding balances on these loans sold with credit recourse was $772 million compared to $916
million at December 31, 2010. The Bancorp maintained an estimated credit loss reserve on these loans sold with credit recourse of $17 million at December 31, 2011 and $16 million at December 31, 2010; recorded in other liabilities in
the Consolidated Balance Sheets. To determine the credit loss reserve, the Bancorp used an approach that is consistent with its overall approach in estimating credit losses for various categories of residential mortgage loans held in its loan
portfolio. For further information on residential mortgage loans sold with credit recourse, see Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Private Mortgage Insurance
For certain mortgage loans originated by the Bancorp, borrowers may be required to obtain PMI provided by third-party insurers. In some
instances, these insurers cede a portion of the PMI premiums to the Bancorp, and the Bancorp provides reinsurance coverage within a specified range of the total PMI coverage. The Bancorps reinsurance coverage typically ranges from 5% to 10% of
the total PMI coverage.
The Bancorps maximum exposure in the event of nonperformance by the underlying
borrowers is equivalent to the Bancorps total outstanding reinsurance coverage, which was $77 million at December 31, 2011 and $115 million at December 31, 2010. The Bancorp maintained a reserve, included in other liabilities in the
Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets, related to exposures within the reinsurance portfolio of $27 million as of December 31, 2011 and $42 million as of December 31, 2010. During the second quarter of 2009, the Bancorp suspended the
practice of providing reinsurance of private mortgage insurance for newly originated mortgage loans. In the third quarter of 2010, the Bancorp allowed one of its third-party insurers to terminate its reinsurance agreement with the Bancorp, resulting
in the Bancorp releasing collateral to the insurer in the form of investment securities and other assets with a carrying value of $19 million, and the insurer assuming the Bancorps obligations under the reinsurance agreement, resulting in a
decrease to the Bancorps reserve liability of $20 million and decrease in the Bancorps maximum exposure of $53 million. In the second quarter of 2011, the Bancorp allowed one of its third-party insurers to terminate its reinsurance
agreement with the Bancorp, resulting in the Bancorp releasing collateral to the insurer in the form of investment securities and other assets with a carrying value of $5 million, and the insurer assuming the Bancorps obligations under the
reinsurance agreement, resulting in a decrease to the Bancorps reserve liability of $11 million and decrease in the Bancorps maximum exposure of $27 million.
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND
OTHER COMMITMENTS
The Bancorp has certain obligations and commitments to make future payments under
contracts. The aggregate contractual obligations and commitments at December 31, 2011 are shown in Table 58. As of December 31, 2011, the Bancorp has unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would impact the effective tax rate in
future periods. Due to the uncertainty of the
amounts to be ultimately paid as well as the timing of such payments, all uncertain tax liabilities that have not been paid have been excluded from the Contractual Obligations and Other
Commitments table. For further detail on the impact of income taxes see Note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
TABLE 58: CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
AND OTHER COMMITMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
|
Less than 1 year |
|
|
|
1-3 years |
|
|
|
3-5 years |
|
|
|
Greater than 5 years |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Contractually obligated payments due by period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits without a stated
maturity(a) |
|
$ |
78,033 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78,033 |
|
Long-term debt(b) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1,692 |
|
|
|
2,995 |
|
|
|
4,987 |
|
|
|
9,682 |
|
Time deposits(c) |
|
|
3,821 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
3,432 |
|
|
|
7,677 |
|
Forward contracts to sell mortgage
loans(d) |
|
|
5,705 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,705 |
|
Short-term borrowings(e) |
|
|
3,585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,585 |
|
Noncancelable lease
obligations(f) |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
Partnership investment
commitments(g) |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Purchase obligations(h) |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
Pension obligations(i) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Total contractually obligated payments due by period |
|
$ |
91,506 |
|
|
|
2,369 |
|
|
|
3,303 |
|
|
|
8,956 |
|
|
|
106,134 |
|
Other commitments by expiration period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to extend credit(j) |
|
$ |
28,980 |
|
|
|
7,150 |
|
|
|
11,393 |
|
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
47,885 |
|
Letters of
credit(k) |
|
|
1,940 |
|
|
|
2,409 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
4,744 |
|
Total other commitments by expiration period |
|
$ |
30,920 |
|
|
|
9,559 |
|
|
|
11,649 |
|
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
52,629 |
|
(a) |
Includes demand, interest checking, savings, money market and foreign office deposits. For additional information, see the Deposits discussion in the Balance Sheet
Analysis section of MD&A. |
(b) |
In the banking industry, interest-bearing obligations are principally used to fund interest-earning assets. As such, interest charges on contractual obligations were
excluded from reported amounts, as the potential cash outflows would have corresponding cash inflows from interest-earning assets. See Note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on these debt instruments.
|
(c) |
Includes other time and certificates $100,000 and over. For additional information, see the Deposits discussion in the Balance Sheet Analysis section of MD&A.
|
(d) |
See Note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on forward contracts to sell residential mortgage loans.
|
(e) |
Includes federal funds purchased and borrowings with an original maturity of less than one year. For additional information, see Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements. |
(f) |
Includes rental commitments. |
(g) |
Includes low-income housing, historic tax investments and market tax credits. |
(h) |
Represents agreements to purchase goods or services and includes commitments to various general contractors for work related to banking center construction.
|
(i) |
See Note 21 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on pension obligations. |
(j) |
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend, typically having fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses that may require payment of a fee. Many of
the commitments to extend credit may expire without being drawn upon. The total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash flow requirements. For additional information, see Note 17 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
(k) |
Letters of credit are conditional commitments issued to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. For additional information, see Note 17 of the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. |
MANAGEMENTS ASSESSMENT AS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERNAL
CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
The Bancorp conducted an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of
the Bancorps management, including the Bancorps Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Bancorps disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act). Based on the foregoing, as of the end of the period covered by this report, the Bancorps Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Bancorps disclosure
controls and procedures were effective, in all material respects, to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports the Bancorp files and submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported as and when
required and information is accumulated and communicated to management on a timely basis.
The management of
Fifth Third Bancorp is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control, designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external
purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The Bancorps management assessed the effectiveness of the Bancorps internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2011. Managements assessment is based on the criteria established in the Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and was designed to provide reasonable
assurance that the Bancorp maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2011. Based on this assessment, management believes that the Bancorp maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2011. The Bancorps independent registered public accounting firm, that audited the Bancorps consolidated financial statements included in this annual report, has issued an audit report on our internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2011. This report appears on page 76 of the annual report.
The
Bancorps management also conducted an evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to determine whether any changes occurred during the year covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Bancorps internal control over financial reporting. Based on this evaluation, there has been no such change during the year covered by this report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin T. Kabat |
|
Daniel T. Poston |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
February 29, 2012 |
|
February 29, 2012 |
75
REPORTS OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Fifth Third Bancorp:
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Fifth Third Bancorp and
subsidiaries (the Bancorp) as of December 31, 2011, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. The
Bancorps management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Managements
Assessment as to the Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Bancorps internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors, 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 generally accepted accounting principles. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding
prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the companys assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion
or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the Bancorp maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2011, based on the criteria established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2011 of the Bancorp and our report dated February 29, 2012 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
Cincinnati, Ohio
February 29, 2012
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of Fifth Third
Bancorp:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Fifth Third Bancorp and subsidiaries
(the Bancorp) as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the related consolidated statements of income, equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2011. These consolidated financial
statements are the responsibility of the Bancorps management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Fifth Third Bancorp and subsidiaries at December 31, 2011 and 2010, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2011, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the Bancorps internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2011, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 29, 2012 expressed an unqualified opinion on
the Bancorps internal control over financial reporting.
Cincinnati, Ohio
February 29, 2012
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 ($ in millions, except share data) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks (a) |
|
$ |
2,663 |
|
|
|
2,159 |
|
Available-for-sale and other securities
(b) |
|
|
15,362 |
|
|
|
15,414 |
|
Held-to-maturity securities (c) |
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
Trading securities |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
Other short-term investments
(a) |
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
1,515 |
|
Loans held for sale (d) |
|
|
2,954 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
30,783 |
|
|
|
27,191 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans (a) |
|
|
10,138 |
|
|
|
10,845 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,020 |
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(e) |
|
|
10,672 |
|
|
|
8,956 |
|
Home equity (a) |
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
Automobile loans (a) |
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases |
|
|
81,018 |
|
|
|
77,491 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses(a) |
|
|
(2,255 |
) |
|
|
(3,004 |
) |
Portfolio loans and leases, net |
|
|
78,763 |
|
|
|
74,487 |
|
Bank premises and equipment |
|
|
2,447 |
|
|
|
2,389 |
|
Operating lease equipment |
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
2,417 |
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Servicing rights |
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
822 |
|
Other assets (a) |
|
|
8,863 |
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
116,967 |
|
|
|
111,007 |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demand |
|
$ |
27,600 |
|
|
|
21,413 |
|
Interest checking |
|
|
20,392 |
|
|
|
18,560 |
|
Savings |
|
|
21,756 |
|
|
|
20,903 |
|
Money market |
|
|
4,989 |
|
|
|
5,035 |
|
Other time |
|
|
4,638 |
|
|
|
7,728 |
|
Certificates$100,000 and over |
|
|
3,039 |
|
|
|
4,287 |
|
Foreign office and other |
|
|
3,296 |
|
|
|
3,722 |
|
Total deposits |
|
|
85,710 |
|
|
|
81,648 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,574 |
|
Accrued taxes, interest and expenses |
|
|
1,469 |
|
|
|
889 |
|
Other liabilities (a) |
|
|
3,270 |
|
|
|
2,979 |
|
Long-term debt (a) |
|
|
9,682 |
|
|
|
9,558 |
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
103,716 |
|
|
|
96,927 |
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock (f) |
|
|
2,051 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
Preferred stock (g) |
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
3,654 |
|
Capital surplus (h) |
|
|
2,792 |
|
|
|
1,715 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
6,719 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
Treasury stock |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
Total Bancorp shareholders equity |
|
|
13,201 |
|
|
|
14,051 |
|
Noncontrolling interests |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Total Equity |
|
|
13,251 |
|
|
|
14,080 |
|
Total Liabilities and Equity |
|
$ |
116,967 |
|
|
|
111,007 |
|
(a) |
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, includes $30 and $52 of cash, $7 of other
short-term investments, $50 and $29 of commercial mortgage loans, $223 and $241 of home equity loans, $259 and $648 of automobile loans, ($10) and ($14) of ALLL,
$4 and $7 of other assets, $4 and $12 of other liabilities, $191 and $692 of long-term debt from consolidated VIEs that are included in their respective captions. See Note 11.
|
(b) |
Amortized cost of $14,614 and $14,919 at December 31, 2011 and 2010 respectively.
|
(c) |
Fair value of $322 and $353 at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
|
(d) |
Includes $2,751 and $1,892 of residential mortgage loans held for sale measured at fair value at December 31,
2011, and 2010, respectively. |
(e) |
Includes $65 and $46 of residential mortgage loans measured at fair value at December 31, 2011 and
2010, respectively. |
(f) |
Common shares: Stated value $2.22 per share; authorized 2,000,000,000; outstanding at December 31, 2011 919,804,436
(excludes 4,088,145 treasury shares) and December 31, 2010 796,272,522 (excludes 5,231,666 treasury shares). |
(g) |
317,680 shares of undesignated no par value preferred stock are authorized of which none had been issued; 5.0% cumulative Series F perpetual
preferred stock with a $25,000 liquidation preference: 136,320 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010, which were redeemed on February 2, 2011; 8.5% non-cumulative Series G convertible (into 2,159.8272 common shares) perpetual
preferred stock with a $25,000 liquidation preference: 46,000 authorized, 16,450 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2011, 16,451 issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010.
|
(h) |
Includes a ten-year warrant initially valued at $239 to purchase up to 43,617,747 shares of common stock, no par value, related to Series F
preferred stock, at an initial exercise price of $11.72 per share at December 31, 2010, which was repurchased for $280 on March 16, 2011. |
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions, except per share data) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and fees on loans and leases |
|
$ |
3,613 |
|
|
|
3,823 |
|
|
|
3,934 |
|
Interest on securities |
|
|
600 |
|
|
|
658 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
Interest on other short-term investments |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total interest income |
|
|
4,218 |
|
|
|
4,489 |
|
|
|
4,668 |
|
Interest Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on deposits |
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
591 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
Interest on other short-term borrowings |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Interest on long-term debt |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
Net Interest Income |
|
|
3,557 |
|
|
|
3,604 |
|
|
|
3,354 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
Net Interest Income (Loss) After Provision for Loan and Lease Losses |
|
|
3,134 |
|
|
|
2,066 |
|
|
|
(189 |
) |
Noninterest Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
553 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
520 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
632 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
316 |
|
|
|
615 |
|
Gain on sale of processing business |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,758 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
Securities gains (losses), net |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Securities gains, netnon-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing
rights |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
4,782 |
|
Noninterest Expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, wages and incentives |
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
1,430 |
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
Net occupancy expense |
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
Technology and communications |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Equipment expense |
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
1,224 |
|
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
3,758 |
|
|
|
3,855 |
|
|
|
3,826 |
|
Income Before Income Taxes |
|
|
1,831 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
Applicable income tax expense |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Net Income |
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net Income attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Net Income Available to Common Shareholders |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
Earnings Per Share |
|
$ |
1.20 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
Earnings Per Diluted Share |
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
78
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bancorp Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
Bancorp |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Shareholders |
|
|
Controlling |
|
|
Total |
|
($ in millions, except per share data) |
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Surplus |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
Interests |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balance at December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
1,295 |
|
|
|
4,241 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
5,824 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
12,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,077 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
143 |
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
880 |
|
Cash dividends declared: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock at $0.04 per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
Preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
Accretion of preferred dividends, Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
635 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
986 |
|
Dividends on exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
(674 |
) |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
Stock-based awards issued or exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Restricted stock grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Change in corporate tax benefit related to stock-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
Reversal of OTTI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
3,609 |
|
|
|
1,743 |
|
|
|
6,326 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
13,497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,497 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
753 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73 |
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
826 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
826 |
|
Cash dividends declared: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock at $0.04 per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(205 |
) |
Accretion of preferred dividends, Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
Stock-based awards issued or exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Restricted stock grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Impact of cumulative effect of change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(77 |
) |
Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
3,654 |
|
|
|
1,715 |
|
|
|
6,719 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
14,051 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
14,080 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,297 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,453 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1,454 |
|
Cash dividends declared: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock at $0.28 per share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(257 |
) |
Preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,648 |
|
Redemption of preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
Redemption of stock warrant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(280 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(280 |
) |
Accretion of preferred dividends, Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
Stock-based awards issued or exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
Restricted stock grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Noncontrolling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Balance at December 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
2,051 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
2,792 |
|
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
13,201 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
13,251 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
1,298 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
Depreciation, amortization and accretion |
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Provision for deferred income taxes |
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
Realized securities gains |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Realized securities gains non-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
Realized securities losses |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Realized securities losses non-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Provision for mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Net (gains) losses on sales of loans and fair value adjustments on loans held for sale |
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
Capitalized mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(236 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
(373 |
) |
Excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds from sales of loans held for sale |
|
|
14,783 |
|
|
|
18,634 |
|
|
|
21,504 |
|
Loans originated for sale, net of repayments |
|
|
(15,199 |
) |
|
|
(18,231 |
) |
|
|
(22,252 |
) |
Dividends representing return on equity method investments |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Gain on sale of processing business, net of tax |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,052 |
) |
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading securities |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
826 |
|
Accrued taxes, interest and expenses |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(1,200 |
) |
Other liabilities |
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating
Activities |
|
|
2,366 |
|
|
|
3,305 |
|
|
|
3,794 |
|
Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
2,471 |
|
|
|
2,578 |
|
|
|
3,750 |
|
Loans |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
331 |
|
Disposal of bank premises and equipment |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Repayments / maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
3,502 |
|
|
|
4,620 |
|
|
|
117,901 |
|
Held-to-maturity securities |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Purchases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
(5,689 |
) |
|
|
(5,218 |
) |
|
|
(126,942 |
) |
Held-to-maturity securities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Bank premises and equipment |
|
|
(319 |
) |
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
(173 |
) |
Restricted cash from the initial consolidation of variable interest entities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds from sale and dividends representing return of equity method investments |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Proceeds from sale of processing business |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
562 |
|
Net cash paid in business combination |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
(267 |
) |
|
|
1,861 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Loans and leases |
|
|
(5,422 |
) |
|
|
(2,507 |
) |
|
|
5,497 |
|
Operating lease equipment |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(75 |
) |
Net Cash (Used in) Provided by Investing
Activities |
|
|
(5,285 |
) |
|
|
1,708 |
|
|
|
1,076 |
|
Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core deposits |
|
|
5,264 |
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
9,550 |
|
Certificates - $100,000 and over, including other foreign office |
|
|
(1,202 |
) |
|
|
(3,429 |
) |
|
|
(4,159 |
) |
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
1,665 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(8,544 |
) |
Dividends paid on common shares |
|
|
(192 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Dividends paid on preferred shares |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
Repayment of long-term debt |
|
|
(1,607 |
) |
|
|
(2,473 |
) |
|
|
(3,065 |
) |
Issuance of common shares |
|
|
1,648 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
986 |
|
Redemption of preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
Dividends on exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Redemption of stock warrant |
|
|
(280 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interests |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Net Cash Provided By (Used In) Financing Activities |
|
|
3,423 |
|
|
|
(5,172 |
) |
|
|
(5,291 |
) |
Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Due from Banks |
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
(421 |
) |
Cash and Due from Banks at Beginning of Period |
|
|
2,159 |
|
|
|
2,318 |
|
|
|
2,739 |
|
Cash and Due from Banks at End of Period |
|
$ |
2,663 |
|
|
|
2,159 |
|
|
|
2,318 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Note 2 contains cash payments related to interest and income taxes in
addition to noncash investing and financing activities.
80
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING AND
REPORTING POLICIES
Nature of Operations
Fifth Third Bancorp, an Ohio corporation, conducts its principal lending, deposit gathering, transaction processing and service advisory
activities through its banking and non-banking subsidiaries from banking centers located throughout the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United States.
Basis of Presentation
The Consolidated Financial Statements include
the accounts of the Bancorp and its majority-owned subsidiaries and VIEs in which the Bancorp has been determined to be the primary beneficiary. Other entities, including certain joint ventures, in which the Bancorp has the ability to exercise
significant influence over operating and financial policies of the investee, but upon which the Bancorp does not possess control, are accounted for by the equity method and not consolidated. Those entities in which the Bancorp does not have the
ability to exercise significant influence are generally carried at the lower of cost or fair value. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Certain prior period data has been reclassified to conform to current period
presentation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying
notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Cash and Due From Banks
Cash and due from banks consist of currency and coin, cash items in the process of collection and due from banks. Currency and coin
includes both U.S. and foreign currency owned and held at Fifth Third offices and that is in-transit to the FRB. Cash items in the process of collection include checks and drafts that are drawn on another depository institution or the FRB that are
payable immediately upon presentation in the U.S. Balances due from banks include non-interest bearing balances that are funds on deposit at other depository institutions or the FRB.
Securities
Securities are classified as held-to-maturity, available-for-sale or trading on the date of purchase. Only those securities which management has the intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified
as held-to-maturity and reported at amortized cost. Securities are classified as available-for-sale when, in managements judgment, they may be sold in response to, or in anticipation of, changes in market conditions. Securities are classified
as trading when bought and held principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term. Available-for-sale securities are reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses, net of related deferred income taxes included in other
comprehensive income. Trading securities are reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses included in noninterest income. The fair value of a security is determined based on quoted market prices. If quoted market prices are not available,
fair value is determined based on quoted prices of similar instruments or discounted cash flow models that incorporate market inputs and assumptions including discount rates, prepayment speeds, and loss rates. Realized securities gains or losses are
reported within noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The cost of securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
Available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities with unrealized losses are reviewed quarterly for possible OTTI. For debt securities, if the Bancorp intends to sell the debt security or will more
likely than not be required to sell the debt security before recovery of the entire amortized cost basis, then an OTTI has occurred. However, even if the Bancorp does not intend to sell the debt security and will not likely be required to sell the
debt security
before recovery of its entire amortized cost basis, the Bancorp must evaluate expected cash flows to be received and determine if a credit loss has occurred. In the event of a credit loss, the
credit component of the impairment is recognized within noninterest income and the non-credit component is recognized through other comprehensive income. For equity securities, the Bancorps management evaluates the securities in an unrealized
loss position in the available-for-sale portfolio for OTTI on the basis of the duration of the decline in value of the security and severity of that decline as well as the Bancorps intent and ability to hold these securities for a period of
time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in the market value. If it is determined that the impairment on an equity security is other than temporary, an impairment loss equal to the difference between the carrying value of the security
and its fair value is recognized within noninterest income.
Portfolio Loans and Leases
Basis of Accounting
Portfolio loans and leases are generally reported at the principal amount outstanding, net of unearned income, deferred loan fees and
costs, and any direct principal charge-offs. Direct loan origination fees and costs are deferred and the net amount is amortized over the estimated life of the related loans as a yield adjustment. Interest income is recognized based on the principal
balance outstanding computed using the effective interest method.
Purchased loans are evaluated for evidence
of credit deterioration at acquisition and recorded at their initial fair value. For loans acquired with no evidence of credit deterioration, the fair value discount or premium is amortized over the contractual life of the loan as an adjustment to
yield. For loans acquired with evidence of credit deterioration, the Bancorp determines at the acquisition date the excess of the loans contractually required payments over all cash flows expected to be collected as an amount that should not
be accreted into interest income (nonaccretable difference). The remaining amount representing the difference in the expected cash flows of acquired loans and the initial investment in the acquired loans is accreted into interest income over the
remaining life of the loan or pool of loans (accretable yield). Subsequent to the purchase date, increases in expected cash flows over those expected at the purchase date are recognized prospectively as interest income over the remaining life of the
loan. The present value of any decreases in expected cash flows after the purchase date is recognized by recording an ALLL or a direct charge-off. Subsequent to the purchase date, the methods utilized to estimate the required ALLL are similar to
originated loans. Loans carried at fair value, mortgage loans held for sale and loans under revolving credit agreements are excluded from the scope of this guidance on loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality.
The Bancorps lease portfolio consists of both direct financing and leveraged leases. Direct financing leases are
carried at the aggregate of lease payments plus estimated residual value of the leased property, less unearned income. Interest income on direct financing leases is recognized over the term of the lease to achieve a constant periodic rate of return
on the outstanding investment. Leveraged leases are carried at the aggregate of lease payments (less nonrecourse debt payments) plus estimated residual value of the leased property, less unearned income. Interest income on leveraged leases is
recognized over the term of the lease to achieve a constant rate of return on the outstanding investment in the lease, net of the related deferred income tax liability, in the years in which the net investment is positive.
Nonaccrual Loans
When a
loan is placed on nonaccrual status, the accrual of interest is discontinued and all previously accrued and unpaid interest is charged against income. Commercial loans are placed on nonaccrual status when there is a clear indication that the
borrowers cash flow
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
may not be sufficient to meet payments as they become due. Such loans are also placed on nonaccrual status when the principal or interest is past due ninety days or more, unless the loan is both
well secured and in the process of collection. The Bancorp classifies residential mortgage loans that have principal and interest payments that have become past due 150 days and home equity loans with principal and interest payments that have become
past due 180 days as nonaccrual unless the loan is both well secured and in the process of collection. Automobile and other consumer loans and leases that have been modified in a TDR and subsequently become past due 90 days are placed on nonaccrual
status. Credit card loans that have been modified in a TDR are classified as nonaccrual unless such loans have sustained repayment performance of six months or greater and are reasonably assured of repayment in accordance with the restructured
terms. Well secured loans are collateralized by perfected security interests in real and/or personal property for which the Bancorp estimates proceeds from sale would be sufficient to recover the outstanding principal and accrued interest balance of
the loan and pay all costs to sell the collateral. The Bancorp considers a loan in the process of collection if collection efforts or legal action is proceeding and the Bancorp expects to collect funds sufficient to bring the loan current or recover
the entire outstanding principal and accrued interest balance.
Nonaccrual commercial loans, other than loans
modified in a TDR and nonaccrual credit card loans, are generally accounted for on the cost recovery method. The Bancorp believes the cost recovery method is appropriate for nonaccrual commercial loans and nonaccrual credit card loans because the
assessment of collectability of the remaining recorded investment of these loans involves a high degree of subjectivity and uncertainty due to the nature or absence of underlying collateral. Under the cost recovery method, any payments received are
applied to reduce principal. Once the entire recorded investment is collected, additional payments received are treated as recoveries of amounts previously charged-off until recovered in full, and any subsequent payments are treated as interest
income. Nonaccrual residential mortgage loans and other nonaccrual consumer loans are generally accounted for on the cash basis method. The Bancorp believes the cash basis method is appropriate for nonaccrual residential mortgage and other
nonaccrual consumer loans because such loans have generally been written down to estimated collateral values and the collectability of the remaining investment involves only an assessment of the fair value of the underlying collateral, which can be
measured more objectively with a lesser degree of uncertainty than assessments of typical commercial loan collateral. Under the cash basis method, interest income is recognized upon cash receipt to the extent to which it would have been accrued on
the loans remaining balance at the contractual rate. Nonaccrual loans may be returned to accrual status when all delinquent interest and principal payments become current in accordance with the loan agreement or when the loan is both
well-secured and in the process of collection.
Commercial loans on nonaccrual status, as well as criticized
commercial loans with aggregate borrower relationships exceeding $1 million are subject to an individual review to identify charge-offs. The Bancorp does not have an established delinquency threshold for partially or fully charging off commercial
loans. Residential mortgage, home equity and credit card loans that have principal and interest payments that have become past due 180 days are charged off to the ALLL, unless such loans are both well-secured and in the process of collection.
Automobile and other consumer loans and leases that have principal and interest payments that have become past due 120 days are charged off to the ALLL, unless such loans are both well-secured and in the process of collection.
Restructured Loans
A
loan is accounted for as a TDR if the Bancorp, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrowers financial difficulties, grants a
concession to the borrower that it would not otherwise consider. A TDR typically involves a modification of terms such as a reduction of the stated interest rate or face amount of the loan, a
reduction of accrued interest, or an extension of the maturity date(s) at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for a new loan with similar risk. The Bancorp measures the impairment loss of a TDR based on the difference between
the original loans carrying amount and the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the original, effective yield of the loan. Residential mortgage loans, home equity loans, automobile loans and other consumer loans modified
as part of a TDR are maintained on accrual status, provided there is reasonable assurance of repayment and of performance according to the modified terms based upon a current, well-documented credit evaluation. TDRs of commercial loans and credit
cards remain on nonaccrual status until a six-month payment history is sustained. During the nonaccrual period, TDRs of commercial loans are accounted for using the cash basis method for income recognition, provided that full repayment of principal
under the modified terms of the loan is reasonably assured.
Impaired Loans
A loan is considered to be impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Bancorp will be unable to
collect all amounts due (including both principal and interest) according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. For loans modified in a TDR, the contractual terms of the loan agreement refer to the terms specified in the original loan
agreement. A loan restructured in a TDR is no longer considered impaired in years after the restructuring if the restructuring agreement specifies a rate equal to or greater than the rate the Bancorp was willing to accept at the time of the
restructuring for a new loan with comparable risk and the loan is not impaired based on the terms specified by the restructuring agreement. Refer to the ALLL section for discussion regarding the Bancorps methodology for identifying impaired
loans and determination of the need for a loss accrual.
Loans Held for Sale
Loans held for sale represent conforming fixed rate residential mortgage loans originated or acquired with the intent to sell in the
secondary market and commercial loans and other loans that management has an active plan to sell. Loans held for sale may be carried at the lower of cost or fair value, or carried at fair value where the Bancorp has elected the fair value option of
accounting under U.S. GAAP. The Bancorp has elected to measure residential mortgage loans originated as held for sale under the fair value option. For loans in which the Bancorp has not elected the fair value option, the lower of cost or fair value
is determined at the individual loan level.
The fair value of residential mortgage loans held for sale is
estimated based upon mortgage-backed securities prices and spreads to those prices or, for certain ARM loans, discounted cash flow models that may incorporate the anticipated portfolio composition, credit spreads of asset-backed securities with
similar collateral, and market conditions. The anticipated portfolio composition includes the effects of interest rate spreads and discount rates due to loan characteristics such as the state in which the loan was originated, the loan amount and the
ARM margin. These fair value marks are recorded as a component of noninterest income in mortgage banking net revenue. The Bancorp generally has commitments to sell residential mortgage loans held for sale in the secondary market. Gains or losses on
sales are recognized in mortgage banking net revenue upon delivery.
Managements intent to sell
residential mortgage loans classified as held for sale may change over time due to such factors as changes in the overall liquidity in markets or changes in characteristics specific to certain loans held for sale. Consequently,
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
these loans may be reclassified to loans held for investment and, thereafter, reported within the Bancorps residential mortgages class of portfolio loans and leases. In such cases, the
residential mortgage loans will continue to be measured at fair value, which is based on mortgage-backed securities prices and a credit component that is based on internally developed loss rate models.
Loans held for sale are placed on nonaccrual status consistent with the Bancorps nonaccrual policy for portfolio
loans and leases.
Other Real Estate Owned
OREO, which is included in other assets, represents property acquired through foreclosure or other proceedings and is carried at the lower
of cost or fair value, less costs to sell. All OREO property is periodically evaluated and decreases in carrying value are recognized as reductions in other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
ALLL
The Bancorp disaggregates its portfolio loans and leases into portfolio segments for purposes of determining the ALLL. The Bancorps portfolio segments include commercial, residential mortgage, and
consumer. The Bancorp further disaggregates its portfolio segments into classes for purposes of monitoring and assessing credit quality based on certain risk characteristics. Classes within the commercial portfolio segment include commercial and
industrial, commercial mortgage owner-occupied, commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied, commercial construction, and commercial leasing. The residential mortgage portfolio segment is also considered a class. Classes within the consumer segment
include home equity, automobile, credit card, and other consumer loans and leases. For an analysis of the Bancorps ALLL by portfolio segment and credit quality information by class, see Note 6.
The Bancorp maintains the ALLL to absorb probable loan and lease losses inherent in its portfolio segments. The ALLL is
maintained at a level the Bancorp considers to be adequate and is based on ongoing quarterly assessments and evaluations of the collectability and historical loss experience of loans and leases. Credit losses are charged and recoveries are credited
to the ALLL. Provisions for loan and lease losses are based on the Bancorps review of the historical credit loss experience and such factors that, in managements judgment, deserve consideration under existing economic conditions in
estimating probable credit losses. In determining the appropriate level of the ALLL, the Bancorp estimates losses using a range derived from base and conservative estimates. The Bancorps strategy for credit risk
management includes a combination of conservative exposure limits significantly below legal lending limits and conservative underwriting, documentation and collections standards. The strategy also emphasizes diversification on a geographic, industry
and customer level, regular credit examinations and quarterly management reviews of large credit exposures and loans experiencing deterioration of credit quality.
The Bancorps methodology for determining the ALLL is based on historical loss rates, current credit grades,
specific allocation on loans modified in a TDR and impaired commercial credits above specified thresholds and other qualitative adjustments. Allowances on individual commercial loans, TDRs and historical loss rates are reviewed quarterly and
adjusted as necessary based on changing borrower and/or collateral conditions and actual collection and charge-off experience. An unallocated allowance is maintained to recognize the imprecision in estimating and measuring losses when evaluating
allowances for individual loans or pools of loans.
Larger commercial loans included within aggregate
borrower relationship balances exceeding $1 million that exhibit probable or observed credit weaknesses, as well as loans that have been modified in a TDR, are subject to individual review for impairment.
The Bancorp considers the current value of collateral, credit quality of any guarantees, the guarantors liquidity and willingness to cooperate, the loan structure, and other factors when
evaluating whether an individual loan is impaired. Other factors may include the industry and geographic region of the borrower, size and financial condition of the borrower, cash flow and leverage of the borrower, and the Bancorps evaluation
of the borrowers management. When individual loans are impaired, allowances are determined based on managements estimate of the borrowers ability to repay the loan given the availability of collateral and other sources of cash
flow, as well as an evaluation of legal options available to the Bancorp. Allowances for impaired loans are measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loans effective interest rate, fair value of the
underlying collateral or readily observable secondary market values. The Bancorp evaluates the collectability of both principal and interest when assessing the need for a loss accrual.
Historical credit loss rates are applied to commercial loans that are not impaired or are impaired, but smaller than the
established threshold of $1 million and thus not subject to specific allowance allocations. The loss rates are derived from a migration analysis, which tracks the historical net charge-off experience sustained on loans according to their internal
risk grade. The risk grading system utilized for allowance analysis purposes encompasses ten categories.
Homogenous loans and leases in the residential mortgage and consumer portfolio segments are not individually risk
graded. Rather, standard credit scoring systems and delinquency monitoring are used to assess credit risks, and allowances are established based on the expected net charge-offs. Loss rates are based on the trailing twelve month net charge-off
history by loan category. Historical loss rates may be adjusted for certain prescriptive and qualitative factors that, in managements judgment, are necessary to reflect losses inherent in the portfolio. Factors that management considers in the
analysis include the effects of the national and local economies; trends in the nature and volume of delinquencies, charge-offs and nonaccrual loans; changes in loan mix; credit score migration comparisons; asset quality trends; risk management and
loan administration; changes in the internal lending policies and credit standards; collection practices; and examination results from bank regulatory agencies and the Bancorps internal credit reviewers.
The Bancorps primary market areas for lending are the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the Unites States.
When evaluating the adequacy of allowances, consideration is given to these regional geographic concentrations and the closely associated effect changing economic conditions have on the Bancorps customers.
In the current year, the Bancorp has not substantively changed any material aspect to its overall approach to
determining its ALLL for any of its portfolio segments. There have been no material changes in criteria or estimation techniques as compared to prior periods that impacted the determination of the current period ALLL for any of the Bancorps
portfolio segments.
Reserve for Unfunded Commitments
The reserve for unfunded commitments is maintained at a level believed by management to be sufficient to absorb estimated probable losses
related to unfunded credit facilities and is included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The determination of the adequacy of the reserve is based upon an evaluation of the unfunded credit facilities, including an assessment of
historical commitment utilization experience, credit risk grading and historical loss rates based on credit grade migration. This process takes into consideration the same risk elements that are analyzed in the determination of the adequacy of the
Bancorps ALLL, as discussed above. Net adjustments to the reserve for unfunded commitments are included in other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Loan Sales and Securitizations
When the Bancorp sells loans through either securitizations or individual loan sales in accordance with its investment policies, it is
required to assess whether the entity holding the sold or securitized loans is a VIE and whether the Bancorp is the primary beneficiary and therefore consolidator of that VIE. If the Bancorp holds the power to direct activities most significant to
the economic performance of the VIE and has the obligation to absorb losses or right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE, then the Bancorp will generally be deemed the primary beneficiary of the VIE. When the Bancorp
previously sold loans into isolated trusts or conduits, it obtained one or more subordinated tranches or other residual interests in these trusts or conduits, as well as the servicing rights to the underlying loans. Effective with the adoption of
amended VIE consolidation guidance on January 1, 2010, the Bancorp was required to consolidate these VIEs, and accordingly, the underlying loans and other assets and liabilities of these VIEs are included in the Bancorps Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Prior to the January 1, 2010 adoption of the VIE
consolidation guidance referenced above, gains or losses recognized on the sale or securitization of such loans were reported as a component of noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income and were based on the previous carrying
amount of the loans sold or securitized, as well as the fair value of the servicing rights and other interests obtained by the Bancorp at the date of sale or securitization. Adjustments to the fair value of these other interests prior to
January 1, 2010 were included in accumulated other comprehensive income in the Consolidated Balance Sheets or in noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income if the fair value had declined below the carrying amount and such
decline was determined to be other-than-temporary.
Servicing rights resulting from residential mortgage and
commercial loan sales are initially recorded at fair value and subsequently amortized in proportion to and over the period of estimated net servicing revenues and are reported as a component of mortgage banking net revenue and corporate banking
revenue, respectively, in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Servicing rights are assessed for impairment monthly, based on fair value, with temporary impairment recognized through a valuation allowance and permanent impairment recognized
through a write-off of the servicing asset and related valuation allowance. Key economic assumptions used in measuring any potential impairment of the servicing rights include the prepayment speeds of the underlying loans, the weighted-average life,
the discount rate, the weighted-average coupon and the weighted-average default rate, as applicable. The primary risk of material changes to the value of the servicing rights resides in the potential volatility in the economic assumptions used,
particularly the prepayment speeds. The Bancorp monitors risk and adjusts its valuation allowance as necessary to adequately reserve for impairment in the servicing portfolio. For purposes of measuring impairment, the mortgage servicing rights are
stratified into classes based on the financial asset type (fixed-rate vs. adjustable-rate) and interest rates. Fees received for servicing loans owned by investors are based on a percentage of the outstanding monthly principal balance of such loans
and are included in noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income as loan payments are received. Costs of servicing loans are charged to expense as incurred.
Bank Premises and Equipment
Bank premises and equipment, including
leasehold improvements, are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method based on estimated useful lives of the assets for book purposes, while accelerated depreciation is
used for income tax purposes.
Amortization of leasehold improvements is computed using the straight-line method over the lives of the related leases or useful lives of the related assets, whichever is shorter. The Bancorp
tests its long-lived assets for impairment through both a probability-weighted and primary-asset approach whenever events or changes in circumstances dictate. Maintenance, repairs and minor improvements are charged to noninterest expense in the
Consolidated Statements of Income as incurred.
Derivative Financial Instruments
The Bancorp accounts for its derivatives as either assets or liabilities measured at fair value through adjustments to accumulated other
comprehensive income and/or current earnings, as appropriate. On the date the Bancorp enters into a derivative contract, the Bancorp designates the derivative instrument as either a fair value hedge, cash flow hedge or as a free-standing derivative
instrument. For a fair value hedge, changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument and changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment attributable to the hedged risk are recorded in current
period net income. For a cash flow hedge, changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument, to the extent that it is effective, are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income and subsequently reclassified to net income in the same
period(s) that the hedged transaction impacts net income. For free-standing derivative instruments, changes in fair values are reported in current period net income.
Prior to entering into a hedge transaction, the Bancorp formally documents the relationship between hedging instruments
and hedged items, as well as the risk management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedge transactions. This process includes linking all derivative instruments that are designated as fair value or cash flow hedges to specific assets or
liabilities on the balance sheet or to specific forecasted transactions, along with a formal assessment at both inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis as to the effectiveness of the derivative instrument in offsetting changes in fair values
or cash flows of the hedged item. If it is determined that the derivative instrument is not highly effective as a hedge, hedge accounting is discontinued and the adjustment to fair value of the derivative instrument is recorded in net income.
Income Taxes
The Bancorp estimates income tax expense based on amounts expected to be owed to the various tax jurisdictions in which the Bancorp conducts business. On a quarterly basis, management assesses the
reasonableness of its effective tax rate based upon its current estimate of the amount and components of net income, tax credits and the applicable statutory tax rates expected for the full year. The estimated income tax expense is recorded in the
Consolidated Statements of Income.
Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined using the
balance sheet method and are reported in other assets and accrued taxes, interest and expenses, respectively, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Under this method, the net deferred tax asset or liability is based on the tax effects of the
differences between the book and tax basis of assets and liabilities, and reflects enacted changes in tax rates and laws. Deferred tax assets are recognized to the extent they exist and are subject to a valuation allowance based on managements
judgment that realization is more-likely-than-not. This analysis is performed on a quarterly basis and includes an evaluation of all positive and negative evidence to determine whether realization is more-likely-than-not.
Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due to taxing jurisdictions and are reported in accrued taxes, interest
and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Bancorp evaluates and assesses the relative risks and appropriate tax treatment of transactions and filing positions after considering statutes, regulations, judicial precedent and other
information and maintains tax accruals consistent with its evaluation of these relative
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
risks and merits. Changes to the estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in tax rates, interpretations of tax laws, the status of examinations being conducted by taxing
authorities and changes to statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance that impact the relative risks of tax positions. These changes, when they occur, can affect deferred taxes and accrued taxes as well as the current periods income tax
expense and can be significant to the operating results of the Bancorp. For additional information on income taxes, see Note 20.
Earnings Per Share
Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Earnings per diluted
share is computed by dividing adjusted net income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock and common stock equivalents outstanding during the period. Dilutive common stock equivalents represent the
assumed conversion of dilutive convertible preferred stock and the exercise of dilutive stock-based awards and warrants.
The Bancorp calculates earnings per share pursuant to the two-class method. The two-class method is an earnings allocation formula that determines earnings per share separately for common stock and
participating securities according to dividends declared and participation rights in undistributed earnings. For purposes of calculating earnings per share under the two-class method, restricted shares that contain nonforfeitable rights to dividends
are considered participating securities until vested. While the dividends declared per share on such restricted shares are the same as dividends declared per common share outstanding, the dividends recognized on such restricted shares may be less
because dividends paid on restricted shares that are expected to be forfeited are reclassified to compensation expense during the period when forfeiture is expected.
Goodwill
Business combinations entered into by the Bancorp
typically include the acquisition of goodwill. U.S. GAAP requires goodwill to be tested for impairment at the Bancorps reporting unit level on an annual basis, which for the Bancorp is September 30, and more frequently if events or
circumstances indicate that there may be impairment. The Bancorp has determined that its segments qualify as reporting units under U.S. GAAP. Impairment exists when a reporting units carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value,
which is determined through a two-step impairment test. The first step (Step 1) compares the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second
step (Step 2) of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the impairment loss amount, if any.
The fair value of a reporting unit is the price that would be received to sell the unit as a whole in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Since none of the Bancorps reporting units are publicly traded, individual reporting unit fair value determinations cannot be directly correlated to the Bancorps stock
price. To determine the fair value of a reporting unit, the Bancorp employs an income-based approach, utilizing the reporting units forecasted cash flows (including a terminal value approach to estimate cash flows beyond the final year of the
forecast) and the reporting units estimated cost of equity as the discount rate. Additionally, the Bancorp determines its market capitalization based on the average of the closing price of the Bancorps stock during the month including
the measurement date, incorporating an additional control premium, and compares this market-based fair value measurement to the aggregate fair value of the Bancorps reporting units in order to corroborate the results of the income approach.
When required to perform Step 2, the Bancorp compares the implied fair
value of a reporting units goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount exceeds the implied fair value, an impairment loss equal to that excess amount is recognized. An impairment loss recognized cannot exceed the
carrying amount of that goodwill and cannot be reversed even if the fair value of the reporting unit recovers.
During Step 2, the Bancorp determines the implied fair value of goodwill for a reporting unit by assigning the fair
value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. The excess of the fair value of the reporting unit
over the amounts assigned to its assets and liabilities is the implied fair value of goodwill. This assignment process is only performed for purposes of testing goodwill for impairment. The Bancorp does not adjust the carrying values of recognized
assets or liabilities (other than goodwill, if appropriate), nor recognize previously unrecognized intangible assets in the Consolidated Financial Statements as a result of this assignment process. Refer to Note 9 for further information regarding
the Bancorps goodwill.
Fair Value Measurements
The Bancorp measures certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which defines fair value as the
price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Valuation techniques the Bancorp uses to measure fair value include the market approach,
income approach and cost approach. The market approach uses prices or relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. The income approach involves discounting future amounts to a single
present amount and is based on current market expectations about those future amounts. The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of the asset.
U.S. GAAP establishes a fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair
value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). An instruments
categorization within the fair value hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the instruments fair value measurement. The three levels within the fair value hierarchy are described as follows:
Level 1 - Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Bancorp has the ability to
access at the measurement date.
Level 2 - Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable
for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 2 inputs include: quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; inputs
other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability; and inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.
Level 3 - Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability for which there is little, if any, market activity at the measurement
date. Unobservable inputs reflect the Bancorps own assumptions about what market participants would use to price the asset or liability. The inputs are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances, which might include
the Bancorps own financial data such as internally developed
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
pricing models and discounted cash flow methodologies, as well as instruments for which the fair value determination requires significant management judgment.
The Bancorps fair value measurements involve various valuation techniques and models, which involve inputs that are observable, when
available. Valuation techniques and parameters used for measuring assets and liabilities are reviewed and validated by the Bancorp on a quarterly basis. Additionally, the Bancorp monitors the fair values of significant assets and liabilities using a
variety of methods including the evaluation of pricing runs and exception reports based on certain analytical criteria, comparison to previous trades and overall review and assessments for reasonableness. See Note 27 for further information on fair
value measurements.
Stock-Based Compensation
In accordance with U.S. GAAP, the Bancorp recognizes compensation expense for the grant-date fair value of stock-based awards that are
expected to vest over the requisite service period. Awards with a graded vesting are expensed on a straight-line basis. Awards to employees that meet eligible retirement status are expensed immediately. As compensation expense is recognized, a
deferred tax asset is recorded that represents an estimate of future tax deduction from exercise or release of restrictions. At the time awards are exercised, cancelled, expire, or restrictions are released, the Bancorp may be required to recognize
an adjustment to income tax expense for the difference between the previously estimated tax deduction and the actual tax deduction realized. For further information on the Bancorps stock-based compensation plans, see Note 24.
Other
Securities and other property held by Fifth Third Investment Advisors, a division of the Bancorps banking subsidiary, in a fiduciary or agency capacity are not included in the Consolidated Balance
Sheets because such items are not assets of the subsidiaries. Investment advisory revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income is recognized on the accrual basis. Investment advisory service revenues are recognized monthly based on a fee charged
per transaction processed and/or a fee charged on the market value of average account balances associated with individual contracts.
The Bancorp recognizes revenue from its card and processing services on an accrual basis as such services are performed, recording revenues net of certain costs (primarily interchange fees charged by
credit card associations) not controlled by the Bancorp.
The Bancorp purchases life insurance policies on
the lives of certain directors, officers and employees and is the owner and beneficiary of the policies. The Bancorp invests in these policies, known as BOLI, to provide an efficient form of funding for long-term retirement and other employee
benefits costs. The Bancorp records these BOLI policies within other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at each policys respective cash surrender value, with changes recorded in other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of
Income.
Other intangible assets consist of core deposit intangibles, customer lists, non-competition
agreements and cardholder relationships. Other intangibles are amortized on either a straight-line or an accelerated basis over their useful lives. The Bancorp reviews other intangible assets for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that carrying amounts may not be recoverable.
Securities sold under repurchase
agreements are accounted for as collateralized financing transactions and included in other short-term borrowings in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at the amounts which the securities were sold plus accrued interest.
Acquisitions of treasury stock are carried at cost. Reissuance of shares
in treasury for acquisitions, exercises of stock-based awards or other corporate purposes is recorded based on the specific identification method.
Advertising costs are generally expensed as incurred.
Accounting and Reporting Developments
Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses
In July 2010, the FASB issued guidance that requires the Bancorp to disclose a greater level of disaggregated information about the credit
quality of its loans and leases and the ALLL. The new guidance defines two levels of disaggregation portfolio segment and class. A portfolio segment is defined as the level at which the Bancorp develops and documents a systematic method for
determining its ALLL. Classes generally represent a further disaggregation of a portfolio segment based on certain risk characteristics. The disclosures relating to information as of the end of a reporting period were effective for interim and
annual reporting periods ending on or after December 15, 2010 and these disclosure requirements were adopted by the Bancorp as of December 31, 2010. The disclosures regarding activity that occurs during a reporting period were effective
for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2010 and these disclosure requirements were adopted by the Bancorp as of January 1, 2011. These disclosures are included in Note 6.
When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts
In December 2010, the FASB issued amended guidance to address questions about entities with reporting units with zero or negative carrying
amounts. For those reporting units, the amended guidance requires the entity to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. In determining whether it is more likely than not that a
goodwill impairment exists, an entity should consider whether there are any adverse qualitative factors indicating that an impairment may exist. The Bancorp does not currently have any reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts, and
therefore the adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2011 did not have a material impact on the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations
In December 2010, the FASB issued amended guidance to address the diversity in practice about the interpretation of the pro forma revenue
and earnings disclosure requirements for business combinations. The amended guidance clarifies that for business combination(s) that occur during the year, the Bancorp is required to disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the
business combination(s) occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. The amended guidance is effective for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual
reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010 and is effective for business combinations consummated by the Bancorp on or after January 1, 2011. The Bancorp has not consummated a business combination since such guidance became
effective.
A Creditors Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring
In April 2011, the FASB issued amended guidance clarifying whether a creditor has granted a concession, and whether a debtor is
experiencing financial difficulties, for purposes of determining whether a restructuring constitutes a TDR. The amended guidance also requires the Bancorp to disclose new information about TDRs, including qualitative and quantitative
information by portfolio segment and class. The amended guidance was effective for the first
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
interim or annual reporting period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and was adopted by the Bancorp as of July 1, 2011. The amended guidance for identifying TDRs has been
applied retrospectively to January 1, 2011 and did not have a material impact on the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements. The disclosures required under the amended guidance are included in Note 6.
Reconsideration of Effective Control for Repurchase Agreements
In April 2011, the FASB issued amended guidance clarifying when the Bancorp can recognize a sale upon the transfer of financial assets subject to a repurchase agreement. That determination is based, in
part, on whether the Bancorp has maintained effective control over the transferred financial assets. Under the amended guidance, the FASB concluded that the assessment of effective control should focus on a transferors contractual rights and
obligations with respect to transferred financial assets, not on whether the transferor has the practical ability to perform in accordance with those rights or obligations. The amended guidance is effective for transactions that occur in interim and
annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011. The Bancorp accounts for all of its existing repurchase agreements as secured borrowings. Therefore, this amended guidance is not expected to have a material impact on the Bancorps
accounting for repurchase agreements upon adoption on January 1, 2012.
Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and
Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs
In May 2011, the FASB issued amended guidance that will result in common
fair value measurement and disclosure requirements between U.S. GAAP and IFRS. Under the amended guidance, the Bancorp will be required to expand its disclosure for fair value instruments categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy to
include (1) the valuation processes used by the Bancorp; and (2) a narrative description of the sensitivity of the fair value measurement to changes in unobservable inputs for recurring fair value measurements and the interrelationships
between those unobservable inputs, if any. The Bancorp will also be required to disclose the categorization by level of the fair value hierarchy for items that are not measured at fair value in the statement of financial position but for which the
fair value is required to be disclosed (e.g. portfolio loans). The amended guidance is to be applied
prospectively and is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011.
Presentation of Comprehensive Income
In June 2011, the FASB issued amended
guidance on the presentation requirements for comprehensive income. The amended guidance requires the Bancorp to present total comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income on the face of the
financial statements, either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The amended guidance does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item
of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. This amended guidance will be applied retrospectively and is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011.
Testing Goodwill for Impairment
In September 2011, the FASB issued amended guidance on testing goodwill for impairment. The amended guidance simplifies how the Bancorp is required to test goodwill for impairment and permits the Bancorp
to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, the Bancorp determines it is
not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test would be unnecessary. However, if the Bancorp concludes otherwise, it would then be required to perform
Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test, and continue to Step 2, if necessary. The amended guidance is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011.
Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities
In December 2011, the FASB issued amended guidance related to disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities. The amended guidance requires the Bancorp to disclose both gross information and net
information about financial instruments, including derivatives, and transactions eligible for offset in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as well as financial instruments and transactions subject to agreements similar to a master netting arrangement.
The amended guidance will be applied retrospectively and is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after January 1, 2013.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2. SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Cash payments related to interest
and income taxes in addition to noncash investing and financing activities are presented in the following table for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash payments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
658 |
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
1,416 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portfolio loans to held for sale loans |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Held for sale loans to portfolio loans |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Portfolio loans to OREO |
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
Held for sale loans to OREO |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
Held for sale loans to trading securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of tangible assets acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
Contingent consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Impact of change in accounting principle: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in available-for-sale securities, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
941 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in portfolio loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease in demand deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in other short-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,344 |
|
|
|
|
|
3. RESTRICTIONS ON CASH AND DIVIDENDS
The FRB, under Regulation D, requires that banks hold cash in reserve against deposit
liabilities, known as the reserve requirement. The amount of the reserve requirement is calculated based on net transaction account deposits as defined by the FRB and may be satisfied with vault cash. When vault cash is not sufficient to meet the
reserve requirement, the remaining amount must be satisfied with funds held at the FRB. At December 31, 2011, the Bancorps banking subsidiary reserve requirement was $1.1 billion. Vault cash was not sufficient to meet the total reserve
requirement; therefore, the Bancorps banking subsidiary satisfied the reserve requirement with its $1.5 billion deposit at the FRB. At December 31, 2010, the Bancorps banking subsidiary reserve requirement of $575 million was fully
satisfied with vault cash.
The dividends paid by the Bancorps banking subsidiary are subject to
regulations and limitations prescribed by state and federal supervisory agencies. The Bancorps banking subsidiary paid the Bancorps nonbank subsidiary holding company $2.0 billion and $1.4 billion in dividends during the years ended
December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The Bancorps nonbank subsidiary holding company paid the Bancorp $1.7 billion and $1.4 billion in dividends during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. At
December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorps banking subsidiary, under these provisions, was prohibited from declaring additional dividends without obtaining prior approval from supervisory agencies.
In 2008, the Bancorp sold $3.4 billion in Series F senior preferred stock and related warrants to the U.S. Treasury
under the terms of the CPP. The terms included certain restrictions on common stock dividends, which required the U.S. Treasurys consent to increase common stock dividends for a period of three years from the date of investment unless the
preferred shares were redeemed in whole or the U.S. Treasury transferred all of the preferred shares to a third party. For the Bancorp, approval from the U.S. Treasury was required for common stock dividends in excess of $0.15 per share of common
stock. Also, no dividends could be declared or paid on the Bancorps common stock unless all accrued and unpaid dividends had been paid on the preferred shares and certain other outstanding securities. Additionally, the Bancorps
ability to pay dividends on its common stock was limited by its need to maintain adequate capital levels, comply with safe and sound banking practices and meet regulatory expectations.
On February 2, 2011, the Bancorp redeemed all 136,320 shares of its Series F preferred stock held by
the U.S. Treasury under the CPP totaling $3.4 billion. As such, the Bancorp has no restrictions on common stock dividends pursuant to the CPP as of December 31, 2011. See Note 23 for further information on the redemption of the preferred
shares.
In February 2009, the FRB advised bank holding companies that safety and soundness considerations
required that dividends be substantially reduced or eliminated. Subsequently, the FRB indicated that increased capital distributions would generally not be considered prudent in the absence of a well-developed capital plan and a capital position
that would remain strong even under adverse conditions. In November 2010, the FRB issued guidelines to provide a common, conservative approach to ensure bank holding companies hold adequate capital to maintain ready access to funding, continue
operations and meet their obligations to creditors and counterparties, and continue to serve as credit intermediaries, even in adverse conditions. These guidelines required the nineteen bank holding companies that participated in the 2009 SCAP to
participate in the 2011 CCAR. The 2011 CCAR required the submission of a comprehensive capital plan that assumed a minimum planning horizon of 24 months under various economic scenarios. The plan required bank holding companies to provide dividend,
stock redemption and stock repurchase plans as well as plans for complying with the proposed revisions to the regulatory capital framework approved by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel III). In March 2011, the FRB announced it had
completed the 2011 CCAR and for bank holding companies that proposed capital distributions in their plan, the FRB either objected to the plan or provided a non objection whereby the FRB concurred with the proposed 2011 capital distributions. The
Bancorp received a non objection to its 2011 CCAR capital plan.
The FRB provided final rules of the 2012
CCAR on November 22, 2011. The CCAR requires the nineteen SCAP participating bank holding companies to submit a capital plan to the FRB by January 9,
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2012 and the Bancorp complied with this requirement. The mandatory elements of the capital plan are an assessment of the expected uses and sources of capital over the planning horizon, a
description of all planned capital actions over the planning horizon, a discussion of any expected changes to the Bancorps business plan that are likely to have a material impact on its capital adequacy or liquidity, a detailed description of
the Bancorps process for assessing capital adequacy and the Bancorps capital policy.
The
FRBs review of the Bancorps capital plan will assess the comprehensiveness of its capital plan, the reasonableness of
the assumptions and analysis underlying the capital plan and a review of the robustness of the capital adequacy process, the capital policy and the Bancorps ability to maintain capital
above the minimum regulatory capital ratio and above a Tier 1 common ratio of five percent on a pro forma basis under expected and stressful conditions throughout the planning horizon. Following the FRBs assessment of the capital plan, it will
object or provide a notice of non-objection to the submitted capital plan by March 15, 2012.
4.
SECURITIES
The
following table provides the amortized cost, fair value and unrealized gains and losses for the major categories of the available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Unrealized Gains |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Unrealized Gains |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Available-for-sale and other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and government agencies |
|
$ |
171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
230 |
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
1,782 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,962 |
|
|
|
1,564 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,645 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
9,743 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
10,284 |
|
|
|
10,570 |
|
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
10,973 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
1,338 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
1,342 |
|
Other
securities(a) |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
14,614 |
|
|
|
758 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
15,362 |
|
|
|
14,919 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
15,414 |
|
Held-to-maturity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
320 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
348 |
|
Other debt securities |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
322 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
353 |
|
(a) |
Other securities consist of FHLB and FRB restricted stock holdings of $497 and $345, respectively, at December 31, 2011 and, $524 and $344, respectively, at
December 31, 2010, that are carried at cost, and certain mutual fund and equity security holdings. |
The
following table presents realized gains and losses that were recognized in income from available-for-sale securities for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Realized gains |
|
$ |
75 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Realized losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Net realized gains |
|
$ |
75 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Trading securities totaled $177 million as of December 31, 2011, compared to $294
million at December 31, 2010. Gross realized gains on trading securities were $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009. Gross realized losses on trading securities were $7 million, $1 million, and $2 million for the
years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009 respectively. Net unrealized gains on trading securities were $5 million at December 31, 2011 and net unrealized losses were $8
million for the year ended December 31, 2009 and immaterial to the Bancorp for the year ended December 31, 2010.
At December 31, 2011 and 2010 securities with a fair value of $13.3 billion and $11.3 billion, respectively, were
pledged to secure borrowings, public deposits, trust funds, derivative contracts and for other purposes as required or permitted by law.
The expected maturity
distribution of the Bancorps agency mortgage-backed securities and the contractual maturity distribution of the Bancorps other available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities as of December 31, 2011 are shown in the following
table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-Sale & Other |
|
|
Held-to-Maturity |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Debt securities:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under 1 year |
|
$ |
884 |
|
|
|
906 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
1-5 years |
|
|
10,599 |
|
|
|
11,197 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
5-10 years |
|
|
1,351 |
|
|
|
1,462 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Over 10 years |
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
765 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
14,614 |
|
|
|
15,362 |
|
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
322 |
|
(a) |
Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities when there exists a right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table provides the fair value and gross
unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities in an unrealized loss position, aggregated by investment category and length of time the individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and government agencies |
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Other securities |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
633 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and government agencies |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
1,555 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,555 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Other securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,129 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
2,181 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments
The Bancorp recognized $19 million and $3 million of OTTI, included in securities gains (losses), net, in the Bancorps Consolidated
Statements of Income, on its available-for-sale debt securities during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and no OTTI was recognized on held-to-maturity debt securities for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, OTTI recognized on available-for-sale and held-to-maturity debt securities was immaterial to the Bancorps consolidated financial statements. Additionally, at December 31, 2011 an immaterial
percent of unrealized losses in the available-for-sale securities portfolio were represented by non-rated securities, compared to approximately one percent at December 31, 2010.
During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Bancorp did not recognize OTTI on any of its available-for-sale equity
securities. In addition, for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, OTTI recognized on available-for-sale equity securities was immaterial to the Bancorps consolidated financial statements.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
5. LOANS AND LEASES
The Bancorp diversifies its loan and lease portfolio by offering a variety of loan and
lease products with various payment terms and rate structures. Lending activities are concentrated within those states in which the Bancorp has banking centers and are primarily located in the Midwestern and Southeastern regions of the United
States. The Bancorps commercial loan portfolio consists of lending to various industry types. Management periodically reviews the
performance of its loan and lease products to evaluate whether they are performing within acceptable interest rate and credit risk levels and changes are made to underwriting policies and
procedures as needed. The Bancorp maintains an allowance to absorb loan and lease losses inherent in the portfolio. For further information on credit quality and the ALLL, see Note 6.
The following table provides a summary of the total loans and leases classified by primary purpose as of
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Loans and leases held for sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
45 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
2,802 |
|
|
|
1,901 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Total loans and leases held for sale |
|
$ |
2,954 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
30,783 |
|
|
|
27,191 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,138 |
|
|
|
10,845 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,020 |
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
Total commercial loans and leases |
|
|
45,472 |
|
|
|
43,462 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
10,672 |
|
|
|
8,956 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
Total consumer loans and leases |
|
|
35,546 |
|
|
|
34,029 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
$ |
81,018 |
|
|
|
77,491 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases are recorded net of unearned income, which totaled $942
million as of December 31, 2011 and $1.0 billion as of December 31, 2010. Additionally, portfolio loans and leases are recorded net of unamortized premiums and discounts, deferred loan fees and costs, and fair
value adjustments (associated with acquired loans or loans designated as fair value upon origination) which totaled a net premium of $45 million as of December 31, 2011 and a net discount of
$19 million as of December 31, 2010.
The following table presents a summary
of the total loans and leases owned by the Bancorp as of and for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance |
|
|
Balance of Loans 90 Days
or More Past Due |
|
|
Net Charge-Offs |
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
30,828 |
|
|
|
27,275 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
$ |
276 |
|
|
|
586 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,214 |
|
|
|
10,992 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,037 |
|
|
|
2,111 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
13,474 |
|
|
|
10,857 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
Home equity loans |
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
Credit Card |
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total loans and leases |
|
$ |
83,972 |
|
|
|
79,707 |
|
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
$ |
1,172 |
|
|
|
2,328 |
|
Less: Loans held for sale |
|
$ |
2,954 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
$ |
81,018 |
|
|
|
77,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bancorp engages in commercial and consumer lease products primarily related to the
financing of commercial equipment and automobiles. The Bancorp had $2.9 billion of direct financing leases and $1.7 billion of leveraged leases at December 31, 2011 compared to $3.0 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively, at December 31,
2010.
Pre-tax income from leveraged leases for 2011 was $33 million compared to
pre-tax income in 2010 of $49 million. The tax effect of this income was an expense of $10 million in 2011 and 2010.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The components of the investment in lease financing at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Rentals receivable, net of principal and interest on nonrecourse debt |
|
$ |
3,757 |
|
|
|
3,775 |
|
Estimated residual value of leased assets |
|
|
772 |
|
|
|
900 |
|
Initial direct cost, net of amortization |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Gross investment in lease financing |
|
|
4,545 |
|
|
|
4,691 |
|
Unearned income |
|
|
(942 |
) |
|
|
(1,040 |
) |
Net investment in lease financing(a) |
|
$ |
3,603 |
|
|
|
3,651 |
|
(a) |
The accumulated allowance for uncollectible minimum lease payments was $79 million and $112 million at December 31, 2011
and 2010, respectively. |
The Bancorp periodically reviews residual values associated with its leasing portfolio.
Declines in residual values that are deemed to be other-than-temporary are recognized as a loss. The Bancorp recognized $4 million of residual value write-downs related to commercial leases for the year ended December 31, 2011 and an immaterial
amount of residual value write-downs related to commercial leases was
recognized for the year ending December 31, 2010. The Bancorp recognized no residual value write-downs relating to consumer automobile leases in 2011 and 2010. At December 31, 2011, the
minimum future lease payments receivable for each of the years 2012 through 2016 was $662 million, $561 million, $553 million, $360 million and $76 million, respectively.
6. CREDIT QUALITY AND THE ALLOWANCE
FOR LOAN AND LEASE LOSSES
The Bancorp disaggregates ALLL balances and transactions in the ALLL by portfolio segment.
Credit quality related disclosures for loans and leases are further disaggregated by
class. The disaggregated disclosure requirements relating to activity that occurs during a reporting period do not apply to periods beginning before December 15, 2010.
Allowance for Loan and
Lease Losses
The following table summarizes transactions in the ALLL for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Balance at January 1 |
|
$ |
3,004 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
Impact of change in accounting principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
Losses charged off |
|
|
(1,314 |
) |
|
|
(2,485 |
) |
|
|
(2,719 |
) |
Recoveries of losses previously charged off |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
Balance at December 31 |
|
$ |
2,255 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
The following tables summarize transactions in the ALLL by portfolio segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2011
($ in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Unallocated |
|
|
Total |
|
Transactions in the ALLL: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at January 1 |
|
$ |
1,989 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
Losses charged off |
|
|
(615 |
) |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(519 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,314 |
) |
Recoveries of losses previously charged off |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
423 |
|
Balance at December 31 |
|
$ |
1,527 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
2,255 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2010
($ in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Unallocated |
|
|
Total |
|
Transactions in the ALLL: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at January 1 |
|
$ |
2,517 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
Losses charged off |
|
|
(1,444 |
) |
|
|
(441 |
) |
|
|
(600 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,485 |
) |
Recoveries of losses previously charged off |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
836 |
|
|
|
374 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
1,538 |
|
Impact of change in accounting principal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45 |
|
Balance at December 31 |
|
$ |
1,989 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following tables provide a summary of the ALLL and related loans and
leases classified by portfolio segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Unallocated |
|
|
Total |
|
ALLL:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
155 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350 |
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment |
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
Total ALLL |
|
$ |
1,527 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
2,255 |
|
Loans and leases:(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
1,170 |
|
|
|
1,258 |
|
|
|
574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,002 |
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment |
|
|
44,299 |
|
|
|
9,341 |
|
|
|
24,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,940 |
|
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
$ |
45,472 |
|
|
|
10,607 |
|
|
|
24,874 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,953 |
|
(a) |
Includes $14 related to leveraged leases. |
(b) |
Excludes $65 of residential mortgage loans measured at fair value, and includes $1,022 of leveraged leases, net of unearned income. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Residential Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Unallocated |
|
|
Total |
|
ALLL:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
209 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
435 |
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment |
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Unallocated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
Total ALLL |
|
$ |
1,989 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
Loans and leases:(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment |
|
$ |
1,076 |
|
|
|
1,180 |
|
|
|
651 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,907 |
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment |
|
|
42,382 |
|
|
|
7,718 |
|
|
|
24,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,514 |
|
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
$ |
43,462 |
|
|
|
8,910 |
|
|
|
25,073 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,445 |
|
(a) |
Includes $15 related to leveraged leases. |
(b) |
Excludes $46 of residential mortgage loans measured at fair value, and includes $1,039 of leveraged leases, net of unearned income. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CREDIT RISK PROFILE
Commercial Portfolio Segment
For purposes of monitoring the credit quality and risk characteristics of its commercial
portfolio segment, the Bancorp disaggregates the segment into the following classes: commercial and industrial, commercial mortgage owner-occupied, commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied, commercial construction and commercial leasing.
To facilitate the monitoring of credit quality within the commercial portfolio segment, and for purposes of analyzing
historical loss rates used in the determination of the ALLL for the commercial portfolio segment, the Bancorp utilizes the following categories of credit grades: pass, special mention, substandard, doubtful or loss. The five categories, which are
derived from standard regulatory rating definitions, are assigned upon initial approval of credit to borrowers and updated periodically thereafter. Pass ratings, which are assigned to those borrowers that do not have identified potential or well
defined weaknesses and for which there is a high likelihood of orderly repayment, are updated periodically based on the size and credit characteristics of the borrower. All other categories are updated on a quarterly basis during the month preceding
the end of the calendar quarter.
The Bancorp assigns a special mention rating to loans and leases that have
potential weaknesses that deserve managements close attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may, at some future date, result in the deterioration of the repayment prospects for the loan or lease or the Bancorps credit
position.
The Bancorp assigns a substandard rating to loans and leases that are
inadequately protected by the current sound worth and paying capacity of the borrower or of the collateral pledged. Substandard loans and leases have well defined weaknesses or weaknesses that could jeopardize the orderly repayment of the debt.
Loans and leases in this grade also are characterized by the distinct possibility that the Bancorp will sustain some loss if the deficiencies noted are not addressed and corrected.
The Bancorp assigns a doubtful rating to loans and leases that have all the attributes of a substandard rating with the
added characteristic that the weaknesses make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions, and values, highly questionable and improbable. The possibility of loss is extremely high, but because of certain
important and reasonable specific pending factors that may work to the advantage of and strengthen the credit quality of the loan or lease, its classification as an estimated loss is deferred until its more exact status may be determined. Pending
factors may include a proposed merger or acquisition, liquidation proceeding, capital injection, perfecting liens on additional collateral or refinancing plans.
Loans and leases classified as loss are considered uncollectible and are charged off in the period in which they are
determined to be uncollectible. Because loans and leases in this category are fully charged down, they are not included in the following tables.
The following table summarizes the
credit risk profile of the Bancorps commercial portfolio segment, by class:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011
($ in millions) |
|
Pass |
|
|
Special Mention |
|
|
Substandard |
|
|
Doubtful |
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
27,199 |
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
1,831 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
30,783 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans owner-occupied |
|
|
3,893 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
778 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
5,266 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans nonowner-occupied |
|
|
3,328 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
984 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
4,872 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
1,020 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,434 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3,531 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
38,197 |
|
|
|
3,016 |
|
|
|
4,050 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
45,472 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
($ in millions) |
|
Pass |
|
|
Special Mention |
|
|
Substandard |
|
|
Doubtful |
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
23,147 |
|
|
|
1,406 |
|
|
|
2,541 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
27,191 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans owner-occupied |
|
|
4,034 |
|
|
|
430 |
|
|
|
854 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
5,340 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans nonowner-occupied |
|
|
3,620 |
|
|
|
647 |
|
|
|
1,174 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
5,505 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,034 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,269 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
35,104 |
|
|
|
2,959 |
|
|
|
5,157 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
43,462 |
|
Consumer Portfolio Segment
For purposes of monitoring the credit quality and risk characteristics of its consumer portfolio segment, the Bancorp disaggregates the
segment into the following classes: home equity, automobile loans, credit card, and other consumer loans and leases. The Bancorps residential mortgage portfolio segment is also a separate class.
The Bancorp considers repayment performance as the best indicator of credit quality for residential mortgage and
consumer loans, which includes both the delinquency status and performing versus nonperforming status of the loans. The delinquency status of all residential mortgage and consumer loans is presented by class in the age analysis section below while
the performing versus nonperforming status is presented in the table below. Residential mortgage loans that have principal and interest payments that have become past due 150 days and home equity loans with principal and interest payments that have
become past due 180 days are
classified as nonperforming unless such loans are both well secured and in the process of collection. Automobile and other consumer loans and leases that have been modified in a TDR and
subsequently become past due 90 days are classified as nonperforming. Credit card loans that have been modified in a TDR are classified as nonperforming unless such loans have a sustained repayment performance of six months or greater and are
reasonably assured of repayment in accordance with the restructured terms. Well secured loans are collateralized by perfected security interests in real and/or personal property for which the Bancorp estimates proceeds from sale would be sufficient
to recover the outstanding principal and accrued interest balance of the loan and pay all costs to sell the collateral. The Bancorp considers a loan in the process of collection if collection efforts or legal action is proceeding and the Bancorp
expects to collect funds sufficient to bring the loan current or recover the entire outstanding principal and accrued interest balance.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table presents a summary of the Bancorps
residential mortgage and consumer portfolio segments disaggregated into performing versus nonperforming status as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Performing |
|
|
Nonperforming |
|
|
Performing |
|
|
Nonperforming |
|
Residential mortgage loans(a) |
|
$ |
10,332 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
8,642 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,665 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
11,457 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,825 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10,980 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,930 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
1,841 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
35,101 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
33,517 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $65 and $46 of loans measured at fair value at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
|
Age Analysis of Past Due Loans and Leases
The following tables summarize the Bancorps recorded investment in portfolio loans and leases by age and class:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past Due |
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Current Loans and Leases |
|
|
30-89 Days |
|
|
90
Days and Greater(c) |
|
|
Total Past Due |
|
|
Total Loans and Leases |
|
|
90 Days Past Due and Still Accruing |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
30,493 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
30,783 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
5,088 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
5,266 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
4,649 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
4,872 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
887 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
1,020 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,521 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
3,531 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Residential mortgage loans(a)
(b) |
|
|
10,149 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
10,607 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,455 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
10,719 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,744 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
11,827 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,873 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
1,978 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases(a) |
|
$ |
79,207 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
1,227 |
|
|
|
1,746 |
|
|
|
80,953 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $65 of loans measured at fair value. |
(b) |
Information for current residential mortgage loans includes advances made pursuant to servicing agreements for GNMA mortgage pools whose repayments are insured by
the Federal Housing Administration or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. As of December 31, 2011, $45 of these loans were 30-89 days past due and $309 were 90 days or more past due. The Bancorp recognized an immaterial amount of
losses for the year ended December 31, 2011 due to claim denials and curtailments associated with these advances. |
(c) |
Includes accrual and nonaccrual loans and leases. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past Due |
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Current Loans and Leases |
|
|
30-89 Days |
|
|
90
Days and Greater(c) |
|
|
Total Past Due |
|
|
Total Loans and Leases |
|
|
90 Days Past Due and Still Accruing |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
26,687 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
27,191 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
5,151 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
5,340 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
5,252 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
5,505 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,831 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,361 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Residential mortgage loans(a)
(b) |
|
|
8,404 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
506 |
|
|
|
8,910 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
11,220 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
11,513 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
10,872 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
10,983 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,771 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
672 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases(a) |
|
$ |
75,221 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
2,224 |
|
|
|
77,445 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $46 of loans measured at fair value. |
(b) |
Information for current residential mortgage loans includes advances made pursuant to servicing agreements for GNMA mortgage pools whose repayments are insured by
the Federal Housing Administration or guaranteed by the Department of Veterans Affairs. As of December 31, 2010, $55 of these loans were 30-89 days past due and $284 were 90 days or more past due. The Bancorp recognized $2 million in losses for
the year ended December 31, 2010 due to claim denials and curtailments associated with these advances. |
(c) |
Includes accrual and nonaccrual loans and leases. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Impaired Loans and Leases
Larger commercial loans included within aggregate borrower relationship balances exceeding $1 million that exhibit probable or observed
credit weaknesses are subject to individual review for impairment. The Bancorp also performs an individual review on loans that are restructured in a troubled debt restructuring. The Bancorp considers the current value of collateral, credit quality
of any guarantees, the loan
structure, and other factors when evaluating whether an individual loan is impaired. Other factors may include the geography and industry of the borrower, size and financial condition of the
borrower, cash flow and leverage of the borrower, and the Bancorps evaluation of the borrowers management. Smaller-balance homogenous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment are not included in the following tables.
The following table
summarizes the Bancorps impaired loans and leases (by class) that were subject to individual review as of December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011
($ in millions) |
|
Unpaid Principal Balance |
|
|
Recorded Investment
|
|
|
Allowance |
|
With a related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
330 |
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2
|
|
Restructured residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1,091 |
|
|
|
1,038 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
Restructured consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total impaired loans with a related allowance |
|
$ |
2,448 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
With no related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
375 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructured residential mortgage loans |
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructured consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans with no related allowance |
|
|
1,117 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
3,565 |
|
|
|
3,013 |
(a) |
|
|
352 |
|
(a) |
Includes $390, $1,117 and $495, respectively, of commercial, residential mortgage and consumer TDRs on
accrual status; $160, $141 and $79, respectively, of commercial, residential mortgage and consumer TDRs on nonaccrual status. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table summarizes the Bancorps average
impaired loans and leases and interest income by class for the year ended December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2011 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Average Recorded Investment |
|
|
Interest Income Recognized |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
532 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructured residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Restructured consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
2,968 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
The following table summarizes the Bancorps impaired loans and leases (by class) that were subject
to individual review as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Unpaid Principal Balance |
|
|
Recorded Investment |
|
|
Allowance |
|
With a related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
404 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Restructured residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1,126 |
|
|
|
1,071 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Restructured consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Total impaired loans with a related allowance |
|
$ |
2,831 |
|
|
|
2,373 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
With no related allowance recorded: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
194 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructured residential mortgage loans |
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructured consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total impaired loans with no related allowance |
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
3,505 |
|
|
|
2,931 |
(a) |
|
|
438 |
|
(a) |
Includes $228, $1,066 and $492, respectively, of commercial, residential mortgage and consumer TDRs on accrual status; $141, $116 and $90, respectively, of
commercial, residential mortgage and consumer TDRs on nonaccrual status. |
During the year ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009, interest income of $74 million and $54 million, was recognized on impaired loans that had an average balance of $3.2 billion and $2.9 billion, respectively.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Nonperforming Assets:
The following table summarizes the Bancorps nonperforming loans and leases, by class, as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
$ |
487 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
267 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Total commercial loans and leases |
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,214 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Total consumer loans and leases |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
Total nonperforming loans and leases(a) |
|
$ |
1,438 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
OREO and other repossessed property(b) |
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $138 and $294 of nonaccrual loans held for sale at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
|
(b) |
Excludes $64 and $38 of OREO related to government insured loans at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
|
Troubled Debt Restructurings
If a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty, the Bancorp may consider, in certain
circumstances, modifying the terms of their loan to maximize collection of amounts due. Within each of the Bancorps loan classes, TDRs typically involve either a reduction of the stated interest rate of the loan, an extension of the
loans maturity date(s) at a stated rate lower than the current market rate for a new loan with similar risk, or in limited circumstances, a reduction of the principal balance of the loan or the loans accrued interest. Upon modification,
an impairment loss is recognized as an increase to the ALLL and is measured as the difference between the original loans carrying amount and the present value of expected future cash flows
discounted at the original, effective yield of the loan. If a portion of the original loans principal balance is determined to be uncollectible at the time of modification, or if the TDR
involves a reduction of the principal balance of the loan or the loans accrued interest, that amount is charged off to the ALLL. At December 31, 2011, the Bancorp had $42 million in line of credit commitments and $1 million in letter of
credit commitments to lend additional funds to borrowers whose terms have been modified in a troubled debt restructuring compared to $47 million and $1 million, respectively, at December 31, 2010.
