UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
Form 10-K
| x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20082009
OR
| ¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File No. 001-07511
STATE STREET CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| Massachusetts | 04-2456637 | |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | |
One Lincoln Street Boston, Massachusetts | 02111 | |
| (Address of principal executive office) | (Zip Code) | |
617-786-3000 (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) | ||
| Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: | ||
(Title of Each Class) | (Name of each exchange on which registered) | |
| Common Stock, $1 par value | New York Stock Exchange | |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark 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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s 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 has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Date 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 whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
| Large accelerated filer x | Accelerated filer ¨ | Non-accelerated filer ¨ | Smaller reporting company ¨ | |||
| (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | ||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Yes ¨ No x
The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the per share price ($63.99)47.20) at which the common equity was last sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (June 30, 2008)2009) was approximately $27.55$23.29 billion.
The number of shares of the registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of January 31, 20092010 was 431,965,675.495,380,839.
Portions of the following documents are incorporated by reference into Parts of this Report on Form 10-K, to the extent noted in such Parts, as indicated below:
(1) The registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for the 20092010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 20092010 (Part III).
Table of Contents
PART I
| ITEM 1. | BUSINESS |
State Street Corporation is a financial holding company, organized in 1969 under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Through its subsidiaries, including its principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank and Trust Company, State Street Corporation provides a fullbroad range of products and services for institutional investors worldwide. All references in this Form 10-K to the parent company are to State Street Corporation. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references in this Form 10-K to “State Street,” “we,” “us,” “our” or similar terms mean State Street Corporation and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. State Street Bank and Trust Company is referred to as State Street Bank. The parent company is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries, assisting those subsidiaries by providing financial resources and management. At December 31, 2008,2009, we had consolidated total assets of $173.63$157.95 billion, consolidated total deposits of $112.23$90.06 billion, consolidated total shareholders’ equity of $12.77$14.49 billion and employed 28,475.27,310. Our executive offices are located at One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111 (telephone (617) 786-3000).
We make available, without charge, on or through our Internet website atwww.statestreet.com, all reports we electronically file with, or furnish to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, including our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, as well as any amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after those documents have been filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. These documents are also accessible on the SEC’s website atwww.sec.gov. We have included the website addresses of State Street and the SEC in this report as inactive textual references only. Except as may be specifically incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K, information on those websites is not part of this Form 10-K.
We have adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines, as well as written charters for the Executive Committee, the Examining and Audit Committee, the Executive Compensation Committee, the Risk and Capital Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of our Board of Directors, and a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers, a Standard of Conduct for Directors and a Standard of Conduct for our employees. Each of these documents is posted on our website, and each is available in print to any shareholder who requests it by writing to the Office of the Secretary, State Street Corporation, One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111.website.
GENERAL
With $18.79 trillion of assets under custody and administration and $1.91 trillion of assets under management at year-end 2009, we are a leading specialist in meeting the needs of institutional investors worldwide. Our customers include mutual funds, collective investment funds and other investment pools, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations, endowments and investment managers. Including the United States, we operate in 25 countries and more than 100 geographic markets worldwide. We conduct our business primarily through our principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank, which traces its beginnings to the founding of the Union Bank in 1792. State Street Bank’s current charter was authorized by a special act of the Massachusetts Legislature in 1891, and its present name was adopted in 1960. With $12.04 trillion of assets under custody and $1.44 trillion of assets under management at year-end 2008, we are a leading specialist in meeting the needs of institutional investors worldwide. Our customers include mutual funds, collective investment funds and other investment pools, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations, endowments and investment managers. Including the United States, we operate in 27 countries and more than 100 geographic markets worldwide.
For a discussion of our business activities, refer to the “Lines of Business” section that follows. For information about our management of capital, liquidity, market risk, including interest-rate risk, and other risks inherent in our businesses, refer to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included under Item 7, and Risk Factors included under Item 1A, of this Form 10-K.1A. Financial information with respect to acquisitions and divestitures, income taxes and non-U.S. activities is included in notes 2, 2221 and 2524 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
LINES OF BUSINESS
We reporthave two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management. These two lines of business provide services to support institutional investors, including custody, recordkeeping, daily pricing and administration, shareholder services, foreign exchange, brokerage and other trading services, securities finance,
deposit and short-term investment facilities, loan and lease financing, investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing, performance, risk and compliance analytics, investment research and investment management, including passive and active U.S. and non-U.S. equity and fixed-income strategies. For additional information about our lines of business, see the “Line of Business Information” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis included under Item 7, and note 2423 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8, of this Form 10-K.8.
COMPETITION
We operate in a highly competitive environment in all areas of our business worldwide. We face competition from other financial services institutions, deposit-taking institutions, investment management firms, insurance companies, mutual funds, broker/dealers, investment banking firms, benefits consultants, leasing companies, and business service and software companies. As we expand globally, we encounter additional sources of competition.
We believe that there are certain key competitive considerations in these markets. These considerations include, for investment servicing, quality of service, economies of scale, technological expertise, quality and scope of sales and marketing, and price; and for investment management, expertise, experience, the availability of related service offerings, quality of service and performance, and price.
Our competitive success will depend upon our ability to develop and market new and innovative services, to adopt or develop new technologies, to bring new services to market in a timely fashion at competitive prices, to continue and expand our relationships with existing customers and to attract new customers.
SUPERVISION AND REGULATION
We areThe parent company is registered with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, which we refer to as the Federal Reserve, as a bank holding company pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. The Bank Holding Company Act, with certain exceptions, limits the activities in which we and our non-banking subsidiaries may engage, to those that the Federal Reserve considers to be closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks. These limits also apply to non-banking entities of which we own or control more than 5% of a class of voting shares. The Federal Reserve may order a bank holding company to terminate any activity or its ownership or control of a non-banking subsidiary if the Federal Reserve finds that the activity, ownership or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of a banking subsidiary or is inconsistent with sound banking principles or statutory purposes. The Bank Holding Company Act also requires a bank holding company to obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve before it may acquire substantially all the assets of any bank or ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any bank.
The parent company operates as a financial holding company, which reduces to some extent the Federal Reserve’s restrictions on our activities. A financial holding company and the companies under its control are permitted to engage in activities considered “financial in nature” as defined by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and Federal Reserve interpretations, and therefore the parent company may engage in a broader range of activities than permitted for bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. Financial holding companies may engage directly or indirectly in activities considered financial in nature, eitherde novo or by acquisition, provided the financial holding company gives the Federal Reserve after-the-fact notice of the new activities. Activities defined to be financial in nature include, but are not limited to, the following: providing financial or investment advice; underwriting; dealing in or making markets in securities; merchant banking, subject to significant limitations; and any activities previously found by the Federal Reserve to be closely related to banking. In order to maintain our status as a financial holding company, each of a bank holding company’sour depository subsidiaries must be well capitalized and well managed, as judged by regulators, and must comply with Community Reinvestment Act obligations. Failure to maintain these standards may ultimately permit the Federal Reserve to take enforcement actions against the company.us.
Many aspects of our business are subject to regulation by other U.S. federal and state governmental and regulatory agencies and self-regulatory organizations (including securities exchanges), and by non-U.S. governmental and regulatory agencies and self-regulatory organizations. Aspects of our public disclosure,
corporate governance principles and internal control systems are subject to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and regulations and rules of the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange.
Capital Adequacy
Like other bank holding companies, we are subject to Federal Reserve minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines. As noted above, our status as a financial holding company also requires that we maintain specified capital ratio levels. State Street Bank is subject to similar risk-based capital and leverage ratio guidelines. As of December 31, 2008,2009, our capital levels on a consolidated basis, and the capital levels of State Street Bank, exceeded the applicable minimum capital requirements and the requirements to qualify as a financial holding company. Failure to meet capital requirements could subject us to a variety of enforcement actions, including the termination of deposit insurance of State Street Bank by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and to certain restrictions on our business that are described further in this “Supervision and Regulation” section.
For additional information about our capital position and capital adequacy, refer to the “Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis included under Item 7, and note 1615 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8, of this Form 10-K.8.
Subsidiaries
The Federal Reserve is the primary federal banking agency responsible for regulating us and our subsidiaries, including State Street Bank, for both our U.S. and non-U.S. operations.
Our bank subsidiaries are subject to supervision and examination by various regulatory authorities. State Street Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System and the FDIC and is subject to applicable federal and state banking laws and to supervision and examination by the Federal Reserve, as well as by the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks, the FDIC, and the regulatory authorities of those states and countries in which a branch of State Street Bank is located. Other subsidiary trust companies are subject to supervision and examination by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, other offices of the Federal Reserve System or by the appropriate state banking regulatory authorities of the states in which they are located. Our non-U.S. banking subsidiaries are subject to regulation by the regulatory authorities of the countries in which they are located. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the capital of each of these banking subsidiaries was in excess of the minimum legal capital requirements as set by those authorities.
The parent company and its non-banking subsidiaries are affiliates of State Street Bank under federal banking laws, which impose restrictions on transfers of funds in the form of loans, extensions of credit, investments or asset purchases from State Street Bank to the parent and its non-banking subsidiaries. Transfers of this kind to affiliates by State Street Bank are limited with respect to each affiliate to 10% of State Street Bank’s capital and surplus, as defined, and to 20% in the aggregate for all affiliates, and are subject to collateral requirements. Federal law also provides that certain transactions with affiliates must be on terms and under circumstances, including credit standards, that are substantially the same or at least as favorable to the institution as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions involving other non-affiliated companies or, in the absence of comparable transactions, on terms and under circumstances, including credit standards, that in good faith would be offered to, or would apply to, non-affiliated companies. State Street Bank is also prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with any extension of credit or lease or sale of property or furnishing of services. The Federal Reserve has jurisdiction to regulate the terms of certain debt issues of bank holding companies. Federal law provides as well for a depositor preference on amounts realized from the liquidation or other resolution of any depository institution insured by the FDIC.
Our investment management division, State Street Global Advisors, or SSgA, which acts as an investment advisor to investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, is registered as an investment advisor with the SEC. However, a major portion of our investment management activities are
conducted by State Street Bank, which is subject to supervision primarily by the Federal Reserve and the SEC with respect to these activities. Our U.S. broker/dealer subsidiary is registered as a broker/dealer with the SEC, is subject to
regulation by the SEC (including the SEC’s net capital rule) and is a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, a self-regulatory organization. Many aspects of our investment management activities are subject to federal and state laws and regulations primarily intended to benefit the investment holder, rather than our shareholders. These laws and regulations generally grant supervisory agencies and bodies broad administrative powers, including the power to limit or restrict us from carrying on our investment management activities in the event that we fail to comply with such laws and regulations, and examination authority. Our business relating to investment management and trusteeship of collective trust funds and separate accounts offered to employee benefit plans is subject to ERISA and is regulated by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Our businesses, including our investment management and securities and futures businesses, are also regulated extensively by non-U.S. governments, securities exchanges, self-regulatory organizations, central banks and regulatory bodies, especially in those jurisdictions in which we maintain an office. For instance, the Financial Services Authority, the London Stock Exchange, and the Euronext.liffe regulate our activities in the United Kingdom; the Deutsche Borse AG and the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority and the Deutsche Borse AG regulate our activities in Germany; and the Financial Services Agency, the Bank of Japan, the Japanese Securities Dealers Association and several Japanese securities and futures exchanges, including the Tokyo Stock Exchange, regulate our activities in Japan. We have established policies, procedures, and systems designed to comply with these requirements. However, as a global financial services institution, we face complexity and costs in our worldwide compliance efforts.
Most of our non-U.S. operations are conducted pursuant to Federal Reserve Regulation K through State Street Bank’s Edge Act corporation subsidiary or through international branches of State Street Bank. An Edge Act corporation is a corporation organized under federal law that conducts foreign business activities. In general, banks may not invest more than 20% of their capital and surplus in their Edge Act corporations (and similar state law corporations), and the investment of any amount in excess of 10% of capital and surplus requires the prior approval of the Federal Reserve.
In addition to our non-U.S. operations conducted pursuant to Regulation K, we make new investments abroad directly (through the parent company or through non-banking subsidiaries of the parent company) pursuant to Federal Reserve Regulation Y, or through international bank branch expansion, which are not subject to the 20% investment limitation for Edge Act corporation subsidiaries.
We are subject to the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, which contains anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws and requires implementation of regulations applicable to financial services companies, including standards for verifying client identification and monitoring client transactions and detecting and reporting suspicious activities. Anti-money laundering laws outside the U.S. contain similar requirements.
We are also subject to the Massachusetts bank holding company statute. The statute requires prior approval by the Massachusetts Board of Bank Incorporation for our acquisition of more than 5% of the voting shares of any additional bank and for other forms of bank acquisitions.
Support of Subsidiary Banks
Under Federal Reserve guidelines, a bank holding company is required to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to its banking subsidiaries. Under these guidelines, the parent company is expected to commit resources to State Street Bank and any other banking subsidiary in circumstances in which it might not do so absent such guidelines. In the event of bankruptcy, any commitment by the parent company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a banking subsidiary will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and will be entitled to a priority payment.
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND GOVERNMENT POLICIES
Economic policies of the U.S. government and its agencies influence our operating environment. Monetary policy conducted by the Federal Reserve directly affects the level of interest rates, which may impact overall credit conditions of the economy. Monetary policy is applied by the Federal Reserve through open market operations in U.S. government securities, changes in reserve requirements for depository institutions, and
changes in the discount rate and availability of borrowing from the Federal Reserve. Government regulation of banks and bank holding companies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors of the banks, rather than for the shareholders of the institutions. We are also impacted by the economic policies of non-U.S. government agencies, such as the European Central Bank.
STATISTICAL DISCLOSURE BY BANK HOLDING COMPANIES
The following information, providedincluded under Items 6, 7 and 8, of this Form 10-K, is incorporated by reference herein:
“Selected Financial Data” table (Item 6)—presents return on average common equity, return on average assets, common dividend payout and equity-to-assets ratios.
“Distribution of Average Assets, Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity; Interest Rates and Interest Differential” table (Item 8)—presents average balance sheet amounts, related fully taxable-equivalent interest earned or paid, related average yields and rates paid and changes in fully taxable-equivalent interest revenue and expense for each major category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities.
Note 3, “Investment Securities,” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Item 8) and “Investment Securities” section included in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Item 7)—disclose information regarding book values, market values, maturities and weighted-average yields of securities (by category).
Note 1, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Loans and Lease Financing” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Item 8)—discloses our policy for placing loans and leases on non-accrual status.
Note 4, “Loans and Lease Financing,” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Item 8) and “Loans and Lease Financing” section included in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Item 7)—disclose distribution of loans, loan maturities and sensitivities of loans to changes in interest rates.
“Loans and Lease Financing” and “Cross-Border Outstandings” sections of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Item 7)—disclose information regarding cross-border outstandings and other loan concentrations of State Street.
“Credit Risk” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (Item 7) and note 4, “Loans and Lease Financing,” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Item 8)—present the allocation of the allowance for loan losses, and a description of factors which influenced management’s judgment in determining amounts of additions or reductions to the allowance, if any, charged or credited to results of operations.
“Distribution of Average Assets, Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity; Interest Rates and Interest Differential” table (Item 8)—discloses deposit information.
Note 8, “Short-Term Borrowings,” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Item 8)—discloses information regarding short-term borrowings of State Street.
| ITEM 1A. | RISK FACTORS |
This Form 10-K contains statements (including statements in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, included in this Form 10-K under Item 7) that are considered “forward-looking statements,”statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws, including statements about industry trends, management’s future expectations and
other matters that do not relate strictly to historical facts, are based on assumptions by management, and are often identified by such forward-looking terminology as “expect,” “look,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “seek,” “may,” “will,” “trend,” “target” and “goal,” or similar statements or variations of such terms. Forward-looking statements may include, among other things, statements about State Street’sour confidence in itsour strategies and itsour expectations about itsour financial performance, market growth, acquisitions and divestitures, new technologies, services and opportunities and earnings.
Forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties, which change over time, are based on management’s expectations and assumptions at the time the statements are made, and are not guarantees of future results. Management’s expectations and assumptions, and the continued validity of the forward-looking statements, are subject to change due to a broad range of factors affecting the national and global economies, the equity, debt, currency and other financial markets, as well as factors specific to State Street and its subsidiaries, including State Street Bank. Factors that could cause changes in the expectations or assumptions on which forward-looking statements are based include, but are not limited to:
global financial market disruptions and the current worldwide economic recession, whether in the U.S. or internationally, and monetary and other governmental actions, including regulation, taxes and fees, designed to address or otherwise be responsive to such disruptions and recession, including actions taken in the U.S. and internationally;internationally to address the financial and economic disruptions that began in 2007;
increases in the volatility of, or declines in the levels of, our net interest revenue, changes in the composition of the assets on our consolidated balance sheet and the possibility that we may be required to change the manner in which we fund those assets;
the financial strength and continuing viability of the counterparties with which we or our clientscustomers do business and withto which we have investment, credit or financial exposure;
the liquidity of the U.S. and international securities markets, particularly the markets for fixed-income securities, and the liquidity requirements of our customers;
the credit quality, and credit agency ratings, and fair values of the securities in our investment securities portfolio, a deterioration or downgrade of which could lead to other-than-temporary impairment of the respective securities and the recognition in our consolidated statement of income of an impairment loss;
the maintenance of credit agency ratings for our debt and depository obligations as well as the level of credibility of credit agency ratings;
the possibility that changesability to accounting rules or in market conditions or asset performance (including the financial condition of any guarantor of any assets) may require any off-balance sheet activities,complete our announced and pending acquisitions, as well as future acquisitions, divestitures and joint ventures, including the unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits we administer,ability to obtain regulatory approvals, the ability to arrange financing as required, and the ability to satisfy other closing conditions;
the risks that acquired businesses will not be consolidated into our financial statements, requiringintegrated successfully, or that the recognition of associated losses;integration will take longer than anticipated, that expected synergies will not be achieved or unexpected disynergies will be experienced, that customer and deposit retention goals will not be met, that other regulatory or operational challenges will be experienced and that disruptions from the transaction will harm relationships with customers, employees or regulators;
the possibility of our customers incurring substantial losses in investment pools where we act as agent, and the possibility of further general reductions in the valuation of assets;
our ability to attract deposits and other low-cost, short-term funding;
potential changes to the competitive environment, including changes due to the effects of consolidation, extensive and changing government regulation and perceptions of State Street as a suitable service provider or counterparty;
the level and volatility of interest rates and the performance and volatility of securities, credit, currency and other markets in the U.S. and internationally;
our ability to measure the fair value of securities in ourthe investment securities portfolio and in the unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits we administer;on our consolidated balance sheet;
the results of litigation, government investigations and similar disputes and, in particular, the effect of current or potential litigation concerning SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies, and proceedings;
the enactment of new legislation and changes in government regulation and enforcement that impactwhich affect us andor our customers, as well as the effects of legal and regulatory proceedings;which may increase our costs and expose us to risk related to compliance;
adverse publicity or other reputational harm;
our ability to pursue acquisitions, strategic alliances and divestures, finance future business acquisitions and obtain regulatory approvals and consents for acquisitions;
the performance and demand for the products and services we offer, including the level and timing of withdrawals from our collective investment products;
our ability to continue to grow revenue, attract and/or retain and compensate highly skilled people, control expenses and attract the capital necessary to achieve our business goals and comply with regulatory requirements;
our ability to control operating risks, information technology systems risks and outsourcing risks and our ability to protect our intellectual property rights, the possibility of errors in the quantitative models we use to manage our business and the possibility that our controls will fail or be circumvented;
the potential for new products and services to impose additional costs on us and expose us to increased operational risk, and our ability to protect our intellectual property rights;
our ability to obtain quality and timely services from third parties with which we contract;risk;
changes in accounting standards and practices, including changes in the interpretation of existing standards, that impact our consolidated financial statements;practices; and
changes in tax legislation and in the interpretation of existing tax laws by U.S. and non-U.S. tax authorities that impact the amount of taxes due.
Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed in our forward-looking statements and from our historical financial results due to the factors discussed in this section and elsewhere in this Form 10-K or disclosed in our other SEC filings. Forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our expectations or beliefs as of any date subsequent to the datetime this Form 10-K is filed with the SEC. State Street undertakesWe undertake no obligation to revise the forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K to reflect events after the datetime it is filed with the SEC. The factors discussed above are not intended to be a complete summary of all risks and uncertainties that may affect our businesses. We cannot anticipate all potential economic, operational and financial developments that may adversely impactaffect our consolidated results of operations and our financial results.condition.
Forward-looking statements should not be viewed as predictions, and should not be the primary basis upon which investors evaluate State Street. Any investor in State Street should consider all risks and uncertainties disclosed in our SEC filings, including our filings under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, in particular our reports on FormForms 10-K, Form 10-Q and Form 8-K, or registration statements filed under the Securities Act of 1933, all of which are accessible on the SEC’s website atwww.sec.gov or on our website atwww.statestreet.com.
The following is a discussion of risk factors applicable to State Street.
GlobalDisruptions in the global financial market disruptions during 2007 and 2008markets that began in mid-2007 have increased the uncertainty and unpredictability we face in managing our business,businesses, and continued or additional disruptions in 2009 could have an adverse effect on our business,businesses, our consolidated results of operations and our financial condition.
Since mid-2007, global credit and other financial markets have suffered from substantial volatility, illiquidity and disruption. In the second half of 2008, theseThese factors resulted in the bankruptcy or acquisition of, or significant government assistance to, a number of major domestic and international financial institutions, some of which were significant counterparties with us. These events, and the potential for increased and continuing disruptions, have significantly diminishedaffected overall confidence in the financial markets and in financial institutions, have further exacerbated liquidity and pricing issues within the fixed-income markets, have increased the uncertainty and unpredictability we face in managing our business and have had an adverse effect on our business,businesses, our consolidated results of operations and our financial condition. The continuation of current disruptions or the occurrence of additional disruptions in the global markets could have an adverse effect on our business,businesses and our consolidated results of operations and our financial condition.
Market disruptions could continue to adversely impact our fee revenue as the value of assets under custody, administration or management would decline, while the costs of providing the related services would remain constant due to the fixed nature of such costs. These factors could reduce our asset-based fee revenue and could adversely affect our other transaction-based revenue, such as securities finance and foreign exchange revenue, and the volume of transactions that we execute for our customers, but the costs of providing the related services would not similarly decline. Further, the degree of volatility in foreign exchange rates can affect our foreign
exchange trading revenue. In general, increased currency volatility may increase our market risk, and our foreign exchange revenue, all other things being equal, is likely to decrease during times of decreased currency volatility. In addition, as our business grows globally, our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates could affect our levels of consolidated revenue, expense and results of operations, as well as the value of our investment in our non-U.S. operations.
The currentoverall worldwide economic recession has adversely affected, and is likely to continue to adversely affect, our businessbusinesses and our consolidated results of operations.operations and financial condition.
Our business isbusinesses are affected by global economic conditions, including regional and international rates of economic growth and the impact that such economic conditions have on the financial markets. Recent downturnsThe downturn in the global economies, as well as the U.S. and global economy, havethat began in mid-2007 has led to an increased level of commercial and consumer delinquencies, a lack of consumer confidence, decreased market valuations and liquidity, increased market volatility and a widespread reduction of business activity generally. The resulting economic pressure and lack of confidence in the financial markets mayhas adversely affectaffected our business, our financial conditionbusinesses and our consolidated results of operations and financial condition, as well as the business of our customers. A worsening of economic conditions in the U.S. or globally would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult conditions on us and on the financial services industry in general.
The failure or instability of any of our significant counterparties, many of whom are financial institutions, and our assumption of significant credit and counterparty risk, could expose us to loss.
The financial markets are characterized by extensive interconnections among financial institutions, including banks, broker/dealers, collective investment funds and insurance companies. As a result of these interconnections, we and many of our customers have concentrated counterparty exposure to other financial institutions. This concentrationAlthough we have procedures for monitoring both individual and aggregate counterparty risk, like other large financial institutions, the nature of our business is such that large individual and aggregate counterparty exposure is inherent in our business as our focus on large institutional investors and their businesses. At any point in time, having one or more counterparties to which our exposure exceeds 10% of our total shareholders’ equity, exclusive of unrealized gains or losses, is not unusual.
Concentration of counterparty exposure presents significant risks to us and to our customers because the failure or perceived weakness of any of our counterparties (or in some cases of our customers’ counterparties) has the potential to expose us to risk of loss.
The current instability of the financial markets has resulted in many financial institutions becoming significantly less creditworthy, and as a result we are exposed to increased counterparty risks, both as principal and in our capacity as agent for our customers. Changes in market perception of the financial strength of particular financial institutions can occur rapidly, is often based upon a variety of factors and is difficult to predict. In addition, as U.S. and non-U.S. governments have addressed the financial crisis in an evolving manner, the criteria for and manner of governmental support of financial institutions and other economically important sectors remain uncertain. If a significant individual counterparty defaults on an obligation to us, we could incur financial losses that materially adversely affect our business, our financial conditionbusinesses and our consolidated results of operations.operations and financial condition.
Although our entire business is subject to these interconnections, several of our lines of business are particularly sensitive to them, including our Treasury operations, currency and other trading, securities lending and investment management. Given the limited number of strong counterparties in the current market, we are not able to mitigate all of our and our customers’ counterparty credit risk. The current consolidation of financial service firms that began in 2008, and which we believe is likely to continue in 2009, and the failures of other financial institutions have increased the concentration of our counterparty risk.
In the normal course of business we assume significant credit and counterparty risk, and even when we hold collateral against this risk, we may incur a loss in the event of a default.
Our focus on large institutional investors and their businesses requires that we assume secured and unsecured credit and counterparty risk, both on-and off-balance sheet, in a variety of forms. We may experience significant intra- and inter-day credit exposure through settlement-related or redemption-related extensions of credit. The degree of thecustomer demand for such overdraftshort-term credit also tends to increase during periods of market turbulence.turbulence, exposing us to further counterparty-related risks. For example, investors in collective investment vehicles for which we act as custodian may engage in significant redemption activity due to adverse market or economic news that was not anticipated by the fund’s manager. Our relationship with our customers, the nature of the settlement process and our systems may limit our ability to decline to extendresult in the extension of short-term credit in such circumstances. For some types of customers, we provide credit to allow them to leverage their portfolios, which increases our potential loss if the customer experiences credit difficulties. From time to time, we may assume concentrated credit risk at the individual obligor, counterparty or guarantor level. In addition, we may from time to time be exposed to concentrated credit risk at the industry or country level, potentially exposing us to a single market or political event or a correlated set of events.
We are also generally not able to net exposures across counterparties
that are affiliated entities and may not be able in all circumstances to net exposures across multiple products to the same legal entity. As a consequence,
we may incur a loss in relation to one entity or product even though our exposure to one of its affiliates or across product types is over-collateralized. Moreover, not all of our counterparty exposure is secured, and when our exposure is secured, the realizable market value of the collateral may be less athave declined by the time we exercise rights against that collateral than the value of the secured obligations.collateral. This risk may be particularly acute if we are required to sell the collateral into an illiquid or temporarily impaired market. See, for example,“—We are exposed to the risk of losses as a result of certain customer relationships with Lehman Brothers.” In some cases, we have indemnified customers against a shortfall in the value of collateral that secures certain repurchase obligations of third parties to such customers.
In addition, our customers often purchase securities or other financial instruments from a financial counterparty, including broker/dealerdealers, under repurchase arrangements, frequently as a method of reinvesting the cash collateral they receive from lending their securities. Under these arrangements, the broker/dealercounterparty is obligated to repurchase these securities or financial instruments from the customer at the same price at some point in the future. The anticipated value of the collateral is intended to exceed the broker/dealer’scounterparty’s repayment obligation. In certainmany cases, we agree to indemnify our customers from any loss that would arise upon a default by the counterparty if the proceeds from the disposition of the securities or other financial assets isare less than the amount of the repayment obligation by the customer’s counterparty. In those instances, we, rather than our customer, are exposed to the risks associated with counterparty default and collateral value.
WeSome of the assets on our consolidated balance sheet are entitled to the benefit of guarantees from monoline insurance companies. Several of these insurance companies have experienced significant deterioration in their financial condition. To the extent that assets require credit support from the guarantors to be able to pay principal and interest in full and the guarantor does not or is not able to make payments required under the guarantee, we are exposed to the risk of loss.
Although our overall business is subject to these interconnections, several of our lines of business are particularly sensitive to them, including our Global Treasury operations, currency and other trading, securities lending and investment management. Given the limited number of strong counterparties in the current market, we are not able to mitigate all of our and our customers’ counterparty credit risk. The current consolidation of financial service firms that began in 2008, and which we believe is likely to continue in 2010, and the failures of other financial institutions, have increased the concentration of our counterparty risk.
We may incur losses, as a result of certain customer relationships withwhich could be material to our financial results in the periods incurred, arising from bankruptcy-related claims by and against Lehman Brothers.entities in the United States and the U.K.
We had indemnificationhave claims against Lehman entities in bankruptcy proceedings in the U.S. and the U.K. We also have amounts that we owe to Lehman entities. These claims and amounts owed arise from the resolution of transactions that existed at the time the Lehman entities entered bankruptcy, including foreign exchange transactions, securities lending arrangements and repurchase agreements. In the aggregate, the amounts that we believe we owe Lehman entities, as reflected in our submissions in the bankruptcy proceedings, are less than our estimate of the realizable value of the claims we have asserted against Lehman entities. However, we may recognize gains and losses in different fiscal periods depending in part on the timing and sequence of the resolution of the claims by us and against us in the different proceedings. In addition, the process for resolving these claims and obligations is complex and may continue for some time. We do not know whether the bankruptcy courts and administrators will accept or challenge our claims; question positions we have taken as to our contractual rights and obligations; question any of the valuations or other calculations that we have used in preparing such claims; or seek amounts from us greater than that which we believe to be due.
For example, in connection with the resolution of our obligations pursuant to the repurchase agreements between our customers in the U.S. and a Lehman entity, we indemnified our customers against loss and assumed our customers’ rights with respect to customer repurchase agreements with Lehman. In the casecollateral consisting of someinterests in commercial real estate loans. For purposes of our customers that entered into repurchase agreements with a U.S.-based Lehman affiliate,claim in the bankruptcy court, we indemnified obligations totaling $1 billion and,valued this collateral at our estimate of its liquidation value following the bankruptcy of Lehman paid this amount to our customers. Upon such payments,bankruptcy; however, when we took possession of this collateral and recorded it in our consolidated balance sheet, we valued the collateral consistingbased upon our estimate of commercial real estate obligations, thatits fair value in accordance with GAAP, which fair value was subjectsignificantly greater than its liquidation value. This difference in valuation, among other factors, could result in the bankruptcy court assigning a lesser value to our customers’ repurchase agreements with Lehman. Based uponclaim or rejecting our assessmentclaim entirely. Similarly,
certain of the likely proceeds to be received from the disposition or maturity of this collateral in light of the then current market environment, during the third quarter of 2008, we established a reserve of $200 million to cover the difference between the estimated fair value of the collateral at the time and the payment we made to our customers. As we do with our investment portfolio, we continue to evaluate the value of the collateral. Upon further evaluation or changes in market conditions, we may incur additional charges if the value of the collateral deteriorates. In addition, upon disposition or maturity of the collateral, the loss incurred may be greater than $200 million.
In addition to the foregoing repurchase agreements, certain customers had entered into securities lending arrangements and/or repurchase agreements with Lehman’s U.K. affiliate. WeIn accordance with the terms of our lending program and repurchase agreement product, we have repaidindemnified those customers against loss in connection with the resolution of these arrangements, and sold or taken possession of the related collateral; however,collateral, which included asset-backed securities. For purposes of the resolution of securities lending arrangements and repurchase agreements in the U.K. in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings, we believevalued asset-backed securities at their assumed liquidation values, in each case reflecting the absence of an active trading market for these securities following the bankruptcy of Lehman. We subsequently recorded these assets in our consolidated balance sheet at a significantly greater value, based upon relevant market conditions and our assessment of their fair value in accordance with GAAP at that time. As a result of these valuation decisions, we determined that there was a shortfall in collateral supporting repurchase agreements and applied excess collateral supporting Lehman’s obligations under securities lending arrangements against Lehman’s obligations under the proceeds fromrepurchase agreements. The administrator in the dispositionU.K. bankruptcy proceedings may challenge any or maturityall of the positions that we have taken, including our valuation of the collateral willand the application of excess collateral supporting Lehman’s obligations under the securities lending arrangements against Lehman’s unsecured obligations under the repurchase agreements. Given the uncertainty in the process and the potential for a court or administrator to challenge the amounts that we believe to be at least equalowed by us or due to the amount we paid to such customers and, consequently, have not established a reserve related to those agreements. Itus, it is possible that we will incur losses relatingour obligations, net of recoveries, to these agreements inLehman entities may be substantial, with the future.
We appointed Lehmanresult that our net payment obligations could be potentially as sub-custodian or prime broker for some of our custody customers and some investment funds managed by SSgA. For custody customers, we made this appointment at their direction. In the case of investment funds managed by SSgA, we appointed Lehman in our capacitymuch as manager of those funds. As of September 15, 2008, the date Lehman was placed in administration, our custody customers had claims against Lehman of approximately $325several hundred million and our investment funds had claims against Lehman of approximately $312 million, both in connection with Lehman’s role as a sub-custodian or prime broker. Estimating the actual amount or timing of any recovery on our clients’ and funds’ claims against Lehman is currently not possible. While we believe that we acted appropriately in appointing Lehman as a sub-custodian and a prime-broker, some customers have requested that we compensate them for their losses. Any agreement to compensate any of these customers could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
dollars.
If all or a significant portion of the unrealized losses in our portfolio of investment securities portfolio on our consolidated balance sheet were determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired, we would recognize a material charge to our earnings and our capital ratios would be adversely impacted.affected.
As of December 31,During 2008 there were $5.45 billion of after-tax net unrealized losses associated with our portfolio of investment securities available for sale and held to maturity that were recorded in other comprehensive income in consolidated shareholders’ equity. In addition to these unrealized losses, there were $870 million of after-tax unrealized losses associated with securities held to maturity that were not required under GAAP to be recorded in other comprehensive income. Generally, the fair value of such securities is based upon information supplied by third-party sources. Market values for the securities in our portfolio declined significantly during 2008 as liquidity and pricing generally in the capital markets was disrupted. When the fair value of a security declines, management must assess whether that decline is “other-than-temporary.” See“—We must apply significant judgment to assign fair values to our assets, and we may not be able to obtain these values, or any value, if these assets were sold.” When management reviews whether a decline in fair value is other than temporary, it considers numerous factors, many of which involve significant judgment. As 2008 progressed,2009, rating agencies imposed an increasing number of downgrades and credit watches on the securities in our investment securities portfolio, which contributed to the decline in marketfair values. Any continued increase in downgrades and credit watches may contribute to a further decline in market values.the fair values of these securities. Further, the measurement of the fair value of these securities, as well as our other financial assets, involves significant judgment due to the complexity of the factors contributing to the measurement. Market volatility makes measurement of the fair value of our investment portfolio even more difficult and subjective. More generally, as market conditions continue to be volatile and we cancannot provide no assurance that the amount of the unrealized losses will not increase.
To the extent that any portion of the unrealized losses in our portfolio of investment securitiesthese portfolios is determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired,other than temporary, and the loss is related to credit factors, we will recognize a charge to our earnings in the quarter during which such determination is made and our capital ratios willcould be adversely impacted.affected. If any such charge is significant, a rating agency might downgrade our credit rating or put us on credit watch. A downgrade or a significant reduction in our capital ratios might adversely impact our ability to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital. Even if we do not determine that the unrealized losses associated with the investment portfoliothese portfolios require an impairment charge, increases in suchthese unrealized losses adversely affect our tangible common equity ratio, which may adversely affect credit rating agency and investor sentiment toward us. SuchThis negative perception also may adversely affect our ability to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital.
Further information with respect to unrealized losses on the securities in our investment portfolio is provided in note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8, and information with respect to the financial assets and liabilities which we carry at fair value on a recurring basis is provided in the “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included under Item 7, and in note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included under Item 8.
We may need to raise additional capital in the future, which may not be available to us or may only be available on unfavorable terms, and which may make future business acquisitions or dispositions difficult.
As a result of continued disruption in the global financial markets or other developments having an adverse effect on our capital ratios, we may need to raise additional capital in order to maintain our credit ratings or for
other purposes. However, our ability to access the capital markets, if needed, will depend on a number of factors, including the state of the financial markets. Accordingly, we cannot be sure of our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, on terms acceptable to us.
Additionally, our ability to make acquisitions in order to achieve greater economies of scale or to expand our product offerings is dependent upon our financial resources and our ability to access the capital markets. In addition, our ability to dispose of businesses that no longer fit our business model may be difficult if attractive financing or capital is not available to prospective buyers. Due to company-specific issues or a lack of liquidity in the capital markets, our ability to expand through acquisitions or to dispose of businesses that no longer are strategic to us may be adversely affected.
Our business activities including the unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits we administer, expose us to liquidity and interest-rate risk.
In our business activities, we assume liquidity and interest-rate risk in our investment portfolio of longer-and intermediate-term assets, which is funded in large part by our customer deposit base. WeSimilarly, as a result of the May 2009 consolidation of the asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer, we fund the portfolio of intermediate term assets held by the conduits through our customer deposit base, through the conduits’ issuance of commercial paper or through draw-downs of other short-term sources of liquidity. In addition, we may be exposed to liquidity or other risks in managing asset pools for third parties that are funded on a short-term basis, or where the customers participating in these products have a right to the return of cash or assets on limited notice. These business activities include, among others, the unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer, as well as securities finance collateral pools, and money market and other short-term investment funds.
In the asset-backed commercial paper conduits, for example, pools of medium-and long-term financial instruments, principally mortgage-funds and other asset-backed securities, are financed through the issuance of short-term commercial paper. The conduits strive to maintain a positive margin between the rate of return on their longer-term assets and the short-term cost of funding. This mismatchliquidity facilities utilized in the maturity of the investment pools and funding creates risk if disruptions occur in the liquidity of the short-term debt or asset-backed securities markets, or if the cost of short-term borrowings exceeds the conduits’ rate of return on their investment pools or purchased assets.
In connection with our administration of the asset-backed commercial paper conduits, we provide contractual back-up liquidity to the conduits. If the conduits cannot issue sufficient commercial paper to meet their ongoing liquidity needs, we are required by contract to, among other things, provide liquidity to the conduits by purchasing portfolio assets from them. If required, these portfolio assets are purchased at prices
determined in accordance with contractual terms of the applicable liquidity asset purchase agreement, which may exceed their fair value. We may also provide liquidity to the conduits by purchasing commercial paper from them or by providing other extensions of credit to the conduits.
Our asset-backed commercial paper conduit program experienced significantly reduced demand for its commercial paper financing beginning in the third quarter of 2007. As the disruption in the credit markets continued through 2008, our liquidity management of the conduits resulted in our purchasing historically high levels of commercial paper from the conduits. During 2008, the amount of commercial paper issued by the conduits held on our consolidated balance sheet increased from approximately $2 million as of December 31, 2007 to approximately $292 million as of March 31, 2008, approximately $212 million as of June 30, 2008, and approximately $7.82 billion as of September 30, 2008 (including $1.63 billion related to the Federal Reserve’s Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, or AMLF). On December 31, 2008, we held $230 million of commercial paper issued by the conduits on our consolidated balance sheet (which did not include $5.70 billion sold by the conduits to the Federal Reserve’s Commercial Paper Funding Facility, or CPFF, as of December 31, 2008). The highest total overnight position (including AMLF) in the conduits’ commercial paper held by State Street during the quarter ended December 31, 2008, was approximately $8.89 billion and during the year ended December 31, 2008, was approximately $9.22 billion. The average total overnight position (including AMLF) for the same periods was approximately $5.43 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2008, and $2.27 billion for the year ended December 31, 2008. As noted above, as of December 31, 2008, the conduits had utilized the Federal Reserve’s CPFF to issue $5.70 billion of commercial paper. The CPFF is currently scheduled to expire for new issuances on October 30, 2009. We may be required to provide additional back-up liquidity if the conduits are unable to place their commercial paper in the market after the CPFF expires.
Our contractual arrangements with the conduits also require us to purchase conduit portfolio assets under other circumstances, such as a downgrade of the credit rating of securities held by the conduits. Purchase of the assets of the conduits pursuant to the contractual agreements described above could affect the size of our balance sheet and related funding requirements, our capital ratios, and, if the conduit assets include unrealized losses, could require us to recognize those losses. As of December 31, 2008, there were $3.56 billion of after-tax net unrealized losses associated with portfolio holdings of the conduits. Because of our contractual agreements to purchase assets from the conduits under specified conditions, we are also exposed to the credit risks in the conduits’ portfolios.
If for any reason we were to consolidate the unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer onto our balance sheet, our funding requirements and capital ratios would be adversely affected and we may record significant unrealized losses.
The unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits we administer are not recorded in our consolidated financial statements. If circumstances change, we may be required under existing accounting standards to consolidate some or all of the otherwise unconsolidated conduits onto our balance sheet. One factor taken into consideration in evaluating whether we are required to consolidate the conduits under existing accounting standards is whether we or third parties are exposed to the majority of the “expected losses” (as defined in the accounting literature) associated with certain risks in the conduits’ business. Investors not affiliated with us have purchased from the conduits notes commonly referred to as “first-loss notes” that bear loss, up to the principal amount of the notes, before any loss would be allocated to us. We use financial models to determine whether the expected losses from the conduits are greater or less than the principal amount of the first-loss notes. If changes in market conditions require us to update the assumptions in our expected loss model, such that we conclude that we absorb greater than 50% of the expected losses, we may be required to consolidate one or more of the conduits unless the amount of first-loss notes is increased. As of December 31, 2008, these conduits had an aggregate of $67 million of first-loss notes outstanding compared to $32 million at December 31, 2007.
In various circumstances, including if the conduits are not able to issue additional first-loss notes, we may be deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the conduits, and we would be required to consolidate the conduits’ assets and liabilities onto our balance sheet. Moreover, current market conditions have increased the difficulty we
face in predicting any such future losses. For example, certain assets of the conduits are entitled to the benefit of guarantees from monoline insurance companies. Our loss analysis depends on our ability to judge whether these insurance companies will continue to perform their guarantee obligations. The aggregate amortized cost of securities with underlying guarantees was approximately $2.49 billion at December 31, 2008 and $3.51 billion at December 31, 2007. Certain of these securities, which totaled approximately $730 million at December 31, 2008, are currently drawing on the underlying guarantees in order to make contractual principal and interest payments to the conduits. In these cases, the performance of the underlying security is highly dependent on the performance of the guarantor. During 2008, many of these guarantors experienced ratings downgrades. The credit ratings of the guarantors ranged from “AAA” to “CCC” as of December 31, 2008. None of these securities are in default.
It is also possible that changes to existing accounting standards will be adopted that will require us to consolidate the conduits. The Financial Accounting Standards Board is considering changes to accounting standards related to off-balance sheet vehicles such as the conduits and industry-wide revisions are under discussion that, if adopted in the form currently under consideration, would require us to consolidate, on January 1, 2010, all of the conduits we administer. Alternatively, existing accounting standards may be interpreted differently in the future in a manner that increases the risk of consolidation of the conduits. Consolidation would adversely affect the size of our balance sheet and related funding requirements, adversely affect our capital ratios and require us to recognize the conduits’ unrealized losses in the conduit assets resulting from the difference between the book value and the market value of the conduits’ portfolios. As of December 31, 2008, there were $3.56 billion of after-tax net unrealized losses associated with portfolio holdings of the conduits.
We must apply significant judgment to assign fair values to our assets, and we may not be able to realize these values, or any value, if these assets were sold.
As of December 31, 2008, including the effect of master netting agreements, approximately 39% of our consolidated total assets and approximately 8% of our consolidated total liabilities were carried at fair value on a recurring basis. Current accounting standards require us to categorize these assets and liabilities according to a fair value valuation hierarchy. On the same basis, approximately 33% of our financial assets and approximately 8% of our financial liabilities were categorized in level 2 of the valuation hierarchy (meaning that their fair value was determined by reference to quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities or other observable inputs) or level 3 (meaning that their fair value was determined by reference to inputs that are unobservable in the market and therefore require a greater degree of management judgment). The determination of fair value for financial assets and liabilities categorized in level 2 or 3 involves significant judgment due to the complexity of factors contributing to the valuation, many of which are not readily observable in the market. The current market disruptions make valuation even more difficult and subjective. In addition, we have historically placed a high level of reliance on information obtained from third-party sources to measure fair values. Third-party sources also use assumptions, judgments and estimates in determining securities values, and different third parties use different methodologies or provide different prices for securities.
In addition, the nature of the market participant that is valuing the securities at any given time could impact the valuation of the securities. For example, investment banks, such as the underwriters of our public offerings, may value our securities differently than securities pricing providers. Moreover, depending upon, among other things, the measurement date of the security, the subsequent sale price of the security may be different from its recorded fair value. These differences may be significant, especially if the security is sold during a period of illiquidity or market disruption or as part of a large block of securities under a forced transaction.
Adverse conditions in the economy or financial markets may simultaneously trigger adverse events affecting multiple aspects of our business.
Adverse economic or financial market conditions could simultaneously adversely affect several aspects of our business. For example, conditions in the financial markets that might require us to purchase assets from the conduits pursuant to the liquidity asset purchase agreements or result in the consolidation of the conduits and
recognition of the conduits’ unrealized losses may at the same time also require us to recognize other-than-temporary impairment in our portfolio of investment securities. If multiple aspects of our business are simultaneously impacted by economic or financial market conditions or other events, the demands on our liquidity may exceed our resources.
We may need to raise additional capital in the future, which may not be available to us or may only be available on unfavorable terms.
As a result of continued disruption in the financial markets or other developments having an adverse effect on our capital ratios, we may need to raise additional capital in order to maintain our credit ratings or for other purposes. However, our ability to access the capital markets, if needed, will depend on a number of factors, including the state of the financial markets. Accordingly, we cannot assure you of our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, on terms acceptable to us.
If our custody customers experience high levels of redemption requests from their investors, or if high volumes in the securities markets disrupt normal settlements, we may provide significant and unanticipated overdraft availability, exposing us to risk of loss.
We provide custody and related services for mutual funds and other collective investment vehicles managed by unaffiliated managers. Generally, these affiliated and unaffiliated collective investment pools offer investors liquidity on a daily basis or with notice periods of a month or less. During periods of disruption in the financial markets, failures in the settlement process tend to increase, and investor demand for liquidity from these investment pools can be extremely high relative to normal cash levels maintained by those funds. In such circumstances, we may, but generally are not required to, provide short-term extensions of credit. For example, during the second half of 2008, we funded higher-than-normal levels of overdrafts by unaffiliated mutual funds and other collective investment vehicles, with particular liquidity requirements by money market funds. The provision of such overdraft availability may affect the size of our balance sheet, which, in the absence of additional capital, could adversely affect our capital ratios. In addition, if these overdrafts are substantial relative to the net assets of the investment pool, we may be subject to the risk that the investment pool is unable to liquidate assets to pay down the overdraft or that a decline in the value of the investment pool’s assets may result in the fund not having sufficient assets to satisfy its obligation to repay the overdrafts, exposing us to risk of loss.municipal bond programs.
Our reputation and business prospects may be damaged if our customers incur substantial losses in investment pools where we act as agent.
Our management of collective investment pools on behalf of customers exposes us to reputational risk.risk and, in some cases, operational losses. The incurrence by our customers of substantial losses in these pools, particularly in money market funds (where there is a general market expectation that net asset value will not drop below $1.00 per share), in situations where we make distributions in-kind to satisfy redemption requests or in circumstances where one of our investment strategies significantly underperforms the market or our competitors’ products, could result in significant harm to our reputation and significantly and adversely affect the prospects of our associated business units. Because we often implement investment and operational decisions and actions over multiple investment pools to achieve scale, we face increased risk that losses, even small losses, may have a significant effect in the aggregate.
In some very limited circumstances, and consistent with applicable regulatory requirements, we may compensate investment pools for all or a portion of the pool’s losses even though we are not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so. For example, duringBecause we often implement investment and operational decisions and actions over multiple investment pools to achieve scale, we face the first and fourth quarters of 2008, we elected to provide support to stable value accounts managed by SSgA. These accounts, offered to retirement plans, allow participants to purchase and redeem units atrisk that losses, even small losses, may have a constant net asset value regardless of volatilitysignificant effect in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with third-party financial institutions that agree to make upaggregate. While it is currently not our intention, any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. These financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account. During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely impacted the market value of the securities in these accounts to the point that the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts.
During the first quarter of 2008, although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we contributed $160 million to these accounts. In addition, during the fourth quarter of 2008, although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of debt securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the current market environment, and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts, to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. This election resulted in a fourth quarter 2008 charge of $450 million. Any future decision by us to provide financial support to our investment pools would potentially result in the recognition of significant losses and could in certain situations require us to consolidate the investment pools onto our consolidated balance sheet. A failure or inability to provide such support could damage our reputation among current and prospective customers. Any termination by a third-party guarantor of its guarantee could, if we were unable to replace the guarantee, adversely affect our business or result in litigation.