The following table
provides a summary of loans modified in a TDR by the Bancorp during the year ended December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)(a) |
|
Number of loans modified in a
TDR during the period(b) |
|
|
Recorded investment in loans modified in a TDR during the period |
|
|
Increase (Decrease) to ALLL upon modification |
|
|
Charge-offs recognized upon modification |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
52 |
|
|
$ |
83 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1,728 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
1,317 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Credit card |
|
|
12,234 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
|
16,912 |
|
|
$ |
810 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
(a) |
Excludes all loans and leases held for sale and loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality. |
(b) |
Represents number of loans post-modification. |
The Bancorp considers TDRs that become 90 days or more past due under the modified terms as
subsequently defaulted. For commercial loans not subject to individual review for impairment, the historical loss rates that are applied to such commercial loans for purposes of determining the allowance include historical losses associated
with subsequent defaults on loans previously modified in a TDR. For consumer loans, the Bancorp performs a qualitative assessment of the adequacy of the consumer ALLL by comparing the consumer ALLL to forecasted consumer losses over the
projected loss emergence period (the forecasted losses include the
impact of subsequent defaults of consumer TDRs). When a residential mortgage, home equity, auto or other consumer loan that has been modified in a TDR subsequently defaults, the present
value of expected cash flows used in the measurement of the potential impairment loss is generally limited to the expected net proceeds from the sale of the loans underlying collateral and any resulting impairment loss is reflected as a
charge-off or an increase in ALLL. When a credit card loan that has been modified in a TDR subsequently defaults, the calculation of the impairment loss is consistent with the Bancorps calculation for other credit card loans that have
become 90 days or more past due.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table provides a summary of subsequent defaults
that occurred during the year ended December 31, 2011 and within 12 months of the restructuring date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)(a) |
|
Number of Contracts |
|
|
Recorded Investment |
|
Commercial: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
8 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
Commercial mortgage owner-occupied loans |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Commercial mortgage nonowner-occupied loans |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Consumer: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity |
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases |
|
|
657 |
|
|
$ |
86 |
|
(a) |
Excludes all loans and leases held for sale and loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
7. LOANS WITH DETERIORATED CREDIT QUALITY ACQUIRED IN A TRANSFER
The Bancorp has acquired in prior years certain loans for which there was evidence of deterioration of credit quality since origination
and for which it was probable, at acquisition, that all contractually required payments would not be collected. During the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Bancorp recorded provision expense for loans acquired with deteriorated
credit quality of $7 million, $6 million and $21 million, respectively, in the Consolidated Statements of Income. In addition, as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp maintained an allowance for loan and lease losses of $2 million and $3
million, respectively, on these loans.
The following table reflects the outstanding balance of all
contractually required payments and carrying amounts of loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
Outstanding balance |
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Carrying Amount |
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
A summary of activity in the accretable yield is
provided.
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Accretable Yield |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
28 |
|
Additions |
|
|
- |
|
Accretion |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Disposals |
|
|
- |
|
Reclassifications from (to) nonaccretable differences, net |
|
|
(13 |
) |
Balance as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
9 |
|
Additions |
|
|
- |
|
Accretion |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Disposals |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Reclassifications from (to) nonaccretable differences, net |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Balance as of December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
2 |
|
Additions |
|
|
- |
|
Accretion |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Disposals |
|
|
- |
|
Reclassifications from (to) nonaccretable differences, net |
|
|
- |
|
Balance as of December 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
- |
|
The following table reflects loans that were acquired with deteriorated credit quality during the years
ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Contractually required payments receivable at acquisition: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Consumer |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Cash flows expected to be collected at acquisition |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fair value of acquired loans at acquisition |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
8. BANK PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT
The following is a summary of bank premises and equipment at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Estimated Useful Life |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Land and improvements |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
834 |
|
|
|
797 |
|
Buildings |
|
|
5 to 50 yrs. |
|
|
|
1,623 |
|
|
|
1,593 |
|
Equipment |
|
|
3 to 20 yrs. |
|
|
|
1,318 |
|
|
|
1,296 |
|
Leasehold improvements |
|
|
3 to 40 yrs. |
|
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
|
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,862 |
) |
|
|
(1,782 |
) |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,447 |
|
|
|
2,389 |
|
Depreciation and amortization expense related to bank premises and equipment was $224
million in 2011, $225 million in 2010 and $227 million in 2009.
Gross occupancy expense for cancelable and
noncancelable leases was $99 million in 2011, $98 million in 2010 and $102 million in 2009, which was reduced by rental income from leased premises of $19 million in 2011 and 2010 and $16 million in 2009.
The Bancorps subsidiaries have entered into a number of
noncancelable and capital lease agreements with respect to bank premises and equipment. The following table provides the annual future minimum payments under capital leases and noncancelable operating leases at December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Operating Leases |
|
|
Capital Leases |
|
Year ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
2013 |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
2014 |
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
2015 |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
2016 |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total minimum lease payments |
|
$ |
851 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Less: Amounts representing interest |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Present value of net minimum lease payments |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
23 |
|
9. GOODWILL
Business combinations entered into by the Bancorp typically include the acquisition of
goodwill. Acquisition activity includes acquisitions in the respective period, in addition to purchase accounting adjustments related to previous acquisitions. The Commercial Banking and Consumer Lending segments goodwill carrying amounts
include
cumulative impairment charges of $750 million and $215 million, respectively, that were recognized in the fourth quarter of 2008. Changes in the net carrying amount of goodwill, by reporting
unit, for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Commercial Banking |
|
|
Branch Banking |
|
|
Consumer Lending |
|
|
Investment Advisors |
|
|
Total |
|
Net carrying value as of December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Acquisition activity |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net carrying value as of December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Acquisition activity |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net carrying value as of December 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
The Bancorp completed its annual goodwill impairment test as of September 30, 2011 and
determined that no impairment existed. In Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test, the Bancorp compared the fair value of each reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. To determine the fair value of a reporting unit, the Bancorp
employed an income-based approach utilizing the reporting units forecasted cash flows (including a terminal value approach to estimate cash flows beyond the final year of the forecast) and the reporting units estimated cost of equity as
the discount rate. The Bancorp believes that this DCF method, using management projections for the respective reporting units and an appropriate risk adjusted discount rate, is most reflective of a market participants view of fair values given
current market conditions. Under the DCF method, the forecasted cash flows were developed for each reporting unit by considering several key business drivers such as new business initiatives, client retention standards, market share changes,
anticipated loan and deposit growth, forward interest rates, historical performance, and industry and economic trends, among other considerations.
The long-term growth rate used in
determining the terminal value of each reporting unit was estimated at three percent based on the Bancorps assessment of the minimum expected terminal growth rate of each reporting unit, as well as broader economic considerations such as gross
domestic product and inflation. Discount rates were estimated based on a Capital Asset Pricing Model, which considers the risk-free interest rate, market risk premium, beta, and in some cases, unsystematic risk and size premium adjustments specific
to a particular reporting unit. The discount rates used to develop the estimated fair value of the reporting units were 16.9% for Commercial Banking, 15.9% for Branch Banking and 18.7% for Investment Advisors.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Based on the results of the Step 1 test, the Bancorp determined that the
fair value of the Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, and Investment Advisors segments exceeded their respective carrying values, and consequently, no further testing was required.
The Step 1 analysis prepared for the Bancorps segments resulted in the fair values of the Commercial Banking and
Branch Banking segments exceeding their carrying values, including goodwill, by 9% and 4% respectively, while the fair value of the Investment Advisors segment substantially exceeded its carrying value, including goodwill.
The long-term growth rate required to avoid failing Step 1 for the Commercial Banking reporting unit, with all other
assumptions held constant, was 0.3%. Other key assumptions used in forecasting cash flows for the Commercial Banking reporting unit include commercial loan portfolio growth as well as long-term credit loss rates, which are based on long-term
historical loss rates and managements expectation of long-term credit quality within the portfolio.
The long-term growth rate required to avoid failing Step 1 for the Branch Banking reporting unit, with all other
assumptions held constant, was 1.4%. Other key assumptions used in forecasting cash flows for the Branch Banking reporting unit include deposit growth assumptions, forecasted spreads earned on
the units deposits, and the impact of recent and anticipated regulatory changes affecting retail banking.
The Bancorp forecasts its deposit growth based on expected growth in loan demand as well as availability and expected use of alternative funding sources over that period. The earnings spread assumption on
deposits is based on forward LIBOR rates and the sensitivity of the Bancorps deposit rates to changes in LIBOR. The Bancorp considered the impact of recent and anticipated regulatory changes that impacted overdraft revenue, debit interchange
revenue and credit card revenue in 2011 and will continue to evaluate the potential impact of these changes in 2012 and beyond. Changes in these key assumptions and inputs to these key assumptions could negatively impact the fair value of the
Commercial Banking and Branch Banking reporting units in future periods. These changes would include unanticipated regulatory changes, movement in interest rates and economic trends affecting the segments profitability.
10. INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Intangible assets consist of servicing rights, core deposit intangibles, customer lists,
non-compete agreements and cardholder relationships. Intangible assets, excluding servicing rights, are amortized on either a straight-line or an accelerated basis over their estimated useful lives and have an estimated weighted-average life at
December 31, 2011 of 3.9 years. The
Bancorp reviews intangible assets for possible impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that carrying amounts may not be recoverable. For more information on servicing
rights, see Note 12. The details of the Bancorps intangible assets are shown in the following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Gross Carrying Amount |
|
|
Accumulated Amortization |
|
|
Valuation Allowance |
|
|
Net Carrying Amount |
|
As of December 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights |
|
$ |
2,520 |
|
|
|
(1,281 |
) |
|
|
(558 |
) |
|
|
681 |
|
Core deposit intangibles |
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
(407 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Other |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Total intangible assets |
|
$ |
3,003 |
|
|
|
(1,724 |
) |
|
|
(558 |
) |
|
|
721 |
|
As of December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights |
|
$ |
2,284 |
|
|
|
(1,146 |
) |
|
|
(316 |
) |
|
|
822 |
|
Core deposit intangibles |
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
(389 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Other |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Total intangible assets |
|
$ |
2,767 |
|
|
|
(1,567 |
) |
|
|
(316 |
) |
|
|
884 |
|
As of December 31, 2011, all of the Bancorps intangible assets were being
amortized. Amortization expense recognized on intangible assets, including servicing rights, for the years ending December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 was $157 million,
$181 million and $204 million, respectively. Estimated amortization expense for the years ending December 31, 2012 through 2016 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Mortgage Servicing Rights |
|
|
Other Intangible Assets |
|
|
Total |
|
2012 |
|
$ |
252 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
2013 |
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
2014 |
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
2015 |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
2016 |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
11. VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES
The Bancorp, in the normal course of business, engages in a variety of activities that
involve VIEs, which are legal entities that lack sufficient equity to finance their activities, or the equity investors of the entities as a group lack any of the characteristics of a controlling interest. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is
generally the enterprise that has both the power to direct the activities most significant to the economic performance of the VIE and the obligation to absorb losses or receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE. For certain
investment funds, the primary beneficiary is the enterprise that will absorb a majority of the funds expected losses or receive a majority of the funds expected residual returns. The Bancorp evaluates its interest in certain entities to
determine if these entities meet the definition of a VIE and whether the Bancorp is the primary beneficiary and should
consolidate the entity based on the variable interests it held both at inception and when there is a change in circumstances that require a reconsideration. If the Bancorp is determined to be the
primary beneficiary of a VIE, it must account for the VIE as a consolidated subsidiary. If the Bancorp is determined not to be the primary beneficiary of a VIE but holds a variable interest in the entity, such variable interests are accounted for
under the equity method of accounting or other accounting standards as appropriate.
Consolidated VIEs
The following table provides a summary of the classifications of consolidated VIE assets, liabilities and noncontrolling
interests included in the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Home Equity Securitization |
|
|
Automobile Loan Securitizations |
|
|
CDC Investments |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
223 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
259 |
|
ALLL |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
191 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
195 |
|
Noncontrolling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Home Equity Securitization |
|
|
Automobile Loan Securitizations |
|
|
CDC Investments |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
241 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
648 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
648 |
|
ALLL |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
970 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
692 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
133 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
704 |
|
Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Home Equity and Automobile Loan Securitizations
The Bancorp previously sold $903 million of home equity lines of credit to an isolated trust. Additionally, the Bancorp previously sold
$2.7 billion of automobile loans to an isolated trust and conduits in three separate transactions. Each of these transactions isolated the related loans through the use of a VIE that, under accounting guidance effective prior to January 1,
2010, was not consolidated by the Bancorp. The VIEs were funded through loans from large multi-seller asset-backed commercial paper conduits sponsored by third party agents, asset-backed securities issued with varying levels of credit subordination
and payment priority, and residual interests. The Bancorp retained residual interests in these entities and, therefore, has an obligation to absorb losses and a right to receive benefits from the VIEs that could potentially be significant to the
VIEs. In addition, the Bancorp retained servicing rights for the
underlying loans and, therefore, holds the power to direct the activities of the VIEs that most significantly impact the economic performance of the VIEs. As a result, the Bancorp determined it
is the primary beneficiary of these VIEs and, effective January 1, 2010, these VIEs have been consolidated in the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements. The assets of each VIE are restricted to the settlement of the long-term debt
and other liabilities of the respective entity. Third-party holders of this debt do not have recourse to the general assets of the Bancorp.
The economic performance of the VIEs is most significantly impacted by the performance of the underlying loans. The principal risks to which the entities are exposed include credit risk and interest rate
risk. Credit risk is managed through credit enhancement in the form of reserve accounts, overcollateralization, excess interest on the loans, the subordination of certain classes of asset-backed
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
securities to other classes, and in the case of the home equity transaction, an insurance policy with a third party guaranteeing payment of accrued and unpaid interest and principal on the
securities. Interest rate risk is managed by interest rate swaps between the VIEs and third parties.
CDC Investments
CDC, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bancorp, was created to invest in projects to create affordable housing, revitalize business and
residential areas, and preserve historic landmarks. CDC generally co-invests with other unrelated companies and/or individuals and typically makes investments in a separate legal entity that owns the property under development. The entities are
usually formed as limited partnerships and LLCs, and CDC typically invests as a limited partner/investor member in the form of equity contributions. The economic performance of the VIEs is driven by the performance of their underlying investment
projects as well as the VIEs ability to operate in compliance with the rules and regulations necessary for the qualification of tax credits generated by equity investments. Typically, the general partner or managing member will be the party
that has the right to make decisions that will most significantly impact the economic performance of the entity. The Bancorp serves as the managing member of certain LLCs invested in business revitalization projects. The Bancorp has
provided an indemnification guarantee to the investor member of these LLCs related to the qualification of tax credits generated by the investor members investment. Accordingly, the Bancorp
concluded that it is the primary beneficiary and, therefore, has consolidated these VIEs. As a result, the VIEs are presented as noncontrolling interests in the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements. This presentation includes reporting
separately the equity attributable to the noncontrolling interests in the Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity. Additionally, the net income attributable to the noncontrolling interests is reported separately
in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Bancorps maximum exposure related to the indemnification at December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $10 million and $9 million, respectively, which is based on an amount required to meet the investor
members defined target rate of return.
Non-consolidated VIEs
The following tables provide a summary of assets and liabilities carried on the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets related to
non-consolidated VIEs for which the Bancorp holds a variable interest, but is not the primary beneficiary to the VIE, as well as the Bancorps maximum exposure to losses associated with its interests in the entities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Total Assets |
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
Maximum Exposure |
|
CDC investments |
|
$ |
1,243 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
1,243 |
|
Private equity investments |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
Money market funds |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Loans provided to VIEs |
|
|
1,370 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,203 |
|
Restructured loans |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Total Assets |
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
Maximum Exposure |
|
CDC investments |
|
$ |
1,241 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
1,241 |
|
Private equity investments |
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
322 |
|
Money market funds |
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Loans provided to VIEs |
|
|
1,175 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,908 |
|
Restructured loans |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
CDC Investments
As noted previously, CDC typically invests in VIEs as a limited partner or investor member in the form of equity contributions. The Bancorp has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of these
VIEs because it lacks the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance of the underlying project or the VIEs ability to operate in compliance with the rules and regulations necessary for the
qualification of tax credits generated by equity investments. This power is held by the general partners/managing members who exercise full and exclusive control of the operations of the VIEs. Accordingly, the Bancorp accounts for these investments
under the equity method of accounting.
The Bancorps funding requirements are limited to its invested
capital and any additional unfunded commitments for future equity contributions. The Bancorps maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the VIEs is limited to the carrying amounts of the investments, including the unfunded
commitments. The carrying amounts of these investments, which are included in other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, and the liabilities related to the unfunded commitments, which are included in other liabilities in the Consolidated
Balance Sheets, are included in the previous tables for all periods presented. The Bancorp has no other liquidity arrangements or obligations to purchase assets of the VIEs that
would expose the Bancorp to a loss. In certain arrangements, the general partner/managing member of the VIE has guaranteed a level of projected tax credits to be received by the limited
partners/investor members, thereby minimizing a portion of the Bancorps risk.
Private Equity Investments
The Bancorp invests as a limited partner in private equity funds which provide the Bancorp an opportunity to obtain higher rates of return
on invested capital, while also creating cross-selling opportunities for the Bancorps commercial products. Each of the limited partnerships has an unrelated third-party general partner responsible for appointing the fund manager. The Bancorp
has not been appointed fund manager for any of these private equity funds. The funds finance primarily all of their activities from the partners capital contributions and investment returns. Under the VIE consolidation guidance still
applicable to the funds, the Bancorp has determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of the funds because it does not absorb a majority of the funds expected losses or receive a majority of the funds expected residual returns.
Therefore, the Bancorp accounts for its investments in these limited partnerships under the equity method of accounting.
The Bancorp is exposed to losses arising from negative performance of the underlying investments in the private equity
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
funds. As a limited partner, the Bancorps maximum exposure to loss is limited to the carrying amounts of the investments plus unfunded commitments. The carrying amounts of these
investments, which are included in other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, are included in the above tables. Also, as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 the unfunded commitment amounts to the funds were $166 million and $193 million,
respectively. The Bancorp made capital contributions of $48 million and $34 million, respectively, to private equity funds during 2011 and 2010.
Money Market Funds
Under
U.S. GAAP, money market funds are generally not considered VIEs because they are generally deemed to have sufficient equity at risk to finance their activities without additional subordinated financial support, and the fund shareholders do not lack
the characteristics of a controlling interest. However, when a situation arises where an investment manager provides credit support to a fund, even when not contractually required to do so, the investment manager is deemed under U.S. GAAP to have
provided an implicit guarantee of the funds performance to the funds shareholders. Such an implicit guarantee would require the investment manager and other variable interest holders to reconsider the VIE status of the fund, as well as
all other similar funds where such an implicit guarantee is now deemed to exist.
In the fourth quarter of
2010, the Bancorp voluntarily provided credit support of less than $1 million to a money market fund managed by FTAM. Accordingly, the Bancorp was required to analyze the money market funds and similar funds managed by FTAM under the VIE
consolidation guidance still applicable to these funds to determine the primary beneficiary of each fund. In analyzing these funds, the Bancorp determined that interest rate risk and credit risk are the two main risks to which the funds are exposed.
After analyzing the interest rate risk variability and credit risk variability associated with these funds, the Bancorp determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of these funds because it does not absorb a majority of the funds
expected losses or receive a majority of the funds expected residual returns. Therefore, the Bancorps investments in these funds are included as other securities in the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Loans Provided to VIEs
The Bancorp has provided funding to certain unconsolidated VIEs sponsored by third parties. These VIEs are generally established to
finance certain consumer and small business loans originated by third parties. The entities are primarily funded through the issuance of a loan from the Bancorp or syndication through which the Bancorp is involved. The sponsor/administrator of the
entities is responsible for servicing the underlying assets in the VIEs. Because the sponsor/administrator, not the Bancorp, holds the servicing responsibilities, which include the establishment and employment of default mitigation policies and
procedures, the Bancorp does not hold the power to direct the activities most significant to the economic performance of the entity and, therefore, is not the primary beneficiary.
The principal risk to which these entities are exposed is credit risk related to the underlying assets. The
Bancorps maximum exposure to loss is equal to the carrying amounts of the loans and unfunded commitments to the VIEs. The Bancorps outstanding loans to these VIEs, included in commercial loans in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, are
included in the previous tables for all periods presented. Also, as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorps unfunded commitments to these entities were $833 million and $733 million, respectively. The loans and unfunded commitments to
these VIEs are included in the Bancorps overall analysis of the ALLL and reserve for unfunded commitments,
respectively. The Bancorp does not provide any implicit or explicit liquidity guarantees or principal value guarantees to these VIEs.
Restructured Loans
As part of loan restructuring efforts, the Bancorp
received equity capital from certain borrowers to facilitate the restructuring of the borrowers debt. These borrowers meet the definition of a VIE because the Bancorp was involved in their refinancing and because their equity capital is
insufficient to fund ongoing operations. These restructurings were intended to provide the VIEs with serviceable debt levels while providing the Bancorp an opportunity to maximize the recovery of the loans. The VIEs finance their operations from
earned income, capital contributions, and through restructured debt agreements. Assets of the VIEs are used to settle their specific obligations, including loan payments due to the Bancorp. The Bancorp continues to maintain its relationship with
these VIEs as a lender and minority shareholder, however, it is not involved in management decisions and does not have sufficient voting rights to control the membership of the respective boards. Therefore, the Bancorp accounts for its equity
investments in these VIEs under the equity method or cost method based on its percentage of ownership and ability to exercise significant influence.
The Bancorps maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with these VIEs is limited to the equity investments, the principal and accrued interest on the outstanding loans, and any
unfunded commitments. Due to the VIEs short-term cash deficit projections at the restructuring dates, the Bancorp determined that the initial fair value of its equity investments in these VIEs was zero. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010,
the Bancorps carrying value of these equity investments was immaterial. Additionally, the Bancorp had outstanding loans to these VIEs, included in commercial loans in the Consolidated Balance Sheets, which are included in the above tables for
all periods presented. The Bancorps unfunded loan commitments to these VIEs were $2 million and $1 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The loans and unfunded commitments to these VIEs are included in the Bancorps
overall analysis of the ALLL and reserve for unfunded commitments, respectively. The Bancorp does not provide any implicit or explicit liquidity guarantees or principal value guarantees to these VIEs.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
12. SALES OF RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE RECEIVABLES
AND MORTGAGE SERVICING RIGHTS
The Bancorp sold fixed and adjustable rate residential mortgage loans during 2011, 2010,
and 2009. In those sales, the Bancorp obtained servicing responsibilities and the investors have no recourse to the Bancorps other assets for failure of debtors to
pay when due. The Bancorp receives annual servicing fees based on a percentage of the outstanding balance. The Bancorp identifies classes of servicing assets based on financial asset type and
interest rates.
Information related
to residential mortgage loan sales and the Bancorps mortgage banking activity, which is included in mortgage banking net revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income, for the years ended December 31 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Residential mortgage loan sales |
|
$ |
14,733 |
|
|
|
17,861 |
|
|
|
20,605 |
|
Origination fees and gains on loan sales |
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
485 |
|
Servicing fees |
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
Servicing Assets
The following table presents changes in the servicing assets related to residential mortgage loans for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Carrying amount as of the beginning of the period |
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
Servicing obligations that result from the transfer of residential mortgage loans |
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
Amortization |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
Carrying amount before valuation allowance |
|
|
1,239 |
|
|
|
1,138 |
|
Valuation allowance for servicing assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
|
(316 |
) |
|
|
(280 |
) |
Servicing impairment |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
Ending balance |
|
|
(558 |
) |
|
|
(316 |
) |
Carrying amount as of the end of the period |
|
$ |
681 |
|
|
|
822 |
|
Temporary impairment or impairment recovery, affected through a change in the MSR valuation
allowance, is captured as a component of mortgage banking net revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Bancorp maintains a non-qualifying hedging strategy to manage a portion of the risk associated with changes in the value of the MSR
portfolio. This strategy includes the purchase of free-standing derivatives and
various available-for-sale securities. The interest income, mark-to-market adjustments and gain or loss from sale activities associated with these portfolios are expected to economically hedge a
portion of the change in value of the MSR portfolio caused by fluctuating discount rates, earnings rates and prepayment speeds.
The fair value of the
servicing asset is based on the present value of expected future cash flows. The following table displays the beginning and ending fair value for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Fixed rate residential mortgage loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
791 |
|
|
|
667 |
|
Ending balance |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
Adjustable rate residential mortgage loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Ending balance |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
The following table presents activity related to valuations of the MSR portfolio and the impact of the
non-qualifying hedging strategy, which is included in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Securities gains, netnon-qualifying hedges on MSRs |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Changes in fair value and settlement of free-standing derivatives purchased to economically hedge the MSR portfolio (Mortgage
banking net revenue) |
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Provision for MSR impairment (Mortgage banking net revenue) |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the key economic
assumptions used in measuring the interests that continued to be held by the Bancorp at the date of sale or securitization resulting from transactions completed during the years ended December 31 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Rate |
|
Weighted- Average Life (in years) |
|
|
Prepayment Speed (annual) |
|
|
Discount Rate (annual) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Default rate |
|
|
Weighted- Average Life (in years) |
|
|
Prepayment Speed (annual) |
|
|
Discount Rate (annual) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Default rate |
|
Residential mortgage loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servicing assets |
|
Fixed |
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
% |
|
|
10.5 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
% |
|
|
10.3 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
Servicing assets |
|
Adjustable |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
22.8 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
23.3 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Based on historical credit experience, expected credit losses for residential mortgage loan
servicing assets have been deemed immaterial, as the Bancorp sold the majority of the underlying loans without recourse. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp serviced $57.1 billion and $54.2 billion, respectively, of residential mortgage
loans for other investors. The value of
interests that continue to be held by the Bancorp is subject to credit, prepayment and interest rate risks on the sold financial assets. At December 31, 2011, the sensitivity of the current
fair value of residual cash flows to immediate 10% and 20% adverse changes in those assumptions are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Weighted- Average Life
(in |
|
|
Prepayment
Speed Assumption |
|
|
Residual
Servicing Cash Flows |
|
|
Weighted-Average Default |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact of Adverse Change on Fair Value |
|
|
Discount |
|
|
Impact of Adverse Change on Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
|
Impact of Adverse Change on Fair Value |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Rate |
|
|
Value |
|
|
years) |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
10% |
|
|
20% |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
10% |
|
|
20% |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
10% |
|
|
20% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servicing assets |
|
|
Fixed |
|
|
$ |
649 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
17.9 |
% |
|
$ |
(36 |
) |
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
- |
% |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Servicing assets |
|
|
Adjustable |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
28.7 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
These sensitivities are hypothetical and should be used with caution. As the figures
indicate, changes in fair value based on a 10% and 20% variation in the assumptions typically cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumption to the change in fair value may not be linear. Also, in the previous table, the
effect of a variation in a particular
assumption on the fair value of the interests that continue to be held by the Bancorp is calculated without changing any other assumption; in reality, changes in one factor may result in changes
in another (for example, increases in market interest rates may result in lower prepayments and increased credit losses), which might magnify or counteract these sensitivities.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
13. DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The Bancorp maintains an overall risk management strategy that incorporates the use of
derivative instruments to reduce certain risks related to interest rate, prepayment and foreign currency volatility. Additionally, the Bancorp holds derivative instruments for the benefit of its commercial customers and for other business purposes.
The Bancorp does not enter into unhedged speculative derivative positions.
The Bancorps interest rate
risk management strategy involves modifying the repricing characteristics of certain financial instruments so that changes in interest rates do not adversely affect the Bancorps net interest margin and cash flows. Derivative instruments that
the Bancorp may use as part of its interest rate risk management strategy include interest rate swaps, interest rate floors, interest rate caps, forward contracts, options and swaptions. Interest rate swap contracts are exchanges of interest
payments, such as fixed-rate payments for floating-rate payments, based on a stated notional amount and maturity date. Interest rate floors protect against declining rates, while interest rate caps protect against rising interest rates. Forward
contracts are contracts in which the buyer agrees to purchase, and the seller agrees to make delivery of, a specific financial instrument at a predetermined price or yield. Options provide the purchaser with the right, but not the obligation, to
purchase or sell a contracted item during a specified period at an agreed upon price. Swaptions are financial instruments granting the owner the right, but not the obligation, to enter into or cancel a swap.
Prepayment volatility arises mostly from changes in fair value of the largely fixed-rate MSR portfolio, mortgage loans
and mortgage-backed securities. The Bancorp may enter into various free-standing derivatives (principal-only swaps, interest rate swaptions, interest rate floors, mortgage options, TBAs and interest rate swaps) to economically hedge prepayment
volatility. Principal-only swaps are total return swaps based on changes in the value of the underlying mortgage principal-only trust. TBAs are a forward purchase agreement for a mortgage-backed securities trade whereby the terms of the security are
undefined at the time the trade is made.
Foreign currency volatility occurs as the Bancorp enters into
certain loans denominated in foreign currencies. Derivative instruments that the Bancorp may use to economically hedge these foreign denominated loans include foreign exchange swaps and forward contracts.
The Bancorp also enters into derivative contracts (including foreign exchange contracts, commodity contracts and
interest rate contracts) for the benefit of commercial customers and other business purposes. The Bancorp may economically hedge significant exposures related to these free-standing derivatives by entering into offsetting third-party contracts with
approved, reputable counterparties with substantially matching terms and currencies. Credit risk arises from the possible inability of counterparties to meet the terms of their contracts. The Bancorps exposure is limited to the replacement
value of the contracts rather than the notional, principal or contract amounts. Credit risk is minimized through credit approvals, limits, counterparty collateral and monitoring procedures.
The Bancorps derivative assets contain certain contracts in which the Bancorp requires the counterparties to
provide collateral in the form of cash and securities to offset changes in the fair value of the derivatives, including changes in the fair value due to credit risk of the counterparty. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the balance of
collateral held by the Bancorp for derivative assets was $1.2 billion and $903 million, respectively. The credit component negatively impacting the fair value of derivative assets associated with customer accommodation contracts as of
December 31, 2011 and 2010 was $28 million and $41 million, respectively.
In measuring the fair value
of derivative liabilities, the Bancorp considers its own credit risk, taking into consideration collateral
maintenance requirements of certain derivative counterparties and the duration of instruments with counterparties that do not require collateral maintenance. When necessary, the Bancorp primarily
posts collateral in the form of cash and securities to offset changes in fair value of the derivatives, including changes in fair value due to the Bancorps credit risk. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the balance of collateral posted by
the Bancorp for derivative liabilities was $788 million and $680 million, respectively. Certain of the Bancorps derivative liabilities contain credit-risk related contingent features that could result in the requirement to post additional
collateral upon the occurrence of specified events. As of December 31, 2011, the fair value of the additional collateral that could be required to be posted as a result of the credit-risk related contingent features being triggered was not
material to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements. The posting of collateral has been determined to remove the need for consideration of credit risk. As a result, the Bancorp determined that the impact of the Bancorps credit
risk to the valuation of its derivative liabilities was immaterial to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Bancorp holds certain derivative instruments that qualify for hedge accounting treatment and are designated as either fair value hedges or cash flow hedges. Derivative instruments that do not qualify
for hedge accounting treatment, or for which hedge accounting is not established, are held as free-standing derivatives. All customer accommodation derivatives are held as free-standing derivatives.
The fair value of derivative instruments is presented on a gross basis, even when the derivative instruments are subject
to master netting arrangements. Derivative instruments with a positive fair value are reported in other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets while derivative instruments with a negative fair value are reported in other liabilities in the
Consolidated Balance Sheets. Cash collateral payables and receivables associated with the derivative instruments are not added to or netted against the fair value amounts.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following tables reflect the notional amounts and fair
values for all derivative instruments included in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
Derivative |
|
December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Liabilities |
|
Qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
$ |
4,080 |
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total fair value hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
662 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Cash flow hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate floors related to C&I loans |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate swaps related to C&I loans |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate caps related to long-term debt |
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Total derivatives designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
812 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Derivatives not designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free-standing derivativesrisk management and other business purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts related to MSRs |
|
|
3,077 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Forward contracts related to held for sale mortgage loans |
|
|
5,705 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Put options associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Stock warrants associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Swap associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares |
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
78 |
|
Total free-standing derivativesrisk management and other business
purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
Free-standing derivativescustomer accommodation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts for customers |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
795 |
|
Interest rate lock commitments |
|
|
3,835 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
2,074 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
17,909 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
Derivative instruments related to equity linked CDs |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total free-standing derivativescustomer accommodation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,237 |
|
|
|
1,203 |
|
Total derivatives not designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,544 |
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,356 |
|
|
|
1,344 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
Derivative |
|
December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Liabilities |
|
Qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
$ |
4,355 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total fair value hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Cash flow hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate floors related to C&I loans |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate swaps related to C&I loans |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate caps related to long-term debt |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
|
1,190 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Total cash flow hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Total derivatives designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Derivatives not designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free-standing derivativesrisk management and other business purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts related to MSRs |
|
|
12,477 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
Forward contracts related to held for sale mortgage loans |
|
|
6,389 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts for trading purposes |
|
|
2,494 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Put options associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
769 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Stock warrants associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Swap associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares |
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total free-standing derivativesrisk management and other business
purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
Free-standing derivativescustomer accommodation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts for customers |
|
|
26,817 |
|
|
|
701 |
|
|
|
735 |
|
Interest rate lock commitments |
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
1,878 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
17,998 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
Derivative instruments related to equity linked CDs |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total free-standing derivativescustomer accommodation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
|
1,157 |
|
Total derivatives not designated as qualifying hedging instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,467 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,074 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Fair Value Hedges
The Bancorp may enter into interest rate swaps to convert its fixed-rate funding to floating-rate. Decisions to convert fixed-rate funding
to floating are made primarily through consideration of the asset/liability mix of the Bancorp, the desired asset/liability sensitivity and interest rate levels. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010 certain interest rate swaps met the criteria
required to qualify for the shortcut method of accounting. Based on this shortcut method of accounting treatment, no ineffectiveness is assumed. For interest rate swaps that do not meet the shortcut requirements, an assessment of hedge effectiveness
using regression analysis was performed and such swaps were accounted for using the long-haul
method. The long-haul method requires a quarterly assessment of hedge effectiveness and measurement of ineffectiveness. For interest rate swaps accounted for as a fair value hedge using the
long-haul method, ineffectiveness is the difference between the changes in the fair value of the interest rate swap and changes in fair value of the related hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged. The ineffectiveness on interest rate
swaps hedging fixed-rate funding is reported within interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The following table reflects the change in fair value of interest rate contracts, designated as fair value hedges, as well as the change
in fair value of the related hedged items attributable to the risk being hedged, included in the Consolidated Statements of Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Consolidated Statements of Income Caption |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value of interest rate swaps hedging long-term debt |
|
Interest on long-term debt |
|
$ |
220 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
(548 |
) |
Change in fair value of hedged long-term debt |
|
Interest on long-term debt |
|
|
(227 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
538 |
|
Change in fair value of interest rate swaps hedging time deposits |
|
Interest on deposits |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Change in fair value of hedged time deposits |
|
Interest on deposits |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Cash Flow Hedges
The Bancorp may enter into interest rate swaps to convert floating-rate assets and liabilities to fixed rates or to hedge certain
forecasted transactions. The assets or liabilities may be grouped in circumstances where they share the same risk exposure for which the Bancorp desired to hedge. The Bancorp may also enter into interest rate caps and floors to limit cash flow
variability of floating rate assets and liabilities. As of December 31, 2011, all hedges designated as cash flow hedges are assessed for effectiveness using regression analysis. Ineffectiveness is generally measured as the amount by which the
cumulative change in the fair value of the hedging instrument exceeds the present value of the cumulative change in the hedged items expected cash flows attributable to the risk being hedged. Ineffectiveness is reported within other
noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The effective portion of the cumulative gains or losses on cash flow hedges are reported within accumulated other comprehensive income and are reclassified from accumulated other
comprehensive income to current period earnings when the forecasted transaction affects earnings.
Reclassified gains and losses on interest rate contracts related to commercial and industrial loans are recorded within
interest
income while reclassified gains and losses on interest rate contracts related to debt are recorded within interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. As of December 31, 2011
and 2010, $80 million and $67 million, respectively, of deferred gains, net of tax, on cash flow hedges were recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2011, $70 million in net
deferred gains, net of tax, recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income are expected to be reclassified into earnings during the next twelve months. During 2011, $11 million of losses were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive
income into noninterest expense as it was determined that the original forecasted transaction was no longer probable of occurring by the end of the originally specified time period or within the additional period of time as defined by U.S. GAAP.
During 2010, there were no gains or losses reclassified into earnings associated with the discontinuance of cash flow hedges because it was probable that the original forecasted transaction would not occur.
The following table presents the net gains (losses) recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income and accumulated
other comprehensive income in the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity relating to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Amount of net gain recognized in OCI |
|
$ |
89 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Amount of net gain reclassified from OCI into net income |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Amount of ineffectiveness recognized in other noninterest income |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Free-Standing Derivative Instruments Risk Management and Other Business
Purposes
As part of its overall risk management strategy relative to its mortgage banking activity, the Bancorp may
enter into various free-standing derivatives (principal-only swaps, interest rate swaptions, interest rate floors, mortgage options, TBAs and interest rate swaps) to economically hedge changes in fair value of its largely fixed-rate MSR portfolio.
Principal-only swaps hedge the mortgage-LIBOR spread because these swaps appreciate in value as a result of tightening spreads. Principal-only swaps also provide prepayment protection by increasing in value when prepayment speeds increase, as
opposed to MSRs that lose value in a faster prepayment environment. Receive fixed/pay floating interest rate swaps and swaptions increase in value when interest rates do not increase as quickly as expected.
The Bancorp enters into forward contracts and mortgage options to
economically hedge the change in fair value of certain residential mortgage loans held for sale due to changes in interest rates. The Bancorp may also enter into forward swaps to economically hedge the change in fair value of certain commercial
mortgage loans held for sale due to changes in interest rates. Interest rate lock commitments issued on residential mortgage loan commitments that will be held for sale are also considered free-standing derivative instruments and the interest rate
exposure on these commitments is economically hedged primarily with forward contracts. Revaluation gains and losses from free-standing derivatives related to mortgage banking activity are recorded as a component of mortgage banking net revenue in
the Consolidated Statements of Income.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Additionally, the Bancorp may enter into free-standing derivative
instruments (options, swaptions and interest rate swaps) in order to minimize significant fluctuations in earnings and cash flows caused by interest rate and prepayment volatility. The gains and losses on these derivative contracts are recorded
within other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
In conjunction with the sale of
the processing business in 2009, the Bancorp received warrants and issued put options, which are accounted for as free-standing derivatives. Refer to Note 27 for further discussion of significant inputs and assumptions used in the valuation of these
instruments.