Our businesses may be adversely affected by litigation.
From time to time, our customers, or the government on their behalf, may make claims and take legal action relating to our performance of fiduciary or contractual responsibilities. We may also face employment lawsuits or other legal claims. In any such claims or actions, demands for substantial monetary damages may be asserted against us and may result in financial liability or an adverse effect on our reputation among investors or on customer demand for our products and services. We may be unable to accurately estimate our exposure to litigation risk when we record balance sheet reserves for probable loss contingencies. As a result, any reserves we establish to cover any settlements or judgments may not be sufficient to cover our actual financial exposure, which may have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
In the ordinary course of our business, we are also subject to various regulatory, governmental and law enforcement inquiries, investigations and subpoenas. These may be directed generally to participants in the businesses in which we are involved or may be specifically directed at us. In regulatory enforcement matters, claims for disgorgement, the imposition of penalties and the imposition of other remedial sanctions are possible.
In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of legal actions and regulatory matters, we cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of any pending matter or, if determined adversely to us, the costs associated with any such matter, particularly where the claimant seeks very large or indeterminate damages or where the matter presents novel legal theories, involves a large number of parties or is at a preliminary stage. The resolution of certain pending legal actions or regulatory matters, if unfavorable, could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations for the quarter in which such actions or matters are resolved or a reserve is established.
Further information with respect to the foregoing and our other ongoing litigation matters is provided in Legal Proceedings included under Item 3.
We may incur losses, which could be material to our consolidated results of operations in the period incurred, with respect to sub-custody and prime broker arrangements we had with Lehman entities.
Various Lehman entities that served as sub-custodian or prime broker for some of our customers or funds entered insolvency proceedings in September 2008. Estimating the actual amount or timing of any recovery on our customers’ and funds’ claims against any of these Lehman entities is currently not possible. When these insolvency proceedings were commenced, cash and securities attributable to our custody customers, having approximately $325 million in net asset value at September 15, 2008, was held by or through Lehman entities. While the appointment of these Lehman entities had been made at our customer’s direction and we believe that we carried out our responsibilities with respect to our customers, our custody customers may nevertheless seek to recover from us any losses they incur as a result of the Lehman insolvency proceedings.
In the case of common trust funds managed by us, in our capacity as manager and trustee, we had appointed Lehman as prime broker for four of these funds, which at September 15, 2008 (the date two of the Lehman entities involved entered insolvency proceedings) had cash and securities with net asset values of approximately $312 million held by or though Lehman entities. The investors in these funds have commenced or threatened litigation against us, and in one case have obtained a judgment against us. There can be no assurance as to the outcome of these proceedings, and an adverse resolution could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the fiscal period or periods in which resolved. See Legal Proceedings included under Item 3.
We face litigation and potential additional governmental inquiries in connection with our provision of foreign exchange services to custody customers.
In October 2009, the Attorney General of the State of California commenced an action against State Street Bank under the California False Claims Act and California Business and Professional Code relating to foreign exchange services State Street Bank provides to California state pension plans. The California Attorney General asserts that the pricing of certain foreign exchange transactions for these pension plans was not consistent with the terms of the applicable custody contracts and related disclosures to the plans, and that, as a result, State Street Bank made false claims and engaged in unfair competition. The Attorney General asserts actual damages of $56 million for periods from 2001 to 2007 and seeks additional penalties, including treble damages. We provide custody and foreign exchange services to government pension plans in other jurisdictions and attorney generals from a number of these other jurisdictions, as well as the U.S. Attorney General’s office, have requested information in connection with informal inquiries into our foreign exchange pricing. If additional governmental proceedings of this nature were to be commenced, such actions could have a material impact on our reputation and on our future revenues. While no other customers have commenced legal proceedings, the services we offer to the State of California are also offered to a broad range of custody clients in the U.S. and internationally. There can be no assurance as to the outcome of the pending proceeding in California or other proceedings that might be commenced against us by any other Attorneys General or customers, and the resolution of any such proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our future consolidated results of operations. In light of the
action commenced by the California Attorney General, we are providing customers with greater transparency into the pricing of this product and other alternatives offered by us for addressing their foreign exchange requirements. Although we believe such disclosures will address customer interests for increased transparency, over time such action may result in pressure on our pricing of this product or result in clients electing other foreign exchange execution options, which would have an adverse impact on the revenue from, and profitability of, this product for us.
We may be exposed to customer claims, financial loss, reputational damage and regulatory scrutiny as a result of transacting purchases and redemptions relating to the unregistered cash collateral pools underlying our securities lending program at a net asset value of $1.00 per unit rather than a lower net asset value based upon market value of the underlying portfolios.
A portion of the cash collateral received by customers under our securities lending program is invested in cash collateral pools that we manage. Interests in these cash collateral pools are held by unaffiliated customers and by registered and unregistered investment funds that we manage. Our cash collateral pools that are money market funds registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 are required to maintain, and have maintained, a constant net asset value of $1.00 per unit. The remainder of our cash collateral pools are bank collective investment funds that are not required to be registered under the Investment Company Act. These unregistered cash collateral pools seek, but are not required, to maintain, and transact purchases and redemptions at, a constant net asset value of $1.00 per unit. At December 31, 2008
Our securities lending operations consist of two components; a direct lending program for third-party investment managers and December 31, 2007,asset owners, the collateral pools for which we refer to as direct lending collateral pools; and investment funds with a broad range of investment objectives that are managed by SSgA and engage in securities lending, which we refer to as SSgA lending funds. The following table shows the aggregate net asset values of the unregistered direct lending collateral pools and the aggregate net asset value of thesethe unregistered cash collateral pools (basedunderlying the SSgA lending funds, in each case based on a constant net asset value of $1.00) was approximately $122 billion$1.00 per unit.
| (in billions) | December 31, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | December 31, 2007(1) | ||||||
Direct lending collateral pools | $ | 85 | $ | 85 | $ | 150 | |||
Collateral pools underlying SSgA lending funds | 24 | 31 | 44 | ||||||
| (1) | Certain of the SSgA lending funds were participants in the direct lending collateral pools until October 2008. The direct lending collateral pool balances at December 31, 2007 related to SSgA lending funds have been included within the SSgA lending fund balances and excluded from the direct lending collateral pool balances presented above. |
We may incur losses, which could be material to our consolidated results of operations in the period incurred, as a result of continuing to transact based upon a consistent $1.00 per unit net asset value.
Both the direct lending collateral pools and $194 billion, respectively.
Throughout 2008 and currently, these unregistered cashthe collateral pools underlying the SSgA lending funds have continued to transact purchases and redemptions at a constant net asset value of $1.00 per unit even though the market value of the unregistered cash collateral pools’ portfolio holdings, determined using pricing from third-party pricing sources, has been below $1.00 per unit. At December 31,This difference between the transaction value used for purchase and redemption activity and the market value of the collateral pool’s assets arose, depending upon the collateral pool, at various points since the commencement of the financial crisis in mid-2007 and has persisted throughout 2008 and 2009. The following table sets forth the range of net asset valuevalues per unit and weighted-average net asset values per unit based upon the market value of our unregistered cash collateral pools ranged from $0.908 to $1.00, withunderlying the weighted-average net asset value on such date being $0.939. A substantial portiondirect lending program and SSgA lending funds as of the decline in the market value of these assets occurred in the fourth quarter of 2008. December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
| December 31, 2009 | December 31, 2008 | December 31, 2007 | ||||||||||
| Range | Weighted Average | Range | Weighted Average | Range | Weighted Average | |||||||
Direct lending collateral pools | $0.93 to $1.00 | $0.986 | $0.92 to $1.00 | $0.941 | $0.99 to $1.00 | $0.993 | ||||||
Collateral pools underlying SSgA lending funds | $0.97 to $0.99 | $0.981 | $0.91 to $0.95 | $0.932 | $0.99 to $1.00 | $0.991 | ||||||
We believe that our practice of continuing to transacteffect purchases and redemptions at $1.00 per unit atin the unregistered cash collateral pools, notwithstanding that the underlying portfolios havinghave a market value of less than $1.00 per unit, is consistent with the practices of other securities lending agents and in compliance with the terms of our unregistered cash collateral pools.pools and in the best interests of participants in the direct lending program and the SSgA lending funds. We have continued this practice for a number of reasons, including the fact that none of the securities in the cash collateral pools is currently in default or considered to be materially impaired, and that there are restrictions on withdrawals from the collective investment funds. Moreover,Although the cashmarket value of the assets in the collateral pools have adequate sourceshas improved during 2009, a portion of liquidity, from normal lending activity underthese assets are floating rate instruments with several years of remaining maturity; consequently, the securities lending program,rate of valuation improvement is likely to slow in 2010 or the market value may decline again as a cash collateral pool without the need to sell securities the valuesresult of which have been adversely impacted by the lack of liquiditychanges in market sentiment or in the fixed-income markets. Ifcredit quality of such instruments. However, as described below, if we continue to transact purchases and redemptions from the unregistered cash collateral pools based upon a constant net asset value of $1.00 per unit net asset value and the liquid assets of these pools turn out to be insufficient to support redemption activity at such value, or the pools suffer material defaultscredit losses on their underlying portfolio holdings, investors in the unregistered cash collateral poolsdirect lending program and/or the SSgA lending funds may seek to hold us responsible for any shortfall due to prior redemptions at a value above the market value of the underlying portfolio or as a result of any such portfolio defaults.
Moreover,We may incur losses, which could be material to our consolidated results of operations in the period incurred, as a result of our imposition of restrictions on redemptions from, and our management of, the direct lending program.
Beginning in October 2008, following the increased market disruption resulting from the bankruptcy of Lehman, we began to require, and continue to require, that direct participants in the collateral pools who wish to redeem their interests in the pools, other than in connection with the ordinary course operation of the securities lending program, to accept redemption proceeds in the form of in-kind distributions. While the redemption restrictions were imposed to protect the interest of all participants in the direct lending program (which include ERISA plans, governmental retirement plans, mutual funds and other institutional asset owners), the prolonged imposition of these restrictions could materially and adversely affect the relationship with our lending customers and the financial results of our direct lending operation. Despite these redemption restrictions, one significant participant in the direct lending program redeemed a substantial portion of its interest in the collateral pools in a manner that we determined not to be consistent with the ordinary course of operations of the securities lending program. After attempts to resolve the dispute with the redeeming participant and have them restore short-term liquidity to the collateral pool, we took action, as trustee, that in effect resulted in an in-kind redemption of the participant’s remaining interest in the collateral pool in a manner that caused such in-kind redemption and the
prior cash redemptions, taken as a whole, to be completed on substantially the same basis as if the participant had initially requested an in-kind redemption of its entire interest in the collateral pool. The redeeming participant has commenced a legal action against us for damages that it alleges it incurred as a result of this redemption. An adverse judgment in such case could have an adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations for the period in which such judgment is issued. In addition to the actions relating to the redeeming participant, we are in discussions with a limited number of securities lending customers in the U.K. who have questioned whether our management of their participation in our securities lending program was consistent with the obligations owed by us to them. At this time, we do not know if we will enter into a settlement with respect to such claims or if the amount of any settlement would be less than or greater than the reserve established.
We may incur losses which could be material to our consolidated results of operations in the period incurred, as a result of our valuation of units of the SSgA lending funds and our imposition of restrictions on redemptions.
A broad range of unregistered collective investment pools that SSgA manages, referred to as lending funds participate in our securities lending program and as a result hold interests in certain of the unregistered cash collateral pools discussed above. Aspools. The lending funds continue to purchase and redeem units of the lending funds at prices that assign a participant in these unregistered cashvalue of $1.00 to units of the collateral pools these lending funds may have the same claims as other clients discussed above.held by such funds. If it was determined that the historical or prospective
transaction valuation of these units for subscriptionpurchase or redemption purposes at $1.00 was not appropriate, or if investors in the lending funds determine for their own purposes that theof units in the unregistered cash collateral pools held byof the lending funds should be valued atreflect a pricevalue of the units of the collateral pools of less than $1.00, the net asset value of the lending funds may also be adversely affected and the lending fund investors may claim that they overpaid for their investment, or that investors who redeemed their units at prices that reflect a valuation of units of the collateral pools of $1.00 were overcompensated, and seek to hold us responsible for their relatedalleged investment loss. For financial reporting purposes, the lending funds’ financial statements for the periods ended December 31, 2008 and 2009 reflected or will reflect net asset values for the lending funds based upon a valuation of the units of the collateral pools at market value rather than at the $1.00 transaction value. If we continue to transact purchases and redemptions of units of the unregistered cashlending funds based upon the $1.00 transaction value of the collateral pools at a net assetrather than their financial statement reported value, that reflects a valuation of $1.00 per unit, such potential exposure would likely increase over time. Since the percentage of a lending fund’s assets on loan varies based on the fund’s investment focus and with changes in market demand, the potential impact of this issue on the net asset value of the lending fund will vary significantly, butand in some cases may be material.
In such circumstances, our reputation as an asset manager andeffort to provide investors in the marketability of theseSSgA lending funds equal access to liquidity in the collateral pools and limit the need to sell portfolio securities into an illiquid market in order to meet redemption requests, in March 2009, we established restrictions on the percentage of an investor’s interest in a lending fund that may be adversely affectedredeemed in any month. These restrictions superseded limitations on redemption other than in kind or that were to an extent consistent with the customers’ ordinary course of their participation in the lending funds. The restrictions on redemptions currently do not apply to participant level activity in defined contribution plans. Investors in the lending funds have objected to, and may claim to have been harmed by, such limitations on liquidity of their investment, notwithstanding our right to implement such restrictions under the governing documents for such funds. As a result, participants in our lending funds may seek to be compensated for any loss they incurred or allege to have incurred resulting from either a changethe valuation of the units of the lending funds or restrictions on the liquidity of such units.
We may incur losses, which could be material to our consolidated results of operations in the reported net asset valueperiod incurred, as a result of the collective investment pool or previous redemption and subscription activity in the collateral pools at the constant net asset value of $1.00 per unit.
Any claims asserted by investors in the unregistered cash collateral pools or ourdirect lending program and SSgA lending funds may be substantial, may entail litigation and may result in regulatory scrutinyan inquiry by the SEC.
The SEC is conducting an informal inquiry into the management of our securities lending program.program and disclosures made to direct lending participants and participants in the SSgA lending funds, in particular as to the adequacy of our disclosures regarding the collateral pools during periods when those pools had a market value of less than $1.00. While we are cooperating with such inquiry, we cannot determine whether the staff of the SEC will conclude that our disclosures or conduct of the program form the basis of a potential formal proceeding seeking damages or other remedies. In addition to the action with the redeeming participant in the direct lending program referred to above, participants in certain of the lending funds have commenced putative class actions on behalf of all investors in the lending funds that are benefit plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act. The class actions allege, among other things, failure to Our planreduce operating costsexercise prudence in the management of the collateral pools and support long-term growth may not achieve its intended objectives.
Duringbreach of the fourth quarter of 2008, we recorded charges of $306 milliongoverning instruments in connection with a restructuring plan. The plan is intended to reduce our future operating costs, including through global workforce reductions that are expected to be substantially completedimposition of restrictions on redemptions and seek both damages and injunctive relief. A determination by the endSEC or any other regulatory authority to commence an enforcement proceeding with regard to our securities lending operations or SSgA lending funds, or an adverse outcome in the class action or any future proceedings, could have a material adverse impact upon our securities lending operations or the operations of the first quarterSSgA or upon our consolidated results of 2009, in order to support our long-term growth while aligning the organization to meet the challengesoperations and opportunities presented by the current market environment. Risks associated with implementing our restructuring plan and other workforce management issues may impair our ability to achieve anticipated operating cost reductions or may otherwise harm our business. We may also experience delays in implementing the plan. To the extent we make changes to the plan, we may incur additional charges, adjust our accrual or re-evaluate the plan.financial condition.
If we are unable to continuously attract deposits and other short-term funding, our consolidated financial condition, including our capital ratios, our consolidated results of operations and our business prospects could be harmed.
Liquidity management is critical to the management of our consolidated balance sheet and to our ability to service our customer base. We generally use our sources of funds to:
extend credit to our customers in connection with our custody business;
meet demands for return of funds on deposit by customers; and
manage the pool of intermediate-andintermediate- and longer-term assets that compriseare included in the investment securities on our investment portfolio.consolidated balance sheet.
Because the demand for credit by our customers is difficult to forecast and control, and may be at its peak at times of disruption in the securities markets, and because the average maturity of our investment portfolio is significantly longer than the contractual maturity of our deposit base, we need to continuously attract, and are dependent upon, access to various sources of short-term funding.
In managing our liquidity, our primary source of short-term funding is customer deposits, which are predominantly transaction-based deposits by institutional investors. Our ability to continue to attract these deposits, and other short-term funding sources such as certificates of deposit and commercial paper, is subject to variability based upon a number of factors, including volume and volatility in the global securities markets, the relative interest rates that we are prepared to pay for these liabilities and the perception of safety of those deposits or short-term obligations relative to alternative short-term investments available to our customers, including in the capital markets. For example, the disruptioncontraction in the global fixed-income securities markets,number of counterparties for which began inwe have a favorable credit assessment as a result of ongoing market disruptions has made it difficult to invest our available liquidity, which has adversely affected the third quarterrate of 2007 and continued throughout 2008, had a substantially greater impact upon liquidity and valuations in those markets than has historically been experienced. In addition, liquidity in the inter-bank market, as well as the markets for commercial paper, certificates of deposit and other short-term instruments, significantly contracted during 2008.
return that we earned on these assets, which could harm our ability to attract customer deposits.
The availability and cost of credit in short-term markets is highly dependent upon the markets’ perception of our liquidity and creditworthiness. Our efforts to monitor and manage our liquidity risk may not be successful or sufficient to deal with dramatic or unanticipated changes in the global securities markets or other event-driven reductions in liquidity. In such events, our cost of funds may increase, thereby reducing our net interest revenue, or we may need to dispose of a portion of our investment portfolio, which, depending upon market conditions, could result in our realizingthe realization of a loss or experiencing other adverse consequences, including adverse accounting consequences.
If we are unable to successfully invest customer depositsin our business may be adversely affected.
During the recent market disruptions, we experienced substantial inflowsconsolidated statement of liquid assets, particularly customer deposits, as short-term deposits with us became more attractive relative to other short-term investment options. However, the contraction in the number of counterparties for which we had a favorable credit assessment made it difficult to invest, even on an overnight basis, all of our available liquidity, which adversely impacted the rate of return that we earned on these assets. As a result of this contraction of counterparties during the recent market disruptions, we have frequently placed deposits with government central banks, resulting in a minimal rate of return. If we continue to face difficulty investing these assets, our ability to attract customer deposits may be harmed, which would in turn harm our business and our results of operations.income.
Any downgrades in our credit ratings, or an actual or perceived reduction in our financial strength, could adversely affect our borrowing costs, capital costs and liquidity and cause reputational harm.
Various independent rating agencies publish credit ratings for our debt obligations based on their evaluation of a number of factors, some of which relate to our performance and other corporate developments, including financings, acquisitions and joint ventures, and some of which relate to general industry conditions. We anticipate that the rating agencies will review our ratings regularly based on our consolidated results of operations and developments in our business.businesses. Our credit rating was downgraded by each of the principal rating agencies during the first quarter of 2009. A further downgrade or a significant reduction in our capital ratios might adversely affect our ability to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital. We cannot assure youprovide assurance that we will continue to maintain our current ratings. The current market environment and our
exposure to other financial institution counterparties increases the risk that we may not maintain our current ratings. Downgrades in our credit ratings may adversely affect our borrowing costs, our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, in turn, our liquidity. A failure to maintain an acceptable credit rating may also preclude us from being competitive in certain products, may be negatively perceived by our customers or counterparties or may have other adverse reputational effects.
An actual or perceived reduction inAdditionally, our financial strength may cause others to reduce or cease doing business with us.
Our counterparties, as well as our customers, rely upon our financial strength and stability and evaluate the risks of doing business with us. If we experience diminished financial strength or stability, actual or perceived, including due to market or regulatory developments, our announced or rumored business developments or consolidated results of operations, a decline in our stock price or a reduced credit rating, our counterparties may become less willing to enter into transactions, secured or unsecured, with us, our customers may reduce or place limits upon the level of services we provide them or seek other service providers and our prospective customers may select other service providers. The risk that we may be perceived as less creditworthy relative to other market participants is increased in the current market environment, where the consolidation of financial institutions, including major global financial institutions, is resulting in a smaller number of much larger counterparties and competitors. If our counterparties perceive us to be a less viable counterparty, our ability to enter into financial transactions on terms acceptable to us or our customers, on our or our customers’ behalf, will be materially compromised. If our customers reduce their deposits with us or select other service providers for all or a portion of the services we provide them, our net interest revenue and fee revenuerevenues will decrease accordingly.
Our businesses may be negatively affected by adverse publicity or other reputational harm.
Our relationship with many of our customers is predicated upon our reputation as a fiduciary and a service provider that adheres to the highest standards of ethics, service quality and regulatory compliance. Adverse publicity, regulatory actions, litigation, operational failures, the failure to meet customer expectations and other issues with respect to one or more of our businesses could materially and adversely affect our reputation, our ability to attract and retain customers or our
sources of funding.funding for the same or other businesses. Preserving and enhancing our reputation also depends on maintaining systems and procedures that address known risks and regulatory requirements, as well as our ability to identify and mitigate additional risks that arise due to changes in our businesses and the marketplaces in which we operate, the regulatory environment and customer expectations. If any of these developments has a material effect on our reputation, our business will suffer.
Governmental responses to recent market disruptions may be inadequate and may have unintended consequences.
In response to recent market disruptions, legislators and financial regulators have taken a number of steps to stabilize the financial markets. These steps included the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the provision of other direct and indirect assistance to distressed financial institutions, assistance by the banking authorities in arranging acquisitions of weakened banks and broker/dealers, implementation of programs by the Federal Reserve to provide liquidity to the commercial paper markets and temporary prohibitions on short sales of certain financial institution securities. Additional legislative and regulatory measures are under consideration, including, for example, measures with respect to modifications of residential mortgages. The overall effects of these and other legislative and regulatory efforts on the financial markets are uncertain, and may not have the intended stabilization effects. In addition to these actions in the U.S., other governments have taken regulatory and other steps to support financial institutions, to guarantee deposits and to seek to stabilize the financial markets. Should these or other legislative or regulatory initiatives fail to stabilize the financial markets, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected.
In addition, while these measures have been taken to support the markets, they may have unintended consequences on the global financial system or our businesses, including reducing competition, increasing the general level of uncertainty in the markets or favoring or disfavoring certain lines of business, institutions or depositors. We may need to modify our strategies, businesses or operations, and we may incur increased capital requirements and constraints or additional costs in order to satisfy new regulatory requirements or to compete in a changed business environment.
Our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s TARP capital purchase program restricts our ability to increase dividends on our common stock, undertake stock repurchase programs and compensate our employees.
In October 2008, the U.S. Treasury invested $2 billion in State Street pursuant to the TARP capital purchase program. The terms of the TARP capital purchase program require us to pay cumulative preferred dividends to Treasury and restrict our ability to increase dividends on our common stock, redeem Treasury’s investment without receiving high-quality replacement capital, undertake common stock repurchase programs and compensate our employees. In February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, among other things, retroactively imposed additional compensation and governance restrictions on participants in the program. Additional restrictions may be imposed by Treasury or Congress on us at a later date, and these restrictions may also apply to us retroactively. These restrictions may have a material adverse affect on our operations, revenue and financial condition, on our ability to pay dividends or on our ability to attract talented executives and other employees.
Government-imposed limitations on short sales and investor decisions to reduce short selling may harm our securities finance revenues.
Government-imposed prohibitions and restrictions on short sales of securities, designed to address perceived market abuses, negatively impacted the value of securities on loan during 2008. Although many of these restrictions have expired, continued reductions in the overall volume of short sales likely would decrease our securities finance revenue. In addition, media and regulatory focus on short selling, and losses incurred in securities finance programs sponsored by other financial institutions, have caused some institutional investors to reduce or eliminate their securities finance programs. Continued investor avoidance of short sales or renewed regulatory prohibitions on short sales would affect our business model and the demand for our services, and both our revenue from securities finance operations and the liquidity and market value of the collateral pools in which our customers invest may be adversely affected.
Because our fee income is based in part on the value of assets under custody or management, our business could be adversely affected by further declines in asset values.