In conjunction with the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares in 2009, the Bancorp entered into a
total return swap in which the Bancorp will make or receive payments based on subsequent changes in the conversion rate of the Class B shares into Class A shares. This total return swap is accounted for as a free-standing derivative. See Note
27 for further discussion of
significant inputs and assumptions used in the valuation of this instrument.
The Bancorp entered into certain derivatives (forwards, futures and options) related to its foreign exchange business. These derivative contracts were not designated against specific assets or liabilities
or to forecasted transactions. Therefore, these instruments did not qualify for hedge accounting. The Bancorp economically hedged the exposures related to these derivative contracts by entering into offsetting contracts with approved, reputable,
independent counterparties with substantially similar terms. Revaluation gains and losses on these foreign currency derivative contracts were recorded within other noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The net gains (losses)
recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income relating to free-standing derivative instruments used for risk management and other business purposes are summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
Consolidated Statements of Income Caption |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward contracts related to residential mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
$ |
(128 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Interest rate swaps and swaptions related to MSR portfolio |
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Interest rate swaps related to long-term debt |
|
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange contracts for trading purposes |
|
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Equity contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Put options associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Swap associated with sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares |
|
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Free-Standing Derivative Instruments Customer Accommodation
The majority of the free-standing derivative instruments the Bancorp enters into are for the benefit of its commercial
customers. These derivative contracts are not designated against specific assets or liabilities on the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets or to forecasted transactions and, therefore, do not qualify for hedge accounting. These instruments
include foreign exchange derivative contracts entered into for the benefit of commercial customers involved in international trade to hedge their exposure to foreign currency fluctuations and commodity contracts to hedge such items as natural gas
and various other derivative contracts. The Bancorp may economically hedge significant exposures related to these derivative contracts entered into for the benefit of customers by entering into offsetting contracts with approved, reputable,
independent counterparties with substantially matching terms. The Bancorp hedges its interest rate exposure on commercial customer transactions by executing offsetting swap agreements with primary dealers. Revaluation gains and losses on interest
rate, foreign exchange, commodity and other commercial customer derivative contracts are recorded as a component of corporate banking revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
The Bancorp previously offered its customers an equity-linked certificate of deposit that had a return linked to equity
indices. Under U.S. GAAP, a certificate of deposit that pays
interest based on changes on an equity index is a hybrid instrument that requires separation into a host contract (the certificate of deposit) and an embedded derivative contract (written equity
call option). The Bancorp entered into offsetting derivative contracts to economically hedge the exposure taken through the issuance of equity-linked certificates of deposit. Both the embedded derivative and the derivative contract entered into by
the Bancorp are recorded as free-standing derivatives and recorded at fair value with offsetting gains and losses recognized within noninterest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The Bancorp enters into risk participation agreements,
under which the Bancorp assumes credit exposure relating to certain underlying interest rate derivative contracts. The Bancorp only enters into these risk participation agreements in instances in which the Bancorp has participated in the loan that
the underlying interest rate derivative contract was designed to hedge. The Bancorp will make payments under these agreements if a customer defaults on its obligation to perform under the terms of the underlying interest rate derivative contract. As
of December 31, 2011 and 2010 the total notional amount of the risk participation agreements was $808 million and $851 million, respectively, and the fair value was a liability of $2 million at December 31, 2011 and $1 million at
December 31, 2010, which is included in interest rate contracts for customers. As of December 31, 2011, the risk participation agreements had an average life of 2.5 years.
The Bancorps maximum exposure in the risk participation agreements is contingent on the fair value of the
underlying interest rate derivative contracts in an asset position at the time of default. The Bancorp monitors the credit risk associated with the underlying customers in the risk participation agreements through the same risk grading system
currently utilized for establishing loss reserves in its loan and lease portfolio.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Risk ratings of the notional amount of risk participation
agreements under this risk rating system are summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31 ($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Pass |
|
$ |
772 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
Special mention |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Substandard |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Doubtful |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
808 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
The net gains (losses) recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income relating to free-standing
derivative instruments used for customer accommodation are summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31
($ in millions) |
|
Consolidated Statements of Income Caption |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts for customers (contract revenue) |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Interest rate contracts for customers (credit losses) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
Interest rate contracts for customers (credit portion of fair value adjustment) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Interest rate lock commitments |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
Commodity contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts for customers (contract revenue) |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Commodity contracts for customers (credit portion of fair value adjustment) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign exchange contractscustomers (contract revenue) |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Foreign exchange contractscustomers (credit portion of fair value
adjustment) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
14. OTHER ASSETS
The following table provides the
components of other assets included in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Derivative instruments |
|
$ |
2,356 |
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
Bank owned life insurance |
|
|
1,742 |
|
|
|
1,715 |
|
Partnership investments |
|
|
1,413 |
|
|
|
1,367 |
|
Accounts receivable and drafts-in-process |
|
|
955 |
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
Bankers acceptances |
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC |
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
522 |
|
OREO and other repossessed personal property |
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Accrued interest receivable |
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
413 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Income tax receivable |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Deferred tax asset |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other |
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
8,863 |
|
|
|
8,400 |
|
The Bancorp incorporates the utilization of derivative instruments as part of its overall
risk management strategy to reduce certain risks related to interest rate, prepayment and foreign currency volatility. The Bancorp also holds derivatives instruments for the benefit of its commercial customers. For further information on derivative
instruments, see Note 13.
The Bancorp purchases life insurance policies on the lives of certain directors,
officers and employees and is the owner and beneficiary of the policies. See Note 1 for further information. Certain BOLI policies have a stable value agreement through either a large, well-rated bank or multi-national insurance carrier that
provides limited cash surrender value protection from declines in the value of each policys underlying investments. During 2009, the value of the investments underlying one of the Bancorps BOLI policies continued to decline due to
disruptions in the credit markets, widening of credit spreads between U.S. treasuries/swaps versus municipal bonds and bank trust preferred securities, and illiquidity in the asset-backed securities market. These factors caused the cash surrender
value to decline further beyond the protection provided by the stable value agreement. As a result of exceeding the cash surrender value protection, the Bancorp recorded charges of $10 million during 2009 to reflect declines
in the policys cash surrender value. The cash surrender value of this BOLI policy was $237 million at December 31, 2009.
During 2009, the Bancorp notified the related insurance carrier of its intent to surrender this BOLI policy. Due to the
fact the Bancorp had not yet decided the manner in which it would surrender the policy, which may have impacted the cash surrender value protection, and because of ongoing developments in litigation with the insurance carrier, the Bancorp recognized
charges of $43 million in 2009 to fully reserve for the potential loss of the cash surrender value protection associated with the policy. In addition, the Bancorp recognized tax benefits of $106 million in 2009 related to losses recorded in prior
periods on this policy that are now expected to be tax deductible.
During 2010, an agreement to settle the
claims with the insurance carrier was reached among the parties to the litigation. As a result of this settlement and the corresponding receipt of settlement proceeds from the insurance carrier in the third quarter of 2010, the Bancorp recorded $152
million in other noninterest income and $25 million associated with legal fees related to the settlement in other noninterest expense in the Bancorps Consolidated Statements of Income.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CDC, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bancorp, was created to invest in
projects to create affordable housing, revitalize business and residential areas, and preserve historic landmarks, which are included above in partnership investments. The Bancorp has determined that these entities are VIEs and the
Bancorps investments represent variable interests. See Note 11 for further information.
A
bankers acceptance is created when a time draft is drawn on and accepted by a bank. By accepting the draft, the bank assumes the credit risk of the underlying obligor, usually the buyer or the seller of goods or their bank, and makes an
unconditional promise to pay the holder of the draft the amount
of the draft at maturity, which is generally less than one year from the date of the draft. When the Bancorp is the accepting bank, it records the full amount of the acceptance in both other
assets and other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
On June 30, 2009, the Bancorp sold an
approximate 51% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC (formerly FTPS) to Advent International. The Bancorps remaining approximate 49% ownership in Vantiv Holding, LLC is accounted for under the equity method of accounting.
OREO represents property acquired through foreclosure or other proceedings and is carried at the lower of cost or fair
value, less costs to sell. See Note 1 for further information.
15.
SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS
Borrowings with original maturities of one year or less are classified as short term, and
include federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings. Federal funds purchased are excess balances in reserve accounts held at Federal Reserve Banks that the Bancorp purchased from other member banks on an overnight basis. Other short-term
borrowings include
securities sold under repurchase agreements, derivative collateral, FHLB advances and other borrowings with original maturities of one year or less.
A summary of short-term borrowings and weighted-average rates follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Rate |
|
As of December 31: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
$ |
346 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
% |
|
$ |
279 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
% |
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
0.09 |
|
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
Average for the years ended December 31: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
$ |
345 |
|
|
|
0.11 |
% |
|
$ |
291 |
|
|
|
0.17 |
% |
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
2,777 |
|
|
|
0.12 |
|
|
|
1,635 |
|
|
|
0.21 |
|
Maximum month-end balance for the years ended December 31: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
$ |
451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
422 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
4,894 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,975 |
|
|
|
|
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
16. LONG-TERM DEBT
The following table is a summary of the
Bancorps long-term borrowings at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Maturity |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Parent Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
6.25% |
|
|
|
$779 |
|
|
|
797 |
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
3.625% |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Subordinated:(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floating-rate notes |
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
0.98% |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2017 |
|
|
|
5.45% |
|
|
|
589 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
4.50% |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2038 |
|
|
|
8.25% |
|
|
|
1,348 |
|
|
|
1,034 |
|
Junior subordinated:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate notes(c) |
|
|
2067 |
|
|
|
6.50% |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
Fixed-rate notes(c) |
|
|
2067 |
|
|
|
7.25% |
|
|
|
594 |
|
|
|
613 |
|
Fixed-rate notes(c) |
|
|
2067 |
|
|
|
7.25% |
|
|
|
894 |
|
|
|
907 |
|
Fixed-rate notes(c) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Structured repurchase agreements: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floating-rate notes |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2.49% |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Floating-rate notes |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2.54% |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floating-rate bank notes |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
0.58% |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
499 |
|
Subordinated:(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate bank notes |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
4.75% |
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
561 |
|
Junior subordinated:(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floating-rate bank notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Floating-rate debentures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Floating-rate debentures |
|
|
2035 |
|
|
|
1.97% -2.24% |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
FHLB advances |
|
|
2012-2041 |
|
|
|
0.05% -8.34% |
|
|
|
1,055 |
|
|
|
1,561 |
|
Notes associated with consolidated VIEs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automobile loan securitizations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate notes |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
4.81% |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
Floating-rate notes |
|
|
2013-2015 |
|
|
|
0.81% -2.25% |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
460 |
|
Home equity securitization: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floating-rate notes |
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
0.50% |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Other |
|
|
2012-2039 |
|
|
|
Varies |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$9,682 |
|
|
|
9,558 |
|
(a) |
Qualify as Tier I capital for regulatory capital purposes. See Note 28 for further information. |
(b) |
Qualify as Tier II capital for regulatory capital purposes. |
(c) |
Future periods of debt are floating. |
The Bancorp pays down long-term debt in accordance with contractual terms over maturity
periods summarized in the above table. Contractually obligated payments for long-term debt as of December 31, 2011 are due over the following periods: $8 million in 2012; $1.7 billion in 2013, $18 million in 2014, $738 million in 2015, $2.3
billion in 2016 and $5.0 billion after 2016.
At December 31, 2011, the Bancorp had outstanding
principal balances of $9.0 billion, net discounts of $18 million and additions for mark-to-market adjustments on its hedged debt of $662 million. At December 31, 2010, the Bancorp had outstanding principal balances of $9.1 billion, net
discounts of $15 million and additions for mark-to-market adjustments on its hedged debt of $439 million. The Bancorp was in compliance with all debt covenants at December 31, 2011.
PARENT COMPANY LONG-TERM BORROWINGS
Senior Notes
In April 2008, the Bancorp issued $750 million of senior notes to third party investors. The senior notes bear a fixed rate of interest of
6.25% per annum. The Bancorp entered into interest rate swaps to convert $675 million to floating rate and, at December 31, 2011 and
2010,
paid a rate of 2.84% and 2.70%, respectively. The notes are unsecured, senior obligations of the Bancorp. Payment of the full principal amount of the notes will be due upon maturity on
May 1, 2013. The notes are not subject to redemption at the Bancorps option at any time prior to maturity.
On January 25, 2011, the Bancorp issued $1.0 billion of senior notes to third party investors. The Senior Notes bear a fixed rate of interest of 3.625% per annum. The Bancorp entered into
interest rate swaps to convert $500 million to floating rate and, at December 31, 2011, paid a rate of 0.26%. The notes are unsecured, senior obligations of the Bancorp. Payment of the full principal amounts of the notes is due upon maturity on
January 25, 2016. The notes are not subject to redemption at the Bancorps option at any time prior to maturity
Subordinated Debt
The subordinated floating-rate notes due in 2016 pay interest at three-month LIBOR plus 42 bps. The Bancorp has entered into interest rate swaps to convert its subordinated fixed-rate notes due in 2017
and 2018 to floating-rate, which pay interest at three-month LIBOR plus 42 bps and 25 bps, respectively, at December 31, 2011. The rates paid on the swaps hedging the subordinated floating-rate
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
notes due in 2017 and 2018 were 0.82% and 0.78%, respectively, at December 31, 2011. Of the $1.0 billion in 8.25% subordinated fixed rate notes due in 2038, $705 million were subsequently
hedged to floating and paid a rate of 3.58% at December 31, 2011.
Junior Subordinated Debt
The 6.50% junior subordinated notes due in 2067, with a carrying and outstanding principal balance of $750 million at December 31,
2011, pay a fixed rate of 6.50% until 2017, then convert to a floating rate at three-month LIBOR plus 137 bps until 2047. Thereafter, the notes pay a floating rate at one-month LIBOR plus 237 bps. Junior subordinated notes due in 2067, with a
carrying amount of $594 million and an outstanding principal balance of $575 million at December 31, 2011, pay a fixed rate of 7.25% until 2057, then convert to a floating rate at three-month LIBOR plus 257 bps. The Bancorp entered into
interest rate swaps to convert $500 million of the fixed-rate debt into a floating rate. At December 31, 2011, the weighted-average rate paid on these swaps was 1.18%. Junior subordinated notes due in 2067, with a carrying amount of $894
million and an outstanding principal balance of $863 million at December 31, 2011, pay a fixed rate of 7.25% until 2057, then convert to a floating rate at three-month LIBOR plus 303 bps thereafter. The Bancorp entered into interest rate swaps
to convert $700 million of the fixed-rate debt into a floating rate. At December 31, 2011, the weighted-average rate paid on the swaps was 1.61%. The obligations were issued to Fifth Third Capital Trusts IV, V and VI, respectively. The Bancorp
has fully and unconditionally guaranteed all obligations under the trust preferred securities issued by Fifth Third Capital Trusts IV, V and VI. In addition, the Bancorp entered into replacement capital covenants for the benefit of holders of
long-term debt senior to the junior subordinated notes that limits, subject to certain restrictions, the Bancorps ability to redeem the junior subordinated notes prior to their scheduled maturity. In November 2010, the Bancorp amended the debt
covenants to remove a requirement to issue replacement capital securities at least 180 days prior to calling the trust preferred securities.
Under recent regulatory developments, certain of the Bancorps trust preferred securities are callable at par as of certain dates, or may become callable at par under certain circumstances. On
March 18, 2011, the Bancorp announced that the Federal Reserve Board did not object to the Bancorps capital plan submitted under the Federal Reserves 2011 CCAR. Pursuant to this plan, the Bancorp redeemed $452 million of certain
trust preferred securities, at par, classified as long-term debt during 2011. The trust preferred securities redeemed related to the Fifth Third Capital Trust VII, First National Bankshares Statutory Trust I and R&G Capital Trust II, LLT. As a
result of these redemptions the Bancorp recorded a $6 million gain on the extinguishment within other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. All redemptions are subject to certain conditions and generally require approval by
the FRB.
Structured Repurchase Agreements
In order to meet its funding obligations, the Bancorp enters into repurchase agreements with customers, which are accounted for as
collateralized financing transactions, where excess customer funds are borrowed overnight by the Bancorp, and later repurchased by the customers. At December 31, 2011, the total amount of repurchase agreements outstanding was $375 million.
SUBSIDIARY LONG-TERM BORROWINGS
Senior and Subordinated Debt
Medium-term senior notes and subordinated bank notes with maturities ranging from one year to 30 years can be issued by the Bancorps banking subsidiary, of which $1.0 billion was outstanding at
December 31, 2011 and 2010 with $19.0 billion available for future issuance. The senior floating-rate bank notes due in 2013 pay a floating rate at three-month LIBOR plus 11 bps. For the subordinated fixed-rate bank notes due in 2015, the
Bancorp entered into interest rate swaps to convert the fixed-rate debt into floating rate. At December 31, 2011, the weighted-average rate paid on the swaps was 0.53%. In addition to the aforementioned redemption of trust preferred securities,
the Bancorp redeemed certain trust preferred securities of $65 million through the remainder of 2011, which related to the R&G Crown Cap Trust IV, the R&G Crown Cap Trust I and First National Bankshares Statutory Trust II. As a result of
these redemptions, the Bancorp recorded a $1 million gain on the extinguishment within other noninterest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Junior Subordinated Debt
The junior subordinated floating-rate bank
notes due in 2035 were assumed by a subsidiary of the Bancorp as part of the acquisition of First Charter in May 2008. The obligation was issued to First Charter Capital Trust I and II, respectively. The notes of First Charter Capital Trust I and II
pay floating at three-month LIBOR plus 169 bps and 142 bps, respectively. The Bancorp has fully and unconditionally guaranteed all obligations under the acquired trust preferred securities issued by First Charter Capital Trust I and II. As
previously mentioned, in the junior subordinated debt section of the parent company long-term borrowings, the FRB did not object to the Bancorps capital plan under the Federal Reserves 2011 CCAR and therefore the Bancorp redeemed $65
million of trust preferred securities previously acquired by a Bancorp subsidiary, at par, during 2011.
FHLB Advances
At December 31, 2011, FHLB advances have rates ranging from 0.05% to 8.34%, with interest payable monthly. The
advances are secured by certain residential mortgage loans and securities totaling $17.5 billion. At December 31, 2010, $500 million of FHLB advances were floating-rate. The Bancorp entered into an interest rate swap with a notional value of
$500 million to convert the floating-rate advances to a fixed rate of 2.63%. During the third quarter of 2011, the Bancorp terminated a $500 million FHLB advance and incurred a termination fee of $2 million within other noninterest expense in the
Consolidated Statements of Income. In November 2010, the Bancorp repaid a floating-rate advance of $1.0 billion due in 2012 and terminated the interest rate cap associated with this advance. The Bancorp recognized a gain on this extinguishment of
debt of $1 million. The $1.1 billion in remaining advances mature as follows: $3 million in 2014, $5 million in 2015, $1 billion in 2016, and $43 million thereafter.
Notes Associated with Consolidated VIEs
As previously discussed in
Note 11, the Bancorp was determined to be the primary beneficiary of VIEs associated with certain automobile loan and home equity securitizations and, effective January 1, 2010, these VIEs have been consolidated in the Bancorps
Consolidated Financial Statements. As of December 31, 2011, the outstanding long-term debt associated with the automobile loan securitizations and home equity securitization was $171 million and $22 million, respectively. Third-party holders of
this debt do not have recourse to the general assets of the Bancorp.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
17. COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND
GUARANTEES
The Bancorp, in the normal course of business, enters into financial instruments and
various agreements to meet the financing needs of its customers. The Bancorp also enters into certain transactions and agreements to manage its interest rate and prepayment risks, provide funding, equipment and locations for its operations and
invest in its communities. These instruments and agreements involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit risk, counterparty risk and market risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheets. The
creditworthiness of counterparties for all instruments and agreements is evaluated on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the Bancorps credit policies. The Bancorps significant commitments, contingent liabilities and guarantees in
excess of the amounts recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets are discussed in further detail below:
Commitments
The Bancorp has certain commitments to make future payments under contracts. The following table reflects a summary of
significant commitments as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commitments to extend credit |
|
$ |
47,719 |
|
|
|
43,677 |
|
Forward contracts to sell mortgage loans |
|
|
5,705 |
|
|
|
6,389 |
|
Letters of credit |
|
|
4,744 |
|
|
|
5,516 |
|
Noncancelable lease obligations |
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
869 |
|
Capital commitments for private equity investments |
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Purchase obligations |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
Capital expenditures |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Commitments to extend credit
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend, typically having fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses that may require payment of a fee. Since many of the commitments to extend credit
may expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash flow requirements. The Bancorp is exposed to credit risk in the event of nonperformance by the counterparty for the amount of the contract.
Fixed-rate commitments are also subject to market risk resulting from fluctuations in interest rates and the Bancorps exposure is limited to the replacement value of those commitments. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp
had a reserve for unfunded commitments totaling $181 million and $227 million, respectively, included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Bancorp monitors the credit risk
associated with commitments to extend credit using the same risk rating system utilized within its loan and lease portfolio. Risk ratings under this risk rating system are summarized in the following table as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Pass |
|
$ |
46,825 |
|
|
|
42,326 |
|
Special mention |
|
|
480 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
Substandard |
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
758 |
|
Doubtful |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
47,719 |
|
|
|
43,677 |
|
Letters of credit
Standby and commercial letters of credit are conditional commitments issued to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party and expire as summarized in the following table as of
December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
|
Less than 1 year(a) |
|
$ |
1,940 |
|
1 - 5 years(a) |
|
|
2,665 |
|
Over 5 years |
|
|
139 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,744 |
|
(a) |
Includes $75 and $3 issued on behalf of commercial customers to facilitate trade payments in U.S. dollars and foreign currencies which expire less than one year and
between one and five years, respectively. |
Standby letters of credit accounted for 98% of total letters of
credit at December 31, 2011 compared to 99% at December 31, 2010 and are considered guarantees in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Approximately 54% of the total standby letters of credit were fully secured as of December 31, 2011 and 2010.
In the event of nonperformance by the customers, the Bancorp has rights to the underlying collateral, which can include commercial real estate, physical plant and property, inventory, receivables, cash and marketable securities. At December 31,
2011 and 2010 the reserve related to these standby letters of credit was $5 million and $10 million, respectively, included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Bancorp monitors the credit risk associated with letters of
credit using the same risk rating system utilized within its loan and lease portfolio.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Risk ratings under this risk rating system are summarized in the following table as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Pass |
|
$ |
4,338 |
|
|
|
4,944 |
|
Special mention |
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Substandard |
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
Doubtful |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Loss |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,744 |
|
|
|
5,516 |
|
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp had outstanding letters of credit that were supporting
certain securities issued as VRDNs. The Bancorp facilitates financing for its commercial customers, which consist of companies and municipalities, by marketing the VRDNs to investors. The VRDNs pay interest to holders at a rate of interest that
fluctuates based upon market demand. The VRDNs generally have long-term maturity dates, but can be tendered by the holder for purchase at par value upon proper advance notice. When the VRDNs are tendered, a remarketing agent generally finds another
investor to purchase the VRDNs to keep the securities outstanding in the market. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, FTS acted as the remarketing agent to issuers on $2.9 billion and $3.4 billion, respectively, of VRDNs. As remarketing agent, FTS
is responsible for finding purchasers for VRDNs that are put by investors. The Bancorp issues letters of credit, as a credit enhancement, to the VRDNs remarketed by FTS, in addition to $440 million and $563 million in VRDNs remarketed by third
parties at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. These letters of credit are included in the total letters of credit balance provided in the previous table. At December 31, 2011, FTS held an immaterial amount of these VRDNs in
its portfolio and classified them as trading securities, compared to $1 million at December 31, 2010. In addition, at December 31, 2011, the Bancorp held an immaterial amount of VRDNs which were purchased from the market, through FTS and
held in its trading securities portfolio, compared to $105 million at December 31, 2010. For the VRDNs remarketed by third parties, in some cases the remarketing agent has failed to remarket the securities and has instructed the indenture
trustee to draw upon $11 million of letters of credit issued by the Bancorp at December 31, 2010. The amount of failed remarketing draws on letters of credit issued by the Bancorp was immaterial at December 31, 2011. The Bancorp recorded
these draws as commercial loans in its Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Forward contracts to sell mortgage loans
The Bancorp enters into forward contracts to economically hedge the change in fair value of certain residential mortgage loans held for
sale due to changes in interest rates. The outstanding notional amounts of these forward contracts are included in the summary of significant commitments table above for all periods presented.
Noncancelable lease obligations and other commitments
The Bancorps
subsidiaries have entered into a number of noncancelable lease agreements. The minimum rental commitments under noncancelable lease agreements are shown in the summary of significant commitments table. The Bancorp has also entered into a limited
number of agreements for work related to banking center construction and to purchase goods or services.
Contingent
Liabilities
Private mortgage reinsurance
For certain mortgage loans originated by the Bancorp, borrowers may be required to obtain PMI provided by third-party
insurers. In some instances, these insurers cede a portion of the PMI premiums to the Bancorp, and the Bancorp provides reinsurance coverage
within
a specified range of the total PMI coverage. The Bancorps reinsurance coverage typically ranges from 5% to 10% of the total PMI coverage. The Bancorps maximum exposure in the event of
nonperformance by the underlying borrowers is equivalent to the Bancorps total outstanding reinsurance coverage, which was $77 million at December 31, 2011 and $115 million at December 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010,
the Bancorp maintained a reserve of $27 million and $42 million, respectively, related to exposures within the reinsurance portfolio which was included in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. During the second quarter of 2009, the
Bancorp suspended the practice of providing reinsurance of private mortgage insurance for newly originated mortgage loans. In the third quarter of 2010, the Bancorp allowed one of its third-party insurers to terminate its reinsurance agreement with
the Bancorp, resulting in the Bancorp releasing collateral to the insurer in the form of investment securities and other assets with a carrying value of $19 million, and the insurer assuming the Bancorps obligations under the reinsurance
agreement, resulting in a decrease to the Bancorps reserve liability of $20 million and decrease in the Bancorps maximum exposure of $53 million. In the second quarter of 2011, the Bancorp allowed one of its third-party insurers to
terminate its reinsurance agreement with the Bancorp, resulting in the Bancorp releasing collateral to the insurer in the form of investment securities and other assets with a carrying value of $5 million, and the insurer assuming the Bancorps
obligations under the reinsurance agreement, resulting in a decrease to the Bancorps reserve liability of $11 million and decrease in the Bancorps maximum exposure of $27 million.
Legal claims
There are legal claims pending against the Bancorp and its
subsidiaries that have arisen in the normal course of business. See Note 18 for additional information regarding these proceedings.
Guarantees
The Bancorp has performance obligations upon the
occurrence of certain events under financial guarantees provided in certain contractual arrangements as discussed in the following sections.
Residential mortgage loans sold with representation and warranty provisions
Conforming residential mortgage loans sold to unrelated third parties are generally sold with representation and warranty provisions. A
contractual liability arises only in the event of a breach of these representations and warranties and, in general, only when a loss results from the breach. The Bancorp may be required to repurchase any previously sold loan or indemnify (make
whole) the investor or insurer for which the representation or warranty of the Bancorp proves to be inaccurate, incomplete or misleading.
The Bancorp establishes a residential mortgage repurchase reserve related to various representations and warranties that reflects managements estimate of losses based on a combination of factors.
Such factors incorporate historical investor audit and repurchase demand rates, appeals success rates and historical loss severity. At the time of a loan sale, the Bancorp records a representation and warranty reserve at the estimated fair value of
the Bancorps guarantee and continually updates the reserve during the life of the
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
loan as losses in excess of the reserve become probable and reasonably estimable. The provision for the estimated fair value of the representation and warranty guarantee arising from the loan
sales is recorded as an adjustment to the gain on sale, which is included in other noninterest income at the time of sale. Updates to the reserve are recorded in other noninterest expense. The majority of repurchase demands occur within the first 36
months following origination.
As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp maintained reserves
related to these loans sold with representation and warranty provisions totaling $55 million and $85 million, respectively, included in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The following table summarizes activity in the reserve for
representation and warranty provisions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Net additions to the reserve |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
Losses charged against the reserve |
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
55 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
The following table provides a rollforward of unresolved claims by claimant type for the year ended
December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSE |
|
|
Private Label |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Units |
|
|
Dollars |
|
|
Units |
|
|
Dollars |
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
845 |
|
|
$ |
150 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
New demands |
|
|
2,050 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Loan paydowns/payoffs |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Resolved claims |
|
|
(2,546 |
) |
|
|
(428 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
328 |
|
|
$ |
47 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
Residential mortgage loans sold with credit recourse
The Bancorp sold certain residential mortgage loans in the secondary market with credit recourse. In the event of any customer default,
pursuant to the credit recourse provided, the Bancorp is required to reimburse the third party. The maximum amount of credit risk in the event of nonperformance by the underlying borrowers is equivalent to the total outstanding balance. In the event
of nonperformance, the Bancorp has rights to the underlying collateral value securing the loan. The outstanding balances on these loans sold with credit recourse were $772 million and $916 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively,
and the delinquency rates were 6.7% at December 31, 2011 and 8.7% at December 31, 2010. The Bancorp maintained an estimated credit loss reserve on these loans sold with credit recourse of $17 million at December 31, 2011 and $16
million at December 31, 2010 recorded in other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. To determine the credit loss reserve, the Bancorp used an approach that is consistent with its overall approach in estimating credit losses for
various categories of residential mortgage loans held in its loan portfolio.
Margin accounts
FTS, a subsidiary of the Bancorp, guarantees the collection of all margin account balances held by its brokerage clearing agent for the
benefit of its customers. FTS is responsible for payment to its brokerage clearing agent for any loss, liability, damage, cost or expense incurred as a result of customers failing to comply with margin or margin maintenance calls on all margin
accounts. The margin account balance held by the brokerage clearing agent was $14 million at December 31, 2011 and $10 million at December 31, 2010. In the event of any customer default, FTS has rights to the underlying collateral
provided. Given the existence of the underlying collateral provided and negligible historical credit losses, the Bancorp does not maintain a loss reserve related to the margin accounts.
Long-term borrowing obligations
The Bancorp had fully and unconditionally
guaranteed certain long-term borrowing obligations issued by wholly-owned issuing trust entities of $2.2 billion and $2.9 billion as of December 31, 2011 and 2010. See Note 16 for further information on these long-term borrowing obligations.
Visa litigation
The Bancorp, as a member bank of Visa prior to Visas reorganization and IPO (the IPO) of its Class A common shares in 2008, had certain indemnification obligations pursuant to
Visas certificate of incorporation and by-laws and in accordance with their membership agreements. In accordance with Visas by-laws prior to the IPO, the Bancorp could have been required to indemnify Visa for the Bancorps
proportional share of losses based on the pre-IPO membership interests. As part of its reorganization and IPO, the Bancorps indemnification obligation was modified to include only certain known litigation (the Covered Litigation)
as of the date of the restructuring. This modification triggered a requirement to recognize a $3 million liability for the year ended December 31, 2007 equal to the fair value of the indemnification obligation. Additionally during 2007, the
Bancorp recorded $169 million for its share of litigation formally settled by Visa and for probable future litigation settlements. In conjunction with the IPO, the Bancorp received 10.1 million of Visas Class B shares based on the
Bancorps membership percentage in Visa prior to the IPO. The Class B shares are not transferable (other than to another member bank) until the later of the third anniversary of the IPO closing or the date which the Covered Litigation has been
resolved; therefore, the Bancorps Class B shares were classified in other assets and accounted for at their carryover basis of $0. Visa deposited $3 billion of the proceeds from the IPO into a litigation escrow account, established for the
purpose of funding judgments in, or settlements of, the Covered Litigation. If Visas litigation committee determines that the escrow account is insufficient, then Visa will issue additional Class A shares and deposit the proceeds from the
sale of the shares into the litigation escrow account. When Visa funds the litigation escrow account, the Class B shares are subject to dilution through an adjustment in the conversion rate of Class B shares into Class A shares. During 2008,
the Bancorp recorded additional reserves of $71 million for probable future settlements related to the Covered Litigation and recorded its proportional share of $169 million of the Visa escrow account net against the Bancorps litigation
reserve.
During 2009, Visa announced it had deposited an additional $700 million into the litigation escrow
account. As a result of this funding, the Bancorp recorded its proportional share of $29 million
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
of these additional funds as a reduction to its net Visa litigation reserve liability and a reduction to noninterest expense. Later in 2009, the Bancorp completed the sale of Visa, Inc. Class B
shares for proceeds of $300 million. As part of this transaction the Bancorp entered into a total return swap in which the Bancorp will make or receive payments based on subsequent changes in the conversion rate of the Class B shares into
Class A shares. The swap terminates on the later of the third anniversary of Visas IPO or the date on which the Covered Litigation is settled. The Bancorp calculates the fair value of the swap based on its estimate of the probability and
timing of certain Covered Litigation settlement scenarios and the resulting payments related to the swap. The counterparty to the swap as a result of its ownership of the Class B shares will be impacted by dilutive adjustments to the conversion rate
of the Class B shares into Class A shares caused by any Covered Litigation losses in excess of the litigation escrow account. If actual judgments in, or settlements of, the Covered Litigation significantly exceed current expectations, then
additional funding by Visa of the litigation escrow account and the resulting dilution of the Class B shares could result in a scenario where the Bancorps ultimate exposure associated with the Covered Litigation (the Visa Litigation
Exposure) exceeds the value of the Class B shares owned by the swap counterparty (the Class B Value). In the event the Bancorp concludes that it is probable that the Visa Litigation Exposure exceeds the Class B Value, the Bancorp
would record a litigation reserve liability and a corresponding amount of other noninterest expense for the amount of the excess. Any such litigation reserve liability would be separate and distinct from the fair value derivative liability
associated with the total return swap.
As of the date of the Bancorps sale of Visa Class B shares and
through December 31, 2011, the Bancorp has concluded that it is not probable that the Visa Litigation Exposure will exceed the Class B Value. Based on this determination, upon the sale of Class B shares, the Bancorp reversed its net Visa
litigation reserve liability and recognized a free-standing derivative liability associated with the total return swap with an initial fair value of $55 million. The sale of the Class B shares, recognition of the derivative liability and reversal of
the net litigation reserve liability resulted in a pre-tax benefit of $288 million ($187 million after-tax) recognized by the Bancorp for the year ended December 31, 2009. In the second quarter of 2010, Visa funded an additional $500 million
into the escrow account which resulted in further dilution in the conversion of Class B shares into Class A shares and required the Bancorp to make a $20 million cash payment (which reduced the swap liability) to the swap counterparty in
accordance with the terms of the swap contract. In the fourth quarter of 2010, Visa funded an additional $800 million into the litigation escrow account which resulted in further dilution in the conversion of Class B shares into Class A shares
and required the Bancorp to make a $35 million cash payment (which reduced the swap liability) to the swap counterparty in accordance with the terms of the swap contract. In the second quarter of 2011, Visa funded an additional $400 million into the
litigation escrow account. Upon Visas funding of the litigation escrow account in the second quarter of 2011, along with additional terms of the total return swap, the Bancorp made a $19 million cash payment (which reduced the swap liability)
to the swap counterparty. During the fourth quarter of 2011, Visa announced it decided to fund an additional $1.565 billion into the litigation escrow account which increased the swap liability approximately $54 million. The fair value of the swap
liability was $78 million as of December 31, 2011, compared to $18 million at December 31, 2010.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
18. LEGAL AND REGULATORY PROCEEDINGS
During April 2006, the Bancorp was added as a defendant in a
consolidated antitrust class action lawsuit originally filed against Visa®, MasterCard® and several other major financial institutions in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York. The plaintiffs, merchants operating commercial businesses throughout the U.S. and trade associations, claim that the interchange fees charged by card-issuing banks are unreasonable and seek injunctive relief and unspecified damages. In
addition to being a named defendant, the Bancorp is also subject to a possible indemnification obligation of Visa as discussed in Note 17 and has also entered into with Visa, MasterCard and certain other named defendants judgment and loss sharing
agreements that attempt to allocate financial responsibility to the parties thereto in the event certain settlements or judgments occur. Accordingly, prior to the sale of Class B shares during 2009, the Bancorp had recorded a litigation reserve of
$243 million to account for its potential exposure in this and related litigation. Additionally, the Bancorp had also recorded its proportional share of $199 million of the Visa escrow account funded with proceeds from the Visa IPO along with
several subsequent fundings. Upon the Bancorps sale of Visa, Inc. Class B shares during 2009, and the recognition of the total return swap that transfers conversion risk of the Class B shares back to the Bancorp, the Bancorp reversed the
remaining net litigation reserve related to the Bancorps exposure through Visa. Additionally, the Bancorp has remaining reserves related to this litigation of $49 million and $30 million as of December 31, 2011, and 2010,
respectively. Refer to Note 17 for further information regarding the Bancorps net litigation reserve and ownership interest in Visa. Fact and expert discovery in the litigation has been essentially completed. A motion for class action
certification, certain defense motions to dismiss, and cross-motions for summary judgments are pending. A tentative date has been set for the third quarter of 2012.
In September 2007, Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. (Katz) filed a suit in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and its Ohio banking subsidiary. In the suit, Katz alleges that the Bancorp and its Ohio bank are infringing on Katzs patents for interactive call processing technology by offering certain
automated telephone banking and other services. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by Katz in various courts against numerous other defendants. Katz is seeking unspecified monetary damages and penalties as well as
injunctive relief in the suit. Management believes there are substantial defenses to these claims and intends to defend them vigorously. The impact of the final disposition of this lawsuit cannot be assessed at this time.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, five putative securities class action complaints were filed against the
Bancorp and its Chief Executive Officer, among other parties. The five cases have been consolidated under the caption Local 295/Local 851 IBT Employer Group Pension Trust and Welfare Fund v. Fifth Third Bancorp. et al., Case No. 1:08CV00421,
and are currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The lawsuits allege violations of federal securities laws related to disclosures made by the Bancorp in press releases and filings with the SEC
regarding its quality and sufficiency of capital, credit losses and related matters, and seeking unquantified damages on behalf of putative classes of persons who either purchased the Bancorps securities or trust preferred securities, or
acquired the Bancorps securities pursuant to the acquisition of First Charter Corporation. These cases remain in the discovery stages of litigation. The impact of the final disposition of these lawsuits cannot be assessed at this time. In
addition to the foregoing, two cases were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Bancorp and certain officers alleging violations of ERISA based on allegations similar to those set forth in the
securities class action cases filed during the same period of time. The two cases alleging violations of ERISA were dismissed by the trial court, and are being appealed to the United States Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
On September 16, 2010, Edward P. Zemprelli (Zemprelli) filed a
lawsuit in the Hamilton County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The lawsuit was a purported derivative action brought by a shareholder of the Bancorp against certain of the Bancorps officers and directors, and which named the Bancorp as a nominal
defendant. In the lawsuit, Zemprelli brought claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment against the defendant officers and directors. The alleged basis for these claims was that the defendant officers and
directors attempted to disguise from the public the truth about the credit quality of the Bancorps loan portfolio, its capital position, and its need to raise capital. Zemprelli, on behalf of the Bancorp, brought unspecified money damages
allegedly sustained by the Bancorp as a result of the defendants conduct, as well as injunctive relief. On August 15, 2011, the Court granted defendants motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment. Zemprelli has filed a notice
of appeal but later dismissed the appeal, as a result the trial court dismissal is final.