The significant declines in equity and other financial markets globally during 2008 have adversely affected and are likely to continue to adversely affect our fee revenue, which is based in part upon the value of assets under custody, administration or management. Further deterioration or a continuation of recent market conditions is likely to lead to a continued decline in the value of assets under custody, administration or management, which would reduce our asset-based fee revenue and may adversely affect other transaction-based revenue, such as securities finance revenue, and the volume of transactions that we execute for our customers. Many of the costs of providing our services are relatively fixed. Therefore, any such decline in revenue would have a disproportionate effect on our earnings.
The illiquidity and volatility of global fixed-income and equity markets has affected our ability to effectively and profitably manage our investment poolsassets on behalf of customers and may make our products less attractive to customers.
We manage assets on behalf of customers in several forms, including in collective investment pools, including money market funds, securities finance collateral pools, cash collateral and other cash products and short-term investment funds. In addition to the impact on the market value of customer portfolios, the illiquidity and volatility of both the global fixed-income and equity markets have negatively affected our ability to manage customer inflows and outflows from our pooled investment vehicles. Within our asset management business, we manage investment pools, such as mutual funds and collective investment funds that generally offer our customers the ability to withdraw their investments on short notice, generally daily or monthly. This feature requires that we manage those pools in a manner that takes into account both maximizing the long-term return on the investment pool and retaining sufficient liquidity to meet reasonably anticipated liquidity requirements of our customers.
During the 2008 market disruptions,disruption that accelerated following the bankruptcy of Lehman, the liquidity in many asset classes, particularly short-andshort- and long-term fixed-income securities, has declined dramatically, and providing liquidity to meet all customer demands in these investment pools without adversely impactingaffecting the return to non-withdrawing customers becamehas become more difficult. For customers that invest directly or indirectly in certain of the collateral pools and seek to terminate participation in lending programs, we have required, in accordance with the applicable customer arrangements, that these withdrawals from the collateral pools take the form of partial in-kind distributions of securities. Although we are entitled to make distributions in-kind, customers have in some cases sought,securities, and may in the future seek, reimbursement for case of SSgA funds that engage in securities lending, we have implemented limitations on the portion of an investor’s interest in such fund that may be withdrawn during
any loss that they incurmonth, although such limitations do not apply to participant directed activity in connection with the disposition of such securities.defined contribution plans. If these higher than normal demands for liquidity from our customers continuewere to return post-Lehman-bankruptcy levels or increase, it could become more difficult to manage the liquidity requirements of our collective investment pools and, as a result, we may elect (or in some situations be required) to support the liquidity of these pools. If the liquidity in the fixed-income markets were to deteriorate further or remain disrupted for a prolonged period, our relationshiprelationships with our customers may be adversely affected, we could, in certain circumstances, be required to consolidate the investment pools, levels of redemption activity could increase and our consolidated results of operations and business prospects could be adversely impacted.affected.
In addition, if a money market fund that we manage were to have unexpected liquidity demands from investors in the fund that exceeded available liquidity, the fund could be required to sell assets to meet those redemption requirements, and it may then be difficult to sell the assets held by the fund at a reasonable price, if at all.
Alternatively, although we have no such obligations or arrangements currently in place, we have in the past, and may in the future, guaranteedguarantee liquidity to investors desiring to make withdrawals from a fund, and a significant amount of such guarantees could adversely affect our own liquidity and consolidated financial condition. Because of the size of the investment pools that we manage, we may not have the financial ability or regulatory authority to support the liquidity demands of our customers. The extreme volatility in the equity markets has led to potential for the return on passive and quantitative products deviating from their target return. The temporary closures of securities exchanges in certain markets such as occurred in Brazil and Russia in the second half of 2008, or artificial floors such as the one implemented in Pakistan, create a risk that customer redemptions in pooled investment vehicles may result in significant tracking error and underperformance relative to stated benchmarks. Any failure of the pools to meet redemption requests or to underperform relative to similar products offered by our competitors could harm our business and our reputation.
For further information regarding risks related to our investment pools, please refer to the risk factor titled “Our reputation and business prospects may be damaged if our customers incur substantial losses in investment pools where we act as agent” on page 11.
Acquisitions, strategic alliances and divestiture pose risks for our business.
As part of our business strategy, we acquire complementary businesses and technologies, enter into strategic alliances and divest portions of our business. During 2009, we announced definitive agreements to acquire the global custody, depository banking, correspondent banking and fund administration business of Intesa Sanpaolo, or Intesa, and the acquisition of Mourant International Finance Administration, or MIFA, for cash. We undertake transactions such as these to, among other reasons, expand our geographic footprint, access new customers, technologies or services, develop closer relationships with our business partners, efficiently deploy capital or to leverage cost savings or other financial opportunities. We may not achieve the expected benefits of these transactions, which could result in increased costs, lowered revenues, ineffective deployment of capital and diminished competitive position or reputation.
These transactions also involve a number of risks and financial, accounting, regulatory, managerial and operational challenges, which could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial condition. For example, the businesses that we acquire or our strategic alliances may underperform relative to the price paid or the resources committed by us, or we may not achieve anticipated cost savings or otherwise be adversely affected by acquisition-related charges. Further, past acquisitions have resulted, and upon closing transactions such as the purchase of Intesa and MIFA will result, in the recording of goodwill and other significant intangible assets on our consolidated balance sheet. We may be required to record impairment in our consolidated statement of income in future periods if we do not realize the value of these assets. Through our acquisitions we may also assume unknown or undisclosed liabilities, fail to properly assess known contingent liabilities or assume businesses with internal control deficiencies. While in most of our transactions we seek to mitigate these risks through, among other things, adequate due diligence and indemnification provisions, we cannot be certain that the indemnification provisions and other risk mitigants we put in place will be sufficient.
Various regulatory approvals or consents are generally required prior to closing or acquisitions and, which may include approvals of the Federal Reserve and other domestic and foreign regulatory authorities. These regulatory authorities may impose conditions on the completion of the acquisition or require changes to its terms that materially affect the terms of the transaction or our ability to capture some of the opportunities presented by the transaction. Any such conditions, or any associated regulatory delays, could limit the benefits of the transaction. Some acquisitions we announce may not be completed, if we do not receive the required regulatory approvals or if other closing conditions are not satisfied.
The integration of our acquisitions results in risks to our business and other uncertainties.
The integration of acquisitions presents risks that differ from the risks associated with our ongoing operations. Integration activities are complicated and time consuming. We may not be able to effectively assimilate services, technologies, key personnel or businesses of acquired companies into our business or service offerings, as anticipated, alliances may not be successful, and we may not achieve related revenue growth or cost savings. We also face the risk of being unable to retain the customer bases of acquired companies or unable to cross-sell our products and services to an acquired business’s customers. Acquisitions of investment servicing businesses entail information technology systems conversions, which involve operational risks and may result in customer dissatisfaction and defection. Customers of asset servicing businesses that we have acquired may be competitors of our non-custody businesses. The loss of some of these customers or a significant reduction in revenues generated from them, for competitive or other reasons, could adversely affect the benefits that we expect to achieve from these acquisitions. With any acquisition, the integration of the operations and resources of the businesses could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of our and the acquired company’s ongoing businesses, or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that could adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with customers and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisition. Integration efforts may also divert management attention and resources.
We are subject to intense competition in all aspects of our business, which could negatively affect our ability to maintain or increase our profitability.
The markets in which we operate across all facets of our business are both highly competitive and global. We have experienced, and anticipate that we will continue to experience, pricing pressure in many of our core businesses. Many of our businesses compete with other domestic and international banks and financial services companies, such as custody banks, investment advisors, broker-dealers, outsourcing companies and data processing companies. Ongoing consolidation within the financial services industry could pose challenges in the markets we serve, including potentially increased downward pricing pressure across our businesses. Many of our competitors, including our competitors in core services, have substantially greater capital resources than we do. In some of our businesses, we are service providers to significant competitors. These competitors are in some instances significant customers, and the retention of these customers involves additional risks, such as the avoidance of actual or perceived conflicts of interest and the maintenance of high levels of service quality. The ability of a competitor to offer comparable or improved products or services at a lower price would likely negatively affect our ability to maintain or increase our profitability. Many of our core services are subject to contracts that have relatively short terms or may be terminated by our customer after a short notice period. In addition, pricing pressures as a result of the activities of competitors, customer pricing reviews, and rebids, as well as the introduction of new products, may result in a reduction in the prices we can charge for our products and services.
If we fail to attract new customers and cross-sell additional products and services to our existing customers, our prospects for growth may be harmed.
Our strategy for growth depends upon both attracting new customers and cross-selling additional products and services to our existing customer base. To the extent that we are not able to achieve these goals, we may not be able to meet our financial goals. In addition, our proactive cross-selling of multiple products and services to our customers can exacerbate the negative financial effects associated with the risk of loss of any one customer.
Development of new products and services may impose additional costs on us and may expose us to increased operational risk.
Our financial performance depends, in part, on our ability to develop and market new and innovative services and to adopt or develop new technologies that differentiate our products or provide cost efficiencies, while avoiding increased related expenses. The introduction of new products and services can entail significant time and resources. Substantial risks and uncertainties are associated with the introduction of new products and services, including technical and control requirements that may need to be developed and implemented, rapid technological change in the industry, our ability to access technical and other information from our customers and the significant and ongoing investments required to bring new products and services to market in a timely manner at competitive prices. Regulatory and internal control requirements, capital requirements, competitive alternatives and shifting market preferences may also determine if such initiatives can be brought to market in a manner that is timely and attractive to our customers. Failure to manage successfully these risks in the development and implementation of new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business and reputation, as well as on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
It may be difficult and costly to protect our intellectual property rights, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.
We may be unable to protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology effectively, which may allow competitors to duplicate our technology and products and may adversely affect our ability to compete with them. To the extent that we are not able to protect our intellectual property effectively through patents or other means, employees with knowledge of our intellectual property may leave and seek to exploit our intellectual property for their own or others’ advantage. In addition, we may infringe upon claims of third-party patents, and we may face intellectual property challenges from other parties. We may not be successful in defending against any such challenges or in obtaining licenses to avoid or resolve any intellectual property disputes. The intellectual property of an acquired business such as that of Currenex, Inc., acquired in 2007, may be an
important component of the value that we agree to pay for such a business. However, such acquisitions are subject to the risks that the acquired business may not own the intellectual property that we believe we are acquiring, that the intellectual property is dependent upon licenses from third parties, that the acquired business infringes upon the intellectual property rights of others, or that the technology does not have the acceptance in the marketplace that we anticipated.
We may be unable to increase the portion of our management fee revenue that is generated from enhanced index and actively managed products, and the investment performance of these products may result in a reduction in the fees that we earn.
Over the past several years, we have sought to increase the portion of our management fee revenue generated from enhanced index and actively managed products, with respect to which we generally receive fees at higher rates compared to passive products. We may not be able to continue to increase this segment of our business at a rate that is consistent with our business and financial goals. The amount of assets we are able to attract and retain in active strategies depends on the performance of such products relative to competitive products in the institutional marketplace. For example, our active fixed-income business continues to be adversely impacted by underperformance in certain fixed-income strategies that occurred in 2007. In addition, with respect to certain of our enhanced index and actively managed products, we have entered into performance fee arrangements, where the management fee revenue we earn is based on the performance of managed funds against specified benchmarks. The reliance on performance fees increases the potential volatility of our management fee revenue. If investment performance in our asset management business fails to meet either benchmarks or the performance of our competitors, we could experience a decline in assets under management and a reduction in the fees that we earn, irrespective of economic or market conditions.
Our business is subject to risks from foreign exchange movements.
The degree of volatility in foreign exchange rates can affect our foreign exchange trading revenue. In general, increased currency volatility may increase our market risk, and our foreign exchange revenue, all other things being equal, is likely to decrease during times of decreased currency volatility. In addition, as our business grows globally, our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates could affect our levels of revenue, expense and earnings, as well as the value of our investment in our non-U.S. operations.
Our revenues and profits are sensitive to changes in interest rates.
Our financial performance could be negatively affected by changes in interest rates as they impactaffect our asset and liability management activities. The levels of interest rates in global markets, changes in the relationship between short- and long-term interest rates, the direction and speed of interest-rate changes, and the asset and liability spreads relative to the currency and geographic mix of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, affect our net interest revenue. Our ability to anticipate these changes or to hedge the related exposures on and off our consolidated balance sheet can significantly influence the success of our asset and liability management activities and the resulting level of our net interest revenue. The impact of changes in interest rates will depend on the relative durations of assets and liabilities in accordance with their relevant currencies. In general, sustained lower interest rates, a flat or inverted yield curve and narrow interest-rate spreads have a constraining effect on our net interest revenue.
Acquisitions, strategic alliances and divestiture pose risks for our business.
Acquisitions of complementary businesses and technologies, development of strategic alliances and divestiture of portions of our business, in addition to fostering organic growth opportunities, are an active part of our overall business strategy to remain competitive. The integration of acquisitions presents risks that differ from the risks associated with our ongoing operations. Our financial results would be significantly harmed by an inability to achieve the cost savings and other benefits that we anticipated in valuing an acquired business. We may not be able to effectively assimilate services, technologies, key personnel or businesses of acquired companies into our business or service offerings, alliances may not be successful, and we may not achieve related revenue growth or cost savings. We also face the risk of being unable to retain the customer bases of
acquired companies or unable to cross-sell our products and services to its customers. Acquisitions of investment servicing businesses entail information technology systems conversions, which involve operational risks and may result in customer dissatisfaction and defection. Customers of asset servicing businesses that we have acquired may be competitors of our non-custody businesses. The loss of some of these customers or a significant reduction in revenues generated from them, for competitive or other reasons, would adversely affect the benefits that we expect to achieve from these acquisitions. In addition, we may not be able to successfully manage the divestiture of identified businesses on satisfactory terms, if at all, which would reduce any anticipated benefits to earnings.
With any acquisition, the integration of the operations and resources of the businesses could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of our and the acquired company’s ongoing businesses, or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that could adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with customers and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisition. Integration efforts may also divert management attention and resources. The acquisition and combination of a business with our operations may also expose us to risks from unknown or contingent liabilities with respect to which we may have no recourse against the seller. Acquisition transactions are often competitive auctions in which we have limited time and access to information to evaluate the risks inherent in the business being acquired, and no or limited recourse against the seller if undisclosed liabilities are discovered after we enter into a definitive agreement.
We may not achieve the benefits we sought in an acquisition, or, if achieved, those benefits may be achieved later than we anticipated. Failure to achieve anticipated benefits from an acquisition could result in increased costs and lower revenues than expected of the combined company. In addition, if the financial performance associated with an acquisition falls short of expectations, impairment charges associated with the goodwill or other intangible assets recorded as part of the acquisition may result.
Unavailability of financing may make future business acquisitions or dispositions difficult.
Our ability to make acquisitions in order to achieve greater economies of scale or to expand our product offering is dependent upon our financial resources and our ability to access the capital markets. In addition, our ability to dispose of businesses that no longer fit our business model may be difficult if attractive financing is not available to prospective buyers. Due to company-specific issues or lack of liquidity in the capital markets, our ability to continue to expand through acquisitions or to dispose of businesses that no longer are strategic to us may be adversely affected.
We face significant regulatory hurdles when planning business acquisitions.
In connection with most acquisitions, before the acquisition can be completed, we must obtain various regulatory approvals or consents, which may include approvals of the Federal Reserve, the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks and other domestic and foreign regulatory authorities. These regulatory authorities may impose conditions on the completion of the acquisition or require changes to its terms. Any such conditions, or any associated regulatory delays, could limit the benefits of the transaction.
Competition for our employees is intense, and we may not be able to attract and retain the highly skilled people we need to support our business.
Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract andand/or retain key people. Competition for the best people in most activities in which we engage can be intense, and we may not be able to hire people or retain them, particularly in light of uncertainty concerning evolving compensation restrictions applicable, or which may become applicable, to us, as a participant in the TARP capital purchase program, under the Emergency Economic Recovery Act of 2008, as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.banks (and potentially not applicable to other financial services firms). The unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could have a material adverse impact on our business because of their skills, their knowledge of our markets, their years of industry experience and, in some cases, the
difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel. Similarly, the loss of key employees, either individually or as a group, can adversely impact customeraffect our customers’ perception of our ability to continue to manage certain types of investment management mandates. In some of our businesses, we have experienced significant employee turnover, which increases costs, requires additional training and increases the potential for operational errors.
Long-term fixed-price contracts expose us to pricing and performance risk.
We enter into long-term fixed-price contracts to provide middle office or investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing services, primarily for conversions, to customers, including services related but not limited to certain trading activities, cash reporting, settlement and reconciliation activities, collateral management and information technology development. These arrangements generally set forth our fee schedule for the term of the contract and, absent a change in service requirements, do not permit us to re-price the contract for changes in our costs or for market pricing. The long-term contracts for these relationships require, in some cases, considerable up-front investment by us, including technology and conversion costs, and carry the risk that pricing for the products and services we provide might not prove adequate to generate expected operating margins over the term of the contracts. Profitability of these contracts is largely a function of our ability to accurately calculate pricing for our services, efficiently assume our contractual responsibilities in a timely manner and our ability to control our costs and maintain the relationship with the customer for an adequate period of time to recover our up-front investment. Our estimate of the profitability of these arrangements can be adversely impactedaffected by declines in the assets under the customers’ management, whether due to general declines in the securities markets or customer specific issues. In addition, the profitability of these arrangements may be based on our ability to cross sell additional services to these customers, and we may be unable to do so.
In addition, performance risk exists in each contract, given our dependence on successful conversion and implementation onto our own operating platforms of the service activities provided. Our failure to meet specified service levels may also adversely affect our revenue from such arrangements, or permit early termination of the contracts by the customer. If the current decline in overall market securities valuations persists or our customers are unable to grow their businesses, these relationships may not be successful. These relationships have been an area of rapid growth in our business, and if the demand for these types of services were to decline, we could see a slowdown in the growth rate of our revenue.revenue decline.
We face significant risks developingOur controls and implementingprocedures may fail or be circumvented, our future business plansrisk management policies and strategies.
In order to maintain and grow our business, we must continuously make strategic decisions about our future business plans, including plans for entering or exiting business lines or geographic markets, plans for acquiring or disposing of businesses and plans to build new systems and other infrastructure. Our business, our results of operations and our financial positionprocedures may be adversely affected by incorrect businessinadequate, and strategic decisions or improper implementation of our decisions. If the business decisions that we make prove erroneous, we may fail to be responsive to industry changes or customer demands. Moreover, the implementation of our decisions may involve significant capital outlays, often far in advance of when we expect to derive any related revenues, and therefore it may be difficult to alter or abandon plans without incurring significant loss.
We are exposed to operational risk which could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations.
We may fail to identify and manage risks related to a variety of aspects of our business, including, but not limited to, operational risk, interest-rate risk, trading risk, fiduciary risk, legal and compliance risk, liquidity risk and credit risk. We have adopted various controls, procedures, policies and systems to monitor and manage risk. While we currently believe that our risk management process is effective, we cannot provide assurance that those controls, procedures, policies and systems will always be adequate to identify and manage the risks in our various businesses. In addition, our businesses and the markets in which we operate are continuously evolving. We may fail to fully understand the implications of changes in our businesses or the financial markets and fail to adequately or timely enhance our risk framework to address those changes. If our risk framework is ineffective, either because it fails to keep pace with changes in the financial markets or our businesses or for other reasons, we could incur losses, suffer reputational damage or find ourselves out of compliance with applicable regulatory mandates or expectations.
Operational risk is inherent in all of our business activities. Our customers haveAs a leading provider of services to institutional investors, we provide a broad array of services, including research, investment management, trading services and investment servicing, that give rise to operational risk. In addition, these services generate a broad array of complex and specialized servicing, confidentiality and fiduciary requirements. We face the risk that the policies, procedures and systems we have established to comply with our operational requirements will fail, be inadequate or become outdated. We also face the potential for loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, employee supervisory or monitoring mechanisms or other systems or controls, which could materially affect our future consolidated results of operations. Operational errors that result in us sendingremitting funds to a failing or
bankrupt entity may be irreversible, and may subject us to losses. We may also be subject to disruptions from external events that are wholly or partially beyond our control, which could cause delays or disruptions to operational functions, including information processing and financial market settlement functions. In addition, our customers, vendors and counterparties could suffer from such events. Should these events affect us, or the customers, vendors or counterparties with which we conduct business, our consolidated results of operations could be negatively affected. When we record balance sheet reserves for probable loss contingencies fromrelated to operational losses, we may be unable to accurately estimate our potential exposure, and any reserves we establish to cover operational losses may not be sufficient to cover our actual financial exposure, which may have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition or results of operations.
for the periods in which we recognize the losses.
We depend on information technology, and any failures of our information technology systems could result in significant costs and reputational damage.
Our businesses depend on information technology infrastructure to record and process a large volume of increasingly complex transactions, in many currencies, on a daily basis, across numerous and diverse markets. Any interruptions, delays or breakdowns of this infrastructure could result in significant costs to us and reputational damage.damage to our reputation.
Cost shifting to foreign jurisdictions may expose us to increased operational risk and reputational harm and may not result in expected cost savings.
We actively strive to achieve cost savings by shifting certain business processes to lower-cost geographic locations, including by forming joint ventures and by establishing operations in lower cost areas, such as Poland, India and China, and outsourcing to vendors in various jurisdictions. This effort exposes us to the risk that we may not maintain service quality, control or effective management within these business operations. The increased elements of risk that arise from conducting certain operating processes in some jurisdictions could lead to an increase in reputational risk. During periods of transition, greater operational risk and customer concern exist regarding the continuity of a high level of service delivery. The extent and pace at which we are able to move functions to lower-cost locations may also be impacted by regulatory and customer acceptance issues. Such relocation of functions also entails costs, such as technology and real estate expenses, that may offset or exceed the expected financial benefits of the lower-cost locations.
Any theft, loss or other misappropriation of the confidential information we possess could have an adverse impact on our business and could subject us to regulatory actions, litigation and other adverse effects.
Our businesses and relationships with customers are dependent upon our ability to maintain the confidentiality of our and our customers’ trade secrets and confidential information (including customer transactional data and personal data about our employees, our customers and our customers’ customers). Unauthorized access to such information may occur, resulting in theft, loss or other misappropriation. Any theft, loss or other misappropriation of confidential information could have a material adverse impact on our competitive positions, our relationships with our customers and our reputation and could subject us to regulatory inquiries and enforcement, civil litigation and possible financial liability or costs.
Our businesses may be adversely affected by litigation.
From time to time, our customers may make claims and take legal action relating to our performance of fiduciary or contractual responsibilities. We may also face employment lawsuits or other legal claims. In any such claims or actions, demands for substantial monetary damages may be asserted against us and may result in financial liability or an adverse effect on our reputation among investors or on customer demand for our products and services. We may be unable to accurately estimate our exposure to litigation risk when we record balance sheet reserves for probable loss contingencies. As a result, any reserves we establish to cover any settlements or judgments may not be sufficient to cover our actual financial exposure, which may have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
In the ordinary course of our business, we are also subject to various regulatory, governmental and law enforcement inquiries, investigations and subpoenas. These may be directed generally to participants in the businesses in which we are involved or may be specifically directed at us. In regulatory enforcement matters, claims for disgorgement, the imposition of penalties and the imposition of other remedial sanctions are possible.
In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of legal actions and regulatory matters, we cannot provide assurance as to the outcome of any pending matter or, if determined adversely to us, the costs associated with any such matter, particularly where the claimant seeks very large or indeterminate damages or where the matter presents novel legal theories, involves a large number of parties or is at a preliminary stage. The resolution of certain pending legal actions or regulatory matters, if unfavorable, could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations for the quarter in which such actions or matters are resolved.
We face litigation risks in connection with SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies.
In connection with certain of SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies, during the fourth quarter of 2007, we established a reserve of approximately $625 million to address legal exposure and related costs in connection with such strategies. Among other things, the portfolio managers for certain actively managed fixed-income strategies materially increased the exposure of these strategies to securities collateralized by sub-prime mortgages and shifted the weighting of these portfolios to more highly rated sub-prime instruments. During the third quarter of 2007, as the liquidity and valuations of these securities, including the more highly rated instruments, came under increased pressure, the performance of these strategies was adversely, and in some cases significantly, affected. The underperformance, which was greater than that typically associated with fixed-income funds, also caused a number of our customers to question whether the execution of these strategies was consistent with their investment intent. This questioning has resulted in several civil suits, including putative class action claims, applicable both to funds registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and to those that are exempt from such registration. These lawsuits allege, among other things, that we failed to comply with applicable investment limitations, disclosure obligations and our requisite standard of care in managing these active funds, including those where we act as a fiduciary under ERISA. We have also received, and are in the process of responding to, inquiries or subpoenas from federal and state regulatory authorities regarding SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies. Given our desire to fully respond to customer concerns, in the fourth quarter of 2007, State Street undertook a further review of all the actively managed fixed-income strategies at SSgA that were exposed to sub-prime investments. Based on our review and ongoing discussions with customers who were invested in these strategies, we established a reserve to address our estimated legal exposure.
The reserve was established based upon our best judgment as to legal exposures and related costs associated with certain actively managed fixed-income investment strategies. As of December 31, 2008, we had made settlement and related payments totaling approximately $417 million. The amount of the original reserve was based on certain assumptions. While we believe the reserve represents a reasonable estimate of our legal exposure and other costs associated with these issues, we do not believe that it is feasible to predict or determine the amount of such exposure with certainty. As such, it is possible that we have overestimated or underestimated our exposure. If the amount of our actual exposure is materially different from our reserve, there would be a material impact on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
We face extensive and changing government regulation, which may increase our costs and expose us to risks related to compliance.
Most of our businesses are subject to extensive regulation by multiple regulatory bodies, and many of the customers to which we provide services are themselves subject to a broad range of regulatory requirements. These regulations may affect the manner and terms of delivery of our services. As a financial institution with substantial international operations, we are subject to extensive regulatory and supervisory oversight, both in the U.S. and outside the U.S. in connection with our global operations. The regulations affect, among other things, the scope of our activities and customer services, our capital structure and our ability to fund the operations of our subsidiaries, our lending practices, our dividend policy and the manner in which we market our services. Evolving regulations, such as the Basel II and other global regulatory capital frameworks, short-selling regulations and anti-money laundering regulations, may impose significant compliance costs on us. The
disruption of the financial markets in 2008 and 2009 and resulting governmental support of, and loss of confidence in, financial institutions is likely to resulthas resulted in demand for increased and more extensive regulation of our business both in the U.SU.S. and internationally. Congress is currently considering legislation that may have a significant impact on the regulatory structure for the financial markets, special taxes on financial institutions and increased deposit assessments by the FDIC, and proposals by the White House have included the potential separation of proprietary trading and the management of hedge and other alternative asset funds from banking institutions or restrictions on the flexibility of financial institutions with respect to the compensation of their employees. The proposals currently being considered by Congress, depending upon their final form, could affect our business positively or adversely or may result in substantial additional costs. Different countries may respond to the market and economic environment in different and potentially conflicting manner, which could have the impact of increasing the cost of compliance for us. New or modified regulations and related regulatory guidance may have unforeseen or unintended adverse effects on the financial services industry. Evolving regulations, such as the Basel and other global regulatory capital frameworks, short-selling regulations and anti-money laundering regulations may impose significant compliance costs on us. The regulatory perspective, particularly that of the Federal Reserve Board, on regulatory capital requirements may affect our ability to make acquisitions, declare dividends or repurchase common stock unless we can demonstrate, to the satisfaction of our regulators, that such actions would not adversely affect our regulatory capital position in the event of a severely stressed market environment. In addition, the implementation of certain of the proposals with regard to regulatory capital could disproportionately affect our regulatory capital position relative to that of our competitors.
If we do not comply with governmental regulations, we may be subject to fines, penalties, lawsuits or material restrictions on our businesses in the jurisdiction where the violation occurred, which may adversely affect our business operations and, in turn, our financial results.consolidated results of operations. Similarly, many of our customers are subject to significant regulatory requirements, and retain our services in order for us to assist them in complying with those legal requirements. Changes in these regulations can significantly affect the services that we are asked to provide, as well as our costs. In addition, adverse publicity and damage to our reputation arising from the failure or
perceived failure to comply with legal, regulatory or contractual requirements could affect our ability to attract and retain customers. If we cause customers to fail to comply with these regulatory requirements, we may be liable to them for losses and expenses that they incur. In recent years, regulatory oversight and enforcement have increased substantially, imposing additional costs and increasing the potential risks associated with our operations. If this regulatory trend continues, it could adversely affect our operations and, in turn, our financial results.consolidated results of operations.
Changes in accounting standards may be difficult to predict and may adversely affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations.operations and financial condition.
New accounting standards, or changes in the interpretation of existing accounting standards, by the Financial Accounting Standards Board or the SEC, can potentially affect our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.operations and financial condition. These changes are difficult to predict, and can materially impactaffect how we record and report our consolidated financial condition and results of operations and financial condition and other financial information. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in the revised treatment of certain transactions or activities, and, in some cases, the restatement of consolidated prior period financial statements.
Changes in tax laws or regulations, and challenges to our tax positions with respect to historical transactions, may adversely affect our net income, our effective tax rate and our overallconsolidated results of operations and financial condition.
Our businesses can be directly or indirectly affected by new tax legislation, the expiration of existing tax laws, or the interpretation of existing tax laws worldwide. Changes inU.S. tax laws may affectthat have favorably affected the taxation of certain of our business directly or indirectly through their impactoverseas operations expired at the end of 2009, and it is uncertain when and whether they will be re-enacted. In addition, recent federal government budget submissions include proposals that would have a material adverse effect on the financial markets. taxation of our overseas operations.
In the normal course of business, we are subject to reviews by U.S. and non-U.S. tax authorities. These reviews may result in adjustments to the timing or amount of taxes due and the allocation of taxable income among tax jurisdictions. These adjustments could affect the attainment of our financial goals.
Prior to 2004, we entered into certain leveraged leases, known as sale-in, lease-out, or SILO, transactions. The Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, challenged our tax deductions arising from those transactions. During the second quarter of 2008, while we were engaged in settlement discussions with them, the IRS won a court victory in a SILO case involving other taxpayers. Shortly after that decision, the IRS suspended all SILO settlement discussions and, on August 5, 2008, issued a standard SILO settlement offer to most taxpayers that had such transactions. After reviewing the settlement offer carefully, we have decided not to accept it but to continue to pursue our appeal rights within the IRS.
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 13,Accounting for Leases, we originally recorded income and deferred tax liabilities with respect to our SILO transactions based on projected pre-tax and tax cash flows. In consideration of the terms of the settlement offer and the context in which it was issued, we revised our projections of the timing and amount of the tax cash flows and reflected those revisions in our leveraged lease accounting. During the third quarter of 2008 we substantially increased our reserve for tax-related interest expense that may be incurred upon resolution of this matter.
If we were to further revise our projection of the timing or amount of the tax cash flows from the leases, existing accounting standards would require us to again recalculate the rate of return and the recognition of income from the leases from inception. In addition to the recalculation, it is possible that we would increase our reserve for tax-related interest expense, which would be recorded as an increase to income tax expense.
The quantitative models we use to manage our business may contain errors that result in imprecise risk assessments, inaccurate valuations or poor business decisions.
We use quantitative models to help manage many different aspects of our business.businesses. As an input to our overall assessment of capital adequacy, we use models to measure the amount of credit risk, market risk, operational risk, interest rate risk and business risk we face. During the preparation of our consolidated financial statements, we sometimes use models to measure the value of positions for which reliable market prices are not available. We also use models to support many different types of business decisions including trading activities, hedging, asset and liability management and whether to change business strategy. In all of these uses, errors in the underlying model could result in unanticipated and adverse consequences. Because of our widespread usage of models, potential errors in models pose an ongoing risk to us.
Our controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented, and our risk management policies and procedures may be inadequate.
We may fail to identify and manage risks related to a variety of aspects of our business, including, but not limited to, operational risk, interest-rate risk, trading risk, fiduciary risk, legal and compliance risk, liquidity risk and credit risk. We have adopted various controls, procedures, policies and systems to monitor and manage risk. We cannot provide assurance that those controls, procedures, policies and systems are adequate to identify and manage the risks inherent in our various businesses. In addition, our businesses and the markets in whichAdditionally, we operate are continuously evolving. We may fail to fully understand the implications of changes in our business or the financial markets and fail to adequately or timely enhance our risk framework to address those changes. If our risk framework is ineffective, either because it fails to keep pace with changes in the financial markets or our business or for other reasons, we could incur losses.
We may fail to accurately quantify the magnitude of the risks we face, which could subject us to losses.
We may fail to accurately quantify the magnitude of the risks we face. Our measurement methodologies rely upon many assumptions and historical analyses and correlations. These assumptions may be incorrect, and the historical correlations we rely on may not continue to be relevant. Consequently, the measurements that we make for regulatory and economic capital may not adequately capture or express the true risk profiles of our businesses. Additionally, as businesses and markets evolve, our measurements may not accurately reflect those changes. While our risk measures may indicate sufficient capitalization, we may in fact have inadequate capital to conduct our businesses.
We face significant risks developing and implementing our future business plans and strategies.
In order to maintain and grow our business, we must continuously make strategic decisions about our future business plans, including plans for entering or exiting business lines or geographic markets, plans for acquiring or disposing of businesses and plans to build new systems and other infrastructure. Our business, our consolidated results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected by incorrect business and strategic decisions or improper implementation of our decisions. If the business decisions that we make prove erroneous, we may fail to be responsive to industry changes or customer demands. Moreover, the implementation of our decisions may involve significant capital outlays, often far in advance of when we expect to derive any related revenues, and therefore it may be difficult to alter or abandon plans without incurring significant loss.
| ITEM 1B. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS |
None.
| ITEM 2. | PROPERTIES |
We occupy a total of approximately 8.7 million square feet of office space and related facilities around the world, of which approximately 7.8 million square feet are leased. Of the total leased space, approximately 3.9 million square feet are located in eastern Massachusetts. An additional 1.6 million square feet are located elsewhere throughout the U.S. and in Canada. We lease approximately 1.71.8 million square feet in the U.K. and elsewhere in Europe, and approximately 600,000500,000 square feet in the Asia/Pacific region.
Our headquarters is located at State Street Financial Center, One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts, a 36-story office building. Various divisions of our two lines of business, as well as support functions, occupy space in this building. We lease the entire 1,025,000 square feet of this building, as well as the entire 366,000-square-foot parking garage at One Lincoln Street, under 20-year non-cancelable capital leases.leases expiring in 2023. A portion of the lease payments is offset by subleases for 153,000 square feet of the building. We occupy three buildings located in Quincy, Massachusetts, one of which we own and the otherstwo of which we lease. The buildings, containing a total of approximately 1,057,000 square feet, function as State Street Bank’s principal operations facilities.
We believe that our owned and leased facilities are suitable and adequate for our business needs. Additional information about our occupancy costs, including our commitments under non-cancelable leases, is in note 2019 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
| ITEM 3. | LEGAL PROCEEDINGS |
WeIn the ordinary course of business, we and our subsidiaries are involved in variousdisputes, litigation and regulatory governmental and law enforcement inquiries and subpoenas, as well as legalinvestigations, both pending and threatened. These matters, if resolved adversely against us, may result in monetary damages, fines and penalties or require changes in our business practices. The resolution of these proceedings is inherently difficult to predict. However, we do not believe that arise in the normal courseamount of business. For a discussion of proceedings, litigation exposure and related costs andany judgment, settlement or other similar matters associated with SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies, including the establishment of a reserve of approximately $625 million as of December 31, 2007 and activity in this reserve during 2008, refer to “Risk Factors—We face litigation risks in connection with SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies” included under Item 1A; the “Expenses” and “Line of Business Information” sections of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included under Item 7; and note 11 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. In the opinion of management, after discussion with counsel and based on the information currently available, these
regulatory, governmental and law enforcement inquiries and subpoenas and legal proceedings, including the above-mentioned matters associated with SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies, can be defended or resolved withoutaction arising from any pending proceeding will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position orcondition; although the outcome of certain of the matters described below may have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations for the period in which such matter is resolved or a reserve is determined to be required. We may be subject to proceedings in the future that, if adversely resolved, would have a material adverse effect on our businesses or on our future consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
On February 4, 2010, we announced that we had entered into settlements with the SEC, the Massachusetts Attorney General and the Massachusetts Securities Division of the Office of the Secretary of State to resolve their investigations into losses incurred by, and disclosures made with respect to, certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA during 2007 and earlier periods. In reaching these settlements, we neither admitted nor denied the allegations made by the regulators. Under the terms of the agreements, we agreed to establish a $313 million fair fund, which includes a fine of $50 million and disgorgement of advisory fees and interest of approximately $8 million. The fair fund will be distributed to affected investors in the active fixed-income strategies. The settlement with the SEC is subject to approval by a federal court. Combined with approximately $350 million in prior customer settlements, the compensation to investors will total approximately $663 million. Under the settlements with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, we agreed to pay $10 million to each of the Massachusetts Secretary of State and the Massachusetts Attorney General. Our previously established legal reserve will fully cover the cost of these regulatory settlements.
The SEC had previously requested information regarding two registered funds that invested in sub-prime securities. These funds were not covered by this settlement and the SEC staff has declined to advise us of the status of its inquiry with regard to those funds. As of June 30, 2007, these funds had net assets of less than $300 million, and the net asset value per share of the funds experienced an average decline of approximately 7.23% during the third quarter of 2007. Average returns for industry peer funds were positive during the same period. The U.S. Attorney’s office in Boston has also requested information in connection with our active-fixed income strategies. Several customers who invested in the SSgA active fixed-income strategies covered by the settlement with the SEC have filed litigation claims against us. Of the seven lawsuits filed, we have settled three, including an $89.75 million ERISA class action settlement.
Our U.K. affiliate is currently engaged in an arbitration proceeding in the U.K. arising from its conduct as investment manager of a separate investment account. The claimants allege that we breached certain investment guidelines applicable to the accounts, resulting in alleged losses of approximately €132 million.
An indirect participant in certain of the collective funds managed by SSgA which engage in securities lending commenced during 2009 a putative class action on behalf of all investors in such funds that are ERISA benefit plans. Such action alleges, among other things, that we failed to exercise prudence in the management of our collateral pools in which the collective funds had invested cash collateral from securities lending. A second, related class action complaint was filed in December 2009 by a direct investor in an SSgA lending fund. The complaint additionally alleges that investors in the SSgA lending funds were injured as a result of the limitations on withdrawals from our lending programs imposed in October 2008. In addition, two participants in our securities lending program have brought suit in Missouri challenging actions taken by us in response to their
withdrawal from the program. We believe that the withdrawals were unauthorized and that we acted in the best interests of all program participants. In February 2010, one of these customers threatened to commence litigation against us. As previously disclosed, we have also been responding to inquiries from the SEC in connection with our cash collateral pools.
The Attorney General of the State of California has commenced an action under the California False Claims Act and California Business and Professional Code related to services State Street provides to California state pension plans. The California Attorney General asserts that the pricing of certain foreign exchange transactions for these pension plans was not consistent with the terms of the applicable custody contracts and related disclosures to the plans, and that, as a result, State Street made false claims and engaged in unfair competition. The Attorney General asserts actual damages of $56 million for periods from 2001 to 2007 and seeks additional penalties. A similar action has been commenced in the District of Columbia by an anonymous whistleblower who purports to sue on behalf of DC public pension funds. We provide custody and foreign exchange services to government pension plans in other jurisdictions, and attorneys general from a number of these other jurisdictions, as well as the U.S. Attorney General’s office, have requested information in connection with inquiries into our foreign exchange pricing.
Two related securities class actions against us were commenced between December 2009 and January 2010. In addition, two participants in the State Street Salary Savings Program have filed class action complaints purportedly on behalf of participants and beneficiaries who invested in the program’s State Street stock option. Those complaints were filed in May 2009 and February 2010. The complaints, all of which are pending in federal court in Boston, allege violations of the federal securities laws and ERISA in connection with our foreign exchange trading business, our investment securities portfolio and our asset-backed commercial paper conduits program. In addition, two State Street shareholders have filed a shareholder derivative complaint in Massachusetts state court alleging fiduciary breaches by present and former directors and officers of State Street in connection with the SSgA active fixed-income matters discussed above. We have moved to dismiss the complaint based on the Board of Directors’ consideration and rejection of the shareholders’ original demand letter.
We managed, through SSgA, four common trust funds for which, in our capacity as manager and trustee, we appointed Lehman as prime broker. As of September 15, 2008 (the date two of the Lehman entities involved entered insolvency proceedings), these funds had cash and securities held by Lehman with net asset values of approximately $312 million. Some customers who invested in the funds managed by us brought litigation against us seeking compensation and additional damages, including double or treble damages, for their alleged losses in connection with our prime brokerage arrangements with Lehman’s entities. A total of seven customers were invested in such funds, of which four currently have suits pending against us. Three cases are pending in federal court in Boston and the fourth is pending in Nova Scotia. We have entered into settlements with two customers, one of which was entered into after the customer obtained a €42 million judgment from a Dutch court. At September 15, 2008, the five customers with whom we have not entered into settlement agreements had approximately $180 million invested in the funds at issue.
| ITEM 4. | SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITIES HOLDERS |
None.
| ITEM 4A. | EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT |
The following table sets forth certain information with regard to each of our executive officers as of February 27, 2009.22, 2010.
Name | Age | Position | ||
Ronald E. Logue | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | |||
Joseph L. Hooley | President and Chief Operating Officer | |||
Joseph C. Antonellis | Vice Chairman | |||
Jeffrey N. Carp | Executive Vice President, Chief Legal Officer and Secretary | |||
James J. Malerba | Executive Vice President and Corporate Controller | |||
| ||||
David C. O’Leary | Executive Vice President | |||
James S. Phalen | Executive Vice President | |||
David C. Phelan | Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Assistant Secretary | |||
Scott F. Powers | President and Chief Executive Officer of State Street Global Advisors | |||
David W. Puth | Executive Vice President | |||
Edward J. Resch | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
All executive officers are appointed by the Board of Directors. All officers hold office at the discretion of the Board. There are no family relationships among any of our directors and executive officers.
Mr. Logue joined State Street in 1990 and has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer since 2004. Mr. Logue joined State Street as Senior Vice President and head of investment servicing for U.S. mutual funds and was elected Vice Chairman in 1999. Mr. Logue served as President from 2001 to April 2008 and as Chief Operating Officer from 2000 to April 2008. As previously announced, Mr. Logue will retire on March 1, 2010. Following his retirement, Mr. Logue will serve as non-executive Chairman of the Board of Directors. With re-election at the 2010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, Mr. Logue plans to serve in that role until he retires as a director on January 1, 2011.
Mr. Hooley joined State Street in 1986 and has served as President and Chief Operating Officer since April 2008. From 2002 to April 2008, Mr. Hooley served as Executive Vice President and head of Investor Services and, in 2006, was appointed Vice Chairman and Global Head of Investment Servicing and Investment Research and Trading. Mr. Hooley was elected to serve on the Board of Directors effective October 22, 2009. As previously announced, Mr. Hooley will serve as President and Chief Executive Officer upon Mr. Logue’s retirement on March 1, 2010.
Mr. Antonellis joined State Street in 1991. In 2003, he was named head of Information Technology and Global Securities Services. In 2006, he was appointed Vice Chairman with additional responsibility as head of Investor Services in North America and Global Investment Manager Outsourcing Services. Beginning on March 1, 2010, Mr. Antonellis will serve as head of all Europe and Asia/Pacific Global Services and Global Markets businesses.
Mr. Carp joined State Street in 2006 as Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer. In 2006, he was also appointed Secretary. From 2004 to 2005, Mr. Carp served as executive vice president and general counsel of Massachusetts Financial Services, an investment management and research company. From 1989 until 2004, Mr. Carp was a senior partner at the law firm of Hale and Dorr LLP, where he was an attorney since 1982. Beginning in February 2010, Mr. Carp began serving as the interim Chief Risk Officer.
Mr. Malerba joined State Street in 2004 as Deputy Corporate Controller. In 2006, he was appointed Corporate Controller. Prior to joining State Street, he served as Deputy Controller at FleetBoston Financial Corporation from 2000 and continued in that role after the merger with Bank of America Corporation in 2004.
Ms. Miskovic became a State Street executive officer in 2008 and serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Risk Officer responsible for leading State Street’s risk management function globally. Before being appointed to this role, Ms. Miskovic served on State Street’s Board of Directors from 2006 until April 2008, and was Chairman of Eurasia Group, a global political risk advisory and consulting firm based in New York, from 2005 until November 2007, also serving as Chief Operating Officer of Eurasia from 2003 until 2005.
Mr. O’Leary joined State Street in 2005 as Executive Vice President and head of Global Human Resources. In 2004, he served as a senior advisor to Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation, a global financial services company, after serving as Managing Director from 1990 to 2003 and Global Head of Human Resources from 1988 to 2003. Beginning on March 1, 2010, Mr. O’Leary will serve as Chief Administrative Officer.
Mr. James Phalen joined State Street in 1992. As of 2003, he served as Executive Vice President of State Street and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CitiStreet, a global benefits provider and retirement plan record keeper. In February 2005, he was appointed head of Investor Services in North America. In 2006, he was appointed head of international operations for Investment Servicing and Investment Research and Trading, based in Europe. From January 2008 until May 2008, he served on an interim basis as President and Chief Executive Officer of State Street Global Advisors. Beginning on March 1, 2010, Mr. Phalen will serve as head of Global Operations, Technology and Product Development.
Mr. David Phelan joined State Street in 2006 as Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Assistant Secretary. From 1995 until 2006, he was a senior partner at the law firm of Hale and Dorr LLP (and, following a merger, of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP), where he was an attorney since 1993.
Mr. Powers joined State Street in May 2008 as President and Chief Executive Officer of State Street Global Advisors. Prior to joining State Street, Mr. Powers served as Chief Executive Officer of Old Mutual US, the U.S. operating unit of London-based Old Mutual plc, an international savings and wealth management company, from September 2001 through April 2008.
Mr. Puth joined State Street in August 2008 as Executive Vice President and head of State Street’s Securities Finance, Global Markets and Investment Research businesses. Prior to joining State Street, Mr. Puth was the President of the Eriska Group, a risk management advisory firm that he founded in 2007. Prior to that time, Mr. Puth was with JPMorgan Chase and heritage corporations from 1988 where he was a Managing Director and a member of the bank’s Executive Committee.
Mr. Resch joined State Street in 2002 as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. He also served as Treasurer from 2006 until January 2008.
In addition, effective March 1, 2010, each of the following individuals will also begin serving as executive officers of State Street.
John L. Klinck, Jr., age 46, will, beginning on March 1, 2010, serve as Executive Vice President and global head of Corporate Development and Global Relationship Management. Presently, Mr. Klinck is Executive Vice President and global head of Alternative Investment Solutions, a role in which he has served since 2006, when he joined State Street. Prior to joining State Street, Mr. Klinck was with Mellon Financial Corporation, a global financial services company, from 1997 to 2006. During that time, he served as vice chairman and president of its Investment Manager Solutions group and before that as chairman for Mellon Europe, where he was responsible for the company’s investor services business in the region.
Alison A. Quirk, age 48, will, beginning on March 1, 2010, serve as Executive Vice President and head of Global Human Resources. Presently, Ms. Quirk is Executive Vice President, Global Human Resources and has held various senior roles in that group since she joined State Street in 2002.
Michael F. Rogers, age 52, will, beginning on March 1, 2010, serve as Executive Vice President and head of Global Services, including alternative investment solutions, for all of the Americas. Presently, Mr. Rogers is Executive Vice President and head of the Relationship Management group, a role which he has held since 2009. From State Street’s acquisition of Investors Financial Services Corp. in July 2007 to 2009, Mr. Rogers headed the post-acquisition Investors Financial Services Corp. business and its integration into State Street. Before joining State Street at the time of the acquisition, Mr. Rogers spent 27 years at Investors Financial Services Corp. in various capacities, most recently as President beginning in 2001.
PART II
| ITEM 5. | MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES |
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol STT. There were 4,2414,079 shareholders of record at Decemberas of January 31, 2008.2010. Information concerning the market prices of, and dividends on, our common stock during the past two years is included in this Form 10-K under Item 8, under the caption “Quarterly Summarized Financial Information.”
In January 2008, under anAdditional information about our common stock, including existing authorization by our Board of Directors we repurchased 552,000 sharesauthorization with respect to purchases by us of our common stock in connection with a $1 billion accelerated share repurchase program that concluded on January 18, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, approximately 13,245,000 shares remained available for future purchase under the Board authorization. We generally employ third-party broker/dealers to acquire shares on the open market in connection with our common stock purchase program.