In September 2011,
DataTreasury Corporation filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. In the suit, DataTreasury alleges that the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are infringing
on DataTreasurys patents for imaged-based check processing. This lawsuit is one of many related patent infringement suits brought by DataTreasury against numerous other defendants. DataTreasury is seeking unspecified monetary damages and
penalties. Due to the recent filing of the lawsuit, management is in the process of reviewing the claims against the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary.
The Bancorp and its subsidiaries are not parties to any other material litigation. However, there are other litigation matters that arise in the normal course of business. While it is impossible to
ascertain the ultimate resolution or range of financial liability with respect to these contingent matters, management believes any resulting liability from these other actions would not have a material effect upon the Bancorps consolidated
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
The Bancorp and/or its affiliates are or may become
involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the SEC, regarding their respective businesses. Such matters may
result in material adverse consequences, including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, orders, injunctions or other actions, amendments and/or restatements of the Bancorps SEC filings and/or financial
statements, as applicable, and/or determinations of material weaknesses in our disclosure controls and procedures. The SEC is investigating and has made several requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning issues which the Bancorp
understands relate to accounting and reporting matters involving certain of its commercial loans. This could lead to an enforcement proceeding by the SEC which, in turn, may result in one or more such material adverse consequences.
On May 16, 2011, the Bancorp caused a notice to be delivered to the trustee of Fifth Third Capital Trust VII (the
Trust) to mandatorily redeem the 8.875% trust preferred securities of the Trust (the Trust Preferred Securities) at an aggregate cash redemption price of $25.18 per Trust Preferred Security. The Trust Preferred Securities
were listed on the NYSE. The NYSE was notified of the redemption on May 17, 2011 and a Current Report on Form 8-K describing the redemption notice was filed by the Company with the SEC on May 18, 2011. Trading in this security was halted
by the NYSE shortly after this Form 8-K was filed and did not resume until May 19, 2011. The Trust Preferred Securities traded at prices above the redemption amount during the period
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
between the time the trustee was notified and before the Form 8-K describing the redemption was filed. The Bancorp was neither a party to nor a participant in any trading of the Trust Preferred
Securities during such period or thereafter. On May 25, 2011, the Bancorp announced it would voluntarily compensate persons who purchased these Trust Preferred Securities after the redemption notice was delivered on May 16, 2011 and before
trading was halted in the security on May 18, 2011. The compensation process was substantially completed by December 31, 2011 and Fifth Third paid out less than $1 million to affected security holders who submitted claims. The SEC
investigated and made requests for information, including by subpoena, concerning the circumstances and related issues surrounding the notification and disclosure process and timing thereof in connection with such redemption of the Trust Preferred
Securities. The Bancorp cooperated with those requests. On August 1, 2011, the Bancorp received a Wells notice from the staff of the SEC advising the Bancorp that the staff has reached a preliminary conclusion to recommend that the
Commission authorize the staff to file an enforcement action against the Bancorp relating to such matter for violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. On November 22, 2011 the Bancorp entered into
a settlement with the SEC in connection with the alleged violation of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD. Under the terms of the settlement, Fifth Third neither admitted nor denied such allegations and agreed
to cease and desist from committing any violations and any future violations of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Regulation FD. As noted in the order instituting the proceeding, in agreeing to this settlement, the SEC considered the
remedial acts promptly and voluntarily undertaken by Fifth Thirdincluding its compensation of investors harmed by the timing of its disclosure and its adoption and implementation of additional policies and procedures relating to the redemption
of securitiesand the cooperation it afforded the SEC staff.
The Bancorp is party to numerous claims
and lawsuits concerning matters arising from the conduct of its business activities. The outcome of litigation and the timing of ultimate resolution are inherently difficult to predict. The following factors, among others, contribute to this lack of
predictability: plaintiff claims often include significant legal uncertainties, damages alleged by plaintiffs are often unspecified or overstated, discovery may not have started or may not be complete and material facts may be disputed or
unsubstantiated. As a result of these factors, the Bancorp is not always able to provide an estimate of the range of reasonably possible outcomes for each claim. A reserve for a potential
litigation loss is established when information related to the loss contingency indicates both that a loss is probable and that the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. Any such reserve is adjusted from time to time thereafter as appropriate
to reflect changes in circumstances. The Bancorp also determines, when possible (due to the uncertainties described above), estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of reasonably possible losses, in excess of amounts reserved. Under U.S.
GAAP, an event is reasonably possible if the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely and an event is remote if the chance of the future event or events
occurring is slight. Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the Bancorp is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which
the Bancorp believes the risk of loss is more than slight. For matters where the Bancorp is able to estimate such possible losses or ranges of possible losses, the Bancorp currently estimates that it is reasonably possible that it could incur losses
related to legal proceedings including the matters discussed above in an aggregate amount up to approximately $68 million in excess of amounts reserved, with it also being reasonably possible that no losses will be incurred in these matters. The
estimates included in this amount are based on the Bancorps analysis of currently available information, and as new information is obtained the Bancorp may change its estimates.
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 reserve that cannot be estimated. Based on information currently available, advice of counsel, available insurance coverage and established reserves, the Bancorp believes that the eventual outcome of
the actions against the Bancorp and/or its subsidiaries, including the matters described above, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Bancorps 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 Bancorps results of operations for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the size of the loss or
liability imposed and the operating results for the applicable period.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
19. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
The Bancorp maintains written policies and procedures covering related party transactions
to principal shareholders, directors and executives of the Bancorp. These procedures cover transactions such as employee-stock purchase loans, personal lines of credit, residential secured loans, overdrafts, letters of credit and increases in
indebtedness. Such transactions are subject to the Bancorps normal underwriting and approval procedures. Prior to the closing of a loan to a related party, Compliance Risk Management must approve and determine whether the transaction requires
approval from or a post notification be sent to the Bancorps Board of Directors. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, certain directors, executive officers, principal holders of Bancorp common stock, associates of such persons, and affiliated
companies of such persons were indebted, including undrawn commitments to lend, to the Bancorps banking subsidiary.
The following table summarizes the Bancorps activities with its principal shareholders, directors and executives at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Commitments to lend, net of participations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directors and their affiliated companies |
|
$ |
254 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
Executive officers |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
259 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
Outstanding balance on loans, net of participations and undrawn commitments |
|
$ |
172 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
The commitments to lend are in the form of loans and guarantees for various business and personal
interests. This indebtedness was incurred in the ordinary course of business on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with unrelated parties. This
indebtedness does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other features unfavorable to the Bancorp.
On June 30, 2009, the Bancorp completed the sale of a majority interest in its processing business, Vantiv Holding, LLC. Advent International acquired an approximate 51% interest in Vantiv Holding,
LLC for cash and warrants. The Bancorp retained the remaining approximate 49% interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC and, as part of the sale, Vantiv Holding, LLC assumed loans totaling $1.25 billion owed to the Bancorp. The Bancorp recognized $57 million
and $26 million,
respectively, in noninterest income as part of its equity method investment in Vantiv Holding, LLC for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 and received distributions totaling $3
million and $25 million, respectively, during 2011 and 2010.
The Bancorp and Vantiv Holding, LLC have
various agreements in place covering services relating to the operations of Vantiv Holding, LLC. The services provided by the Bancorp to Vantiv Holding, LLC were required to support Vantiv Holding, LLC as a standalone entity during the deconversion
period. These services involve transition support, including product development, risk management, legal, accounting and general business resources. Vantiv Holding, LLC paid the Bancorp $21 million and $49 million, respectively, for these services
for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. Other services provided to Vantiv Holding, LLC by the Bancorp, which will continue beyond the deconversion period, include treasury management, clearing, settlement, sponsorship, and data center
support. Vantiv Holding, LLC paid the Bancorp $37 million and $34 million, respectively, for these services for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010. In addition to the previously mentioned services, the Bancorp entered into an agreement
under which Vantiv Holding, LLC will provide processing services to the Bancorp. The total amount of fees relating to the processing services provided to the Bancorp by Vantiv Holding, LLC totaled $74 million and $64 million, respectively, for the
years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.
During the fourth quarter of 2010, Vantiv Holding, LLC
refinanced its debt into a larger syndicated loan structure that included the Bancorp. The Bancorp recognized $4 million in syndication fees in 2010 associated with the refinanced loan to Vantiv Holding, LLC. The outstanding balance of loans to
Vantiv Holding, LLC was $377 million and $381 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Interest income relating to the loans was $18 million, $102 million and $60 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2011,
2010 and 2009 and is included in interest and fees on loans and leases in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Vantiv Holding, LLCs line of credit was $50 million as of December 31, 2011 and 2010. Vantiv Holding, LLC did not draw upon
its lines of credit during the years ended December 31, 2011 or 2010.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
20. INCOME TAXES
The Bancorp and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return. The following is a summary of applicable income taxes
included in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Current income tax expense (benefit): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Federal income taxes |
|
$ |
82 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(157 |
) |
State and local income taxes |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Foreign income taxes |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(154 |
) |
Deferred income tax expense (benefit): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Federal income taxes |
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
State and local income taxes |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
Foreign income taxes |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred income tax expense |
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Applicable income tax expense |
|
$ |
533 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following is a reconciliation between the statutory U.S. Federal income tax rate and the
Bancorps effective tax rate for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Statutory tax rate |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
|
Increase (decrease) resulting from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State taxes, net of federal benefit |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Tax-exempt income |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
|
|
(18.7 |
) |
Credits |
|
|
(7.3 |
) |
|
|
(14.1 |
) |
|
|
(14.6 |
) |
Goodwill |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8.7 |
|
Interest to taxing authority, net of tax |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
Other changes in unrecognized tax benefits |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Unrealized stock-based compensation benefits |
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
29.1 |
% |
|
|
19.8 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt income in the rate reconciliation table includes interest on municipal bonds,
interest on tax-exempt lending, income/charges on life insurance policies held by the Bancorp, and certain gains on sales of leases that are exempt from federal taxation.
During 2010, the Bancorp settled its outstanding dispute with the IRS relating to a specific capital raising
transaction. This favorable settlement reduced income tax expense (including interest) by $19 million. During 2009, the Bancorp settled its outstanding dispute with the IRS relating to certain
leveraged lease transactions. This favorable settlement reduced income tax expense (including interest) by $6 million and $55 million for 2010 and 2009, respectively.
During 2009, the Bancorp notified the carrier of one of the Bancorps policies of its intent to surrender a certain
BOLI policy and was therefore required to establish a deferred tax asset relating to the difference between its financial reporting and tax basis of its investment. As a result, income tax expense for 2009 was favorably impacted by $106 million.
The following table provides a summary of the Bancorps unrecognized tax benefits as of
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Tax positions that would impact the effective tax rate, if recognized |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Tax positions where the ultimate deductibility is highly certain, but for which there is uncertainty about the timing of the
deduction |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending amounts of the Bancorps
unrecognized tax benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Unrecognized tax benefits at January 1 |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
Gross increases for tax positions taken during prior period |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Gross decreases for tax positions taken during prior period |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(329 |
) |
Gross increases for tax positions taken during current period |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Settlements with taxing authorities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(563 |
) |
Lapse of applicable statute of limitations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits at December 31 |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Bancorps unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 relate
largely to state income tax exposures from taking tax positions where the Bancorp believes it is likely that, upon examination, a state will take a position contrary to the position taken by the Bancorp.
Substantially all of the reduction of unrecognized tax benefits during
2010 related to the settlement of the Bancorps dispute with the IRS relating to the specific capital raising transaction mentioned previously. Similarly, substantially all of the reduction of unrecognized tax benefits during 2009 related to
the settlement of certain leveraged lease transactions with the IRS.
While it is reasonably possible that the amount of the
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
unrecognized tax benefit with respect to certain of the Bancorps uncertain tax positions could increase or decrease during the next 12 months, the Bancorp believes it is unlikely
that its unrecognized tax benefits will change by a material amount during the next 12 months. Deferred income taxes are comprised of the following items at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
$ |
789 |
|
|
|
1,051 |
|
Deferred compensation |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
Impairment reserves |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
Reserves |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Reserve for unfunded commitments |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
State net operating losses |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
Other |
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets |
|
$ |
1,422 |
|
|
|
1,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease financing |
|
$ |
853 |
|
|
|
801 |
|
Investments in joint ventures and partnership interests |
|
|
468 |
|
|
|
481 |
|
Other comprehensive income |
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
MSRs |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
Bank premises and equipment |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
State deferred taxes |
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Other |
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities |
|
$ |
2,046 |
|
|
|
1,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net deferred tax liability |
|
$ |
(624 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets are included as a component of other assets in the Consolidated Balance
Sheets and deferred tax liabilities are included as a component of accrued taxes, interest and expenses in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp had recorded deferred tax assets of $63 million and $66 million, respectively, related to state net operating loss carryforwards. The deferred tax assets
relating to state net operating losses are presented net of specific valuation allowances, primarily resulting from leasing operations, of $34 million and $25 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. If these carry forwards are not
utilized, they will expire in varying amounts through 2030. Additionally, at December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp had federal general business tax credit carryforwards of $5 million and $45 million, respectively. If unused, these credit
carryforwards will expire in 2031.
The Bancorp has determined that a valuation allowance is not needed
against the remaining deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2011 or 2010. The Bancorp considered all of the positive and negative evidence available to determine whether it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will ultimately
be realized and, based upon that evidence, the Bancorp believes it is more likely than not that the deferred tax assets recorded at December 31, 2011 and 2010 will ultimately be realized. The Bancorp reached this conclusion as the Bancorp has
taxable income in the carryback period and it is expected that the Bancorps remaining deferred tax assets will be realized through the reversal of its existing taxable temporary differences and its projected future taxable income.
As required under U.S. GAAP, the Bancorp established a deferred tax asset for stock-based awards granted to its
employees. When the actual tax deduction for these stock-based awards is less than the expense previously recognized for financial reporting or when the awards expire unexercised, the Bancorp is required to write-off the deferred tax asset
previously established for these stock-based awards. As a result of the expiration of certain stock options and SARs and the lapse of restrictions on certain shares of restricted stock during the year ended December 31, 2011, the Bancorp
recorded additional income tax expense of approximately $26 million related to the write-off of a portion of the deferred tax asset previously established. As a result of the Bancorps stock price as of December 31, 2011, it is reasonably
possible that the Bancorp will be required to record an additional $21 million of income tax expense over the next twelve months, primarily in the second quarter of 2012. The Bancorp cannot predict its stock price or whether its employees will
exercise other stock-based awards with lower exercise prices in the future; therefore, it is possible that the impact to income tax expense will be greater than or less than $21 million over the next twelve months.
The IRS concluded its audit for 2006 and 2007 during the third quarter of
2010. As a result, all issues have been resolved with the IRS through 2007. Further, the IRS has concluded its fieldwork on the Bancorps 2008 and 2009 federal income tax returns. No material issues were identified as a result of the IRS audit
and all significant issues have been resolved. The Bancorp anticipates that the IRS audit of the 2008 and 2009 federal income tax returns will be completed during 2012. The statute of limitations for the Bancorps federal income tax returns
remains open for tax years 2008-2011. On occasion, as various state and local taxing jurisdictions examine the returns of the Bancorp and its subsidiaries, the Bancorp may agree to extend the statute of limitations for a short period of time.
Otherwise, with the exception of a few states with insignificant uncertain tax positions, the statutes of limitations for state income tax returns remain open only for tax years in accordance with each states statutes.
Any interest and penalties incurred in connection with income taxes are recorded as a component of income tax expense in
the Consolidated Financial Statements. During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Bancorp recognized interest expense of $1 million, net of the related tax impact related to interest and penalties. During the year ended December 31,
2010, the Bancorp recognized an interest benefit incurred in connection with income taxes of $8 million, net of the related tax impact. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp had accrued interest liabilities, net of the related tax
benefits, of $3 million and $1 million, respectively. No material liabilities were recorded for penalties.
Retained earnings at December 31, 2011 and 2010 included $157 million in allocations of earnings for bad debt
deductions of former thrift subsidiaries for which no income tax has been provided. Under current tax law, if certain of the Bancorps subsidiaries use these bad debt reserves for purposes other than to absorb bad debt losses, they will be
subject to federal income tax at the current corporate tax rate.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
21. RETIREMENT AND BENEFIT PLANS
The Bancorps qualified defined benefit plans benefits were frozen in 1998,
except for grandfathered employees. The Bancorps other retirement plans consist of nonqualified, supplemental retirement plans, which are funded on an as needed basis. A majority of these plans were obtained in acquisitions from prior years.
The Bancorp recognizes the
overfunded and underfunded status of its pension plans as an asset and liability, respectively. The overfunded and underfunded amounts recognized in other assets and other liabilities,
respectively, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets were as follows as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Prepaid benefit cost |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Accrued benefit liability |
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net underfunded status |
|
$ |
(72 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize the defined benefit retirement plans as of and for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plans with an Overfunded Status(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at January 1 |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
182 |
|
Actual return on assets |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Contributions |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Settlement |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at December 31 |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation at January 1 |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
183 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Settlement |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Actuarial loss |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation at December 31 |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overfunded projected benefit obligation recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as an asset |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) The Bancorps defined benefit plan had an Overfunded Status at December 31, 2010. The plan was
Underfunded at December 31, 2011 and is reflected in the Underfunded Status table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plans with an Underfunded Status |
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at January 1 |
|
$ |
197 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Actual return on assets |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Contributions |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Settlement |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at December 31 |
|
$ |
181 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation at January 1 |
|
$ |
227 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Settlement |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Actuarial gain |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation at December 31 |
|
$ |
253 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unfunded projected benefit obligation recognized in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as a liability |
|
$ |
(72 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated net actuarial loss for the defined benefit pension plans that will be
amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost during 2012 is $14 million. The estimated net prior service cost for the defined benefit pension plan that will be amortized from
accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost during 2012 is
immaterial to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table summarizes net periodic benefit cost and
other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Components of net periodic benefit cost: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Expected return on assets |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Amortization of net actuarial loss |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Amortization of net prior service cost |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Settlement |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in other comprehensive income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss (gain) |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Net prior service cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Amortization of net actuarial loss |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Amortization of prior service cost |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Settlement |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total recognized in other comprehensive income |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income |
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements of Plan Assets
The following table summarizes plan assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using (a) |
|
2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Equity Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities (Growth)(b) |
|
$ |
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
53 |
|
Equity securities (Value) |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
105 |
|
Mutual and exchange traded funds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market funds |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5 |
|
International funds |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Commodity funds |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mutual and exchange traded funds |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury obligations |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Agency mortgage backed |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Non-agency mortgage backed |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Corporate bonds(d) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt securities |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total plan assets |
|
$ |
154 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using (a) |
|
2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Equity Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities (Growth)(b) |
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
Equity securities (Value) |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mutual and exchange traded funds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market funds |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
International funds |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Commodity funds |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mutual and exchange traded funds |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury obligations |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
U.S. Government agencies (c) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Agency mortgage backed |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Non-agency mortgage backed |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Corporate bonds(d) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt securities |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total plan assets |
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
$ |
197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a) |
For further information on fair value hierarchy levels, see Note 27. |
b) |
Includes holdings in Bancorp common stock. |
c) |
Includes debt securities issued by U.S. Government sponsored agencies. |
d) |
Includes private label asset backed securities. |
The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments measured
at fair value, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy.
Equity
securities
The plan measures common stock using quoted prices which are available in an active market and classifies
these investments within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy.
Mutual and exchange traded funds
All of the plans mutual and exchange traded funds are publicly traded. The plan measures the value of these investments using the
funds quoted prices that are available in an active market and classifies these investments within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy.
Debt securities
For certain U.S. Treasury obligations and federal
agency securities, the plan measures the fair value based on quoted prices, which are available in an active market and classifies
these investments within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Where quoted prices are not available, the plan measures the fair value of these investments based on matrix pricing models that
include the bid price, which factors in the yield curve and other characteristics of the security including the interest rate, prepayment speeds and length of maturity. Therefore, these investments are classified within Level 2 of the valuation
hierarchy.
Plan Assumptions
The plan assumptions are evaluated annually and are updated as necessary. The discount rate assumption reflects the yield on a portfolio of high quality fixed-income instruments that have a similar
duration to the plans liabilities. The expected long-term rate of return assumption reflects the average return expected on the assets invested to provide for the plans liabilities. In determining the expected long-term rate of return,
the Bancorp evaluated actuarial and economic inputs, including long-term inflation rate assumptions and broad equity and bond indices long-term return projections, as well as actual long-term historical plan performance.
The following table summarizes the
plan assumptions for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Assumptions |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
For measuring benefit obligations at year end: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
|
4.27 |
% |
|
|
5.39 |
|
|
|
5.88 |
|
Rate of compensation increase |
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
For measuring net periodic benefit cost: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
|
5.39 |
|
|
|
5.88 |
|
|
|
6.11 |
|
Rate of compensation increase |
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Lowering both the expected rate of return on the plan and the discount rate by 0.25% would
have increased the 2011 pension expense by approximately $1 million.
Based on the actuarial assumptions, the
Bancorp does not expect to contribute to the plan in 2012. Estimated pension benefit payments, which reflect expected future service, are $20 million in 2012, $17 million in 2013, $16 million in 2014, $16 million in 2015 and $15 million in 2016. The
total estimated payments for the years 2017 through 2021 is $66 million.
Investment Policies and Strategies
The Bancorps policy for the investment of plan assets is to employ investment strategies that achieve a range of weighted-average
target asset allocations relating to equity securities (including the Bancorps common stock), fixed income securities (including federal agency obligations, corporate bonds and notes) and cash.
The following table
provides the Bancorps targeted and actual weighted-average asset allocations by asset category for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average asset allocation |
|
Targeted range |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
% |
|
|
72 |
|
Bancorp common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities(a) |
|
|
70-80 |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Total fixed income securities |
|
|
20-25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Cash |
|
|
0-5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Includes mutual and exchange traded funds. |
The risk tolerance for the plan is determined by management to be moderate to
aggressive, recognizing that higher returns involve some volatility and that periodic declines in the portfolios value are tolerated in an effort to achieve real capital growth. There were no significant concentrations of risk associated
with the investments of the Bancorps benefit and retirement plan at December 31, 2011 and 2010.
Permitted asset classes of the plan include cash and cash equivalents, fixed income (domestic and non-U.S. bonds),
equities (U.S., non-U.S., emerging markets and REITS), equipment leasing precious metals, commodity transactions and mortgages. The plan utilizes derivative instruments including puts, calls, straddles or other option strategies, as approved by
management.
Prohibited asset classes of the plan include venture capital, short sales, limited partnerships
and leveraged transactions. Per ERISA, the Bancorps common stock cannot exceed ten percent of the fair value of plan assets.
Fifth Third Bank, as Trustee, is expected to manage the plan assets in a
manner consistent with the plan agreement and other regulatory, federal and state laws. The Fifth Third Bank Pension, Profit Sharing and Medical Plan Committee (the Committee) is the plan administrator. The Trustee is required to provide
to the Committee monthly and quarterly reports covering a list of plan assets, portfolio performance, transactions and asset allocation. The Trustee is also required to keep the Committee apprised of any material changes in the Trustees
outlook and recommended investment policy.
Other Information on Retirement and Benefit Plans
The accumulated benefit obligation for all defined benefit plans was $253 million and $227 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010,
respectively. Amounts relating to the Bancorps defined benefit plans with assets exceeding benefit obligations were as follows at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Projected benefit obligation |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Fair value of plan assets |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts relating to the Bancorps defined benefit plans with benefit obligations exceeding assets
were as follows at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Projected benefit obligation |
|
$ |
253 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation |
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Fair value of plan assets |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, $159 million and $172 million, respectively, of plan
assets were managed through mutual funds by Fifth Third Bank, a subsidiary of the Bancorp. Plan assets included $5 million of Bancorp common stock as of December 31, 2011 and 2010. Plan assets are not expected to be returned to the Bancorp
during 2012.
The Bancorps profit sharing plan expense was $35 million for 2011,
$31 million for 2010, and $17 million for 2009. Expenses recognized for matching contributions to the Bancorps defined contribution savings plans were $40 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, and $36 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
22. ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
The activity of the
components of other comprehensive income and accumulated other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Comprehensive Income |
|
|
Total Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Pretax Activity |
|
|
Tax Effect |
|
|
Net Activity |
|
|
Beginning Balance |
|
|
Net Activity |
|
|
Ending Balance |
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized holding gains on available-for-sale securities arising during period |
|
|
$309 |
|
|
|
(108) |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains included in net income |
|
|
(56) |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(37) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
(89) |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
485 |
|
Unrealized holding gains on cash flow hedge derivatives arising during period |
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
(31) |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains on cash flow hedge derivatives included in net income |
|
|
(69) |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
(45) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on cash flow hedge derivatives |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(7) |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Defined benefit plans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net prior service cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial gain |
|
|
(32) |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(21) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit plans, net |
|
|
(32) |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(21) |
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$241 |
|
|
|
(85) |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized holding gains on available-for-sale securities arising during period |
|
|
$216 |
|
|
|
(73) |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains included in net income |
|
|
(57) |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(38) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
(54) |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
Unrealized holding gains on cash flow hedge derivatives arising during period |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains on cash flow hedge derivatives included in net income |
|
|
(60) |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
(39) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on cash flow hedge derivatives |
|
|
(58) |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(38) |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
67 |
|
Defined benefit plans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net prior service cost |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit plans, net |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$112 |
|
|
|
(39) |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized holding gains on available-for-sale securities arising during period |
|
|
$248 |
|
|
|
(86) |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains included in net income |
|
|
(57) |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(37) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment related to prior OTTI charges |
|
|
(37) |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(24) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities |
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
(53) |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
Unrealized holding gains on cash flow hedge derivatives arising during period |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
(26) |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for net gains on cash flow hedge derivatives included in net
income |
|
|
(49) |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
(32) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on cash flow hedge derivatives |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
Defined benefit plans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net prior service cost |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit plans, net |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$219 |
|
|
|
(76) |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
23. COMMON, PREFERRED AND TREASURY STOCK
The following is a
summary of the share activity within common, preferred and treasury stock for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Preferred Stock |
|
|
Treasury Stock |
|
($ in millions, except share data) |
|
Value |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Shares |
|
Shares at December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
1,295 |
|
|
|
583,427,104 |
|
|
$ |
4,241 |
|
|
|
180,620 |
|
|
$ |
229 |
|
|
|
6,040,492 |
|
Issuance of common shares |
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
157,955,960 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
60,121,124 |
|
|
|
(674) |
|
|
|
(27,849) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Accretion from dividends on preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Stock-based awards exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
819,796 |
|
Restricted stock grants |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(751,464 |
) |
Other |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
327,200 |
|
Shares at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
$1,779 |
|
|
|
801,504,188 |
|
|
|
$3,609 |
|
|
|
152,771 |
|
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
|
6,436,024 |
|
Accretion from dividends on preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Stock-based awards exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
16,391 |
|
Restricted stock grants and forfeitures, net |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(62) |
|
|
|
(1,334,967) |
|
Employee stock ownership through benefit plans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
|
|
114,218 |
|
Shares at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
$1,779 |
|
|
|
801,504,188 |
|
|
|
$3,654 |
|
|
|
152,771 |
|
|
$ |
130 |
|
|
|
5,231,666 |
|
Issuance of common shares |
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
122,388,393 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Redemption of preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(3,408) |
|
|
|
(136,320) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Accretion from dividends on preferred shares, Series F |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Stock-based awards exercised, including treasury shares issued |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(336,735 |
) |
Restricted stock grants |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(756,381 |
) |
Other |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(50,405) |
|
Shares at December 31, 2011 |
|
|
$2,051 |
|
|
|
923,892,581 |
|
|
|
$398 |
|
|
|
16,450 |
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
|
4,088,145 |
|
In 2008, the Bancorp issued 8.5% non-cumulative Series G convertible preferred stock. The
depository shares represent shares of its convertible preferred stock and has a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share. The preferred stock is convertible at any time, at the option of the shareholder, into 2,159.8272 shares of common stock,
representing a conversion price of approximately $11.575 per share of common stock.
On December 31,
2008, the U.S. Treasury purchased $3.4 billion, or 136,320 shares, of the Bancorps Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series F, with a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share and related 10-year warrant in the amount of 15%
of the preferred stock investment. The warrant gave the U.S Treasury the right to purchase 43,617,747 shares of the Bancorps common stock at $11.72 per share. The Series F senior preferred stock was issued complying with the terms established
by the CPP. Per the program terms, the U.S. Treasurys investment consisted of senior preferred stock with a five percent dividend for each of the first five years of investment and nine percent thereafter, unless the shares were redeemed. The
shares were callable by the Bancorp at par after three years and could be repurchased at any time under certain circumstances. The terms also included restrictions on the repurchase of common stock and an increase in common stock dividends, which
required the U.S. Treasurys consent, for a period of three years from the date of investment unless the preferred shares were redeemed in whole or the U.S. Treasury had transferred all of the preferred shares to a third party.
The proceeds from issuance of the Series F preferred stock were allocated to the preferred stock and to the warrant
based on their relative fair values, which resulted in an initial book value of $3.2 billion for the preferred stock and $239 million for the warrant. The resulting discount to the preferred stock was being accreted over five years through retained
earnings as a preferred stock dividend, resulting in an effective yield of 6.7% for the Series F preferred stock for the first five years.
On May 7, 2009, the Bancorp announced the SCAP results. While not required to raise additional overall capital, the Bancorp was required to augment its existing capital base to maintain a capital
buffer above the newly required four percent threshold of the Tier I common equity ratio. As a result, the Bancorp initiated a number of capital actions including the offer to exchange Series G preferred shares and a common stock offering.
On June 4, 2009, the Bancorp announced the successful completion of
a $1.0 billion at-the-market offering of its common shares. Through this offering, the Bancorp issued approximately 158 million shares at an average price of $6.33.
On June 17, 2009, the Bancorp completed its offer to exchange 2,158.8272 shares of its common stock, no par value,
and $8,250 in cash, for each set of 250 validly tendered and accepted depositary shares. The Bancorp issued approximately 60 million shares of common stock and paid $230 million in cash in exchange for 7 million depositary shares. Overall,
$696 million in liquidation amount of the Bancorps depositary shares were validly tendered, not withdrawn and exchanged, which represented 63% of the aggregate liquidation amount of its depositary shares. An aggregate of 7 million
depositary shares representing 27,849 shares of Series G preferred stock were retired upon receipt. At the time of exchange, the Bancorp recognized an increase to retained earnings and net income available to common shareholders of $35 million,
calculated as the difference between the carrying amount of the Series G preferred stock exchanged and the sum of the fair value of the common stock plus cash delivered. As a result of this exchange, the Bancorp increased its common equity by $441
million. As of December 31, 2011, Series G preferred stock had 4,112,750 depositary shares representing 16,450 shares outstanding and 1,700 shares reserved for issuance.
On January 25, 2011, the Bancorp raised $1.7 billion in new common equity through the issuance of 121,428,572
shares of common stock in an underwritten offering with an initial price of $14.00 per share. On January 24, 2011, the underwriters exercised their option to purchase an additional 12,142,857 shares at the offering price of $14.00 per share. In
connection with this exercise, the Bancorp entered into a forward sale agreement which resulted in a final net payment of 959,821 shares on February 4, 2011. On February 2, 2011, the Bancorp used these proceeds along with proceeds from a
senior debt offering and other available resources to repurchase all 136,320 Series F preferred shares. In connection with the redemption of the Series F Preferred Stock, the Bancorp accelerated the accretion of the remaining issuance discount on
the
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Series F Preferred Stock and recorded a reduction in retained earnings and a corresponding increase in preferred stock of $153 million in the Bancorps Consolidated Balance Sheet. On
March 16, 2011, the Bancorp repurchased the warrant issued to the U.S. Treasury in connection with the CPP preferred stock
investment at an agreed upon price of $280 million, which was recorded as a reduction to capital surplus in the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
During 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Bancorp repurchased an immaterial amount of common stock.
24.
STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
The Bancorp has historically emphasized employee stock ownership. The following table
provides detail of the number of shares to be issued upon exercise of outstanding stock-based
awards and remaining shares available for future issuance under all of the Bancorps equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Category (shares in thousands) |
|
Number of Shares to be Issued Upon Exercise |
|
|
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|
|
Shares Available for Future Issuance |
|
Equity compensation plans approved by shareholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,283 |
(a) |
SARs |
|
|
(b |
) |
|
|
(b |
) |
|
|
(a |
) |
Restricted stock |
|
|
4,764 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
(a |
) |
Stock options (c) |
|
|
6,562 |
|
|
$ |
59.73 |
|
|
|
(a |
) |
Phantom stock units |
|
|
(d |
) |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Performance units |
|
|
(e |
) |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
(a |
) |
Employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,548 |
(f) |
Total Shares |
|
|
11,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,831 |
|
(a) |
Under the 2011 Incentive Compensation Plan, 39 million shares plus up to 4.5 million shares from the 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan (the Predecessor
Plan) of stock were authorized for issuance as incentive and nonqualified stock options, SARs, restricted stock and restricted stock units, performance units and performance restricted stock awards. |
(b) |
The number of shares to be issued upon exercise will be determined at vesting based on the difference between the grant price and the market price at the date of
exercise. |
(c) |
Excludes 1 million outstanding options awarded under plans assumed by the Bancorp in connection with certain mergers and acquisitions. The Bancorp has not made
any awards under these plans and will make no additional awards under these plans. The weighted-average exercise price of the outstanding options is $16.31 per share. |
(d) |
Phantom stock units are settled in cash. |
(e) |
The number of shares to be issued is dependent upon the Bancorp achieving certain predefined performance targets and ranges from zero shares to approximately
1.5 million shares. |
(f) |
Represents remaining shares of Fifth Third common stock under the Bancorps 1993 Stock Purchase Plan, as amended and restated, including an additional
1.5 million shares approved by shareholders on March 28, 2007 and an additional 12 million shares approved by shareholders on April 21, 2009. |
Stock-based awards are eligible for issuance under the Bancorps Incentive
Compensation Plan to key employees and directors of the Bancorp and its subsidiaries. The Incentive Compensation Plan was approved by shareholders on April 19, 2011, which authorizes the issuance of up to 39 million shares plus up to
4.5 million shares under the Predecessor Plan for Full Value Awards as equity compensation and provides for incentive and nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and restricted stock units, and performance share
and restricted stock awards. Full Value Awards are defined as awards with no cash outlay for the employee to obtain the full value. Based on total stock-based awards outstanding (including stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock
and performance units) and shares remaining for future grants under the 2011 Incentive Compensation Plan, the Bancorps total overhang is nine percent. The overhang measurement represents the potential dilution to which the Bancorps
shareholders of common stock are exposed due to the potential that stock-based compensation will be awarded to executives, directors or key employees of the Bancorp. SARs, restricted stock, stock options and performance units outstanding represent
six percent of the Bancorps issued shares at December 31, 2011.
All of the Bancorps
stock-based awards are to be settled with stock with the exception of phantom stock units and a portion of the performance units that are to be settled in cash. The Bancorp has historically used treasury stock to settle stock-based awards, when
available. SARs, issued at fair value based on the closing price of the Bancorps common stock on the date of grant, have up to ten-year terms and vest and become exercisable either ratably or fully over a four year period of continued
employment. The Bancorp does not grant discounted
SARs or stock options, re-price previously granted SARs or stock options, or grant reload stock options. Restricted stock grants vest after four years, or ratably over three or four years or
ratably after three years of continued employment and include dividend and voting rights. Stock options were previously issued at fair value based on the closing price of the Bancorps common stock on the date of grant, had up to ten-year terms
and vested and became fully exercisable ratably over a three or four year period of continued employment. Performance unit awards have three-year cliff vesting terms with performance or market conditions as defined by the plan.
Stock-based compensation expense was $59 million, $64 million and $51 million for the years ended December 31,
2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and is included in salaries, wages, and incentives in the Consolidated Statements of Income. The total related income tax benefit recognized was $21 million for 2011 and $18 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Stock Appreciation Rights
The Bancorp uses assumptions, which are evaluated and revised as necessary, in estimating the grant-date fair value of each SAR grant. The
weighted-average assumptions were as follows for the years ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Expected life (in years) |
|
6 |
|
6 |
|
6 |
Expected volatility |
|
35% |
|
38% |
|
73% |
Expected dividend yield |
|
2.0% |
|
2.0% |
|
1.3% |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
2.6% |
|
3.1% |
|
2.2% |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The expected life is derived from historical exercise patterns and represents the amount of
time that options granted are expected to be outstanding. The expected volatility is based on a combination of historical and implied volatilities of the Bancorps common stock. The expected dividend yield is based on annual dividends divided
by the Bancorps stock price. Annual dividends are based on projected dividends, estimated using a historical long-term dividend payout ratio, over the estimated life of the awards. The risk-free interest rate for periods within the contractual
life of the option is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The grant-date fair value of SARs is measured using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of SARs granted was $4.29, $5.10 and $2.41 per share for the years ended 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The total grant-date fair value of SARs that vested during 2011, 2010 and
2009 was $20 million, $25 million, and $26 million, respectively.
At December 31, 2011, there was $47
million of stock-based compensation expense related to nonvested SARs not yet recognized. The expense is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted-average period of approximately 2.7 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
SARs (shares in thousands) |
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
Outstanding at January 1 |
|
|
31,152 |
|
|
$ |
24.67 |
|
|
|
28,571 |
|
|
$ |
26.82 |
|
|
|
22,508 |
|
|
$ |
35.43 |
|
Granted |
|
|
8,633 |
|
|
|
13.36 |
|
|
|
5,310 |
|
|
|
14.74 |
|
|
|
8,398 |
|
|
|
4.05 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(521 |
) |
|
|
3.96 |
|
|
|
(319 |
) |
|
|
3.96 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(2,762 |
) |
|
|
25.76 |
|
|
|
(2,410 |
) |
|
|
30.87 |
|
|
|
(2,335 |
) |
|
|
27.93 |
|
Outstanding at December 31 |
|
|
36,502 |
|
|
$ |
22.20 |
|
|
|
31,152 |
|
|
$ |
24.67 |
|
|
|
28,571 |
|
|
$ |
26.82 |
|
Exercisable at December 31 |
|
|
20,070 |
|
|
$ |
30.29 |
|
|
|
16,347 |
|
|
$ |
34.94 |
|
|
|
12,254 |
|
|
$ |
40.38 |
|
The following table summarizes outstanding and exercisable SARs by grant price at December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding SARs |
|
|
Exercisable SARs |
|
Grant price per share |
|
Number of SARs at Year End (000s) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
|
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) |
|
|
Number of SARs at Year End (000s) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
|
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) |
|
Under $10.00 |
|
|
6,293 |
|
|
|
$4.04 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
2,845 |
|
|
$ |
3.96 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
$10.01-$20.00 |
|
|
17,845 |
|
|
|
15.37 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
|
4,978 |
|
|
|
18.18 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
$20.01-$30.00 |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
22.85 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
22.42 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
$30.01-$40.00 |
|
|
8,118 |
|
|
|
38.73 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
8,118 |
|
|
|
38.73 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
Over $40.00 |
|
|
4,207 |
|
|
|
46.41 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
4,107 |
|
|
|
46.57 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
All SARs |
|
|
36,502 |
|
|
|
$22.20 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
20,070 |
|
|
$ |
30.29 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
Restricted Stock Awards
The total grant-date fair value of RSAs that vested during 2011, 2010 and 2009 was $37 million, $30 million and $36 million, respectively.
At December 31, 2011, there was $40 million of
stock-based compensation expense related to nonvested restricted stock not yet recognized. The expense is expected to be recognized over a remaining weighted-average period of approximately 2.2
years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
RSAs (shares in thousands) |
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant -Date Fair Value |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant -Date Fair Value |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant -Date Fair Value |
|
Nonvested at January 1 |
|
|
5,158 |
|
|
$ |
18.89 |
|
|
|
4,645 |
|
|
$ |
23.85 |
|
|
|
5,584 |
|
|
$ |
29.04 |
|
Granted |
|
|
1,702 |
|
|
|
13.19 |
|
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
14.69 |
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
4.72 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(1,646 |
) |
|
|
22.52 |
|
|
|
(817 |
) |
|
|
36.96 |
|
|
|
(870 |
) |
|
|
40.84 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
(450 |
) |
|
|
15.34 |
|
|
|
(347 |
) |
|
|
22.39 |
|
|
|
(820 |
) |
|
|
23.86 |
|
Nonvested at December 31 |
|
|
4,764 |
|
|
$ |
15.95 |
|
|
|
5,158 |
|
|
$ |
18.89 |
|
|
|
4,645 |
|
|
$ |
23.85 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following table summarizes unvested RSAs by grant-date fair value at
December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested RSAs |
|
Grant-Date Fair Value Per Share |
|
Number of RSAs at Year End (000s) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) |
|
Under $10.00 |
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
$10.01-$20.00 |
|
|
3,982 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
$20.01-$30.00 |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
$30.01-$40.00 |
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
All RSAs |
|
|
4,764 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Stock options
The grant-date fair value of stock options is measured using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. There were no stock options granted
during 2011 and 2010. Stock options granted during 2009 were immaterial to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised was immaterial to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements in 2011, 2010 and 2009. Cash received from options exercised during
2011 was $1 million and was immaterial to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements in 2010 and 2009. Tax benefits realized from exercised options were immaterial to the Consolidated
Financial Statements during 2011, 2010 and 2009. All stock options were vested at December 31, 2008, therefore, no stock options vested during 2011, 2010, or 2009. As of December 31, 2011, the aggregate intrinsic value of both outstanding
options and exercisable options was immaterial to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Stock Options (shares in thousands) |
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Weighted- Average Grant Price |
|
Outstanding at January 1 |
|
|
11,859 |
|
|
$ |
52.01 |
|
|
|
15,504 |
|
|
$ |
49.29 |
|
|
|
20,564 |
|
|
$ |
48.97 |
|
Granted |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8.59 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(96 |
) |
|
|
9.25 |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
8.76 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
8.33 |
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(4,179 |
) |
|
|
49.61 |
|
|
|
(3,587 |
) |
|
|
40.54 |
|
|
|
(5,050 |
) |
|
|
48.06 |
|
Outstanding at December 31 |
|
|
7,584 |
|
|
$ |
53.88 |
|
|
|
11,859 |
|
|
$ |
52.01 |
|
|
|
15,504 |
|
|
$ |
49.29 |
|
Exercisable at December 31 |
|
|
7,584 |
|
|
$ |
53.88 |
|
|
|
11,859 |
|
|
$ |
52.01 |
|
|
|
15,504 |
|
|
$ |
49.29 |
|
The following table summarizes outstanding and exercisable stock options by exercise price at December 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding and Exercisable Stock Options |
|
Exercise price per share |
|
Number of Options at Year End (000s) |
|
|
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|
|
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) |
|
Under $10.00 |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
$9.62 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
$10.01-$20.00 |
|
|
694 |
|
|
|
12.59 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
$20.01-$30.00 |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
23.63 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
$30.01-$40.00 |
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
36.25 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Over $40.00 |
|
|
6,566 |
|
|
|
59.74 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
All stock options |
|
|
7,584 |
|
|
|
$53.88 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Other stock-based compensation
During 2009, the Bancorps Board of Directors approved the use of phantom stock units as part of its compensation for executives in
connection with changes made in reaction to the TARP compensation rules. On February 22, 2011, the Bancorp redeemed its Series F preferred stock held by the U.S. Treasury under the CPP. As a result of this redemption, the last payment of
phantom stock occurred in April of 2011. The phantom stock units were issued under the Bancorps 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan. The number of phantom stock units was determined each pay period by dividing the amount of salary to be paid in
phantom stock units for that pay period, by the reported closing price of the Bancorps common stock on the
pay date for such pay period. The phantom stock units vest immediately. Phantom stock was expensed based on the number of outstanding units multiplied by the closing price of the Bancorps
stock at period end. The phantom stock units did not include any rights to receive dividends or dividend equivalents. Phantom stock units issued on or before June 12, 2010 were settled in cash upon the earlier to occur of June 15, 2011 or
the executives death. Units issued thereafter will be settled in cash with 50% to be settled on June 15, 2012 and 50% to be settled on June 15, 2013. The amount paid on settlement of the phantom stock units is equal to the total
amount of phantom stock units settled at the reported closing price of the Bancorps common stock on the settlement
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
date. Under the phantom stock program, 132,649 and 488,703 respective phantom stock units were granted with a weighted average grant price of $14.40 and $12.80, during the years ended
December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. During 2011, 521,091 phantom stock units were settled. No phantom stock units were settled during 2010.
Performance units are payable contingent upon the Bancorp achieving certain predefined performance targets over the three-year measurement period. Awards granted during 2011 and 2010 will be entirely
settled in stock. During 2009, the awards granted are payable 50% in stock and 50% in cash. The performance targets are based on the Bancorps performance relative to a defined peer group. During 2011, 2010 and 2009,
328,061, 61,320, and 1,118,958 performance units, respectively, were granted by the Bancorp. These awards were granted at a weighted-average grant-date fair value of $13.36, $13.76 and $3.96 per
unit during 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The Bancorp sponsors a stock purchase plan that allows
qualifying employees to purchase shares of the Bancorps common stock with a 15% match. During the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, there were 886,447, 749,127 and 1,343,632 shares, respectively, purchased by participants and
the Bancorp recognized stock-based compensation expense of $1 million each year.
25. OTHER
NONINTEREST INCOME AND OTHER NONINTEREST EXPENSE
The following table presents the major components of other noninterest income and other noninterest expense for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Other noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease income |
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
Equity method income from interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
BOLI income (loss) |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Cardholder fees |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
Net gain from warrant and put options associated with sale of the processing business |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Gain on loan sales |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Consumer loan and lease fees |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Banking center income |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
TSA revenue |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Loss on sale of OREO |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(78) |
|
|
|
(70) |
|
Loss on swap associated with the sale of Visa, Inc. class B shares |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
(19) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Gain on sale/redemption of Visa, Inc. ownership interests |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
244 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
250 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
Other noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FDIC insurance and other taxes |
|
$ |
201 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Loan and lease |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
Losses and adjustments |
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Affordable housing investments impairment |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Professional services fees |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Travel |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Postal and courier |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Operating lease |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
OREO expense |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Recruitment and education |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Data processing |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Insurance |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Intangible asset amortization |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
Supplies |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Visa litigation reserve |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(73) |
|
Provision for unfunded commitments and letters of credit |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(24) |
|
|
|
99 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,224 |
|
|
|
1,394 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
26. EARNINGS PER SHARE
The calculation of earnings per
share and the reconciliation of earnings per share and earnings per diluted share for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
(in millions, except per share data) |
|
Income |
|
|
Average Shares |
|
|
Per Share Amount |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Average Shares |
|
|
Per Share Amount |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Average Shares |
|
|
Per Share Amount |
|
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Bancorp |
|
$ |
1,297 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common shareholders |
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Income allocated to participating securities |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocated to common shareholders |
|
$ |
1,088 |
|
|
|
906 |
|
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
Earnings per diluted share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
1,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based awards |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Series G convertible preferred stock (a) |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(0.02) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(21) |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
(0.06) |
|
Warrants related to Series F preferred stock |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net income available to common shareholders plus assumed conversions |
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Income allocated to participating securities |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocated to common shareholders plus assumed conversions |
|
$ |
1,123 |
|
|
|
950 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
799 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
(a) |
The additive effect to income from dividends on convertible preferred stock for the year ended December 31, 2009 included preferred dividends of $14 for Series
G preferred shares, offset by a $35 reduction to preferred dividends due to the conversion of a portion of Series G preferred shares during the second quarter of 2009. |
Shares are excluded from the computation of net income per diluted share when their
inclusion has an anti-dilutive effect on earnings per share. The diluted earnings per share computation for the years 2011, 2010, and 2009 excludes 29 million, 23 million, and 23 million, respectively, of stock appreciation rights,
8 million, 12 million, and 17 million, respectively, of stock options and 1 million, 1 million and 4 million shares, respectively, of unvested restricted stock that had not yet been exercised. In 2010, 36 million
shares related to the Bancorps Series G preferred stock that were not part of the conversion of preferred shares in the second quarter of 2009 were excluded from the computation of net income per diluted share because their inclusion would
have been anti-dilutive to earnings per share.
For the year ended December 31, 2009, there were 44 million
shares under warrants related to the Bancorps Series F preferred stock from the CPP that were excluded from the computation of net income per diluted share, as their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive to earnings per share due to the
exercise price of the shares being greater than the average market price of the common shares. The warrants had an initial exercise price of $11.72 per share.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
27. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
The Bancorp measures certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance
with U.S. GAAP, which defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. U.S. GAAP also establishes a fair value
hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1)
and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). A financial instruments categorization within the fair value
hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the instruments fair value measurement. For more information regarding the fair value hierarchy and how the Bancorp
measures fair value, see Note 1.
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
The following tables summarize assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, including residential mortgage loans
held for sale for which the Bancorp has elected the fair value option as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and Government agencies |
|
|
$171 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
171 |
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,962 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,962 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10,284 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10,284 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
Other
securities(a) |
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
190 |
|
Available-for-sale
securities(a) |
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
14,164 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
14,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
144 |
|
Trading securities |
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,751 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,751 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(b) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Derivative assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1,773 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
1,815 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
294 |
|
Equity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
134 |
|
Derivative assets |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2,201 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
2,356 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$508 |
|
|
|
19,148 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
19,869 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts |
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
858 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
275 |
|
Equity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
130 |
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
1,344 |
|
Short positions |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
$56 |
|
|
|
1,211 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
1,350 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and Government agencies |
|
|
$230 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
230 |
|
U.S. Government sponsored agencies |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,645 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,645 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10,973 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
10,973 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,342 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,342 |
|
Other
securities(a) |
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
184 |
|
Available-for-sale
securities(a) |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
14,136 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
14,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury and Government agencies |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Obligations of states and political subdivisions |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Agency mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Other bonds, notes and debentures |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
144 |
|
Trading securities |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,892 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,892 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(b) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Derivative assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
1,448 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
1,551 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
343 |
|
Equity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
99 |
|
Derivative assets |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
1,890 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$548 |
|
|
|
18,158 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
18,852 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
Foreign exchange contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
323 |
|
Equity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Commodity contracts |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Derivative liabilities |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
1,261 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
Short positions |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
$15 |
|
|
|
1,262 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
1,316 |
|
(a) |
Excludes FHLB and FRB restricted stock totaling $497 and $345, respectively, at December 31,
2011, $524 and $344, respectively, at December 31, 2010. |
(b) |
Includes residential mortgage loans originated as held for sale and subsequently transferred to held for investment. |
The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for significant
instruments measured at fair value, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy. Residential mortgage loans held for sale that are reclassified to held for investment are transferred from Level 2 to
Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy as described below. It is the Bancorps policy to value any transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy based on end of period fair values.
Available-for-sale and trading securities
Where quoted prices are
available in an active market, securities are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Level 1 securities include government bonds and exchange traded equities. If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated
using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics, or discounted cash flows. Examples of such instruments, which are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy, include agency and non-agency mortgage-backed
securities, other asset-backed securities, obligations of U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds. Agency mortgage-backed securities, obligations of U.S. Government sponsored agencies, and corporate and municipal bonds
are generally valued using a market approach based on observable prices of securities with similar characteristics.
Non-agency mortgage-backed securities and other asset- backed securities
are generally valued using an income approach based on discounted cash flows, incorporating prepayment speeds, performance of underlying collateral and specific tranche-level attributes. In certain cases where there is limited activity or less
transparency around inputs to the valuation, securities are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. Trading securities classified as Level 3 consist of auction rate securities. Due to the illiquidity in the market for these types of
securities at December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp measured fair value using a discount rate based on the assumed holding period.
Residential mortgage loans held for sale and held for investment
For residential mortgage loans held for sale, fair value is estimated based upon mortgage-backed securities prices and spreads to those prices or, for certain ARM loans, DCF models that may incorporate
the anticipated portfolio composition, credit spreads of asset-backed securities with similar collateral and market conditions. The anticipated portfolio composition includes the effect of interest rate spreads and discount rates due to loan
characteristics such as the state in which the loan was originated, the loan amount and the ARM margin. Residential mortgage loans held for sale that are valued based on mortgage backed securities prices are classified within Level 2 of the
valuation hierarchy as the valuation is based on
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
external pricing for similar instruments. ARM loans classified as held for sale are also classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy due to the use of observable inputs in the DCF model.
These observable inputs include interest rate spreads from agency mortgage-backed securities market rates and observable discount rates. For residential mortgage loans reclassified from held for sale to held for investment, the fair value estimation
is based on mortgage-backed securities prices and a credit component that is based on internally developed loss rate models. Therefore, these loans are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.
Derivatives
Exchange-traded derivatives valued using quoted prices and certain over-the-counter derivatives valued using active bids are classified
within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Most derivative contracts are valued using discounted cash flow or other models that incorporate current market interest rates, credit spreads assigned to the derivative counterparties and other market
parameters and, therefore, are classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy. Such derivatives include basic and structured interest rate swaps and options. Derivatives that are valued based upon models with significant
unobservable market parameters are classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, derivatives classified as Level 3, which are valued using an
option-pricing model containing unobservable inputs, consisted primarily of warrants and put rights associated with the sale of the processing business to Advent International and a total return swap associated with the Bancorps sale of Visa,
Inc. Class B shares. Level 3 derivatives also include interest rate lock commitments, which utilize internally generated loan closing rate assumptions as a significant unobservable input in the valuation process.
In connection with the sale of the processing business, the Bancorp provided Advent International with certain put
options that are exercisable in the event of certain circumstances. In addition, the associated warrants allow the Bancorp to purchase an incremental 10% nonvoting interest in Vantiv Holding, LLC under certain defined conditions involving change of
control. The fair values of the warrants and put options are calculated applying Black-Scholes option valuation models using probability weighted scenarios. The assumptions utilized in the models are summarized in the following table as of
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Warrants |
|
|
Put Options (b) |
|
|
Warrants |
|
|
Put Options |
|
Expected term (years) |
|
|
7.5 17.5 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
8.5 18.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 3.0 |
|
Expected volatility(a) |
|
|
35.4 35.5 |
% |
|
|
31.5 |
% |
|
|
36.0 37.0 |
% |
|
|
25.6 44.6 |
% |
Risk free rate |
|
|
1.57 2.88 |
% |
|
|
0.31 |
% |
|
|
3.06 4.18 |
% |
|
|
0.23 1.05 |
% |
Expected dividend rate |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
% |
(a) |
Based on historical and implied volatilities of comparable companies assuming similar expected terms. |
(b) |
Historically, three scenarios have been used to estimate the fair value of the put options. Two of the scenarios terms expired prior to December 31, 2011.
Therefore, the assumptions at December 31, 2011 only include one scenario. |
Under the terms of the total return swap, the Bancorp will make or receive payments based
on subsequent changes in the conversion rate of the Visa, Inc. Class B shares into Class A shares. The fair value of the total return swap was calculated using a discounted cash flow model based on unobservable inputs consisting of
managements estimate of the probability of certain litigation scenarios, timing of litigation settlements and payments related to the swap.
The net fair value of the interest rate lock commitments at December 31, 2011 was $33 million. Immediate decreases in current interest rates of 25 bps and 50 bps would result in increases in the fair
value of the interest rate lock commitments of approximately $16 million and $28 million, respectively. Immediate increases of current interest rates of 25 bps and 50 bps
would result in decreases in the fair value of the interest rate lock commitments of approximately $20 million and $45 million, respectively. The decrease in fair value of interest rate lock
commitments due to immediate 10% and 20% adverse changes in the assumed loan closing rates would be approximately $4 million and $7 million, respectively, and the increase in fair value due to immediate 10% and 20% favorable changes in the assumed
loan closing rates would be approximately $3 million and $6 million, respectively. These sensitivities are hypothetical and should be used with caution, as changes in fair value based on a variation in assumptions typically cannot be extrapolated
because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change in fair value may not be linear.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following tables are a reconciliation of
assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Trading Securities |
|
|
Residential Mortgage Loans |
|
|
Interest
Rate Derivatives, Net(a) |
|
|
Equity Derivatives, Net(a)
|
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
Total gains or losses (realized/unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
(43) |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Purchases |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Sales |
|
|
(5) |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Settlements |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9) |
|
|
|
(175) |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(164) |
|
Transfers into Level 3(b) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
$ |
130 |
|
The amount of total gains or losses for the period included in earnings attributable to
the change in unrealized gains or losses relating to assets still held at December 31, 2011(c) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(43) |
|
|
$ |
(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level
3) |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Residual Interests in Securitizations |
|
|
Trading Securities |
|
|
Residential Mortgage Loans |
|
|
Interest Rate Derivatives, Net(a)
|
|
|
Equity Derivatives, Net(a)
|
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
174 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
Total gains or losses (realized/unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
|
176 |
|
Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements, net |
|
|
(174)(d) |
|
|
|
(10) |
|
|
|
(6) |
|
|
|
(183) |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(317) |
|
Transfers into Level 3(b) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
The amount of total gains or losses for the period included in earnings attributable to
the change in unrealized gains or losses relating to assets still held at December 31, 2010(c) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(14) |
|
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) |
|
For the year ended December 31, 2009 ($ in millions) |
|
Residual Interests in Securitizations |
|
|
Trading Securities |
|
|
Residential Mortgage Loans |
|
|
Derivatives, Net(e) |
|
|
Total Fair Value |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
146 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
$ |
177 |
|
Total gains or losses (realized/unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
Included in other comprehensive income |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements, net |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
(8) |
|
|
|
(160) |
|
|
|
(136) |
|
Transfers into Level 3(b) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
174 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
The amount of total gains or losses for the period included in earnings attributable to
the change in unrealized gains or losses relating to assets still held at December 31, 2009(c) |
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
(a) |
Net interest rate derivatives include derivative assets and liabilities of $34 and $2, respectively, as of
December 31, 2011 and $13 and $11, respectively, as of December 31, 2010. Net equity derivatives include derivative assets and liabilities of $113 and $81, respectively, as of
December 31, 2011, and $81 and $28, respectively, as of December 31, 2010. |
(b) |
Includes residential mortgage loans held for sale that were transferred to held for investment. |
(c) |
Includes interest income and expense. |
(d) |
Due to a change in U.S. GAAP adopted by the Bancorp on January 1, 2010, all residual interests in securitizations were eliminated concurrent with the
consolidation of the related VIEs. |
(e) |
Net derivatives include derivative assets and liabilities of $84 and $75, respectively, at December 31, 2009. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The total gains and losses included in earnings for assets
and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) were recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
$- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
(46) |
|
|
|
(15) |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Securities gains (losses), net |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Total gains |
|
|
$166 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
The total gains and losses included in earnings attributable to changes in unrealized gains and losses
related to Level 3 assets and liabilities still held at December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 were recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Income as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
$- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
(45) |
|
|
|
(15) |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Securities losses, net |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Total (losses) gains |
|
|
$(7) |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis. These assets and liabilities are
not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis; however, they are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances, such as when
there is evidence of impairment. The following tables represent those assets that were subject to fair value adjustments during the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 and still held as
of the end of the period, and the related losses from fair value adjustments on assets sold during the period as well as assets still held as of the end of the period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
Total Losses |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
2011 |
|
Commercial loans held for
sale(a) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
(67 |
) |
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
(328 |
) |
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
(124 |
) |
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
MSRs |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
OREO property |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
(171 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
(992 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
Total Losses |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
|
2010 |
|
Commercial loans held for
sale(a) |
|
$ |
120 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
770 |
|
|
|
890 |
|
|
|
(448 |
) |
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
(470 |
) |
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
(207 |
) |
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
(159 |
) |
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Other consumer loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
MSRs |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
822 |
|
|
|
822 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
OREO property |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
(264 |
) |
Total |
|
$ |
120 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
2,747 |
|
|
|
2,938 |
|
|
|
(1,602 |
) |
(a) |
Includes commercial nonaccrual loans held for sale. |
During 2011, the Bancorp transferred $143 million of commercial loans from the portfolio to
loans held for sale that upon transfer were measured at fair value. These loans had fair value adjustments totaling $31 million and were based on discounted cash flow models incorporating appraisals of the underlying collateral, as well as
assumptions about investor return requirements and amounts and timing of expected cash flows, and were therefore, classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. Additionally, during 2011, existing commercial loans held for sale with a fair
value of $48 million were further adjusted using the same methodology as loans transferred to held for sale. Therefore, these loans were classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy.
During 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp recorded nonrecurring impairment adjustments to certain commercial and industrial,
commercial mortgage and commercial construction loans held for investment. Such amounts are generally based on the fair value of the underlying collateral supporting the loan and were classified within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. In cases
where the carrying value exceeds the fair value, an impairment loss is recognized. The fair values and recognized impairment losses are reflected in the previous table.
During 2011, the Bancorp recognized temporary impairments in certain classes of the MSR portfolio in which the carrying
value was adjusted to fair value as of December 31, 2011. MSRs do not trade in an active, open market with readily observable prices. While sales of MSRs do occur, the precise terms and conditions typically are not readily available.
Accordingly, the Bancorp estimates the fair value of MSRs using discounted cash flow models with certain unobservable inputs, primarily prepayment speed assumptions, resulting in a classification within Level 3 of the valuation hierarchy. Refer to
Note 12 for further information on the Bancorps MSRs.
During the 2011 and 2010, the Bancorp recorded
nonrecurring adjustments to certain commercial and residential real estate properties classified as OREO and measured at the lower of carrying amount or fair value, less costs to sell. Nonrecurring losses included in the above table are primarily
due to declines in real estate values of the OREO properties. These losses include $100 million in losses, recorded as charge-offs, on new OREO properties transferred from loans during the period and $71 million in losses, recorded in other
noninterest income, attributable to fair value adjustments on OREO
properties subsequent to their transfer from loans. Such fair value amounts are generally based on appraisals of the property values, resulting in a classification within Level 3 of the valuation
hierarchy. In cases where the carrying amount exceeds the fair value, less costs to sell, an impairment loss is recognized. The previous tables reflect the fair value measurements of the properties before deducting the estimated costs to sell.
Fair Value Option
The Bancorp elected to measure certain residential mortgage loans held for sale under the fair value option as allowed under U.S. GAAP. Managements intent to sell residential mortgage loans
classified as held for sale may change over time due to such factors as changes in the overall liquidity in markets or changes in characteristics specific to certain loans held for sale. Consequently, these loans may be reclassified to loans held
for investment and maintained in the Bancorps loan portfolio. In such cases, the loans will continue to be measured at fair value. Residential loans with fair values of $24 million and $26 million were transferred to the Bancorps
portfolio during 2011 and 2010, respectively. The net impact related to fair value adjustments on these loans was a gain of $4 million during 2011. Fair value adjustments on residential mortgage loans transferred to the Bancorps portfolio
during 2010 were immaterial.
Fair value changes included in earnings for instruments held at
December 31, 2011 and 2010 for which the fair value option was elected included gains of $123 million and $25 million, respectively. Additionally, fair value changes included in earnings for instruments for which the fair value option was
elected but are no longer held by the Bancorp at December 31, 2011 and 2010 included gains of $168 million and $171 million during 2011 and 2010, respectively. These
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
gains are reported in mortgage banking net revenue in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Valuation adjustments related to instrument-specific credit risk for residential mortgage loans measured at fair value negatively impacted the fair value of those loans by $3 million at December 31,
2011 and $5 million at December 31, 2010. Interest on residential mortgage loans measured at fair value is
accrued as it is earned using the effective interest method and is reported as interest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
The following table summarizes the difference between the fair value and the principal balance for residential mortgage
loans measured at fair value as of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Principal Balance |
|
|
Difference |
|
December 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans measured at fair value |
|
|
$2,816 |
|
|
|
2,693 |
|
|
|
123 |
|
Past due loans of 90 days or more |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Nonaccrual loans |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans measured at fair value |
|
|
$1,938 |
|
|
|
1,913 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Past due loans of 90 days or more |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Nonaccrual loans |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Fair Value of Certain Financial Instruments
The following tables summarize the carrying amounts and estimated fair values for certain financial instruments, excluding financial
instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Net Carrying Amount |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Financial assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
2,663 |
|
|
|
2,663 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
842 |
|
|
|
842 |
|
Held-to-maturity securities |
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
322 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
1,781 |
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
29,854 |
|
|
|
30,300 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
9,697 |
|
|
|
8,870 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
943 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,451 |
|
|
|
3,237 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(a) |
|
|
10,380 |
|
|
|
9,978 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
10,524 |
|
|
|
9,737 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
11,784 |
|
|
|
11,747 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,872 |
|
|
|
1,958 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
Unallocated allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases, net(a) |
|
$ |
78,698 |
|
|
|
76,964 |
|
Financial liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
85,710 |
|
|
|
85,599 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
9,682 |
|
|
|
10,197 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $65 of residential mortgage loans measured at fair value on a recurring basis. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Net Carrying Amount |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Financial assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
2,159 |
|
|
|
2,159 |
|
Other securities |
|
|
868 |
|
|
|
868 |
|
Held-to-maturity securities |
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
1,515 |
|
|
|
1,515 |
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
324 |
|
Portfolio loans and leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and industrial loans |
|
|
26,068 |
|
|
|
27,322 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
10,248 |
|
|
|
9,513 |
|
Commercial construction loans |
|
|
1,890 |
|
|
|
1,471 |
|
Commercial leases |
|
|
3,267 |
|
|
|
2,934 |
|
Residential mortgage loans(a) |
|
|
8,600 |
|
|
|
7,577 |
|
Home equity |
|
|
11,248 |
|
|
|
9,366 |
|
Automobile loans |
|
|
10,910 |
|
|
|
10,975 |
|
Credit card |
|
|
1,738 |
|
|
|
1,786 |
|
Other consumer loans and leases |
|
|
622 |
|
|
|
682 |
|
Unallocated allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total portfolio loans and leases, net(a) |
|
$ |
74,441 |
|
|
|
71,626 |
|
Financial liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
81,648 |
|
|
|
81,860 |
|
Federal funds purchased |
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
1,574 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
9,558 |
|
|
|
9,921 |
|
(a) |
Excludes $46 of residential mortgage loans measured at fair value on a recurring basis. |
Cash and due from banks, other securities, other short-term investments, deposits, federal funds
purchased and other short-term borrowings
For financial instruments with a short-term or no stated maturity, prevailing
market rates and limited credit risk, carrying amounts approximate fair value. Those financial instruments include cash and due from banks, FHLB and FRB restricted stock, other short-term investments, certain deposits (demand, interest checking,
savings, money market and foreign office deposits), and federal funds purchased. Fair values for other time deposits, certificates of deposit $100,000 and over and other short-term borrowings were estimated using a discounted cash flow calculation
that applied prevailing LIBOR/swap interest rates for the same maturities.
Held-to-maturity securities
The Bancorps held-to-maturity securities are primarily composed of instruments that provide income tax credits as the economic
return on the investment. The fair value of these instruments is estimated based on current U.S. Treasury tax credit rates.
Loans held for sale
Fair values for commercial loans held for sale were valued based on executable bids when available, or on discounted cash flow models incorporating appraisals of the underlying collateral, as well as
assumptions about investor return requirements and amounts and timing of expected cash flows. Fair values for other consumer loans held for sale are based on contractual values upon which the loans may be sold to a third party, and approximate their
carrying value.
Portfolio loans and leases, net
Fair values were estimated by discounting future cash flows using the current market rates of loans to borrowers with similar credit characteristics and similar remaining maturities.
Long-term debt
Fair
value of long-term debt was based on quoted market prices, when available, or a discounted cash flow calculation using LIBOR/swap interest rates and, in some cases, a spread for new issues for borrowings of similar terms.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
28. CERTAIN REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND CAPITAL RATIOS
The principal source of income and funds for the Bancorp (parent company) are dividends
from its subsidiaries. The dividends paid by the Bancorps banking subsidiary are subject to regulations and limitations prescribed by the appropriate state and federal supervisory authorities. The Bancorps nonbank subsidiaries are also
limited by certain federal and state statutory provisions and regulations covering the amount of dividends that may be paid in any given year.
The Bancorps banking subsidiary must maintain cash reserve balances when total reservable deposit liabilities are greater than the regulatory exemption. These reserve requirements may be satisfied
with vault cash and noninterest-bearing cash balances on deposit with the FRB. In 2011 and 2010, the banking subsidiary was required to maintain average cash reserve balances of $744 million and $547 million, respectively.
The FRB adopted guidelines pursuant to which it assesses the adequacy of capital in examining and supervising a bank
holding company and in analyzing applications to it under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. These guidelines include quantitative measures that assign risk weightings to assets and off-balance sheet items, as well as define and set
minimum regulatory capital requirements. All bank holding companies are required to maintain Tier I capital (core capital) of at least four percent of risk-weighted assets (Tier I capital ratio), total capital (Tier I plus Tier II capital) of at
least eight percent of risk-weighted assets (Total risk-based capital ratio), and Tier I capital of at least three percent of adjusted quarterly average assets (Tier I leverage ratio). Failure to meet the minimum capital requirements can initiate
certain actions by regulators that could have a direct material effect on the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bancorp.
Tier I capital consists principally of shareholders equity including Tier I qualifying trust preferred securities. It excludes unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities and
unrecognized pension actuarial gains and losses and prior service cost, goodwill, certain other intangibles and unrealized cash flow hedges. Current provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will phase out the inclusion of certain trust preferred securities
as a component of Tier I capital beginning January 1, 2013. Under these provisions, these trust preferred securities would qualify as a component of Tier II capital. At December 31, 2011, the Bancorps Tier I capital included $2.2
billion of trust preferred securities.
Tier II capital consists principally of term subordinated debt,
redeemable preferred stock and, subject to limitations, allowances for loan and lease losses.
Assets and
credit equivalent amounts of off-balance-sheet items are assigned to one of several broad risk categories, according to the obligor, guarantor or nature of collateral. The aggregate dollar value of the amount of each category is multiplied by the
associated risk weighting of that category. The resulting weighted values from each of the risk categories in sum is the total risk-weighted assets. Quarterly average assets for this purpose do not include goodwill and any other intangible assets
and other investments that the FRB determines should be deducted from Tier I capital.
The supervisory
agencies, including the Bancorps primary regulator, the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, have issued regulations regarding the capital adequacy of banking subsidiaries. These requirements are substantially similar to those adopted by the FRB
regarding bank holding companies, as described previously. In addition, the federal banking agencies have issued substantially similar regulations to implement the system of prompt corrective action established by Section 38 of the Federal
Deposit Insurance Act. Under the regulations, a bank generally shall be deemed to be well-capitalized if it has a Total risk-based capital ratio of 10% or more, a Tier I capital ratio of six percent or more, a Tier I leverage ratio of five percent
or more and is not subject to any written capital order or directive. If an institution becomes undercapitalized, it would become subject to significant additional oversight, regulations and requirements as mandated by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Act.
The Bancorp and its banking subsidiary, Fifth Third Bank (Ohio), had Tier I, Total risk-based capital
and Tier I leverage ratios above the well-capitalized levels at December 31, 2011 and 2010. As of December 31, 2011, the most recent notification from the FRB categorized the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary as well-capitalized under the
regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. To continue to qualify for financial holding company status pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, the Bancorps banking subsidiary must, among other things, maintain
well-capitalized capital ratios.
The following table presents capital and risk-based capital and
leverage ratios for the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
($ in millions) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Ratio |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Ratio |
|
Tier I capital (to risk-weighted
assets):(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifth Third Bancorp (Consolidated) |
|
$ |
12,503 |
|
|
|
11.91 |
% |
|
$ |
13,965 |
|
|
|
13.89 |
% |
Fifth Third Bank |
|
|
12,373 |
|
|
|
12.02 |
|
|
|
12,976 |
|
|
|
13.13 |
|
Total risk-based capital (to risk-weighted
assets):(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifth Third Bancorp (Consolidated) |
|
|
16,885 |
|
|
|
16.09 |
|
|
|
18,178 |
|
|
|
18.08 |
|
Fifth Third Bank |
|
|
14,013 |
|
|
|
13.61 |
|
|
|
14,936 |
|
|
|
15.12 |
|
Tier I leverage (to average assets): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifth Third Bancorp (Consolidated) |
|
|
12,503 |
|
|
|
11.10 |
|
|
|
13,965 |
|
|
|
12.79 |
|
Fifth Third Bank |
|
|
12,373 |
|
|
|
11.20 |
|
|
|
12,976 |
|
|
|
12.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Under the banking agencies risk-based capital guidelines, assets and credit equivalent amounts of derivatives and off-balance sheet exposures are
assigned to broad risk categories. The aggregate dollar amount in each risk category is multiplied by the associated risk weight of the category. The resulting weighted values are added together resulting in the Bancorps total risk-weighted
assets. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
29. PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Statements of Income (Parent Company Only) |
|
For the years ended December 31, |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends from subsidiaries: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank subsidiaries(a) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonbank subsidiaries |
|
|
1,677 |
|
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on loans to subsidiaries |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Total income |
|
|
1,706 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
Other |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes and Change in Undistributed Earnings of Subsidiaries |
|
|
1,465 |
|
|
|
1,219 |
|
|
|
(203 |
) |
Applicable income tax benefit |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Income (Loss) Before Change in Undistributed Earnings of Subsidiaries |
|
|
1,544 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
(Decrease) Increase in undistributed earnings |
|
|
(247 |
) |
|
|
(530 |
) |
|
|
869 |
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
( a) The Bancorps indirect banking subsidiary paid dividends, to the Bancorps direct non-bank subsidiary
holding company of $2.0 billion, $1.4 billion, and $0 for the years ended 2011, 2010, 2009, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Balance Sheets (Parent Company Only) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31 |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
3,588 |
|
|
|
2,953 |
|
Loans to subsidiaries: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
Nonbank subsidiaries |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
Total loans to subsidiaries |
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
1,521 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonbank subsidiaries |
|
|
15,631 |
|
|
|
15,622 |
|
Total investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
15,631 |
|
|
|
15,622 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
545 |
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
21,112 |
|
|
|
20,781 |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
414 |
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
Long-term debt (external) |
|
|
6,784 |
|
|
|
5,960 |
|
Total Liabilities |
|
|
7,861 |
|
|
|
6,730 |
|
Bancorp Shareholders Equity |
|
|
13,251 |
|
|
|
14,051 |
|
Total Liabilities and Bancorp Shareholders Equity |
|
$ |
21,112 |
|
|
|
20,781 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Statements of Cash Flows (Parent Company Only) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Operating Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
1,297 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
737 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for deferred income taxes |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Decrease (Increase) in undistributed earnings |
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
530 |
|
|
|
(869 |
) |
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
83 |
|
Accrued expenses and other liabilities |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(339 |
) |
|
|
591 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities |
|
|
1,583 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
Investing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributions to subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,600 |
) |
Net change in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
1,158 |
|
Loans to subsidiaries |
|
|
489 |
|
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities |
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
(764 |
) |
|
|
(559 |
) |
Financing Activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in other short-term borrowings |
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
(503 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of long-term debt |
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
Dividends paid on common shares |
|
|
(192 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Dividends paid on preferred shares |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
Issuance of common shares |
|
|
1,648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
987 |
|
Redemption of Series F preferred shares and related warrants |
|
|
(3,688 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
Dividends on exchange of preferred shares, Series G |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities |
|
|
(1,477 |
) |
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
Net (Decrease) Increase in Cash |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
(59 |
) |
Cash at Beginning of Year |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Cash at End of Year |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
30. BUSINESS SEGMENTS
The Bancorp reports on four business segments: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer
Lending and Investment Advisors. Results of the Bancorps business segments are presented based on its management structure and management accounting practices. The structure and accounting practices are specific to the Bancorp; therefore, the
financial results of the Bancorps business segments are not necessarily comparable with similar information for other financial institutions. The Bancorp refines its methodologies from time to time as managements accounting practices are
improved and businesses change.
On June 30, 2009, the Bancorp completed the sale of the processing
business, which represented the sale of a majority interest in the Bancorps merchant acquiring and financial institutions processing businesses. Financial data for the merchant acquiring and financial institutions processing businesses was
originally reported in the former Processing Solutions segment through June 30, 2009. As a result of the sale, the Bancorp no longer presents Processing Solutions as a segment and therefore, historical financial information for the merchant
acquiring and financial institutions processing businesses has been reclassified under General Corporate and Other for all periods presented. Interchange revenue previously recorded in the Processing Solutions segment and associated with cards
currently included in Branch Banking is now included in the Branch Banking segment for all periods presented. Additionally, the Bancorp retained its retail credit card and commercial multi-card service businesses, which were also originally reported
in the former Processing Solutions segment through June 30, 2009, and are included in the Branch Banking and Commercial Banking segments, respectively, for all periods presented. Revenue from the remaining ownership interest in the Processing
Business is recorded in General Corporate and Other as noninterest income.
The Bancorp manages interest rate risk centrally at the corporate level
by employing a FTP methodology. This methodology insulates the business segments from interest rate volatility, enabling them to focus on serving customers through loan originations and deposit taking. The FTP system assigns charge rates and credit
rates to classes of assets and liabilities, respectively, based on expected duration and the LIBOR swap curve. Matching duration allocates interest income and interest expense to each segment so its resulting net interest income is insulated from
interest rate risk. In a rising rate environment, the Bancorp benefits from the widening spread between deposit costs and wholesale funding costs. However, the Bancorps FTP system credits this benefit to deposit-providing businesses, such as
Branch Banking and Investment Advisors, on a duration-adjusted basis. The net impact of the FTP methodology is captured in General Corporate and Other.