As a result of our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program, we are not currently permitted to repurchase our common stock without Treasury’s consent. Additional information about this restriction is provided in the “Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and in note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
Additional information about our common stock, and other equity securities is provided in the “Capital—Regulatory Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, included under Item 7, and in note 1312 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
As a bank holding company, the parent company is a legal entity separate and distinct from its principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank, and its non-banking subsidiaries. The right of the parent company to participate as a shareholder in any distribution of assets of State Street Bank upon its liquidation, reorganization or otherwise is subject to the prior claims by creditors of State Street Bank, including obligations for federal funds purchased and securities sold under repurchase agreements and deposit liabilities. Payment of dividends by State Street Bank is subject to the provisions of Massachusetts banking law, which provide that dividends may be paid out of net profits provided (i) capital stock and surplus remain unimpaired, (ii) dividend and retirement fund requirements of any preferred stock have been met, (iii) surplus equals or exceeds capital stock, and (iv) losses and bad debts, as defined, in excess of reserves specifically established for such losses and bad debts, have been deducted from net profits.
Under the Federal Reserve Act and Massachusetts state law, regulatory approval of the Federal Reserve and the Massachusetts Division of Banks would be required if dividends declared by State Street Bank in any year exceeded the total of its net profits for that year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years, less any required transfers to surplus. Information about dividends from the parent company and from our subsidiary banks is provided in the “Capital—Regulatory Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, included under Item 7, and in note 1615 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. Future dividend payments of State Street Bank and other non-banking subsidiaries cannot be determined at this time.
As a result of our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program, we are not currently permitted, without Treasury’s consent, to increase the quarterly dividend per share on our common stock above $0.24 per share. Additional information about this restriction is provided in the “Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, and in note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. In February 2009, in light of the impact of the continued disruption in the global capital markets experienced since the middle of 2007, and as part of a plan to strengthen our tangible common equity, we announced a temporary reduction of the quarterly dividend on our common stock to $0.01 per share.
SHAREHOLDER RETURN PERFORMANCE PRESENTATION
The graph presented below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on State Street’s common stock to the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index for the five fiscal years which commenced January 1, 20042005 and ended December 31, 2008.2009. The cumulative total shareholder return assumes the investment of $100 in State Street common stock and in each index on December 31, 2003,2004, and also assumes reinvestment of dividends. The S&P Financial Index is a publicly available measure of 8178 of the Standard & Poor’s 500 companies, representing 2927 diversified financial services companies, 16 banking companies, 2120 insurance companies and 15 real estate companies.
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Shareholder Return
| 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | |||||||||||||
State Street Corporation | $ | 100 | $ | 96 | $ | 109 | $ | 135 | $ | 164 | $ | 81 | ||||||
S&P 500 Index | 100 | 111 | 116 | 135 | 142 | 90 | ||||||||||||
S&P Financial Index | 100 | 111 | 118 | 141 | 115 | 51 | ||||||||||||
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | ||||||||||||
State Street Corporation | $ | 100 | $ | 115 | $ | 141 | $ | 172 | $85 | $ | 94 | ||||||
S&P 500 Index | 100 | 105 | 121 | 128 | 81 | 102 | |||||||||||
S&P Financial Index | 100 | 107 | 127 | 103 | 46 | 54 | |||||||||||
| ITEM 6. | SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA |
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts or where otherwise noted)
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31: | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | |||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | $ | 5,186 | $ | 4,553 | $ | 4,050 | ||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 907 | 859 | |||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | (18 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | (3 | ) | 24 | ||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of Private Asset Management business, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | 16 | — | |||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | 5,473 | 4,951 | |||||||||||||||
Expenses: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 6,780 | 5,768 | 4,540 | 4,041 | 3,676 | |||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net(1) | — | 467 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | 450 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | 306 | — | — | — | 21 | |||||||||||||||
Provision for indemnification exposure | 200 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Merger, integration and divestiture costs | 115 | 198 | — | — | 62 | |||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | 4,041 | 3,759 | |||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense | 2,842 | 1,903 | 1,771 | 1,432 | 1,192 | |||||||||||||||
Income tax expense from continuing operations | 1,031 | 642 | 675 | 487 | 394 | |||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations | 1,811 | 1,261 | 1,096 | 945 | 798 | |||||||||||||||
Income (Loss) from discontinued operations | — | — | 10 | (107 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | $ | 838 | $ | 798 | ||||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | $ | 838 | $ | 798 | ||||||||||
PER COMMON SHARE: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Basic earnings: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.31 | $ | 2.86 | $ | 2.38 | ||||||||||
Net income | 4.33 | 3.50 | 3.34 | 2.53 | 2.38 | |||||||||||||||
Diluted earnings: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.26 | 2.82 | 2.35 | |||||||||||||||
Net income | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | 2.50 | 2.35 | |||||||||||||||
Cash dividends declared | .95 | .88 | .80 | .72 | .64 | |||||||||||||||
Closing market price (at year end) | 39.33 | 81.20 | 67.44 | 55.44 | 49.12 | |||||||||||||||
AT YEAR END: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities | $ | 76,017 | $ | 74,559 | $ | 64,992 | $ | 59,870 | $ | 37,571 | ||||||||||
Total assets | 173,631 | 142,543 | 107,353 | 97,968 | 94,040 | |||||||||||||||
Deposits | 112,225 | 95,789 | 65,646 | 59,646 | 55,129 | |||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,419 | 3,636 | 2,616 | 2,659 | 2,458 | |||||||||||||||
Total shareholders’ equity | 12,774 | 11,299 | 7,252 | 6,367 | 6,159 | |||||||||||||||
Assets under custody (in billions) | 12,041 | 15,299 | 11,854 | 10,121 | 9,497 | |||||||||||||||
Assets under management (in billions) | 1,444 | 1,979 | 1,749 | 1,441 | 1,354 | |||||||||||||||
Number of employees | 28,475 | 27,110 | 21,700 | 20,965 | 19,668 | |||||||||||||||
RATIOS: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | 16.2 | % | 15.3 | % | 13.3 | % | ||||||||||
Return on average assets | 1.11 | 1.02 | 1.03 | .95 | .84 | |||||||||||||||
Common dividend payout | 22.4 | 25.2 | 24.2 | 25.3 | 26.9 | |||||||||||||||
Net income: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity | 14.8 | 13.4 | 16.4 | 13.6 | 13.3 | |||||||||||||||
Return on average assets | 1.11 | 1.02 | 1.04 | .84 | .84 | |||||||||||||||
Common dividend payout | 22.4 | 25.2 | 24.0 | 28.5 | 26.9 | |||||||||||||||
Average common equity to average total assets | 7.5 | 7.6 | 6.3 | 6.2 | 6.3 | |||||||||||||||
Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 2.08 | 1.71 | 1.25 | 1.08 | 1.08 | |||||||||||||||
Tier 1 risk-based capital | 20.3 | 11.2 | 13.7 | 11.7 | 13.3 | |||||||||||||||
Total risk-based capital | 21.6 | 12.7 | 15.9 | 14.0 | 14.7 | |||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio | 7.8 | 5.3 | 5.8 | 5.6 | 5.5 | |||||||||||||||
Tangible common equity to adjusted tangible assets | 4.6 | 3.9 | 5.1 | 4.8 | 4.5 | |||||||||||||||
| FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31: | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 5,935 | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | $ | 5,186 | $ | 4,553 | ||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 907 | |||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | (3 | ) | ||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | 350 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of Private Asset Management business, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | — | 16 | |||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 8,640 | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | 5,473 | |||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 149 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Expenses: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 5,667 | 6,780 | 5,768 | 4,540 | 4,041 | |||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | 250 | — | 467 | (1) | — | — | ||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | — | 450 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | 306 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Provision for indemnification obligation | — | 200 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | 49 | 115 | 198 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 5,966 | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | 4,041 | |||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense and extraordinary loss | 2,525 | 2,842 | 1,903 | 1,771 | 1,432 | |||||||||||||||
Income tax expense from continuing operations | 722 | 1,031 | 642 | 675 | 487 | |||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before extraordinary loss | 1,803 | 1,811 | 1,261 | 1,096 | 945 | |||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss, net of taxes | (3,684 | ) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||
Income (Loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes | — | — | — | 10 | (107 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (1,881 | ) | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | $ | 838 | |||||||||
Adjustments to net income (loss)(2) | (163 | ) | (22 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders | $ | 1,640 | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | $ | 838 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders | $ | (2,044 | ) | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | $ | 838 | |||||||||
PER COMMON SHARE: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Basic earnings before extraordinary loss: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | $ | 3.50 | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | $ | 3.30 | $ | 2.86 | ||||||||||
Net income | 3.50 | 4.32 | 3.49 | 3.33 | 2.53 | |||||||||||||||
Basic earnings: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | $ | (4.32 | ) | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | $ | 3.30 | $ | 2.86 | |||||||||
Net income (loss) | (4.32 | ) | 4.32 | 3.49 | 3.33 | 2.53 | ||||||||||||||
Diluted earnings before extraordinary loss: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | $ | 3.46 | $ | 4.30 | $ | 3.45 | $ | 3.26 | $ | 2.82 | ||||||||||
Net income | 3.46 | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | 2.50 | |||||||||||||||
Diluted earnings: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations | $ | (4.31 | ) | $ | 4.30 | $ | 3.45 | $ | 3.26 | $ | 2.82 | |||||||||
Net income (loss) | (4.31 | ) | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | 2.50 | ||||||||||||||
Cash dividends declared | .04 | .95 | .88 | .80 | .72 | |||||||||||||||
Closing market price (at year end) | 43.54 | 39.33 | 81.20 | 67.44 | 55.44 | |||||||||||||||
AT YEAR END: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities | $ | 93,576 | $ | 76,017 | $ | 74,559 | $ | 64,992 | $ | 59,870 | ||||||||||
Total assets | 157,946 | 173,631 | 142,543 | 107,353 | 97,968 | |||||||||||||||
Deposits | 90,062 | 112,225 | 95,789 | 65,646 | 59,646 | |||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 8,838 | 4,419 | 3,636 | 2,616 | 2,659 | |||||||||||||||
Total shareholders’ equity | 14,491 | 12,774 | 11,299 | 7,252 | 6,367 | |||||||||||||||
Assets under custody and administration (in billions) | 18,795 | 15,907 | 20,213 | 15,648 | 13,207 | |||||||||||||||
Assets under management (in billions) | 1,911 | 1,444 | 1,979 | 1,749 | 1,441 | |||||||||||||||
Number of employees | 27,310 | 28,475 | 27,110 | 21,700 | 20,965 | |||||||||||||||
RATIOS: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Continuing operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity before extraordinary loss | 13.2 | % | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | 16.2 | % | 15.3 | % | ||||||||||
Return on average assets before extraordinary loss | 1.12 | 1.11 | 1.02 | 1.03 | .95 | |||||||||||||||
Common dividend payout before extraordinary loss | 1.17 | 22.4 | 25.2 | 24.2 | 25.3 | |||||||||||||||
Net income: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity before extraordinary loss | 13.2 | % | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | 16.4 | % | 13.6 | % | ||||||||||
Return on average assets before extraordinary loss | 1.12 | 1.11 | 1.02 | 1.04 | .84 | |||||||||||||||
Common dividend payout before extraordinary loss | 1.17 | 22.4 | 25.2 | 24.0 | 28.5 | |||||||||||||||
Average common equity to average total assets | 8.5 | 7.5 | 7.6 | 6.3 | 6.2 | |||||||||||||||
Net interest margin, fully taxable-equivalent basis | 2.19 | 2.08 | 1.71 | 1.25 | 1.08 | |||||||||||||||
Tier 1 risk-based capital | 17.7 | 20.3 | 11.2 | 13.7 | 11.7 | |||||||||||||||
Total risk-based capital | 19.1 | 21.6 | 12.7 | 15.9 | 14.0 | |||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio | 8.5 | 7.8 | 5.3 | 5.8 | 5.6 | |||||||||||||||
| (1) | Amount was composed of a provision for legal exposure of $600 million, a reduction of salaries and benefits expense of $141 million, and other expenses of $8 |
| (2) | Adjustments were related to preferred stock issued in connection with the |
| ITEM 7. | MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
GENERAL
State Street Corporation is a financial holding company organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. All references in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis to the parent company are to State Street Corporation. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis to “State Street,” “we,” “us,” “our” or similar terms mean State Street Corporation and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. State Street Bank and Trust Company is referred to as State Street Bank. At December 31, 2008,2009, we had total assets of $173.63$157.95 billion, total deposits of $112.23$90.06 billion, total shareholders’ equity of $12.77$14.49 billion and employed 28,475.27,310. With $12.04$18.79 trillion of assets under custody and $1.44administration and $1.91 trillion of assets under management at year-end 2008,2009, we are a leading specialist in meeting the needs of institutional investors worldwide.
On December 22, 2009, we announced a definitive agreement to acquire the global custody, depository banking, correspondent banking and fund administration businesses of Intesa Sanpaolo, or Intesa, a securities services provider with operations in Italy and Luxembourg, for approximately €1.28 billion in a cash transaction. We also expect to provide additional balance sheet capital of approximately €400 million in cash at closing. Intesa had approximately €343 billion of average assets under custody, and approximately €141 billion of average assets under depository bank services, during the first half of 2009. The U.S. dollar equivalent of these amounts will be determined at closing, and will depend on the currency exchange rate at that time. In January 2010, we entered into derivative contracts to minimize the impact of an adverse change in the currency exchange rate on the U.S. dollar equivalent purchase price. We expect to finance the acquisition with internal liquidity.
The acquisition agreement also includes a long-term investment servicing arrangement with Intesa to service all of its investment management affiliates, including Eurizon Capital, the largest fund manager in Italy with approximately €135 billion of assets under management as of September 30, 2009. We expect to close the acquisition during the second quarter of 2010, subject to regulatory approvals and satisfaction of other closing conditions.
On December 1, 2009, we announced a definitive agreement to acquire Mourant International Finance Administration, or MIFA, in a cash transaction. Headquartered in Jersey in the Channel Islands with approximately $170 billion of assets under administration and operations in locations including Dublin, Singapore and New York, MIFA is a provider of fund administration services, particularly for alternative investments, such as private equity, real estate and hedge funds. We expect to close the acquisition during the first half of 2010, subject to regulatory approvals and satisfaction of other closing conditions.
We report two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management. These lines of business provide a fullbroad range of products and services for our customers, which include mutual funds, collective investment funds and other investment pools, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations, endowments and investment managers. Investment Servicing provides services to support institutional investors, such as custody, product- and participant-level accounting, daily pricing and administration; master trust and master custody; recordkeeping; shareholder services, including mutual fund and collective investment fund shareholder accounting; foreign exchange, brokerage and other trading services; securities finance; deposit and short-term investment facilities; loans and lease financing; investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing; and performance, risk and compliance analytics. Investment Management provides a broad array of services for managing financial assets, such as investment research services and investment management, including passive and active U.S. and non-U.S. equity and fixed-income strategies. For additional information about our lines of business, see the “Line of Business Information” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and note 2423 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. Certain previously reported amounts presented have been reclassified to conform to current period classifications. We
prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S., referred to as GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in the application of certain accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses. Accounting policies that require management to make assumptions that are difficult, subjective or complex about matters that are uncertain and may change in subsequent periods are discussed in more depth in the “Significant Accounting Estimates” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Certain financial information provided in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis, has beenor in other public statements, announcements or reports filed with the SEC, is prepared on both a GAAP basis and ana non-GAAP basis, the latter of which we refer to as “operating” basis. Management measures and compares certain financial information on an operating basis, as it believes that this presentation supports meaningful comparisons from period to period and the analysis of comparable financial trends with respect to State Street’s normal ongoing business operations. Management believes that operating-basis financial information, which reports revenue from non-taxable sources on a fully taxable-equivalent basis and excludes the impact of revenue and expenses outside of the normal course of our business, facilitates an investor’s understanding and analysis of State Street’s underlying financial performance and trends in addition to financial information prepared in accordance with GAAP.
This Management’s Discussion and Analysis contains statements that are considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations about revenue and market growth, acquisitions and divestitures, new technologies, services and opportunities, earnings and other factors. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially. We undertake no obligation to revise the forward-looking statements contained in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis to reflect events after the
date time we file this Form 10-K with the SEC. Additional information about forward-looking statements and related risks and uncertainties is included in the Risk Factors section of this Form 10-Kincluded under Item 1A.
OVERVIEW OF FINANCIAL RESULTS
| Years ended December 31, | 2008(1) | 2007(2) | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007(1) | ||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | $ | 5,186 | $ | 5,935 | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | ||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | ||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Gain on CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | — | — | 350 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | 8,640 | 10,693 | 8,336 | ||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 149 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 6,780 | 5,768 | 4,540 | 5,667 | 6,780 | 5,768 | ||||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | — | 467 | — | 250 | — | 467 | (2) | |||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | 450 | — | — | — | 450 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | 306 | — | — | — | 306 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Provision for indemnification exposure | 200 | — | — | — | 200 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | 115 | 198 | — | 49 | 115 | 198 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | 5,966 | 7,851 | 6,433 | ||||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense | 2,842 | 1,903 | 1,771 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense from continuing operations | 1,031 | 642 | 675 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense and extraordinary loss | 2,525 | 2,842 | 1,903 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense | 722 | 1,031 | 642 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations | 1,811 | 1,261 | 1,096 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income from discontinued operations | — | — | 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income before extraordinary loss | 1,803 | 1,811 | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss, net of taxes | (3,684 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (1,881 | ) | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||||
Adjustments to net income (loss)(3) | (163 | ) | (22 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share from continuing operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders | $ | 1,640 | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders | $ | (2,044 | ) | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share before extraordinary loss: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.31 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | ||||||||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.26 | 3.46 | 4.30 | 3.45 | ||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings (Loss) per common share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.34 | $ | (4.32 | ) | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | |||||||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | (4.31 | ) | 4.30 | 3.45 | |||||||||||||||||
Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | 413,182 | 360,675 | 331,350 | 470,602 | 413,182 | 360,675 | ||||||||||||||||||
Diluted | 416,100 | 365,488 | 335,732 | 474,003 | 416,100 | 365,488 | ||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity from continuing operations | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | 16.2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity | 14.8 | 13.4 | 16.4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity before extraordinary loss(4) | 13.2 | % | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Financial results for |
Amount was composed of a provision for legal exposure of $600 million, a reduction of salaries and benefits expense of $141 million, and other expenses of $8 million; refer to the |
| (3) | Adjustments were related to preferred stock issued in connection with the U.S. Treasury’s TARP program in 2008 and redeemed in 2009. |
| (4) | For 2009, return on common shareholders’ equity was determined by dividing net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders by average common shareholders’ equity for the year. |
Financial Highlights
For 2008,2009, we recorded a net incomeloss available to common shareholders of $1.79$2.04 billion, or $4.30$4.31 per diluted share. This included income before the extraordinary loss of $1.64 billion, or $3.46 per diluted share, compared to $1.26and an after-tax extraordinary loss of $3.68 billion, or $3.45$7.77 per diluted share, for 2007. Total revenue increased 28%related to the consolidation of the asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer onto our balance sheet in May 2009. Net income available to common shareholders before the extraordinary loss decreased 8% to $1.64 billion compared to $1.79 billion in 2008, and associated diluted earnings per common share decreased 20% to $3.46 per share from 2007, and return$4.30 per share in 2008. Return on common equity before the extraordinary loss was 14.8%13.2% compared to 13.4%14.8% for 2007.2008.
Total revenue for 2008 grew 28% from 2007. Totaldeclined 19% compared to 2008. A 23% decline in total fee revenue which grew 17%, reflected growth in servicing fees and trading services revenue, up 11% and 27%, respectively, compared to 2007, and securities finance revenue, up 81%. Generally, servicing fees benefited from the inclusion of the acquired Investors
Financial business for the full year and net new business,2008 levels was partly offset by declinesan increase in equity market valuations. Management fees declined 10%net gains from 2007, primarily as a result of declines in equity market valuations and lower performance fees. Trading services revenue grew primarily as a result of higher levels of volatility and the contribution of the acquired Investors Financial business (with respect to foreign exchange revenue), and the inclusion of revenue from the acquired Currenex business (with respect to brokerage and other fees), both for a full year. Securities finance revenue benefited primarily from wider credit spreads across all lending programs, as well as revenue contributed by the acquired Investors Financial business. Processing fees and other revenue were flat with 2007 levels.investment securities. The growthdecline in total revenue also reflected athe absence of the $350 million gain from the sale of our joint venture interest in CitiStreet in July 2008.
Servicing and management fees were down 13% and 20%, respectively, from 2008, mainly due to the impact of declines in equity market valuations, partly offset by the impact of new business on current-period revenue. Trading services revenue declined 25% to $1.09 billion from $1.47 billion, primarily as a result of lower foreign exchange trading volumes, offset by an increase in brokerage fees and other trading services revenue from higher transitions and electronic trading revenues attributable to higher volumes. Securities finance revenue was down 54% to $570 million from $1.23 billion, as a result of lower spreads and lending volumes. Processing fees and other revenue decreased 38% to $171 million from $277 million due to lower product-related revenue.
Net interest revenue increased 53%decreased 3% to $2.56 billion compared to 2007,$2.65 billion for 2008, or 54%2% on a fully taxable-equivalent basis ($2,754 million2.69 billion compared to $1,788 million,$2.75 billion, reflecting increases from tax-equivalent adjustments of $126 million and $104 million, and $58 million, respectively), with a related increase in net interest margin of 37 basis points.. These increasesdecreases were primarily due to the impact of Federal Reserve reductionslower levels of customer deposits and lower interest-rate spreads, largely offset by $621 million of discount accretion recorded in connection with the conduit assets added to our balance sheet in May 2009. Net interest rates duringmargin increased 11 basis points, from 2.08% in 2008 and increasesto 2.19% in customer deposits.2009.
Total expenses of $5.97 billion decreased 24% from 2008, and included merger and integration costs of $49 million associated with the July 2007 Investors Financial acquisition and an additional provision of $250 million associated with the reserve for litigation exposure related to SSgA fixed-income strategies, more fully discussed below. Total expenses in 2009 compared to $7.85 billion increased 22% from 2007, partly reflective ofin 2008, which included the aggregate $1.07 billion of the following items:following: merger and integration costs associated with the July 2007 Investors Financial acquisition ($115 million); thea charge associated with thea cash infusion into the SSgA investment management accounts ($450 million); the restructuring charges associated with the reduction in workforce and other cost initiatives ($306 million); and thea provision for estimated net exposure on an indemnification obligation associated with collateralized repurchase agreements ($200 million). This comparesExpenses from operations of $5.67 billion ($5.97 billion net of $299 million delineated above) decreased 16% compared to the aggregate $665 million of the following items: merger and integration costs associated with Investors Financial ($198 million), and a net charge related to certain active fixed-income strategies managed by State Street Global Advisors, or SSgA ($467 million) recorded in 2007. Expenses2008 expenses from operations of $6.78 billion ($7.85 billion net of $1.07 billion) increased 17.5% compared to 2007 expenses from operationsbillion delineated above), mainly as a result of $5.77 billion ($6.43 billion net of $665 million). The increase resulted from the inclusion of expenses of the acquired Investors Financial business for full-year 2008 compared to six months in 2007, increasesa reduction in salaries and benefits expenses, higher levels of professional fees and securities processing costs, and new fees and assessments paid to banking regulators.
For 2008,expense associated with our non-U.S. revenue was approximately 35% of our total revenue, compared to 41% for 2007 and 43% for 2006. The decrease compared to 2007 was primarily the result of the inclusion of revenue from the acquired Investors Financial business for the full year, compared to six months for 2007,previously announced workforce reduction as well as higher levels of domestic revenue growth.lower accruals for cash incentive compensation.