The business segments are charged provision expense based on the actual net charge-offs experienced by the loans owned by each segment. Provision expense attributable to loan growth and changes in factors
in the ALLL are captured in General Corporate and Other. The financial results of the business segments include allocations for shared services and headquarters expenses. Even with these allocations, the financial results are not necessarily
indicative of the business segments financial condition and results of operations as if they existed as independent entities. Additionally, the business segments form synergies by taking advantage of cross-sell opportunities and when funding
operations, by accessing the capital markets as a collective unit.
Results of operations and assets by
segment for each of the three years ended December 31 are:
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial Banking |
|
|
Branch Banking |
|
|
Consumer Lending |
|
|
Investment Advisors |
|
|
General Corporate |
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
1,357 |
|
|
|
1,423 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,557 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
(748 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
423 |
|
Net interest income after provision for loan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and lease losses |
|
|
867 |
|
|
|
1,030 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
1,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,134 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
597 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
520 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
)(a) |
|
|
375 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
308 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
Securities gains, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
Securities gains, netnon-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
373 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
2,455 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, wages and incentives |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,478 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330 |
|
Net occupancy expense |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
305 |
|
Technology and communications |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
188 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120 |
|
Equipment expense |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
113 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
642 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
(773 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
1,224 |
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
1,073 |
|
|
|
1,579 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
3,758 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,831 |
|
Applicable income tax expense |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
533 |
|
Net income |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
591 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Net income attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,297 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
203 |
|
Net income available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
441 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
Total goodwill |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
45,864 |
|
|
|
46,703 |
|
|
|
24,325 |
|
|
|
7,670 |
|
|
|
(7,595 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,967 |
|
(a) |
Revenue sharing agreements between Investment Advisors and Branch Banking are eliminated in the Consolidated Statements of Income. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial Banking |
|
|
Branch Banking |
|
|
Consumer Lending |
|
|
Investment Advisors |
|
|
General Corporate |
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
1,531 |
|
|
|
1,514 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,604 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
555 |
|
|
|
569 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
(789 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
Net interest income (loss) after provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
|
|
(164 |
) |
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,066 |
|
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
647 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
574 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
364 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(106 |
)(a) |
|
|
361 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
316 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
406 |
|
Securities gains, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
Securities gains, netnon-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing
rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
635 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
670 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
2,729 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, wages and incentives |
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,430 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314 |
|
Net occupancy expense |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
298 |
|
Technology and communications |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
189 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108 |
|
Equipment expense |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
122 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
723 |
|
|
|
652 |
|
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
|
|
(560 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,394 |
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
1,556 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
3,855 |
|
Income (loss) before income taxes |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
940 |
|
Applicable income tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
(142 |
) |
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
178 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
503 |
|
Total goodwill |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
43,609 |
|
|
|
46,244 |
|
|
|
22,604 |
|
|
|
6,759 |
|
|
|
(8,209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
111,007 |
|
(a) |
Revenue sharing agreements between Investment Advisors and Branch Banking are eliminated in the Consolidated Statements of Income. |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 ($ in millions) |
|
Commercial Banking |
|
|
Branch Banking |
|
|
Consumer Lending |
|
|
Investment Advisors |
|
|
General Corporate |
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total |
|
Net interest income |
|
$ |
1,370 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
476 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,354 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
1,360 |
|
|
|
601 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,543 |
|
Net interest income (loss) after provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
976 |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
(1,193 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(189 |
) |
Noninterest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage banking net revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
553 |
|
Service charges on deposits |
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
632 |
|
Investment advisory revenue |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
)(a) |
|
|
326 |
|
Corporate banking revenue |
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
372 |
|
Card and processing revenue |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
(39 |
)(b) |
|
|
615 |
|
Gain on sale of Vantiv Holding, LLC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,758 |
|
Other noninterest income |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
479 |
|
Securities gains (losses), net |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Securities gains, netnon-qualifying hedges on mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
|
Total noninterest income |
|
|
609 |
|
|
|
902 |
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
2,434 |
|
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
4,782 |
|
Noninterest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries, wages and incentives |
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
506 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
Employee benefits |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
311 |
|
Net occupancy expense |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308 |
|
Technology and communications |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
Card and processing expense |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
193 |
|
Equipment expense |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123 |
|
Other noninterest expense |
|
|
741 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
(330 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
1,371 |
|
Total noninterest expense |
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
1,373 |
|
|
|
509 |
|
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
752 |
|
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
3,826 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
(341 |
) |
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
489 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
767 |
|
Applicable income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
Net income |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Bancorp |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
737 |
|
Dividends on preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
226 |
|
Net income available to common shareholders |
|
$ |
(101 |
) |
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
511 |
|
Total goodwill |
|
$ |
613 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
43,312 |
|
|
|
47,839 |
|
|
|
20,923 |
|
|
|
6,057 |
|
|
|
(4,751 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
113,380 |
|
(a) |
Revenue sharing agreements between Investment Advisors and Branch Banking are eliminated in the Consolidated Statements of Income. |
(b) |
Card and processing revenues provided to the banking segments are eliminated in the Consolidated Statements of Income. |
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011
Commission file number 001-33653
Incorporated in the State of Ohio
I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 31-0854434
Address: 38 Fountain Square
Plaza Cincinnati, Ohio 45263
Telephone: (800) 972-3030
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of each class: |
|
Name of each exchange on
which registered: |
Common Stock, Without Par Value |
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC |
8.5% Non-Cumulative Series G Convertible Perpetual Preferred Stock |
|
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC |
7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust V |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI |
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the
Securities Act. Yes: ¨ No: x
Indicate by checkmark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes:
¨ No: x
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: x 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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes: x No: ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or
any amendment to this Form 10-K. x
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 definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer x 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 Act). Yes: ¨ No: x
There were 919,882,874
shares of the Bancorps Common Stock, without par value, outstanding as of January 31, 2012. The Aggregate Market Value of the Voting Stock held by non-affiliates of the Bancorp was $11,457,012,955 as of June 30, 2011.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
This report incorporates into a single document the requirements of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with respect to annual reports on Form 10-K and annual reports to shareholders. The
Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.
Only those sections of this 2011 Annual Report to Shareholders that are specified in this Cross Reference Index constitute part of the Registrants Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2011. No other information contained in this 2011 Annual Report to Shareholders shall be deemed to constitute any part of this Form 10-K nor shall any such information be incorporated into the Form 10-K and shall not be deemed filed as
part of the Registrants Form 10-K.
10-K Cross Reference Index
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART I |
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
Business |
|
|
17-19, 153-158 |
|
|
|
Employees |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
Segment Information |
|
|
39-44, 148-151 |
|
|
|
Average Balance Sheets |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
Analysis of Net Interest Income and Net Interest Income Changes |
|
|
32-44 |
|
|
|
Investment Securities Portfolio |
|
|
48-49, 89-90 |
|
|
|
Loan and Lease Portfolio |
|
|
47-48, 91-92 |
|
|
|
Risk Elements of Loan and Lease Portfolio |
|
|
53-67 |
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
49-50 |
|
|
|
Return on Equity and Assets |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
Short-term Borrowings |
|
|
50, 114 |
|
Item 1A. |
|
Risk Factors |
|
|
25-31 |
|
Item 1B. |
|
Unresolved Staff Comments |
|
|
None |
|
Item 2. |
|
Properties |
|
|
159 |
|
Item 3. |
|
Legal Proceedings |
|
|
121-122 |
|
Item 4. |
|
Mine Safety Disclosures |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Executive Officers of the Bancorp |
|
|
159 |
|
PART II |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities |
|
|
162 |
|
Item 6. |
|
Selected Financial Data |
|
|
15 |
|
Item 7. |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
|
|
15-41, 73-74 |
|
Item 7A. |
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
|
52-72 |
|
Item 8. |
|
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
|
|
77-151 |
|
Item 9. |
|
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
|
|
None |
|
Item 9A. |
|
Controls and Procedures |
|
|
75 |
|
Item 9B. |
|
Other Information |
|
|
None |
|
PART III |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 10. |
|
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance |
|
|
162 |
|
Item 11. |
|
Executive Compensation |
|
|
162 |
|
Item 12. |
|
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
|
|
132-135, 162 |
|
Item 13. |
|
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence |
|
|
162 |
|
Item 14. |
|
Principal Accounting Fees and Services |
|
|
162 |
|
PART IV |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 15. |
|
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules |
|
|
162-165 |
|
SIGNATURES |
|
|
166 |
|
AVAILABILITY OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Fifth Third Bancorp (the Bancorp) files reports with the SEC. Those reports include the annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly
reports on Form 10-Q, current event reports on Form 8-K and proxy statements, as well as any amendments to those reports. The public may read and copy any materials the Bancorp files with the SEC at the SECs Public Reference Room at 450 Fifth
Street, NW, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and
other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov. The Bancorps annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements, and amendments to those reports
filed or furnished pursuant to section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are accessible at no cost on the Bancorps web site at www.53.com on a same day basis after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC.
PART I
General Information
The Bancorp, an Ohio corporation organized in 1975, is a bank holding company as defined by the Bank Holding Company Act
of 1956, as amended (the BHCA), and is registered as such with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the FRB). The Bancorps principal office is located in Cincinnati, Ohio.
The Bancorps subsidiaries provide a wide range of financial products and services to the retail, commercial,
financial, governmental, educational and medical sectors, including a wide variety of checking, savings and money market accounts, and credit products such as credit cards, installment loans, mortgage loans and leases. Fifth Third Bank has deposit
insurance provided by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) through the Deposit Insurance Fund. Refer to Exhibit 21 filed as an attachment to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a list of subsidiaries of the Bancorp as of
December 31, 2011.
The Bancorp derives the majority of its revenues from the U.S. Revenue from foreign
countries and external customers domiciled in foreign countries is immaterial to the Bancorps Consolidated Financial Statements.
Additional information regarding the Bancorps businesses is included in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
Competition
The Bancorp
competes for deposits, loans and other banking services in its principal geographic markets as well as in selected national markets as opportunities arise. In addition to the challenge of attracting and retaining customers for traditional banking
services, the Bancorps competitors include securities dealers, brokers, mortgage bankers, investment advisors and insurance companies. These competitors, with focused products targeted at highly profitable customer segments, compete across
geographic boundaries and provide customers increasing access to meaningful alternatives to banking services in nearly all significant products. The increasingly competitive environment is a result primarily of changes in regulation, changes in
technology, product delivery systems and the accelerating pace of consolidation among financial service providers. These competitive trends are likely to continue.
Acquisitions
The Bancorps strategy for growth includes strengthening
its presence in core markets, expanding into contiguous markets and broadening its product offerings while taking into account the integration and other risks of growth. The Bancorp evaluates strategic acquisition opportunities and conducts due
diligence activities in connection with possible transactions. As a result, discussions, and in some cases, negotiations may take place and future acquisitions involving cash, debt or equity securities may occur. These typically involve the payment
of a premium over book value and current market price, and therefore, some dilution of book value and net income per share may occur with any future transactions.
Regulation and Supervision
In addition to the generally applicable state
and federal laws governing businesses and employers, the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are subject to extensive regulation by federal and state laws and regulations applicable to financial institutions and their parent companies. Virtually all
aspects of the business of the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are subject to specific
requirements or restrictions and general regulatory oversight. The principal objectives of state and federal banking laws and regulations and the supervision, regulation and examination of banks
and their parent companies (such as the Bancorp) by bank regulatory agencies are the maintenance of the safety and soundness of financial institutions, maintenance of the federal deposit insurance system and the protection of consumers or classes of
consumers, rather than the specific protection of shareholders of a bank or the parent company of a bank. To the extent the following material describes statutory or regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the
particular statute or regulation.
Regulators
The Bancorp and/or its banking subsidiary are subject to regulation and supervision primarily by the FRB, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the CFPB) and the Ohio Division of Financial
Institutions (the Division) and additionally by certain other functional regulators and self-regulatory organizations. The Bancorp is also subject to regulation by the SEC by virtue of its status as a public company and due to the nature
of some of its businesses. The Bancorps banking subsidiary is subject to regulation by the FDIC, which insures the banks deposits as permitted by law.
The federal and state laws and regulations that are applicable to banks and to some extent bank holding companies
regulate, among other matters, the scope of their business, their activities, their investments, their reserves against deposits, the timing of the availability of deposited funds, the amount of loans to individual and related borrowers and the
nature, amount of and collateral for certain loans, and the amount of interest that may be charged on loans. Various federal and state consumer laws and regulations also affect the services provided to consumers.
The Bancorp and/or its subsidiary are required to file various reports with, and is subject to examination by
regulators, including the FRB and the Division. The FRB, Division and the CFPB have the authority to issue orders to bank holding companies and/or banks to cease and desist from certain banking practices and violations of conditions imposed by, or
violations of agreements with, the FRB, Division and CFPB. Certain of the Bancorps and/or its banking subsidiary regulators are also empowered to assess civil money penalties against companies or individuals in certain situations, such as when
there is a violation of a law or regulation. Applicable state and federal law also grant certain regulators the authority to impose additional requirements and restrictions on the activities of the Bancorp and or its banking subsidiary and, in some
situations, the imposition of such additional requirements and restrictions will not be publicly available information.
Acquisitions
The BHCA requires the prior approval of the FRB, for a bank holding company to acquire substantially all the assets of a
bank or to acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of any class of the voting shares of any bank, bank holding company or savings association, or to increase any such non-majority ownership or control of any bank, bank
holding company or savings association, or to merge or consolidate with any bank holding company.
The BHCA
prohibits a bank holding company from acquiring a direct or indirect interest in or control of more than 5% of any class of the voting shares of a company that is not a bank or a bank holding company and from engaging directly or indirectly in
activities other than those of banking, managing or controlling banks or furnishing services to its banking
subsidiaries, except that it may engage in and may own shares of companies engaged in certain activities the FRB has determined to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling
banks as to be proper incident thereto.
Financial Holding Companies
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA) permits a qualifying bank holding company to become a financial holding company
(FHC) and thereby to engage directly or indirectly in a broader range of activities than those permitted for a bank holding company under the BHCA. Permitted activities for a FHC include securities underwriting and dealing, insurance
underwriting and brokerage, merchant banking and other activities that are declared by the FRB, in cooperation with the Treasury Department, to be financial in nature or incidental thereto or are declared by the FRB unilaterally to be
complementary to financial activities. In addition, a FHC is allowed to conduct permissible new financial activities or acquire permissible non-bank financial companies with after-the-fact notice to the FRB. A bank holding company may
elect to become a FHC if each of its banking subsidiaries is well capitalized, is well managed and has at least a Satisfactory rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). Dodd-Frank also extended the well capitalized
and well managed requirement to the bank holding company. In 2000, the Bancorp elected and qualified for FHC status under the GLBA. To maintain FHC status, a holding company must continue to meet certain requirements. The failure to meet such
requirements could result in restrictions on the activities of the FHC or loss of FHC status. If restrictions are imposed on the activities of an FHC, such information may not necessarily be available to the public.
Dividends
The Bancorp
depends in part upon dividends received from its direct and indirect subsidiaries, including its indirect banking subsidiary, to fund its activities, including the payment of dividends. The Bancorp and its banking subsidiary are subject to various
federal and state restrictions on their ability to pay dividends. The FRB has authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends if such payment is deemed to be an unsafe or unsound practice. The FRB has indicated generally that it
may be an unsafe or unsound practice for bank holding companies to pay dividends unless a bank holding companys net income is sufficient to fund the dividends and the expected rate of earnings retention is consistent with the
organizations capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. The ability to pay dividends may be further limited by provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and implanting regulations (see the Regulatory Reform section.
Source of Strength
Under long-standing FRB policy and now as codified in the Dodd-Frank Act, a bank holding company is expected to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to each of its banking subsidiaries and
to commit resources to their support. This support may be required at times when the bank holding company may not have the resources to provide it.
FDIC Assessments
As contemplated by the Dodd-Frank Act the FDIC has
revised the framework by which insured depository institutions with more than $10 billion in assets (large IDIs) are assessed for purposes of payments to the Deposit Insurance Fund (the DIF). The final rule implementing
revisions to the assessment system was
released on February 7, 2011, and took effect for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011.
Prior to the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, a large IDIs DIF premiums principally were based on the size of an IDIs domestic deposit base. The Dodd-Frank Act changed the assessment base from a
large IDIs domestic deposit base to its total assets less tangible equity. In addition to potentially greatly increasing the size of a large IDIs assessment base, the expansion of the assessment base affords the FDIC much greater
flexibility to vary its assessment system based upon the different asset classes that large IDIs normally hold on their balance sheets.
To implement this provision, the FDIC created an assessment scheme vastly different from the deposit-based system. Under the new system, large IDIs are assessed under a complex scorecard
methodology that seeks to capture both the probability that an individual large IDI will fail and the magnitude of the impact on the DIF if such a failure occurs.
Transactions with Affiliates
Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve
Act, restrict transactions between a bank and its affiliates (as defined in Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act), including a parent bank holding company. The Bancorps banking subsidiary is subject to certain restrictions,
including but not limited to restrictions on loans to its affiliates, on investments in the stock or securities thereof, on the taking of such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower, and on the issuance of a guarantee or letter
of credit on their behalf. Among other things, these restrictions limit the amount of such transactions, require collateral in prescribed amounts for extensions of credit, prohibit the purchase of low quality assets and require that the terms of
such transactions be substantially equivalent to terms of comparable transactions with non-affiliates. Generally, the Bancorps banking subsidiary is limited in its extension of credit to any affiliate to 10% of the banking subsidiarys
capital stock and surplus and its extension of credit to all affiliates to 20% of the banking subsidiarys capital stock and surplus.
Community Reinvestment Act
The CRA generally requires insured depository institutions to identify the communities they serve and to make loans and investments and
provide services that meet the credit needs of those communities. Furthermore, the CRA requires the FRB to evaluate the performance of the Bancorps banking subsidiary in helping to meet the credit needs of its communities. As a part of the CRA
program, the banking subsidiary is subject to periodic examinations by the FRB, and must maintain comprehensive records of their CRA activities for this purpose. During these examinations, the FRB rates such institutions compliance with CRA as
Outstanding, Satisfactory, Needs to Improve or Substantial Noncompliance. Failure of an institution to receive at least a Satisfactory rating could inhibit such institution or its holding
company from undertaking certain activities, including engaging in activities permitted as a financial holding company under the GLBA and acquiring other financial institutions. The FRB must take into account the record of performance of banks in
meeting the credit needs of the entire community served, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. Fifth Third Bank received a Satisfactory CRA rating in its most recent CRA examination.
Capital
The FRB has
established capital guidelines for bank holding companies and FHCs. The FRB, the Division and the FDIC have also issued regulations establishing capital requirements for
banks. Failure to meet capital requirements could subject the Bancorp and its banking
subsidiary to a variety of restrictions and enforcement actions. In addition, as discussed previously, the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary must remain well capitalized and well managed for the Bancorp to retain its status as a FHC. See the
Regulatory Reform section for additional information on capital requirements impacting the Bancorp.
Privacy
The FRB, FDIC and other bank regulatory agencies have adopted final guidelines (the Guidelines) for safeguarding confidential,
personal customer information. The Guidelines require each financial institution, under the supervision and ongoing oversight of its Board of Directors or an appropriate committee thereof, to create, implement and maintain a comprehensive written
information security program designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information and protect against unauthorized access to
or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. The Bancorp has adopted a customer information security program that has been approved by the Bancorps Board of Directors (the Board).
The GLBA requires financial institutions to implement policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of
nonpublic personal information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. In general, the statute requires explanations to consumers on policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of such nonpublic personal information, and, except as
otherwise required by law, prohibits disclosing such information except as provided in the banking subsidiarys policies and procedures. The Bancorps banking subsidiary has implemented a privacy policy.
Anti-Money Laundering
The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the
Patriot Act), designed to deny terrorists and others the ability to obtain access to the United States financial system, has significant implications for depository institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the
transfer of money. The Patriot Act, as implemented by various federal regulatory agencies, requires financial institutions, including the Bancorp and its subsidiaries, to implement new policies and procedures or amend existing policies and
procedures with respect to, among other matters, anti-money laundering, compliance, suspicious activity and currency transaction reporting and due diligence on customers. The Patriot Act and its underlying regulations also permit information sharing
for counter-terrorist purposes between federal law enforcement agencies and financial institutions, as well as among financial institutions, subject to certain conditions, and require the FRB (and other federal banking agencies) to evaluate the
effectiveness of an applicant in combating money laundering activities when considering applications filed under Section 3 of the BHCA or the Bank Merger Act. The Bancorps Board has approved policies and procedures that are believed to be
compliant with the Patriot Act.
Exempt Brokerage Activities
The GLBA amended the federal securities laws to eliminate the blanket exceptions that banks traditionally have had from the definition of broker and dealer. The GLBA also required
that there be certain transactional activities that would not be brokerage activities, which banks could effect without having to register as a broker. In September 2007, the FRB and SEC
approved Regulation R to govern bank securities activities. Various exemptions permit banks to conduct activities that would otherwise constitute brokerage activities under the securities laws.
Those exemptions include conducting brokerage activities related to trust, fiduciary and similar services, certain services and also conducting a de minimis number of riskless principal transactions, certain asset-backed transactions and certain
securities lending transactions. The Bancorp only conducts non-exempt brokerage activities through its affiliated registered broker-dealer.
Emergency Economic Stabilization
On October 3, 2008, in response to the stresses experienced in the financial markets, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (EESA) was enacted. EESA authorizes the Secretary of the
Treasury to purchase up to $700 billion in troubled assets from financial institutions under the Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP. Troubled assets include residential or commercial mortgages and related instruments originated prior to
March 14, 2008 and any other financial instrument that the Secretary determines, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial stability.
Capital Purchase Program
Pursuant to its authority under EESA, Treasury created the TARP Capital Purchase Program (CPP) under which the Treasury Department was authorized to invest up to $250 billion in senior
preferred stock of U.S. banks and savings associations or their holding companies. Qualifying financial institutions could issue senior preferred stock with a value equal to not less than 1% of risk-weighted assets and not more than the lesser of
$25 billion or 3% of risk-weighted assets.
In connection with the issuance of the senior preferred,
participating institutions were required to issue to Treasury immediately exercisable 10-year warrants to purchase common stock with an aggregate market price equal to 15% of the amount of senior preferred.
On December 31, 2008, the Bancorp entered into a Letter Agreement (including the Securities Purchase
AgreementStandard Terms incorporated by reference therein, the Purchase Agreement) with Treasury pursuant to which the Company issued and sold to Treasury for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $3.4 billion in cash:
(i) 136,320 shares of the Bancorps Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series F, having a liquidation preference of $25,000 per share (the Series F Preferred Stock), and (ii) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to
43,617,747 shares of the Bancorps common stock, no par value per share, at an initial exercise price of $11.72 per share.
In the Purchase Agreement, the Bancorp agreed that, until such time as Treasury ceases to own any debt or equity securities of the Bancorp acquired pursuant to the Purchase Agreement, the Bancorp would
take all necessary action to ensure that its benefit plans with respect to its senior executive officers comply with Section 111(b) of EESA as implemented by any guidance or regulation under the EESA that had been issued and was in effect as of
the date of issuance of the Series F Preferred Stock and the Warrant, and agreed to not adopt any benefit plans with respect to, or which covers, its senior executive officers that do not comply with the EESA.
On February 2, 2011 the Bancorp repurchased the Series F Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury pursuant to
TARP. On March 16, 2011, the Bancorp repurchased the warrant issued to the U.S. Treasury.
Regulatory Reform
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, which is aimed, in part, at accountability and transparency in the financial system and includes numerous provisions that apply
to and/or could impact the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. The Dodd-Frank Act implements changes that, among other things, affect the oversight and supervision of financial institutions, provide for a new resolution procedure for large financial
companies, create a new agency responsible for implementing and enforcing compliance with consumer financial laws, introduce more stringent regulatory capital requirements, effect significant changes in the regulation of over the counter
derivatives, reform the regulation of credit rating agencies, implement changes to corporate governance and executive compensation practices, incorporate requirements on proprietary trading and investing in certain funds by financial institutions
(known as the Volcker Rule), require registration of advisers to certain private funds, and effect significant changes in the securitization market. In order to fully implement many provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, various government
agencies, in particular banking and other financial services agencies are required to promulgate regulations. Set forth below is a discussion of some of the major sections the Dodd-Frank Act and implementing regulations that have or could have a
substantial impact on the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary. Due to the volume of regulations required by the Dodd-Frank Act, not all proposed or final regulations that may have an impact on the Bancorp or its banking subsidiary are necessarily
discussed.
Financial Stability Oversight Council
The Dodd-Frank Act creates the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which is chaired by the Secretary of the Treasury and composed of expertise from various financial services
regulators. The FSOC has responsibility for identifying risks and responding to emerging threats to financial stability. On December 29, 2011, a rule was proposed (with a sixty-day comment period) to assess a fee on large banks and financial
institutions to cover the expenses of the Office of Financial Research and FSOC. The fees would also cover certain expenses incurred by the FDIC. Under the proposal, bank holding companies with at least $50 billion in assets and foreign banks with
at least $50 billion in assets in the U.S. would be assessed a semiannual fee, the size of which has yet to be determined.
Executive
Compensation
The Dodd-Frank Act provides for a say on pay for shareholders of all public companies. Under the Dodd-Frank
Act, each company must give its shareholders the opportunity to vote on the compensation of its executives at least once every three years. The Dodd-Frank Act also adds disclosure and voting requirements for golden parachute compensation that is
payable to named executive officers in connection with sale transactions.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires the
SEC to issue rules directing the stock exchanges to prohibit listing classes of equity securities if a companys compensation committee members are not independent. The Dodd-Frank Act also provides that a companys compensation committee
may only select a compensation consultant, legal counsel or other advisor after taking into consideration factors to be identified by the SEC that affect the independence of a compensation consultant, legal counsel or other advisor.
The SEC is required under the Dodd-Frank Act to issue rules obligating companies to disclose in proxy materials for
annual
meetings of shareholders information that shows the relationship between executive compensation actually paid to their named executive officers and their financial performance, taking into
account any change in the value of the shares of a companys stock and dividends or distributions.
The
Dodd-Frank Act provides that the SEC must issue rules directing the stock exchanges to prohibit listing any security of a company unless the company develops and implements a policy providing for disclosure of the policy of the company on
incentive-based compensation that is based on financial information required to be reported under the securities laws and that, in the event the company is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to the material noncompliance of the
company with any financial reporting requirement under the securities laws, the company will recover from any current or former executive officer of the company who received incentive-based compensation during the three-year period preceding the
date on which the company is required to prepare the restatement based on the erroneous data, any exceptional compensation above what would have been paid under the restatement.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC, by rule, to require that each company disclose in the proxy materials for its
annual meetings whether an employee or board member is permitted to purchase financial instruments designed to hedge or offset decreases in the market value of equity securities granted as compensation or otherwise held by the employee or board
member.
Corporate Governance
The Dodd-Frank Act clarifies that the SEC may, but is not required to promulgate rules that would require that a companys proxy materials include a nominee for the board of directors submitted by a
shareholder. Although the SEC promulgated rules to accomplish this, these rules were invalidated by a federal appeals court decision. The SEC has said that they will not challenge the ruling, but has not ruled out the possibility that new rules
could be proposed.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires stock exchanges to have rules prohibiting their members from
voting securities that they do not beneficially own (unless they have received voting instructions from the beneficial owner) with respect to the election of a member of the board of directors (other than an uncontested election of directors of an
investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940), executive compensation or any other significant matter, as determined by the SEC by rule.
Credit Ratings
The Dodd-Frank Act includes a number of provisions that are
targeted at improving the reliability of credit ratings. The SEC has been charged with adopting various rules in this regard.
Consumer
Issues
The Dodd-Frank Act creates a new bureau, the CFPB, which has the authority to implement regulations pursuant to
numerous consumer protection laws and has supervisory authority, including the power to conduct examination and take enforcement actions, with respect to depository institutions with more than $10 billion in consolidated assets. The CFPB also has
authority, with respect to consumer financial services to, among other things, restrict unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices, enforce laws that prohibit discrimination and unfair treatment and to require certain consumer disclosures.
Debit Card Interchange Fees
The Dodd-Frank Act provides for a set of new rules requiring that interchange transaction fees for electric debit transactions be reasonable and proportional to certain costs associated with
processing the transactions. The FRB was given authority to, among other things, establish
standards for assessing whether interchange fees are reasonable and proportional. In June 2011, the FRB issued a final rule establishing certain standards and prohibitions pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, including establishing standards for debit
card interchange fees and allowing for an upward adjustment if the issuer develops and implements policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent fraud. The provisions regarding debit card interchange fees and the fraud adjustment became
effective October 1, 2011. The rules impose requirements on the Bancorp and its banking subsidiary and may negatively impact our revenues and results of operations.
FDIC Matters and Resolution Planning
The Dodd-Frank Act creates an orderly
liquidation process that the FDIC can employ for failing financial companies that are not insured depository institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act gives the FDIC new authority to create a widely available emergency financial stabilization program to
guarantee the obligations of solvent depository institutions and their holding companies and affiliates during times of severe economic stress. Additionally, Dodd-Frank also codifies many of the temporary changes that had already been implemented,
such as permanently increasing the amount of deposit insurance to $250,000.
In September 2011, the FDIC
approved an interim final rule that requires an insured depository institution with $50 billion or more in total assets to submit periodic contingency plans to the FDIC for resolution in the event of the institutions failure. The rule became
effective in January 2012, however, submission of plans will be staggered over a period of time. The Bancorps banking subsidiary is subject to this rule.
In October 2011, the FRB issued a final rule implementing resolution planning requirements in the Dodd-Frank Act. The
final rule requires bank holding companies with assets of $50 billion or more and nonbank financial firms designated by FSOC for supervision by the FRB to annually submit resolution plans to the FDIC and FRB. Each plan shall describe the
companys strategy for rapid and orderly resolution in bankruptcy during times of financial distress. Under the final rule, companies will submit their initial resolution plans on a staggered basis. The Bancorp will be required to submit a
resolution plan pursuant to this rule.
Proprietary Trading and Investing in Certain Funds
The Dodd-Frank Act sets forth new restrictions on banking organizations ability to engage in proprietary trading and sponsorship of
or investment in private equity and hedge funds (the Volcker rule). The scope of the new restrictions will be more clear upon adoption of final regulations promulgated under the Volcker rule, however the Volker Rule also generally
prohibits any banking entity from sponsoring or acquiring any ownership interest in a private equity or hedge fund. The Volker rule, however, contains a number of exceptions, which exceptions will be clarified upon promulgation of final rules
adopted on an interagency basis. The Volker rule permits transactions in the securities of the U.S. government and its agencies, certain government-sponsored enterprises and states and their political subdivisions, as well as certain investments in
small business investment companies. Transactions on behalf of customers and in connection with certain underwriting and market making activities, as well as risk-mitigating hedging activities and certain foreign banking activities are also
permitted. De minimus ownership of private equity or hedge funds will also be permitted under final regulations as well. In addition to the general
prohibition on sponsorship and investment, the Volker rule contains additional requirements applicable to any private equity or hedge fund that is sponsored by the banking entity or for which it
serves as investment manager or investment advisor. The Bancorp will be required to demonstrate that it has a satisfactory compliance programs specifically to monitor compliance with the Volcker rule.
Derivatives
The
Dodd-Frank Act includes measures to broaden the scope of derivative instruments subject to regulation by requiring clearing and exchange trading of certain derivatives, imposing new capital and margin requirements for certain market participants and
imposing position limits on certain over-the-counter derivatives. To the extent that the Bancorp acts in certain capacities in trading derivatives or trades a certain amount of certain derivatives instruments, then certain affiliates of the Bancorp
may be required to register with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission or the SEC. As with the Volcker Rule, the Bancorp will be required to demonstrate that it has a satisfactory compliance program to monitor the activities of any swap dealer or
major swap participant registered under the new regulations. The ultimate impact of these derivatives regulations, and the time it will take to comply, continues to remain uncertain. The final regulations will impose additional operational and
compliance costs on us and may require us to restructure certain businesses and negatively impact our revenues and results of operations.
Interstate Bank Branching
The Dodd-Frank Act includes provisions permitting national and insured state banks to engage in de novo interstate branching if,
under the laws of the state where the new branch is to be established, as state bank chartered in that state would be permitted to establish a branch.
Systemically Significant Companies and Capital
The Dodd-Frank Act creates
a new regulatory regime for entities that are deemed to be systemically significant financial companies. The Dodd-Frank Act sets a $50 billion consolidated asset floor for a bank holding company to be subject to the heightened oversight
and regulation, although the FRB can adjust those amounts upward for some of the heightened standards under certain circumstances. Dodd-Frank establishes a broad framework for identifying, applying heightened supervision and regulation to, and (as
necessary) limiting the size and activities of systemically significant financial companies.
The Dodd-Frank
Act instructs the FRB to impose enhanced capital and risk-management standards on large financial firms and mandates the Federal Reserve to conduct annual stress tests on all bank holding companies with $50 billion or more in assets to determine
whether they have the capital needed to absorb losses in baseline, adverse, and severely adverse economic conditions. In November 2011, the FRB adopted final rules requiring bank holding companies with $50 billion or more in consolidated assets to
submit capital plans to the FRB on an annual basis. Under the final rules, the FRB annually will evaluate an institutions capital adequacy, internal capital adequacy, assessment processes and plans to make capital distributions such as dividend
payments and stock repurchases.
Also in November 2011, the FRB launched the 2012 Comprehensive Capital
Analysis and Review (CCAR), which required certain large organizations, such as the Bancorp, to submit capital plans by January 9, 2012. As part of the CCAR, the FRB will also carry out a supervisory stress test. An
organizations capital adequacy and its plans to make capital
distributions will be assessed against a number of criteria, including projected performance under stress scenarios.
In December 2011, the FRB issued proposed rules to strengthen regulation and supervision of large bank holding companies
and systemically important nonbank financial firms. The proposed rules would generally apply to all US bank holding companies with consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, such as the Bancorp, and any nonbank financial firms that may be
designated by the FSOC as systemically important companies. The proposal, which is mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, includes a wide range of measures addressing such issues as capital, liquidity, credit exposure, stress testing, risk management and
early remediation requirements. In particular, the proposal includes proposed risk-based capital and leverage requirements that would be implemented in two phases, the first phase would be subject to the FRBs capital plan rule issued in
November 2011. The second phase would involve the FRB issuing a proposal to implement a risk-based capital surcharge based on the framework and methodology developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the Basel Committee),
the current version referred to as Basel III.
Basel III is designed to materially improve the
quality of regulatory capital and introduces a new minimum common equity requirement. Basel III also raises the numerical minimum capital requirements and introduces capital conservation and countercyclical buffers to induce banking organizations to
hold capital in excess of regulatory minimums. In addition, Basel III establishes an international leverage standard for internationally active banks. The FRB is working with other U.S. banking regulators to implement the Basel III capital reforms
in the United States. It is not anticipated that such implementing rules would be issued until 2013 or 2014 and there would most likely be a phase-in period.
The
Bancorps executive offices and the main office of Fifth Third Bank are located on Fountain Square Plaza in downtown Cincinnati, Ohio in a 32-story office tower, a five-story office building with an attached parking garage and a separate
ten-story office building known as the Fifth Third Center, the William S. Rowe Building and the 530 Building, respectively. The Bancorps main operations center is located in Cincinnati, Ohio, in a three-story building with an attached parking
garage known as the Madisonville Operations Center. The Bank owns 100% of these buildings.
At
December 31, 2011, the Bancorp, through its banking and non-banking subsidiaries, operated 1,316 banking centers, of which 911 were owned, 274 were leased and 131 for which the buildings are owned but the land is leased. The banking centers are
located in the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Georgia. The Bancorps significant owned properties are owned free from mortgages and major
encumbrances.
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE BANCORP
Officers are appointed annually by the Board of Directors at the meeting of Directors immediately following the Annual Meeting of Shareholders. The names, ages and positions of the Executive Officers of
the Bancorp as of February 29, 2012 are listed below along with their business experience during the past 5 years:
Kevin T. Kabat, 55. President and Chief Executive Officer of the Bancorp since June 2006 and April 2007, respectively. Previously,
Mr. Kabat was Chairman from June 2008 to June 2010. Previously, Mr. Kabat was Executive Vice President of the Bancorp since December 2003.
Greg D. Carmichael, 50. Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Bancorp since June 2006. Prior to that, Mr. Carmichael was the Executive Vice President and Chief
Information Officer of the Bancorp since June 2003.
Todd Clossin, 50. Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative
Officer of the Bancorp since December 2011. Previously, Mr. Clossin was the President and CEO of Fifth Third Bank (Northeastern Ohio) since January 2005.
Mark D. Hazel, 46. Senior Vice President and Controller of the Bancorp since February 2010. Prior to that, Mr. Hazel was the Assistant Controller of the Bancorp since 2006 and was the
Controller of Nonbank entities since 2003.
James R. Hubbard, 53. Senior Vice President and Chief Legal Officer of the
Bancorp since February 2010. Prior to that, Mr. Hubbard was the Senior Vice President and Director of Legal Services since June 2001.
Gregory L. Kosch, 52. Executive Vice President of the Bancorp since June 2005. Previously, Mr. Kosch was Senior Vice President and head of the Bancorps Commercial Division in the Chicago
affiliate since June 2002.
Bruce K. Lee, 51. Executive Vice President and Chief Credit Officer of the Bancorp since
October 2011. Previously, Mr. Lee was Executive Vice President of the Bancorp since June 2005. Previously Mr. Lee was President and CEO of Fifth Third Bank (Northwestern Ohio) since July 2002.
Daniel T. Poston, 53. Executive Vice President of the Bancorp since June 2003, and
Chief Financial Officer of the Bancorp since September 2009. Previously, Mr. Poston was the Controller of the Bancorp from July 2007 to May 2008 and from November 2008 to September 2009. Previously, Mr. Poston was the Chief Financial
Officer of the Bancorp from May 2008 to November 2008. Formerly, Mr. Poston was the Auditor of the Bancorp since October 2001 and was Senior Vice President of the Bancorp and Fifth Third Bank since January 2002.
Paul L. Reynolds, 50. Executive Vice President, Secretary and Chief Risk Officer of the Bancorp since October 2011. Previously,
Mr. Reynolds was Executive Vice President, Secretary and Chief Administrative Officer of the Bancorp since September 2009. Previously, Mr. Reynolds was Executive Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel since 2002. Prior to that he
was Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Assistant Secretary since 1999.
Joseph R. Robinson, 43. Executive
Vice President and Chief Information Officer and Director of Information Technology and Operations of the Bancorp since September 2009. Previously, Mr. Robinson was Executive Vice President and Chief Information Officer of the Bancorp since
April 2008. Prior to that, he was Senior Vice President and Director of Central Operations since November 2006 and Senior Vice President of IT Enterprise Solutions since March 2004.