ResultsOur financial results for 2008 included2009 reflected the following significant items outside of the ordinary course of our business.following:
During the third and fourth quarters of 2008,Effective May 15, 2009, we participatedelected to take action that resulted in the Federal Reserve’s AMLF,consolidation onto our balance sheet, for financial reporting purposes, of all of the assets and earned $68liabilities of the four third-party-owned, special purpose, multi-seller asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer, and recorded a related after-tax extraordinary loss of approximately $3.68 billion in our consolidated statement of income (see note 11);
In May 2009, we completed two public securities offerings. First, we issued approximately 58.97 million shares of our common stock at an offering price of $39 per share, and received aggregate proceeds from the offering, net of underwriting commissions and related offering costs, of approximately $2.23 billion. Second, we issued $500 million of pre-tax net4.30% fixed-rate senior unsecured notes due 2014. We completed these offerings primarily in connection with our intention to conclude our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s TARP Capital Purchase Program, with the remaining proceeds intended for general corporate purposes;
In June 2009, we redeemed the $2 billion preferred stock portion of the equity investment issued to Treasury in October 2008 under the TARP Capital Purchase Program, reducing retained earnings, and as a result earnings available to common shareholders, by approximately $106 million for 2009, by accelerating the accretion of the remaining discount on the preferred stock into 2009. In July 2009, we repurchased the related warrant to purchase shares of our common stock from Treasury for $60 million, concluding our participation in the program (see note 12);
We recorded interest revenue related to this programof $621 million in 2009 associated with discount accretion on investment securities added in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation (see the “Net Interest Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information)and note 11);
During the third quarter of 2008,2009, we recorded an additional provision for legal exposure of $250 million, to increase the IRS issued a standard settlement offerreserve initially established in 2007 associated with certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA. We settled regulatory inquiries by the SEC, the Massachusetts Secretary of State and the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office related to taxpayersthis exposure in February 2010, and the reserve remaining at that have entered into SILO leveraged leases. We did not accepttime was sufficient to cover the offer and continue to pursue our appeal rights within the IRS. In considerationcost of the terms of the offersettlements (see notes 10 and the context in which it was issued, we revised our projection of the timing and amount of tax cash flows from the leases and recalculated the recognition of lease-related revenue over the leases’ terms from their inception. This recalculation resulted in a cumulative reduction of net interest revenue of $98 million and the accrual of income tax expense of $39 million during 2008 (see the “Net Interest Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information);
We completed the sale of our 50% joint venture interest in CitiStreet in July 2008, and recognized a $350 million pre-tax gain, which was net of exit and other costs associated with the sale (see the “Consolidated Results of Operations—Total Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information);
In October 2008, in connection with SSgA investment management products that rely upon contractual arrangements with wrap providers, we provided support to these accounts by purchasing approximately $2.49 billion of asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities from them at then current market prices and
|
During the fourth quarter of 2008, we recorded restructuring charges of $306 million associated with a reduction in our global workforce and other cost initiatives (see the “Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information);
During the third quarter of 2008, we recorded a $200 million provision to recognize our estimated net exposure related to an indemnification obligation associated with collateralized repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (see the “Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information)20); and
We recorded $115provisions for loan losses of $149 million, of mergerwhich $124 million related to commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnification obligations, reflecting management’s change in expectations of future principal and integration costs associatedinterest cash flows with our July 2007 acquisition of Investors Financial (see the “Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for additional information).
In February 2009, in lightrespect to certain of the impact of the continued disruption in the global capital markets experienced since the middle of 2007, which is described in more detail in the following section, we announced a series of actions to strengthen our tangible common equity, or TCE, ratio. We define the TCE ratio as the relationship of our consolidated common shareholders’ equity to our consolidated total assets, with both amounts reduced by goodwill and other intangible assets net of related deferred taxes.
For 2009, our plan to improve our TCE ratio includes temporarily reducing our quarterly dividend on our common stock to $0.01 per share, the reinvestment of investment securities paying down and maturing during 2009 into interest-bearing deposits with U.S. and non-U.S. central banks, and a resulting reduction in the size of our consolidated balance sheet. We expect that these actions will produce growth in organic capital but will reduce our net interest margin for 2009 by approximately 13% to 18% compared to 2008.
IMPACT OF SECURITIES MARKETS DISRUPTION AND GOVERNMENT ACTIONS
Over the past eighteen months, the global financial markets have experienced significant disruption, including substantial volatility, limited trading activity in some markets and a widespread lack of liquidity. These events, and the potential for increased and continuing disruption, have significantly diminished overall confidence in the financial markets and in financial institutions, and have further worsened liquidity and pricing issues within the fixed-income securities markets. In the second half of 2008, these conditions resulted in the bankruptcy or acquisition of, or significant government assistance to, a number of major domestic and international financial institutions. Overall, this disruption increased the uncertainty and unpredictability we face in our business and affected our results of operations and our financial condition.
The significant declines in equity and other financial markets globally during 2008 adversely affected our servicing and management fee revenues, which are based, in part, on the value of assets under custody or management. Our trading services revenue benefitted from market volatility and the resulting increases in the volumes of transactions that we execute for our customers. Our securities finance revenue was favorably affected by wider spreads, although this business experienced a decline in lending due to the reduction or suspension of participation by some institutional investors in our securities lending program.
During the third and fourth quarters of 2008, in response to the above-described market conditions, federal government and bank regulatory agencies, particularly the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the FDIC, working in cooperation with foreign governments and other central banks, instituted a variety of programs designed to restore confidence in the financial markets, strengthen financial institutions and encourage the flow of credit and liquidity in support of the U.S. economy. The programs in which State Street had significant participation or involvement are described below.
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility
This facility, referred to as the AMLF, was instituted by the Federal Reserve in September 2008. It is designed to restore liquidity in the asset-backed commercial paper markets and assist money market mutual funds in meeting
investor redemption requests. The Federal Reserve extends non-recourse loans to eligible banking organizations to finance their purchase of high-quality asset-backed commercial paper from eligible money market funds or other eligible entities. The facility, originally intended to expire on January 30, 2009, was extended to October 30, 2009.
We began our participation in the AMLF in September 2008, and were one of the first institutions to be fully operational for mutual fund customers desiring to utilize the facility. For 2008, we earned net interest revenue associated with this facility of approximately $68 million. Additional information about the impact of our participation in the AMLF on our consolidated financial statements is provided in the “Consolidated Results of Operations—Net Interest Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in(see note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.4).
Mortgage-Backed Securities Purchase Program
The program, announced by the U.S. Treasury in September 2008, is designed to broaden access to mortgage funding for current and prospective homeowners, as well as to promote market stability through the Treasury’s purchase of new mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The program is intended to expire on December 31, 2009. In October 2008, SSgA was one of two asset managers appointed as an agent to manage assets purchased under the program.
Temporary Guarantee Program for Money Market Funds
The U.S. Treasury instituted the Temporary Guarantee Program for Money Market Funds in September 2008. The program is designed to address temporary dislocations in credit markets. The program temporarily guarantees the share price of any publicly-offered, eligible money market mutual fund that applies for and pays a fee to participate in the program. The program provides coverage to shareholders up to amounts that they held in participating money market funds as of the close of business on September 19, 2008. The program, originally intended to expire on December 29, 2008, has been extended through April 30, 2009. Three of SSgA’s money market funds are participating in the program.
Commercial Paper Funding Facility
The facility, referred to as the CPFF, was instituted by the Federal Reserve and became operational in October 2008. The facility is designed to complement the Federal Reserve’s existing credit facilities to help provide liquidity to term funding markets. It provides a liquidity back-stop to U.S. issuers of commercial paper through a special purpose vehicle that purchases three-month unsecured and asset-backed commercial paper directly from eligible issuers. State Street was appointed CPFF custodian and administrator in October 2008. During the fourth quarter of 2008, we paid a registration fee of approximately $23 million to the Federal Reserve to participate in the facility. The State Street-administered asset-backed commercial paper conduits, as of December 31, 2008, had sold $5.70 billion of commercial paper to the CPFF. The CPFF, originally intended to expire on April 30, 2009, was extended to October 30, 2009.
Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program
The program was announced by the FDIC in October 2008, and final rules were issued in November and December 2008. The program is designed to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the U.S. banking system (1) by guaranteeing newly issued senior unsecured debt of banks, thrifts and certain holding companies, and (2) by providing unlimited insurance protection for non-interest bearing deposit transactions accounts at FDIC-insured institutions through December 31, 2009. The program provides a 100% guarantee for unsecured senior debt issued through June 30, 2009 by banks, thrifts, bank holding companies, financial holding companies and thrift holding companies. The guarantee will exist for three years. In December 2008, we paid aggregate fees of approximately $5 million to participate in both features of this program. Additional information about the FDIC’s guarantee of certain of our senior unsecured debt is provided in the “Liquidity” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis included in this Form 10-K under Item 7.
Money Market Investor Funding Facility
This program, instituted by the Federal Reserve, became operational in November 2008. The program is designed to provide liquidity to eligible U.S. money market investors. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York will provide up to $600 billion of senior secured funding to a series of private-sector special purpose vehicles to finance the purchase of eligible assets from eligible investors. The special purpose vehicles will commence a wind-down process on October 30, 2009 unless the Federal Reserve further extends the facility. State Street facilitated the implementation and extension of this program, working with the Federal Reserve and the program administrator.
TARP Capital Purchase Program
State Street was selected by Treasury as one of the nine financial institutions to participate in the launch of this program, in connection with actions taken by the U.S. government designed to protect the U.S. economy, strengthen public confidence in financial institutions and foster the strong functioning of credit markets. In October 2008, State Street agreed to, and received, a $2 billion investment (based on a percentage of its consolidated risk-weighted assets) through the issuance of 20,000 shares of its Series B preferred stock and a related warrant to purchase approximately 5.6 million shares of its common stock to Treasury. Information about the impact of our participation in the capital purchase program on our consolidated financial statements is provided in the “Capital” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in note 13 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This section discusses our consolidated results of operations for 20082009 compared to 2007,2008, and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. A comparison of consolidated results of operations for 20072008 with those for 20062007 is provided in the “Comparison of 20072008 and 2006—Overview of Consolidated Results of Operations”2007” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
TOTAL REVENUE
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | Change 2007-2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | % Change 2008-2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | 11 | % | $ | 3,276 | $3,745 | $ | 3,388 | (13 | )% | |||||||||||||
Management fees | 1,028 | 1,141 | 943 | (10 | ) | 824 | 1,028 | 1,141 | (20 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | 27 | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | (25 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 1,230 | 681 | 386 | 81 | 570 | 1,230 | 681 | (54 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 277 | 271 | 272 | 2 | 171 | 277 | 271 | (38 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 7,747 | 6,633 | 5,186 | 17 | 5,935 | 7,747 | 6,633 | (23 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest revenue | 4,879 | 5,212 | 4,324 | (6 | ) | 3,286 | 4,879 | 5,212 | (33 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense | 2,229 | 3,482 | 3,214 | (36 | ) | 722 | 2,229 | 3,482 | (68 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 53 | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | (3 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue after provision for loan losses | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | — | — | 350 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | $ | 10,693 | $ | 8,336 | $ | 6,311 | 28 | $ | 8,640 | $ | 10,693 | $ | 8,336 | (19 | ) | |||||||||||||
Our broad range of services generates fee revenue and net interest revenue. Fee revenue generated by our investment servicing and investment management businesses is augmented by securities finance, trading services and other processing fee and other revenue. We earn net interest revenue from customers’ deposits and short-term investment activities, by providing deposit services and short-term investment vehicles, such as repurchase agreements and commercial paper, to meet customers’ needs for high-grade liquid investments, and investing these sources of funds and additional borrowings in assets yielding a higher rate.
Fee Revenue
Servicing and management fees collectively comprisedcomposed approximately 62%69% of our total fee revenue for 20082009 and 68%62% for 2007.2008. These fees are a function of several factors, including the mix and volume of assets under custody and administration and assets under management, securities positions held and the volume of portfolio transactions, and the types of products and services used by customers, and are generally affected by changes in worldwide equity and fixed-income valuations.
Generally, servicing fees are affected, in part, by changes in daily average valuations of assets under custody and administration, while management fees are affected by changes in month-end valuations of assets under management. Additional factors, such as the level of transaction volumes, changes in service level, balance credits, customer minimum balances, pricing concessions and other factors, may have a significant effect on servicing fee revenue. Generally, management fee revenue is more sensitive to market valuations than servicing fee revenue. Management fees for enhanced index and actively managed products are generally earned at higher rates than those for passive products. Enhanced index and actively managed products may also includeinvolve performance fees, which amounted to approximately 2% of management fees for 2008 compared to 6% for 2007.fee arrangements. Performance fees are generated when the performance of certain managed funds exceeds benchmarks specified in the management agreements, andagreements. Generally, we experience more volatility with performance fees than with more traditional management fees.
In light of the above, we estimate, assuming all other factors remain constant, that a 10% increase or decrease in worldwide equity values would result in a corresponding change in our total revenue of
approximately 2%. If fixed-income security values were to increase or decrease by 10%, we would anticipate a corresponding change of approximately 1% in our total revenue. We would expect the above-describedforegoing relationships to exist in normalized financial markets. These relationships were not experienced in 2008 or 2009, in light of the significant disruption in the global financial markets. Thosemarkets disruption that began in 2007. These disrupted conditions adversely affected our servicing and management fee revenues for 2008 and 2009, which are based, in part, on the value of assets under custody and administration or assets under management as described earlier in this section. However, during 2008, in general,In addition, our revenues from trading services revenue benefited fromand securities finance during 2009 were adversely affected by a reduction in the significant volatility in the financial markets experienced during 2008 associated with the aforementioned disruption. Even though the market disruption lessened during this year’s third and from related increasesfourth quarters, the impact of market conditions on our total revenue for the year was more significant than we would anticipate in customer transaction volume; our securities finance revenue benefited from wider spreads, in spite of a decline in securities lending volumes caused by reduced or suspended participation by some institutional investors in the program; and our net interest revenue grew as a result of Federal Reserve rate reductions and significant increases in customer deposits. Collectively, these positive trends offset a portion of the market-related impact on certain of our revenue. In addition, the acquired Investors Financial business contributed a full year of revenue in 2008 compared to six months in 2007.normalized markets.
The following table presents selected equity market indices.indices for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008. Daily averages and the averages of month-end indices demonstrate worldwide changes in equity market valuation changesvaluations that affect servicing and management fee revenue, respectively. Year-end indices impactaffect the value of assets under custody and administration and assets under management at those dates. The index names listed in the table and elsewhere in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis are service marks of their respective owners.
INDEX
| Daily Averages of Indices | Average of Month-End Indices | Year-End Indices | Daily Averages of Indices | Average of Month-End Indices | Year-End Indices | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2008 | 2007 | Change | 2008 | 2007 | Change | 2008 | 2007 | Change | 2009 | 2008 | % Change | 2009 | 2008 | % Change | 2009 | 2008 | % Change | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
S&P 500® | 1,220 | 1,477 | (17 | )% | 1,215 | 1,478 | (18 | )% | 903 | 1,468 | (38 | )% | 948 | 1,220 | (22 | )% | 949 | 1,215 | (22 | )% | 1,115 | 903 | 23 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
NASDAQ® | 2,162 | 2,578 | (16 | ) | 2,149 | 2,588 | (17 | ) | 1,577 | 2,652 | (41 | ) | 1,845 | 2,162 | (15 | ) | 1,857 | 2,149 | (14 | ) | 2,269 | 1,577 | 44 | |||||||||||||||||||
MSCI EAFE® | 1,792 | 2,212 | (19 | ) | 1,777 | 2,230 | (20 | ) | 1,237 | 2,253 | (45 | ) | 1,336 | 1,792 | (25 | ) | 1,344 | 1,777 | (24 | ) | 1,581 | 1,237 | 28 | |||||||||||||||||||
FEE REVENUE
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | Change 2007-2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | % Change 2008-2009 | ||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | 11 | % | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | (13 | )% | ||||||||
Management fees(1) | 1,028 | 1,141 | 943 | (10 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Management fees(1) | 824 | 1,028 | 1,141 | (20 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | 27 | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | (25 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 1,230 | 681 | 386 | 81 | 570 | 1,230 | 681 | (54 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 277 | 271 | 272 | 2 | 171 | 277 | 271 | (38 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | $ | 5,186 | 17 | $ | 5,935 | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | (23 | ) | |||||||||
| (1) | Included performance fees of $9 million, $21 million and $72 million for 2009, 2008 and |
Servicing Fees
Servicing fees include fee revenue from U.S. mutual funds, collective investment funds worldwide, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations, endowments, and other investment pools. Products and services include custody; product- and participant-level accounting; daily pricing and administration; recordkeeping; investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing services; master trust and master custody; and performance, risk and compliance analytics.
The growth13% decline in servicing fees from 20072008 primarily resulted from the inclusion of an additional $232 million of servicing fee revenue from the acquired Investors Financial business, an increase of $87 million from the impact of net new business from existing and new customers and higher transaction volumes. Net new business is defined as new business net of lost business. The aggregate increase in servicing fees was partially offset by declines in daily average equity market valuations, and pricing concessions. During 2008, the portion of assets under custody composed of equities, which generally earn higher fees, declined to 42% of total assets under
custody compared to 57% in 2007, reflectingpartly offset by the impact of declines in equity market valuations.new business on current-period revenue. For 2008 and 2007,2009, servicing fees generated from customers outside the U.S. were approximately 41%37% of total servicing fees.fees compared to approximately 41% for 2008.
We are the largest provider of mutual fund custody and accounting services in the United States. We distinguish ourselves from other mutual fund service providers by offering customers a broad array of integrated products and services, including accounting, daily pricing and fund administration. We calculate more than 38%40% of the U.S. mutual fund prices provided to NASDAQ that appear daily inThe Wall Street Journal and other publications with an accuracy rate of 99.9%.
We have a leading position for servicing U.S. tax-exempt assets for corporate and public pension funds. We provide trust and valuation services for more than 5,000 daily-priced portfolios, making us a leader for both monthly and daily valuation services.
We are a leading service provider outside of the U.S. as well. In Germany, we provide Depotbank services for approximately 15%13% of retail and institutional fund assets. In the United Kingdom, we provide custody services for 15%14% of pension fund assets and provide administration services to more than 27%for approximately 16% of mutual fund assets. We service approximately 21% of the hedge fund market and more than $500$650 billion of offshore assets, primarily domiciled in Ireland, Luxembourg and Toronto. We have more than $800 billion in assets under administration in the Asia/Pacific region, and arehold over 85% of the largesttrust assets held by non-domestic trust bankbanks in Japan.that region.
At year-end 2008,2009, our total assets under custody and administration were $12.04$18.79 trillion, compared to $15.30$15.91 trillion a year earlier. The majority of the decreaseincrease compared to 20072008 was primarily the result of declinesincreases in equity market valuations.valuations and a higher level of new business. The value of assets under custody and administration is a broad measure of the relative size of various markets served. Changes in the value of assets under custody and administration do not necessarily result in proportional changes in revenue. Assets under custody and administration consisted of the following at December 31:
ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND ADMINISTRATION
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2007-2008 Annual Growth Rate | 2004-2008 Compound Annual Growth Rate | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2008-2009 Annual Growth Rate | 2005-2009 Compound Annual Growth Rate | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mutual funds | $ | 3,896 | $ | 4,803 | $ | 3,738 | $ | 3,442 | $ | 3,088 | (19 | )% | 6 | % | $ | 4,734 | $ | 4,093 | $ | 5,200 | $ | 4,007 | $ | 3,301 | 16 | % | 9 | % | ||||||||||||||
Collective funds | 2,173 | 3,199 | 1,665 | 1,001 | 911 | (32 | ) | 24 | 3,580 | 2,679 | 3,968 | 1,947 | 1,489 | 34 | 25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pension products | 2,784 | 3,960 | 3,713 | 3,358 | 3,254 | (30 | ) | (4 | ) | 4,395 | 3,621 | 5,246 | 4,914 | 4,334 | 21 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Insurance and other products | 3,188 | 3,337 | 2,738 | 2,320 | 2,244 | (4 | ) | 9 | 6,086 | 5,514 | 5,799 | 4,780 | 4,083 | 10 | 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 12,041 | $ | 15,299 | $ | 11,854 | $ | 10,121 | $ | 9,497 | (21 | ) | 6 | $ | 18,795 | $ | 15,907 | $ | 20,213 | $ | 15,648 | $ | 13,207 | 18 | 9 | |||||||||||||||||
FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT MIX OF ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY AND ADMINISTRATION
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
| (In billions) | ||||||||||||||||||
Equities | $ | 5,003 | $ | 8,653 | $ | 5,821 | $ | 8,828 | $ | 6,691 | $ | 9,532 | ||||||
Fixed-income | 5,014 | 4,087 | 4,035 | 7,236 | 6,689 | 7,739 | ||||||||||||
Short-term and other investments | 2,024 | 2,559 | 1,998 | 2,731 | 2,527 | 2,942 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 12,041 | $ | 15,299 | $ | 11,854 | $ | 18,795 | $ | 15,907 | $ | 20,213 | ||||||
GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER CUSTODY(1)CUSTODY AND ADMINISTRATION(1)
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
| (In billions) | ||||||||||||||||||
United States | $ | 9,506 | $ | 11,792 | $ | 8,962 | $ | 14,585 | $ | 12,424 | $ | 15,335 | ||||||
Other Americas | 498 | 698 | 607 | 606 | 536 | 830 | ||||||||||||
Europe/Middle East/Africa | 1,524 | 2,163 | 1,815 | 2,773 | 2,391 | 3,233 | ||||||||||||
Asia/Pacific | 513 | 646 | 470 | 831 | 556 | 815 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 12,041 | $ | 15,299 | $ | 11,854 | $ | 18,795 | $ | 15,907 | $ | 20,213 | ||||||
| (1) | Geographic mix is based on the location where the assets are serviced. |
Management Fees
We provide a broad range of investment management strategies, specialized investment management advisory services and other financial services for corporations, public funds, and other sophisticated investors. These services are offered through SSgA. Based upon assets under management, SSgA is the largest manager of institutional assets worldwide, the largest manager of assets for tax-exempt organizations (primarily pension plans) in the United States, and the third largest investment manager overall in the world. SSgA offers a broad array of investment management strategies, including passive and active, such as enhanced indexing and hedge fund strategies, using quantitative and fundamental methods for both U.S. and global equities and fixed incomefixed-income securities. SSgA also offers exchange traded funds, or ETFs, such as the SPDR® Dividend ETFs.Gold ETF.
The 10% decrease20% decline in management fees from 20072008 resulted primarily resulted from the impact of declines in average month-end equity market valuations and lower performance fees.the impact of a higher percentage of assets invested in lower-rate passive strategies, partly offset by the impact of new business on current-period revenue. Average month-end
equity market valuations, individually presented in the aboveforegoing “INDEX” table, were down an average of 18%19% compared to 2007. The decrease in performance fees from $72 million in 2007 to $21 million in 2008 was generally the result of reduced levels of assets under management subject to performance fees, and somewhat lower relative performance measured against specified benchmarks during 2008. Management fees generated from customers outside the United States were approximately 40%33% of total management fees for 2008,2009, down slightly from 41%40% for 2007.2008.
At year-end 2008,2009, assets under management were $1.44$1.91 trillion, compared to $1.98$1.44 trillion at year-end 2007.2008. While certain management fees are directly determined by the value of assets under management and the investment strategy employed, management fees reflect other factors as well, including our relationship pricing for customers who use multiple services, and the benchmarks specified in the respective management agreements related to performance fees. Accordingly, no direct correlation necessarily exists between the value of assets under management, market indices and management fee revenue.
The overall decreaseincrease in assets under management at December 31, 20082009 compared to December 31, 2007 resulted from declines2008 primarily reflected an aggregate increase in market valuations and from a net lossnew business of business, with declines in market valuations representing the substantial majority of the decrease. During 2008, we experiencedapproximately $248 billion, compared to an aggregate net loss of business of approximately $55 billion compared to net new business of approximately $116 billion during 2007.2008, and increases in equity market valuations. Our levels of assets under management were affected by a number of factors, including investor issues related to SSgA’s active fixed-income strategies, restrictions on redemptions related to funds engaged in securities lending, and the relative under-performance of certain of our passive equity products. The increase in net loss ofnew business of $55$248 billion for 2008 did not reflect2009 reflected new business awarded to us during 2008 that had not been2009, primarily in passive strategies, which was installed prior to December 31, 2008. This new business will be reflected in assets under management in future periods after installation.2009.