Robert A. Sullivan, 57. Senior Executive Vice President of the Bancorp since December 2002.
Teresa J. Tanner, 43. Executive Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer of the Bancorp since February 2010. Previously, Ms. Tanner was Senior Vice President and Director of Enterprise
Learning since September 2008. Prior to that, she was Human Resources Senior Vice President and Senior Business Partner for the Information Technology and Central Operations divisions since July 2006. Previously, she was Vice President and Senior
Business Partner for Operations since September 2004.
Tayfun Tuzun, 47. Senior Vice President and Treasurer of the
Bancorp since December of 2011. Previously, Mr. Tuzun was the Assistant Treasurer and Balance Sheet Manager of Fifth Third Bancorp since 2007. Previously, Mr. Tuzun was the Structured Finance Manager since 2007. Prior to that,
Mr. Tuzun was the Director of Research and Risk Management at FSI Group since 2004.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
The Bancorps common stock is traded in the over-the-counter market and is listed under the symbol
FITB on the NASDAQ® Global Select Market System.
High and Low Stock Prices and Dividends Paid Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
Dividends Paid Per Share |
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
13.08 |
|
|
$ |
9.60 |
|
|
$0.08 |
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
13.09 |
|
|
$ |
9.13 |
|
|
$0.08 |
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
14.15 |
|
|
$ |
11.88 |
|
|
$0.06 |
First Quarter |
|
$ |
15.75 |
|
|
$ |
13.25 |
|
|
$0.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
Dividends Paid
Per Share |
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
15.11 |
|
|
$ |
11.71 |
|
|
$0.01 |
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
13.81 |
|
|
$ |
10.64 |
|
|
$0.01 |
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
15.95 |
|
|
$ |
12.00 |
|
|
$0.01 |
First Quarter |
|
$ |
14.05 |
|
|
$ |
9.81 |
|
|
$0.01 |
See a discussion of dividend limitations that the subsidiaries can pay to the Bancorp discussed in Note 3
of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Additionally, as of December 31, 2011, the Bancorp had 55,237 shareholders of record.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
Shares
Purchased(a) |
|
|
Average
Price
Paid Per
Share |
|
|
Shares
Purchased
as Part of
Publicly
Announced
Plans or
Programs |
|
|
Maximum
Shares that May Be Purchased
Under the
Plans or
Programs |
|
October 2011 |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
$- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
November 2011 |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
December 2011 |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
19,201,518 |
|
(a) |
The Bancorp repurchased 48,372, 36,961 and 62,618 shares during October, November and December of 2011 in connection with various employee compensation plans of the
Bancorp. These purchases are not included against the maximum number of shares that may yet be purchased under the Board of Directors authorization. |
See further discussion of stock-based compensation in Note 24 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The following performance graphs do not constitute soliciting material and should not be deemed filed or
incorporated by reference into any other Company filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent the Bancorp specifically incorporates the performance graphs by reference therein.
Total Return Analysis
The graphs below summarize the cumulative return experienced by the Bancorps shareholders over the years 2007 through 2011, and 2002
through 2011, respectively, compared to the S&P 500 Stock and the S&P Banks indices.
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP VS. MARKET
INDICES
PART III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The
information required by this item relating to the Executive Officers of the Registrant is included in PART I under EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE BANCORP.
The information required by this item concerning Directors and the nomination process is incorporated herein by
reference under the caption ELECTION OF DIRECTORS of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
The information required by this item concerning the Audit Committee and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is incorporated herein by reference under the captions CORPORATE GOVERNANCE and
BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ITS COMMITTEES, MEETINGS AND FUNCTIONS of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
The information required by this item concerning Section 16 (a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance is incorporated herein by reference under the caption SECTION 16
(a) BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP REPORTING COMPLIANCE of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference under the captions COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS, COMPENSATION OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND
DIRECTORS, COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT and COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
Security ownership information of certain beneficial owners and management is incorporated herein by reference under the captions
CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS, ELECTION OF DIRECTORS, COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS and COMPENSATION OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012
Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
The information required by this item concerning Equity Compensation Plan
information is included in Note 24 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED
TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference under
the captions CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS, ELECTION OF DIRECTORS, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE and BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ITS COMMITTEES, MEETINGS AND FUNCTIONS of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
The information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference under the caption PRINCIPAL INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM FEES of the Bancorps Proxy Statement for the 2012 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.
PART IV
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Statements Filed |
|
Pages |
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
|
76 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp and Subsidiaries Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
77-80 |
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
|
81-151 |
|
The schedules for the Bancorp and its subsidiaries are omitted because of the absence of conditions under
which they are required, or because the information is set forth in the Consolidated Financial Statements or the notes thereto.
The following
lists the Exhibits to the Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Master Investment Agreement (excluding exhibits and schedules) dated as of March 27, 2009 and amended as of June 30, 2009, among Fifth Third Bank,
Fifth Third Financial Corporation, Advent-Kong Blocker Corp., FTPS Holding, LLC and Fifth Third Processing Solutions, LLC. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 2,
2009. |
3.1 |
|
Second Amended Articles of Incorporation of Fifth Third Bancorp, as amended. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2008. |
3.2 |
|
Code of Regulations of Fifth Third Bancorp, as amended. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission
on June 21, 2010. |
4.1 |
|
Junior Subordinated Indenture, dated as of March 20, 1997 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as Debenture Trustee. Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 26, 1997. |
4.2 |
|
Amended and Restated Trust Agreement, dated as of March 20, 1997 of Fifth Third Capital Trust II, among Fifth Third Bancorp, as Depositor, Wilmington Trust
Company, as Property Trustee, and the Administrative Trustees named therein. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 26, 1997. |
4.3 |
|
Guarantee Agreement, dated as of March 20, 1997 between Fifth Third Bancorp, as Guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee. Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 26, 1997. |
4.4 |
|
Agreement as to Expense and Liabilities, dated as of March 20, 1997 between Fifth Third Bancorp, as the holder of the Common Securities of Fifth Third Capital
Trust I and Fifth Third Capital Trust II. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 26, 1997. |
4.5 |
|
Indenture, dated as of May 23, 2003, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 22, 2003. |
4.6 |
|
Global security representing Fifth Third Bancorps $500,000,000 4.50% Subordinated Notes due 2018. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 22, 2003. |
4.7 |
|
First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of December 20, 2006, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee. Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K filed for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. |
4.8 |
|
Global security representing Fifth Third Bancorps $500,000,000 5.45% Subordinated Notes due 2017. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. |
4.9 |
|
Global security representing Fifth Third Bancorps $250,000,000 Floating Rate Subordinated Notes due 2016. Incorporated by reference to Registrants
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. |
|
|
|
4.10 |
|
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, to the Junior Subordinated
Indenture dated as of May 20, 1997 between Fifth Third and the Trustee. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30,
2007. |
4.11 |
|
Certificate Representing $500,000,000.00 of 6.50% Junior Subordinated Notes of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.12 |
|
Certificate Representing $250,010,000.00 of 6.50% Junior Subordinated Notes of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.13 |
|
Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust dated as of March 30, 2007 of Fifth Third Capital Trust IV among Fifth Third Bancorp, as Sponsor, Wilmington Trust
Company, as Property Trustee and Delaware Trustee, and the Administrative Trustees named therein. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.14 |
|
Certificate Representing 500,000 6.50% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust IV (liquidation amount $1,000 per Trust Preferred Security).
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.15 |
|
Certificate Representing 250,000 6.50% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust IV (liquidation amount $1,000 per Trust Preferred Security).
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.16 |
|
Certificate Representing 10 6.50% Common Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust IV (liquidation amount $1,000 per Common Security). Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.17 |
|
Guarantee Agreement, dated as of March 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp, as Guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee. Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.18 |
|
Agreement as to Expense and Liabilities, dated as of March 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Fifth Third Capital Trust IV. Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. |
4.19 |
|
Replacement Capital Covenant of Fifth Third Bancorp dated as of March 30, 2007. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2007. |
4.20 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of November 24, 2010 amending the Replacement Capital Covenant dated as of March 30, 2007. Incorporated
by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 26, 2010. |
4.21 |
|
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of August 8, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, to the Junior Subordinated
Indenture dated as of May 20, 1997 between Fifth Third and the Trustee. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2007. |
4.22 |
|
Certificate Representing $500,010,000 of 7.25% Junior Subordinated Notes of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration
Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2007. |
4.23 |
|
Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust dated as of August 8, 2007 of Fifth Third Capital Trust V among Fifth Third Bancorp, as Sponsor, Wilmington Trust
Company, as Property Trustee and Delaware Trustee, and the Administrative Trustees named therein. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8,
2007. |
4.24 |
|
Certificate Representing 20,000,000 7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust V (liquidation amount $25 per Trust Preferred Security).
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2007. |
4.25 |
|
Certificate Representing 400 7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust V (liquidation amount $25 per Trust Preferred Security). Incorporated
by reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended June 30, 2007. |
|
|
|
4.26 |
|
Guarantee Agreement, dated as of August 8, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp, as Guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee. Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2007. |
4.27 |
|
Agreement as to Expense and Liabilities, dated as of August 8, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Fifth Third Capital Trust V. Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended June 30, 2007. |
4.28 |
|
Replacement Capital Covenant of Fifth Third Bancorp dated as of August 8, 2007. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2007. |
4.29 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of November 24, 2010 amending the Replacement Capital Covenant dated as of August 8, 2007. Incorporated
by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 26, 2010. |
4.30 |
|
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of October 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, to the Junior Subordinated
Indenture dated as of May 20, 1997 between Fifth Third and the trustee. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2007. |
4.31 |
|
Certificate Representing $862,510,000 of 7.25% Junior Subordinated Notes of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration
Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2007. |
4.32 |
|
Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust dated as of October 30, 2007 of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI among Fifth Third Bancorp, as Sponsor, Wilmington Trust
Company, as Property Trustee and Delaware Trustee, and the Administrative Trustees named therein. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31,
2007. |
4.33 |
|
Certificate Representing 20,000,000 7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI (liquidation amount $25 per Trust Preferred Security).
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2007. (Issuer also entered into an identical certificate on October 30, 2007 representing $362,500,000
in aggregate liquidation amount of 7.25% Trust Preferred Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI.) |
4.34 |
|
Certificate Representing 400 7.25% Common Securities of Fifth Third Capital Trust VI (liquidation amount $25 per Trust Preferred Security). Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended September 30, 2007. |
4.35 |
|
Guarantee Agreement, dated as of October 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp, as Guarantor, and Wilmington Trust Company, as Guarantee Trustee. Incorporated by
reference to Registrants Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2007. |
4.36 |
|
Agreement as to Expense and Liabilities, dated as of October 30, 2007 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Fifth Third Capital Trust VI. Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended September 30, 2007. |
4.37 |
|
Replacement Capital Covenant of Fifth Third Bancorp dated as of October 30, 2007. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 31, 2007. |
4.38 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to Replacement Capital Covenant, dated as of November 24, 2010 amending the Replacement Capital Covenant dated as of October 30, 2007.
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 26, 2010. |
4.39 |
|
Global security dated as of March 4, 2008 representing Fifth Third Bancorps $500,000,000 8.25% Subordinated Notes due 2038. Incorporated by reference to
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended March 31, 2008. (1) |
4.40 |
|
Indenture for Senior Debt Securities dated as of April 30, 2008 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee. Incorporated by reference
to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 6, 2008. |
4.41 |
|
Global security dated as of April 30, 2008 representing Fifth Third Bancorps $500,000,000 6.25% Senior Notes due 2013. Incorporated |
|
|
|
|
|
by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 6, 2008. (2) |
4.42 |
|
Deposit Agreement dated June 25, 2008, between Fifth Third Bancorp, Wilmington Trust Company, as depositary and conversion agent and American Stock Transfer
and Trust Company, as transfer agent, and the holders from time to time of the Receipts described therein. Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 of the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on June 25, 2008. |
4.43 |
|
Form of Certificate Representing the 8.50 % Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock, Series G, of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 of the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, 2008. |
4.44 |
|
Form of Depositary Receipt for the 8.50 % Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock, Series G, of Fifth Third Bancorp. Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.4 of the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, 2008. |
4.45 |
|
Supplemental Indenture dated as of January 25, 2011 between Fifth Third Bancorp and Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, to the Indenture for Senior Debt
Securities dated as of April 30, 2008 between Fifth Third and the Trustee. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2011. |
4.46 |
|
Global Security dated as of January 25, 2011 representing Fifth Third Bancorps $500,000,000 3.625% Senior Notes due 2016. Incorporated by reference to the
Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2011. (3) |
10.1 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp Unfunded Deferred Compensation Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as Amended and Restated. * |
10.2 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp 1990 Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to
the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-8, Registration No. 33-34075. * |
10.3 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp 1987 Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to
the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-8, Registration No. 33-13252. * |
10.4 |
|
Indenture effective November 19, 1992 between Fifth Third Bancorp, Issuer and NBD Bank, N.A., Trustee. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 18, 1992 and as Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrants Registration Statement on Form S-3, Registration No. 33-54134. |
10.5 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp Master Profit Sharing Plan, as Amended and Restated. * |
10.6 |
|
First Amendment to Fifth Third Bancorp Master Profit Sharing Plan, as Amended and Restated.* |
10.7 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp 2011 Incentive Compensation Plan. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Proxy Statement dated March 10,
2011.* |
10.8 |
|
Amended and Restated Fifth Third Bancorp 1993 Stock Purchase Plan.* |
10.9 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp 1998 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan, as Amended. Incorporated by reference to the Exhibits to Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2003.* |
10.10 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp Non-qualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as Amended and Restated. |
10.11 |
|
First Amendment to Fifth Third Bancorp Non-qualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as Amended and Restated.* |
10.12 |
|
Second Amendment to Fifth Third Bancorp Non-qualified Deferred Compensation Plan, as Amended and Restated.* |
10.13 |
|
CNB Bancshares, Inc. 1999 Stock Incentive Plan, 1995 Stock Incentive Plan, 1992 Stock Incentive Plan and Associate Stock Option Plan; and Indiana Federal
Corporation 1986 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to a Registration Statement on Form S-4, Registration No. 333-84955 and by reference to
CNB Bancshares Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998. * |
10.14 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp Stock Option Gain Deferral Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Proxy Statement dated February 9, 2001.* |
10.15 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to Fifth Third Bancorp Stock Option Gain Deferral Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on May 26, 2006. * . |
|
|
|
10.16 |
|
Old Kent Executive Stock Option Plan of 1986, as Amended. Incorporated by reference to the following filings by Old Kent Financial Corporation with the
Securities and Exchange Commission: Exhibit 10 to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 1995; Exhibit 10.19 to Form 8-K filed on March 5, 1997; Exhibit 10.3 to Form 8-K filed on March 2, 2000. * |
10.17 |
|
Old Kent Stock Option Incentive Plan of 1992, as Amended. Incorporated by reference to the following filings by Old Kent Financial Corporation with the
Securities and Exchange Commission: Exhibit 10(b) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1995; Exhibit 10.20 to Form 8-K filed on March 5, 1997; Exhibit 10(d) to Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 1997; Exhibit 10.3 to Form 8-K filed on
March 2, 2000. * |
10.18 |
|
Old Kent Executive Stock Incentive Plan of 1997, as Amended. Incorporated by reference to Old Kent Financial Corporations Annual Meeting Proxy Statement
dated March 1, 1997. * |
10.19 |
|
Old Kent Stock Incentive Plan of 1999. Incorporated by reference to Old Kent Financial Corporations Annual Meeting Proxy Statement dated March 1, 1999.
* |
10.20 |
|
Notice of Grant of Performance Units and Award Agreement. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K filed for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2004. * |
10.21 |
|
Notice of Grant of Restricted Stock and Award Agreement (for Executive Officers). Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K filed
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004. * |
10.22 |
|
Notice of Grant of Stock Appreciation Rights and Award Agreement. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K filed for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2004. * |
10.23 |
|
Notice of Grant of Restricted Stock and Award Agreement (for Directors). Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K filed for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2004. * |
10.24 |
|
Franklin Financial Corporation 1990 Incentive Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Franklin Financial Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 1989.* |
10.25 |
|
Franklin Financial Corporation 2000 Incentive Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Franklin Financial Corporations Registration Statement on
Form S-8, Registration No. 333-52928. * |
10.26 |
|
Amended and Restated First National Bankshares of Florida, Inc. 2003 Incentive Plan. Incorporated by reference to First National Bankshares of Florida,
Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003. * |
10.27 |
|
Southern Community Bancorp Equity Incentive Plan. Incorporated by reference to Southern Community Bancorps Registration Statement on Form SB-2,
Registration No. 333-35548. * |
10.28 |
|
Southern Community Bancorp Director Statutory Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Southern Community Bancorps Registration Statement on Form
SB-2, Registration No. 333-35548. * |
10.29 |
|
Peninsula Bank of Central Florida Key Employee Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Southern Community Bancorps Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2003. * |
10.30 |
|
Peninsula Bank of Central Florida Director Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Southern Community Bancorps Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2003. * |
10.31 |
|
First Bradenton Bank Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2004. * |
10.32 |
|
Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated March 29, 2005, as Amended. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 18, 2005. |
10.33 |
|
Amendment to Stipulation dated May 10, 2005. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on November 18, 2005. |
10.34 |
|
Second Amendment to Stipulation dated August 12, 2005. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 18, 2005. |
10.35 |
|
Order and Final Judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 18, 2005. |
10.36 |
|
Letter Agreement, dated December 31, 2008, including Securities Purchase Agreement Standard Terms incorporated by reference therein, between the Company
and the United States Department of |
|
|
|
|
|
the Treasury. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31,
2008. |
10.37 |
|
Form of Waiver, executed by each of Messrs. Kevin Kabat, Ross Kari, Greg Carmichael, Charles Drucker, Bruce Lee, Dan Poston, Robert A. Sullivan and Terry Zink.
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31, 2008. * |
10.38 |
|
Form of Letter Agreement, executed by each of Messrs. Kevin Kabat, Ross Kari, Greg Carmichael, Charles Drucker, Bruce Lee, Dan Poston, Robert A. Sullivan and
Terry Zink with the Company. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31, 2008. * |
10.39 |
|
Form of Executive Agreements effective December 31, 2008, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Kevin T. Kabat, Robert A. Sullivan, Greg D. Carmichael, Ross Kari,
Bruce K. Lee, Charles D. Drucker and Terry Zink. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31, 2008. * |
10.40 |
|
Form of Executive Agreements effective December 31, 2008, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Nancy Phillips, Daniel T. Poston, Paul L. Reynolds and Mary E. Tuuk.
Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31, 2008. * |
10.41 |
|
Form of Executive Agreement effective December 31, 2008, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Mahesh Sankaran. Incorporated by reference to Registrants Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 31, 2008. * |
10.42 |
|
Form of Executive Agreement effective January 17, 2012, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Tayfun Tuzun.* |
10.43 |
|
Form of Amended Executive Agreements effective January 19, 2012, between Fifth Third Bancorp and Daniel T. Poston and Paul L. Reynolds. Incorporated by reference
to Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 24, 2012. * |
10.44 |
|
Warrant dated June 30, 2009 issued by FTPS Holding, LLC to Fifth Third Bank. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
filed with the Commission on July 2, 2009. |
10.45 |
|
Amended & Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (excluding certain exhibits) dated as of June 30, 2009 among Advent-Kong Blocker Corp.,
Fifth Third Bank, FTPS Partners, LLC, JPDN Enterprises, LLC and FTPS Holding, LLC. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 2, 2009. |
10.46 |
|
Amendment and Restatement Agreement and Reaffirmation (excluding certain schedules) dated as of June 30, 2009 among Fifth Third Processing Solutions, LLC,
FTPS Holding, LLC, Card Management Company, LLC, Fifth Third Holdings, LLC and Fifth Third Bank. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 2, 2009. |
10.47 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement dated as of June 30, 2009 among Advent-Kong Blocker Corp., Fifth Third Bank, FTPS Partners, LLC, JPDN Enterprises, LLC and
FTPS Holding, LLC. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Commission on July 2, 2009. |
10.48 |
|
Form of Agreement Regarding Portion of Salary Payable in Phantom Stock Units dated October 16, 2009 executed by Kevin Kabat, Greg Carmichael, Greg Kosch, Bruce
Lee, Dan Poston, Paul Reynolds, Robert Sullivan, and Terry Zink. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Quarterly Report on 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009. * |
10.49 |
|
Form of Agreement Regarding Portion of Salary Payable in Phantom Stock Units dated March 26, 2010 executed by Mary Tuuk. Incorporated by reference to the
Registrants Quarterly Report on 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009. * |
10.50 |
|
Form of Letter Agreement dated June 29, 2010 executed by each of Kevin Kabat, Greg Carmichael, Greg Kosch, Bruce Lee, Dan Poston, Paul Reynolds, Robert A.
Sullivan and Mary Tuuk with the Company. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Quarterly Report on 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. * |
10.51 |
|
Form of Addendum No.1 to Agreement Regarding Portion of Salary Payable in Phantom Stock Units executed by each of Kevin Kabat, Greg Carmichael, Greg Kosch, Bruce
Lee, Dan Poston, Paul Reynolds, Robert A. Sullivan and Mary Tuuk with the Company. Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Quarterly Report on 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010. * |
12.1 |
|
Computations of Consolidated Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges. |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
Computations of Consolidated Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividend Requirements. |
21 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp Subsidiaries, as of December 31, 2011. |
23 |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm-Deloitte & Touche LLP. |
31(i) |
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Executive Officer. |
31(ii) |
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Financial Officer. |
32(i) |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Executive
Officer. |
32(ii) |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by Chief Financial
Officer. |
99.1 |
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 111 (b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 by Chief Executive Officer |
99.2 |
|
Certification Pursuant to Section 111 (b)(4) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 by Chief Financial Officer |
101 |
|
Interactive data files pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T: (i) the Consolidated Balance Sheets, (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Income, (iii) the
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity, (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, and (v) the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements tagged as blocks of text and in detail. ** |
(1) |
Fifth Third Bancorp also entered into an identical security on March 4, 2008 representing an additional $500,000,000 of its 8.25% Subordinated Notes due 2038.
|
(2) |
Fifth Third Bancorp also entered into an identical security on April 30, 2008 representing an additional $250,000,000 of its 6.25% Senior Notes due 2013.
|
(3) |
Fifth Third Bancorp also entered into an identical security on January 25, 2011 representing an additional $500,000,000 of its 3.625% Senior Notes due 2016.
|
* |
Denotes management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement. |
** |
As provided in Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, this information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.
|
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP |
Registrant |
|
/s/ Kevin T. Kabat |
Kevin T. Kabat |
President and CEO |
Principal Executive Officer |
February 29, 2012 |
Pursuant to requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed on
February 29, 2012 by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities indicated.
|
OFFICERS: |
|
/s/ Kevin T. Kabat |
Kevin T. Kabat |
President and CEO |
Principal Executive Officer |
|
/s/ Daniel T. Poston |
Daniel T. Poston |
Executive Vice President and CFO |
Principal Financial Officer |
|
/s/ Mark D. Hazel |
Mark D. Hazel |
Senior Vice President and Controller |
Principal Accounting Officer |
|
DIRECTORS: |
|
/s/ William M. Isaac |
William M. Isaac |
Chairman |
|
/s/ James P. Hackett |
James P. Hackett |
Lead Director |
|
/s/ Darryl F. Allen |
Darryl F. Allen |
|
/s/ B. Evan Bayh III |
B. Evan Bayh III |
|
/s/ Ulysses L. Bridgeman, Jr. |
Ulysses L. Bridgeman, Jr. |
|
/s/ Emerson L. Brumback |
Emerson L. Brumback |
|
/s/ Gary R. Heminger |
Gary R. Heminger |
|
/s/ Jewell D. Hoover |
Jewell D. Hoover |
|
/s/ Kevin T. Kabat |
Kevin T. Kabat |
|
/s/ Mitchel D. Livingston, Ph.D. |
Mitchel D. Livingston, Ph.D. |
|
/s/ Michael B. McCallister |
Michael B. McCallister |
|
/s/ Hendrik G. Meijer |
Hendrik G. Meijer |
|
/s/ John J. Schiff, Jr. |
John J. Schiff, Jr. |
|
/s/ Marsha C. Williams |
Marsha C. Williams |
CONSOLIDATED TEN YEAR COMPARISON
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AVERAGE ASSETS ($ IN MILLIONS) |
|
|
|
Interest-Earning Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Loans and
Leases |
|
|
Federal Funds
Sold (a) |
|
|
Interest-Bearing
Deposits in
Banks (a) |
|
|
Securities |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Cash and Due
from Banks |
|
|
Other
Assets
|
|
|
Total
Average
Assets |
|
2011 |
|
$ |
80,214 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2,030 |
|
|
|
15,437 |
|
|
$ |
97,682 |
|
|
|
2,352 |
|
|
|
15,335 |
|
|
$ |
112,666 |
|
2010 |
|
|
79,232 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
3,317 |
|
|
|
16,371 |
|
|
|
98,931 |
|
|
|
2,245 |
|
|
|
14,841 |
|
|
|
112,434 |
|
2009 |
|
|
83,391 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
|
|
17,100 |
|
|
|
101,526 |
|
|
|
2,329 |
|
|
|
14,266 |
|
|
|
114,856 |
|
2008 |
|
|
85,835 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
13,424 |
|
|
|
99,880 |
|
|
|
2,490 |
|
|
|
13,411 |
|
|
|
114,296 |
|
2007 |
|
|
78,348 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
11,630 |
|
|
|
90,382 |
|
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
|
10,613 |
|
|
|
102,477 |
|
2006 |
|
|
73,493 |
|
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
20,910 |
|
|
|
94,799 |
|
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
8,713 |
|
|
|
105,238 |
|
2005 |
|
|
67,737 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
24,806 |
|
|
|
92,744 |
|
|
|
2,750 |
|
|
|
8,102 |
|
|
|
102,876 |
|
2004 |
|
|
57,042 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
30,282 |
|
|
|
87,639 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
|
|
5,763 |
|
|
|
94,896 |
|
2003 |
|
|
52,414 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
28,640 |
|
|
|
81,361 |
|
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
|
87,481 |
|
2002 |
|
|
45,539 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
23,246 |
|
|
|
69,124 |
|
|
|
1,551 |
|
|
|
5,007 |
|
|
|
75,037 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AVERAGE DEPOSITS AND SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS ($ IN MILLIONS) |
|
Deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Demand |
|
|
Interest
Checking |
|
|
Savings |
|
|
Money
Market |
|
|
Other
Time |
|
|
Certificates
$100,000 and Over |
|
|
Foreign
Office |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Short-Term
Borrowings |
|
|
Total |
|
2011 |
|
$ |
23,389 |
|
|
|
18,707 |
|
|
|
21,652 |
|
|
|
5,154 |
|
|
|
6,260 |
|
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
3,497 |
|
|
$ |
82,315 |
|
|
|
3,122 |
|
|
$ |
85,437 |
|
2010 |
|
|
19,669 |
|
|
|
18,218 |
|
|
|
19,612 |
|
|
|
4,808 |
|
|
|
10,526 |
|
|
|
6,083 |
|
|
|
3,361 |
|
|
|
82,277 |
|
|
|
1,926 |
|
|
|
84,203 |
|
2009 |
|
|
16,862 |
|
|
|
15,070 |
|
|
|
16,875 |
|
|
|
4,320 |
|
|
|
14,103 |
|
|
|
10,367 |
|
|
|
2,265 |
|
|
|
79,862 |
|
|
|
6,980 |
|
|
|
86,842 |
|
2008 |
|
|
14,017 |
|
|
|
14,191 |
|
|
|
16,192 |
|
|
|
6,127 |
|
|
|
11,135 |
|
|
|
9,531 |
|
|
|
4,220 |
|
|
|
75,413 |
|
|
|
10,760 |
|
|
|
86,173 |
|
2007 |
|
|
13,261 |
|
|
|
14,820 |
|
|
|
14,836 |
|
|
|
6,308 |
|
|
|
10,778 |
|
|
|
6,466 |
|
|
|
3,155 |
|
|
|
69,624 |
|
|
|
6,890 |
|
|
|
76,514 |
|
2006 |
|
|
13,741 |
|
|
|
16,650 |
|
|
|
12,189 |
|
|
|
6,366 |
|
|
|
10,500 |
|
|
|
5,795 |
|
|
|
3,711 |
|
|
|
68,952 |
|
|
|
8,670 |
|
|
|
77,622 |
|
2005 |
|
|
13,868 |
|
|
|
18,884 |
|
|
|
10,007 |
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
|
|
8,491 |
|
|
|
4,001 |
|
|
|
3,967 |
|
|
|
64,388 |
|
|
|
9,511 |
|
|
|
73,899 |
|
2004 |
|
|
12,327 |
|
|
|
19,434 |
|
|
|
7,941 |
|
|
|
3,473 |
|
|
|
6,208 |
|
|
|
2,403 |
|
|
|
4,449 |
|
|
|
56,235 |
|
|
|
13,539 |
|
|
|
69,774 |
|
2003 |
|
|
10,482 |
|
|
|
18,679 |
|
|
|
8,020 |
|
|
|
3,189 |
|
|
|
6,426 |
|
|
|
3,832 |
|
|
|
3,862 |
|
|
|
54,490 |
|
|
|
12,373 |
|
|
|
66,863 |
|
2002 |
|
|
8,952 |
|
|
|
16,239 |
|
|
|
9,465 |
|
|
|
1,162 |
|
|
|
8,855 |
|
|
|
2,237 |
|
|
|
2,018 |
|
|
|
48,928 |
|
|
|
7,191 |
|
|
|
56,119 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME ($ IN MILLIONS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originally Reported |
|
Year |
|
Interest
Income |
|
|
Interest
Expense |
|
|
Noninterest
Income |
|
|
Noninterest
Expense |
|
|
Net Income
(Loss) Available to Common Shareholders |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Diluted
Earnings |
|
|
Dividends
Declared |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Diluted
Earnings |
|
2011 |
|
$ |
4,218 |
|
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
2,455 |
|
|
|
3,758 |
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
1.20 |
|
|
$ |
1.18 |
|
2010 |
|
|
4,489 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
2,729 |
|
|
|
3,855 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
|
|
0.63 |
|
2009 |
|
|
4,668 |
|
|
|
1,314 |
|
|
|
4,782 |
|
|
|
3,826 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
0.73 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
2008 |
|
|
5,608 |
|
|
|
2,094 |
|
|
|
2,946 |
|
|
|
4,564 |
|
|
|
(2,180 |
) |
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
(3.91 |
) |
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
(3.94 |
) |
|
|
(3.94 |
) |
2007 |
|
|
6,027 |
|
|
|
3,018 |
|
|
|
2,467 |
|
|
|
3,311 |
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
1.99 |
|
|
|
1.98 |
|
|
|
1.70 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
1.99 |
|
2006 |
|
|
5,955 |
|
|
|
3,082 |
|
|
|
2,012 |
|
|
|
2,915 |
|
|
|
1,188 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
2.12 |
|
|
|
1.58 |
|
|
|
2.14 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
2005 |
|
|
4,995 |
|
|
|
2,030 |
|
|
|
2,374 |
|
|
|
2,801 |
|
|
|
1,548 |
|
|
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
2.77 |
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
|
|
2.79 |
|
|
|
2.77 |
|
2004 |
|
|
4,114 |
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
2,355 |
|
|
|
2,863 |
|
|
|
1,524 |
|
|
|
2.72 |
|
|
|
2.68 |
|
|
|
1.31 |
|
|
|
2.72 |
|
|
|
2.68 |
|
2003 |
|
|
3,991 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
2,398 |
|
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
1,664 |
|
|
|
2.91 |
|
|
|
2.87 |
|
|
|
1.13 |
|
|
|
2.91 |
|
|
|
2.87 |
|
2002 |
|
|
4,129 |
|
|
|
1,430 |
|
|
|
2,111 |
|
|
|
2,265 |
|
|
|
1,530 |
|
|
|
2.64 |
|
|
|
2.59 |
|
|
|
0.98 |
|
|
|
2.64 |
|
|
|
2.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MISCELLANEOUS AT DECEMBER 31 ($ IN MILLIONS, EXCEPT PER SHARE
DATA) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bancorp Shareholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Common
Shares
Outstanding |
|
|
Common
Stock |
|
|
Preferred
Stock |
|
|
Capital
Surplus |
|
|
Retained Earnings |
|
|
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income |
|
|
Treasury
Stock |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Book Value
Per
Share |
|
|
Allowance for
Loan and Leases Losses |
|
2011 |
|
|
919,804,436 |
|
|
$ |
2,051 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
2,792 |
|
|
|
7,554 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
$ |
13,201 |
|
|
|
13.92 |
|
|
$ |
2,255 |
|
2010 |
|
|
796,272,522 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
3,654 |
|
|
|
1,715 |
|
|
|
6,719 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
14,051 |
|
|
|
13.06 |
|
|
|
3,004 |
|
2009 |
|
|
795,068,164 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
3,609 |
|
|
|
1,743 |
|
|
|
6,326 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
13,497 |
|
|
|
12.44 |
|
|
|
3,749 |
|
2008 |
|
|
577,386,612 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
4,241 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
5,824 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
(229 |
) |
|
|
12,077 |
|
|
|
13.57 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
2007 |
|
|
532,671,925 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
8,413 |
|
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(2,209 |
) |
|
|
9,161 |
|
|
|
17.18 |
|
|
|
937 |
|
2006 |
|
|
556,252,674 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
8,317 |
|
|
|
(179 |
) |
|
|
(1,232 |
) |
|
|
10,022 |
|
|
|
18.00 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
2005 |
|
|
555,623,430 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,827 |
|
|
|
8,007 |
|
|
|
(413 |
) |
|
|
(1,279 |
) |
|
|
9,446 |
|
|
|
16.98 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
2004 |
|
|
557,648,989 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,934 |
|
|
|
7,269 |
|
|
|
(169 |
) |
|
|
(1,414 |
) |
|
|
8,924 |
|
|
|
15.99 |
|
|
|
713 |
|
2003 |
|
|
566,685,301 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1,964 |
|
|
|
6,481 |
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(962 |
) |
|
|
8,667 |
|
|
|
15.29 |
|
|
|
697 |
|
2002 |
|
|
574,355,247 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
|
5,465 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
(544 |
) |
|
|
8,604 |
|
|
|
14.98 |
|
|
|
683 |
|
(a) |
Federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits in banks are combined in other short-term investments in the Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
(b) |
Adjusted for accounting guidance related to the calculation of earnings per share, which was adopted retroactively on January 1, 2009.
|
DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP DIRECTORS
William M. Isaac, Chairman
Senior Managing Director-Global Head of Financial Institutions
FTI Consulting
James P.
Hackett, Lead Director
President & CEO
Steelcase, Inc.
Darryl F. Allen
Retired Chairman
President & CEO
Aeroquip-Vickers, Inc.
B. Evan Bayh III
Partner
McGuireWoods LLP
Ulysses L. Bridgeman, Jr.
President
B.F. Companies
Emerson L. Brumback
Retired
President & COO
M&T Bank
Gary R. Heminger
President & CEO
Marathon Petroleum Corporation
Jewell D.
Hoover
Principal
Hoover
and Associates, LLC
Kevin T. Kabat
President & CEO
Fifth Third Bancorp
Mitchel D. Livingston, Ph.D.
Vice President
for Student Affairs
& Chief Diversity Officer
University of Cincinnati
Michael B. McCallister
Chairman & CEO
Humana, Inc.
Hendrik G. Meijer
Co-Chairman & CEO
Meijer,
Inc.
John J. Schiff, Jr.
Chairman of the Executive Committee
Cincinnati Financial Corporation
Marsha
C. Williams
Retired Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
Orbitz Worldwide, Inc.
DIRECTORS EMERITI
Neil A. Armstrong
Philip G. Barach
John F. Barrett
J. Kenneth Blackwell
Milton C. Boesel, Jr.
Douglas G. Cowan
Thomas L. Dahl
Ronald A. Dauwe
Gerald V. Dirvin
Thomas B. Donnell
Nicholas M. Evans
Richard T. Farmer
Louis R. Fiore
John D. Geary
Ivan W. Gorr
Joseph H. Head, Jr.
Allen M. Hill
William G. Kagler
William J. Keating
Jerry L. Kirby
Robert L. Koch II
Kenneth W. Lowe
Robert B. Morgan
Michael H. Norris
David E. Reese
James E. Rogers
C. Wesley Rowles
George A. Schaefer, Jr.
Donald B. Shackelford
David B. Sharrock
Stephen Stranahan
Dennis J. Sullivan, Jr.
Dudley S. Taft
Thomas W. Traylor
Alton C. Wendzel
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP
OFFICERS
Kevin T. Kabat
President & CEO
Greg D.
Carmichael
Executive Vice President &
Chief Operating Officer
Todd F. Clossin
Executive Vice President &
Chief Administrative Officer
Mark D.
Hazel
Senior Vice President &
Controller
James R. Hubbard
Senior Vice President &
Chief Legal Officer
Gregory L. Kosch
Executive Vice President
Bruce K. Lee
Executive Vice
President &
Chief Credit Officer
Daniel T. Poston
Executive Vice President &
Chief Financial Officer
Paul L. Reynolds
Executive Vice President,
Chief Risk Officer & Secretary
Joseph R. Robinson
Executive Vice
President &
Chief Information Officer
Robert A. Sullivan
Senior Executive Vice President
Teresa J. Tanner
Executive Vice
President &
Chief Human Resources Officer
Tayfun Tuzun
Senior Vice President & Treasurer
AFFILIATE AND MARKET PRESIDENTS
Donald
Abel, Jr.
David A. Call
Greg D.
Carmichael
John N. Daniel
Karen Dee
David Girodat
Thomas Heiks
Nancy H. Huber
Julie Hughes
Jerry Kelsheimer
Randolph Koporc
Robert W. LaClair
Brian Lamb
Ralph S. Michael III
Jordan A.
Miller, Jr.
Thomas Partridge
Reagan
Rick
Robert A. Sullivan
Mary E.
Tuuk
Michelle L. VanDyke
Thomas G.
Welch, Jr.
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP BOARD COMMITTEES
Finance Committee
William M. Isaac, Chair
Emerson L. Brumback
James P. Hackett
Gary R. Heminger
Kevin T. Kabat
Audit Committee
Darryl F.
Allen, Chair
Emerson L. Brumback
Jewell D. Hoover
Marsha C. Williams
Human Capital and Compensation Committee
Gary R. Heminger, Chair
Emerson L. Brumback
Mitchel D. Livingston, Ph. D.
Hendrik G. Meijer
Nominating and Corporate
Governance Committee
James P. Hackett, Chair
Darryl F. Allen
Ulysses L. Bridgeman, Jr.
Marsha C. Williams
Risk and Compliance
Committee
Marsha C. Williams, Chair
B. Evan Bayh III
Ulysses L. Bridgeman, Jr.
Jewell D. Hoover
Hendrik G. Meijer
Trust Committee
Mitchel D. Livingston,
Ph.D., Chair
Kevin T. Kabat
John J.
Schiff, Jr.