Assets under management consisted of the following at December 31:
ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2007-2008 Annual Growth Rate | 2004-2008 Compound Annual Growth Rate | ||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Equities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Passive | $ | 576 | $ | 803 | $ | 691 | $ | 625 | $ | 600 | (28 | )% | (1 | )% | |||||||
Active and other | 91 | 206 | 181 | 147 | 122 | (56 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||||||||
Company stock/ESOP | 39 | 79 | 85 | 76 | 77 | (51 | ) | (16 | ) | ||||||||||||
Total equities | 706 | 1,088 | 957 | 848 | 799 | (35 | ) | (3 | ) | ||||||||||||
Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Passive | 238 | 218 | 180 | 128 | 106 | 9 | 22 | ||||||||||||||
Active | 32 | 41 | 34 | 28 | 35 | (22 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||||||||||
Cash and money market | 468 | 632 | 578 | 437 | 414 | (26 | ) | 3 | |||||||||||||
Total fixed-income and cash/money market | 738 | 891 | 792 | 593 | 555 | (17 | ) | 7 | |||||||||||||
Total | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | $ | 1,441 | $ | 1,354 | (27 | ) | 2 | ||||||||
| As of December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2008-2009 Annual Growth Rate | 2005-2009 Compound Annual Growth Rate | ||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Equities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Passive | $ | 787 | $ | 576 | $ | 803 | $ | 691 | $ | 625 | 37 | % | 6 | % | |||||||
Active and other | 88 | 91 | 206 | 181 | 147 | (3 | ) | (12 | ) | ||||||||||||
Company stock/ESOP | 49 | 39 | 79 | 85 | 76 | 26 | (10 | ) | |||||||||||||
Total equities | 924 | 706 | 1,088 | 957 | 848 | 31 | 2 | ||||||||||||||
Fixed-income: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Passive | 445 | 238 | 218 | 180 | 128 | 87 | 37 | ||||||||||||||
Active | 25 | 32 | 41 | 34 | 28 | (22 | ) | (3 | ) | ||||||||||||
Cash and money market | 517 | 468 | 632 | 578 | 437 | 10 | 4 | ||||||||||||||
Total fixed-income and cash/money market | 987 | 738 | 891 | 792 | 593 | 34 | 14 | ||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 1,911 | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | $ | 1,441 | 32 | 7 | |||||||||
GEOGRAPHIC MIX OF ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT(1)MANAGEMENT(1)
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
| (In billions) | ||||||||||||||||||
United States | $ | 1,020 | $ | 1,353 | $ | 1,202 | $ | 1,357 | $ | 1,020 | $ | 1,353 | ||||||
Other Americas | 24 | 36 | 30 | 29 | 24 | 36 | ||||||||||||
Europe/Middle East/Africa | 272 | 427 | 384 | 345 | 272 | 427 | ||||||||||||
Asia/Pacific | 128 | 163 | 133 | 180 | 128 | 163 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | $ | 1,911 | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | ||||||
| (1) | Geographic mix is based on the location where the assets are managed. |
The following table presents a roll-forward of assets under management for the three years ended December 31:
ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT
| Years Ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||
| (In billions) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | $ | 1,441 | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | ||||||||
Net new business | (55 | ) | 116 | 86 | 248 | (55 | ) | 116 | ||||||||||||
Market appreciation (depreciation) | (480 | ) | 114 | 222 | 219 | (480 | ) | 114 | ||||||||||||
Balance at end of year | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | $ | 1,749 | $ | 1,911 | $ | 1,444 | $ | 1,979 | ||||||||
Trading Services
Trading services revenue includes revenue from foreign exchange trading and brokerage and other trading services. We offer a complete range of foreign exchange services under an account model that focuses on the global requirements of our customers for our proprietary research and to executethe execution of trades in any time zone. Foreign exchange trading revenue is influenced by three principal factors: the volume and type of customer foreign exchange transactions; currency volatility; and the management of currency market risks.
For 2008,2009, foreign exchange trading revenue totaled $1.08 billion for$677 million, a 37% decrease from 2008 a 35% increase from 2007 revenue of $802 million, and benefited from the continued disruption in the global securities markets. The increase was$1.08 billion, mainly driven by a 92% increase16% decline in customer volumes and a 4% decrease in currency volatility, but also included an increase of $45 million of foreign exchange revenue attributable toas the inclusion of a full year of revenue of the acquired Investors Financial business compared to two quarters for 2007. Aggregate customer volumesfinancial markets were relatively flat compared to 2007.more stable during 2009 than during 2008.
We also offer a range of brokerage and other trading products tailored specifically to meet the needs of the global pension community, including transition management, commission recapture and self-directed brokerage. These products are differentiated by our position as an agent of the institutional investor. Brokerage and other trading fees of $417 million were higher by 8% compared to $385 million were up 10% compared to 2007 revenue of $350 million.in 2008. The increase was attributable to higher electronic trading revenues from both the acquired Currenex business and from our Global Link product, as well as an increase in brokerage revenue, principally from growth in fixed-income transition management and equity trading. Thistrading, as well as to an increase was partially offset by a decline in revenues from electronic trading profits.services associated with higher volumes.
Securities Finance
Securities finance provides liquidity to the financial markets, andas well as an effective means for customers to earn revenue on their existingsecurities portfolios. By acting as a lending agent and coordinating loans between lenders and borrowers, we lend securities and provide liquidity to customers around the world. Borrowers provide collateral in the form of cash or securities to State Street in return for loaned securities. Borrowers are generally required to provide collateral equal to a contractually agreed percentage of the fair value of the loaned securities. As the fair value of the loaned securities changes, additional collateral is provided by the borrower or collateral is returned to the borrower. Such movements are typically referred to as daily mark-to-market collateral adjustments.
For cash collateral, we pay a usage fee to the provider of the cash collateral, and invest the cash collateral in certain investment vehicles or managed accounts.accounts as directed by the owner of the loaned securities. In some cases, the investment vehicles or managed accounts may be managed by SSgA. The spread between the yield on the investment vehicle and the usage fee paid to the provider of the collateral is split between the lender of the securities and State Street as agent. For non-cash collateral, the borrower pays a fee for the loaned securities, and the fee is split between the lender of the securities and State Street.
Securities finance revenue, composed of our split of both the spreads related to cash collateral and the fees related to non-cash collateral, is principally a function of the volume of securities on loan and the interest-rate spreads and fees earned on the underlying collateral. For 2008,2009, securities finance revenue increased 81%decreased 54% from a year earlier, primarily as a result of wider creditcompression of spreads across all lending programs partially offset by a decrease in
lending volumes. Spreads benefited from the Federal Reserve’s aggregate 400-basis-point reduction in the federal funds rate during 2008, as well as continued disruption of the global fixed-income securities markets.
Beginninga 32% decrease in the third quarteraverage volume of 2008, a number of institutional investors suspended or limited their participation in our securities lending program, resulting in lower lending volumes. The decreased lending volumeson loan during 2009 compared to 2008.
Market influences are expected to continue as long as this suspended or limited participation continues. During 2008, we experienced significant withdrawal activityto affect our revenue from, and the underlying collateral pools, primarily to allowprofitability of, our securities lending activities in 2010. Over the lending programs to meet mark-to-market changes in collateral agreements caused by declines inpast 18 months, the valuesaggregate volume of securities on loan or the returnunder our direct lending program has decreased significantly, from an average of borrowed securities, with a net reductionapproximately $670 billion of the value ofaggregate securities on loan from June 30,during the second quarter of 2008 to December 31,approximately $440 billion during the fourth quarter of 2008 and approximately $405 billion during the fourth quarter of approximately 41%. We were able to manage these outflows of cash collateral, as well as2009. This decline in average lending volume reflects both the impactgeneral de-leveraging of the disruptionssecurities markets following the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings and, to a lesser degree, regulatory measures affecting securities lending. At the same time, during 2009, the spreads, described above, earned by participants decreased significantly, reflecting prevailing interest rates and government actions to stimulate the economy. Until securities lending volumes and spreads return to more normal levels, our revenues from securities lending activities will be adversely affected, which in turn may discourage customers who exited securities lending in 2007 and 2008 from returning to the credit markets, in a manner that substantially reduced the risk of loss to our customers. However, we imposed limitations on withdrawals from our lending programs in order to manage the liquidity in the cashpractice.
Purported class actions have been filed regarding certain collateral pools underlying funds managed by SSgA, and we are responding to inquiries from the net asset value ofSEC and other regulatory authorities in connection with our cash collateral pools, determined using market valuations, has fallen below $1.00 per unit. We cannot determine how long these limitations will remainpools. Additional information is included in place, nor can we determine how long market illiquidity will continue to affect the valuation of the collateral pools. The continuation of either trend could materially affect the longer-term prospects for our securities lending business. We continue to distinguish our securities lending program from those of our competitors due to the absence to date of realized credit losses with respect to our program.Risk Factors and Legal Proceedings sections included under Items 1A and 3, respectively.
Processing Fees and Other
Processing fees and other revenue includes diverse types of fees and other revenue, including fees from our structured products business, fees from software licensing and maintenance, equity income from our joint venture investments, gains and losses on sales of leased equipment and other assets, and amortization of investments in tax-advantaged financings. Processing fees and other revenue were relatively flatwas $171 million for 2009, a decrease of 38% compared to 2007, with2008. This decrease was mainly the benefitresult of two additional quartersdeclines in fees from our deposit service and structured products businesses, including our tax-exempt investment and conduit commercial paper programs, the latter the result of the May 2009 conduit consolidation.
Prior to the conduit consolidation, we earned administrative fees for providing administrative services to each of the conduits, which generally represented the conduits’ residual earnings after the payment of interest on outstanding commercial paper and the payment of other fees to independent third parties. We earned fee revenue fromof approximately $19 million for 2009 up to the acquired Investors Financial business for 2008date of the consolidation, compared to 2007, offset by lower levels$59 million for all of equity income from joint venture investments.2008 and $63 million for all of 2007. Since the conduits’ assets and liabilities are now recorded in our consolidated balance sheet, the conduits’ business activities generate net interest revenue rather than processing fees and other revenue. More information about the impact of the conduit consolidation on our net interest revenue is provided in the “Net Interest Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
NET INTEREST REVENUE
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements | $ | 12,895 | $ | 339 | 2.63 | % | $ | 14,402 | $ | 756 | 5.25 | % | $ | 12,820 | $ | 663 | 5.17 | % | |||||||||
Investment securities | 72,227 | 3,163 | 4.38 | 70,990 | 3,649 | 5.14 | 61,579 | 2,956 | 4.80 | ||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF(1) | 9,193 | 367 | 4.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Loans and leases(2) | 11,884 | 276 | 2.32 | 10,753 | 394 | 3.67 | 7,670 | 288 | 3.75 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other | 26,426 | 838 | 3.17 | 8,405 | 471 | 5.60 | 10,596 | 462 | 4.36 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | $ | 132,625 | $ | 4,983 | 3.75 | $ | 104,550 | $ | 5,270 | 5.04 | $ | 92,665 | $ | 4,369 | 4.72 | ||||||||||||
Deposits | $ | 79,507 | $ | 1,326 | 1.67 | % | $ | 68,220 | $ | 2,298 | 3.37 | % | $ | 55,635 | $ | 1,891 | 3.40 | % | |||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF(1) | 9,170 | 299 | 3.26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 21,283 | 375 | 1.76 | 22,024 | 959 | 4.36 | 25,699 | 1,145 | 4.46 | ||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,106 | 229 | 5.59 | 3,402 | 225 | 6.62 | 2,621 | 178 | 6.77 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | $ | 114,066 | $ | 2,229 | 1.95 | $ | 93,646 | $ | 3,482 | 3.72 | $ | 83,955 | $ | 3,214 | 3.83 | ||||||||||||
Interest-rate spread | 1.80 | % | 1.32 | % | 0.89 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue - fully taxable-equivalent basis(3) | $ | 2,754 | $ | 1,788 | $ | 1,155 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest margin - fully taxable-equivalent basis | 2.08 | % | 1.71 | % | 1.25 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue—GAAP basis | $ | 2,650 | $ | 1,730 | $ | 1,110 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Years ended December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | Average Balance | Interest Revenue/ Expense | Rate | |||||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions; fully | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 24,162 | $ | 156 | .64 | % | $ | 24,003 | $ | 760 | 3.17 | % | $ | 7,433 | $ | 416 | 5.60 | % | |||||||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements | 3,701 | 24 | .65 | 10,195 | 276 | 2.71 | 12,466 | 664 | 5.32 | ||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds sold | 68 | — | .29 | 2,700 | 63 | 2.33 | 1,936 | 92 | 4.77 | ||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | 1,914 | 20 | 1.02 | 2,423 | 78 | 3.22 | 972 | 55 | 5.60 | ||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities | 81,190 | 2,943 | 3.63 | 72,227 | 3,163 | 4.38 | 70,990 | 3,649 | 5.14 | ||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF(1) | 882 | 25 | 2.86 | 9,193 | 367 | 4.00 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Loans and leases(2) | 9,703 | 242 | 2.49 | 11,884 | 276 | 2.32 | 10,753 | 394 | 3.67 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-earning assets | 1,303 | 2 | .15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | $ | 122,923 | $ | 3,412 | 2.78 | $ | 132,625 | $ | 4,983 | 3.75 | $ | 104,550 | $ | 5,270 | 5.04 | ||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S | $ | 7,616 | $ | 61 | .81 | % | $ | 11,216 | $ | 223 | 1.99 | % | $ | 7,557 | $ | 313 | 4.13 | % | |||||||||
Non-U.S | 61,551 | 134 | .22 | 68,291 | 1,103 | 1.62 | 60,663 | 1,985 | 3.27 | ||||||||||||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 11,065 | 3 | .03 | 14,261 | 177 | 1.24 | 16,132 | 701 | 4.35 | ||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds purchased | 956 | — | .04 | 1,026 | 18 | 1.77 | 1,667 | 86 | 5.15 | ||||||||||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF(1) | 877 | 18 | 2.02 | 9,170 | 299 | 3.26 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 16,847 | 197 | 1.17 | 5,996 | 180 | 2.99 | 4,225 | 172 | 4.09 | ||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 7,917 | 304 | 3.84 | 4,106 | 229 | 5.59 | 3,402 | 225 | 6.62 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-bearing liabilities | 1,131 | 5 | .46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | $ | 107,960 | $ | 722 | .67 | $ | 114,066 | $ | 2,229 | 1.95 | $ | 93,646 | $ | 3,482 | 3.72 | ||||||||||||
Interest-rate spread | 2.11 | % | 1.80 | % | 1.32 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue - fully taxable-equivalent basis(3) | $ | 2,690 | $ | 2,754 | $ | 1,788 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest margin - fully taxable-equivalent basis | 2.19 | % | 2.08 | % | 1.71 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue - GAAP basis | $ | 2,564 | $ | 2,650 | $ | 1,730 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Amounts represent averages of asset-backed commercial paper purchases from eligible unaffiliated money market mutual funds under the Federal Reserve’s Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, or AMLF, and associated borrowings. Additional information about the AMLF, which recently expired, is provided in note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included |
| (2) | Interest revenue for |
| (3) | Amounts include fully taxable-equivalent adjustments of $126 million for 2009, $104 million for 2008 and $58 million for |
Net interest revenue is defined as the total of interest revenue earned on interest-earning assets less interest expense paidincurred on interest-bearing liabilities. Interest-earning assets, which consist of investment securities, loans and leases and other liquid assets, are financed primarily by customer deposits and short-term borrowings. Net interest margin represents the relationship between net interest revenue and average interest-earning assets. Changes in the components of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities are discussed in more detail below. Additional detail about the components of interest revenue and interest expense is provided in note 1817 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
For 2008,2009, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, net interest revenue increased 54% (53%decreased 2% (3% on a GAAP basis) compared to 2007, and net interest margin increased to 2.08% from 1.71%.2008. This growthdecline was generally the result of widening spreadslower rates on fixed-ratefloating-rate investment securities and tax-exempt investment securities,both lower volumes and lower rate spreads on customer deposits, as well as added interest-earning assetsthe re-investment of amortizing and relatedmaturing investment securities into short-term interest-bearing deposits rather than investment securities during the first half of 2009, in connection with our previously announced plan to improve our tangible common equity. The decrease in fully taxable-equivalent net interest revenue was partially offset by discount accretion, described below, on securities added in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation. Average aggregate interest-bearing deposits decreased 13% compared to 2008, primarily due to the current low-yield environment and a decrease in customers’ cash balances more reflective of historical levels as global market disruptions lessened.
In May 2009, we elected to take action that required the consolidation onto our balance sheet, for financial reporting purposes, of the assets and liabilities of the asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we sponsored and administered. Upon consolidation, the aggregate fair value of the conduits’ investment securities was established as their carrying amount, resulting in a discount to the assets’ par value. To the extent that the expected future cash flows from the acquired Investors Financial business. Average transaction deposit volumes, particularly non-U.S.securities exceed their carrying amount, the portion of the discount not related to credit will accrete into interest revenue over the securities’ remaining terms. The timing and ultimate recognition of this accretion will depend on factors including future credit conditions and the timing of underlying collateral prepayment, the predictability of which is challenged by the continuing global financial markets disruption. During 2009, we recorded discount accretion in interest revenue of approximately $621 million, and we anticipate that discount accretion will continue to be a material component of our net interest revenue for 2010. Because the rate of recognition of discount accretion is dependent, in part, on the rate of underlying prepayments, which is beyond our control, the volatility of our net interest revenue may increase.
Interest-bearing deposits increased 18%with banks, including cash balances held at the Federal Reserve to satisfy reserve requirements, averaged $24.16 billion for 2009, relatively flat compared to $24.00 billion in 2008. An average of $12.42 billion was held at the Federal Reserve Bank during 2009, an increase of $6.06 billion compared to $6.36 billion for 2008, with the balances in both periods exceeding minimum reserve requirements. This increase resulted from our investment of excess liquidity, beginning in the second half of 2008, in reserve balances held at the Federal Reserve Bank. Beginning with the fourth quarter of 2008, these balances earn a minimal rate of interest, which rate is subject to change at the Federal Reserve’s discretion.
Average securities purchased under resale agreements decreased 64%, or $6.49 billion, from $10.20 billion for 2008 to $3.70 billion for 2009. Average federal funds sold decreased $2.63 billion, or 97%, to $68 million for 2009 compared to 2007, primarily the result of customers’ accumulation of cash balances during the third and fourth quarters of 2008 to build liquidity.
Average2008. The decrease in federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements decreased 10% or $1.51 billion, from $14.40 billion in 2007 to $12.90 billion for 2008. The decrease was mainly due to athe re-allocation of liquidity to U.S. Treasury securities.securities in the investment securities portfolio and the placement of excess liquidity at the Federal Reserve, as described above, and other central banks.
Average trading account assets decreased 21%, or $509 million, from $2.42 billion for 2008 to $1.91 billion in 2009, due to the absence of conduit asset-backed commercial paper which was eliminated for financial reporting purposes when the conduits were consolidated onto our balance sheet as described above.
Our average investment securities portfolio increased 12%, or $8.96 billion, from approximately $70.99$72.23 billion for 2007in 2008 to approximately $72.23$81.19 billion for 2008, primarilyin 2009, due to the acquisitioneffect of the investmentconduit consolidation and an increase in U.S. Treasury and agency securities, as well as the re-investment of Investors Financialamortizing and maturing securities, partially offset by limited re-investmentsales. During the second half of 2009, we re-initiated our investment strategy of investing in “AAA” and net run-off in the aggregate portfolio, as liquidity was increased in response to the dislocation in the financial markets, and by lower market valuations in the available-for-sale portfolio. On average, for 2008, the investment portfolio included a lower percentage of collateralized mortgage obligations and mortgage- and asset-backed securities compared to a year earlier, and a higher percentage of U.S. Treasury securities. We continued to invest conservatively in “AA” and “AAA” rated securities. Securities rated “AA”“AAA” and “AAA”“AA” comprised approximately 89%80% of the investment securities portfolio, with approximately 69% “AAA” rated, at December 31, 2009, compared to 89% “AAA” and “AA” rated and 78% “AAA” rated, respectively, at December 31, 2008.
Loans and leases averaged $9.70 billion for the 2009, down 18% from $11.88 billion for 2008, up 11% from $10.75 billion for 2007.2008. The increasedecrease was primarily related to higherlower levels of customer overdraft activity, particularly U.S. overdrafts.short-term liquidity required by customers, partially offset by the structured asset-backed loans added in connection with the conduit consolidation. Approximately 67%31% of the average loan and lease portfolio, compared to 67% for 2008, was composed of U.S. and non-U.S. short-duration advances that provide liquidity to customers in support of their transaction flows, which averaged approximately $8.00$2.97 billion for 2008, up from $7.53 billion in 2007.
Average other interest-earning assets increased $18.022009, down $5.03 billion, or 214%, to $26.43 billion in 2008 compared to 2007. The increase was primarily due to an increase in interest-bearing deposits with banks. An average of $6.4 billion was held at the Federal Reserve Bank, which resulted from our investment of excess cash in short-term money market instruments as the financial markets disruption escalated in the second half of 2008.
Our average interest-bearing deposits increased $11.29 billion, or 17%63%, from $68.22 billion in 2007 to $79.51$8.00 billion for 2008. The increase was mainly attributablelower levels of liquidity we
provided to customers during 2009 were due to a decrease in customer demand and not a reduction in credit availability from, or committed lines provided by, State Street. As transaction flows returned to more normalized levels compared to the acquisitionextraordinarily high levels experienced in 2008, customer demand for short-term liquidity declined.
Average interest-bearing deposits decreased $10.34 billion, or 13%, from $79.51 billion to $69.17 billion for 2009 compared to 2008. The decrease was due to lower levels of Investors FinancialU.S. and an increasenon-U.S. deposits, including foreign transaction deposits, which were particularly high during 2008. This decrease also reflected the current low-yield interest rate environment and a decrease in non-U.S. transaction accounts. The growth in deposits was a significant contributor tocustomers’ cash balances, the overall increase in average interest-earning assets.
latter more reflective of historical levels as global market disruptions lessened.
Average other short-term borrowings decreased $741 million,increased $10.85 billion, or 3%181%, to $21.28$16.85 billion for 2008,2009 primarily due to higher customer deposits.the addition of commercial paper in connection with the conduit consolidation and borrowings under the Federal Reserve’s term auction facility, which is a secured lending program available to financial institutions, to fund conduit assets. Average long-term debt increased $704 million,$3.81 billion, or 21%93%, to $4.1$7.92 billion for 20082009 due to a debtthe issuance of an aggregate of approximately $4 billion of unsecured senior notes by State Street and State Street Bank in mid-2007March 2009 under the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP, and an additional debtthe issuance by State Street of $500 million of unsecured senior notes in the first quarter of 2008 to enhance our regulatory capital position. Additional information about our long-term debt is provided in note 10 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.May 2009.
Several factors could affect future levels of our net interest revenue and margin, including the mix of customer liabilities, actions of the various central banks, changes in U.S. and non-U.S. interest rates, and the shapes of the various yield curves around the world. In addition, we expect that our actions announced in February 2009 with respect to our plan to improve our tangible common equity, described earlier under “Financial Highlights,”world and which include the reinvestmentamount of discount accretion on the investment securities paying down and maturing during 2009 into interest-bearing deposits and a resulting reduction in the size ofadded to our consolidated balance sheet will reducein connection with the conduit consolidation. Based on market conditions, we re-initiated our investment strategy of re-investing proceeds from amortizing and maturing securities in highly rated investment securities, such as U.S. Treasuries and federal agency mortgage-backed securities and asset-backed securities, which enhanced our net interest revenue and margin forduring the second half of 2009. The pace at which we continue to re-invest and the types of securities purchased will depend on market conditions over time. These factors and the level of interest rates worldwide are expected to dictate what impact the re-investment program will have on our net interest revenue and net interest margin in the future.
Gains (Losses) Related to Investment Securities, Net
We recorded net gains of $68$368 million from sales of available-for-sale securities for 2008,2009, compared to net gains of $68 million for 2008. The aggregate unrealized loss on securities for which other-than-temporary impairment was recorded in 2009 was $1.15 billion. Of this total, $928 million related to factors other than credit, and was recognized, net of taxes, as a net gaincomponent of $7other comprehensive income in our consolidated statement of condition. We recorded losses from other-than-temporary impairment related to credit of the remaining $227 million in 2007. In addition, we recorded other-than-temporary impairmentour 2009 consolidated statement of income, compared to $122 million in 2008, compared to $34 million in 2007, which resulted from our assessment of impairment.
For 2009, the $227 million of losses was composed of $151 million associated with expected credit losses, $54 million related to management’s decision to sell the impaired securities prior to their recovery in value, and $22 million associated with adverse changes in the timing of expected future cash flows from the securities. The majority of the impairment analysis process. losses related to non-agency mortgage-backed securities which management concluded had experienced credit losses. These securities are reported as asset-backed securities in note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
| Years ended December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
(In millions) | ||||||||
Net gains from sales of available-for-sale securities | $ | 368 | $ | 68 | ||||
Losses from other-than-temporary impairment | (1,155 | ) | (122 | ) | ||||
Losses not related to credit(1) | 928 | — | ||||||
Net impairment losses | (227 | ) | (122 | ) | ||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | $ | 141 | $ | (54 | ) | |||
| (1) | These losses were not recorded in our consolidated results of operations, but were recognized as a component of other comprehensive income, net of related taxes, in our consolidated balance sheet; refer to the following discussion and to note 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. |
Management regularly reviews the investment securities portfolio to determine whether it expects any lossidentify other-than-temporary impairment of principal or interest,individual securities. Pursuant to the provisions of a new accounting standard, which we adopted effective April 1, 2009, impairment related to expected losses represents the difference between the discounted values of the expected future cash flows from the securities compared to their current amortized cost basis, with each discount rate commensurate with the effective yield on the underlying security. For debt securities held to maturity, other-than-temporary impairment remaining after credit-related impairment (which credit-related impairment is recorded in lightour consolidated statement of current marketincome) is recognized, net of taxes, as a component of other comprehensive income in the shareholders’ equity section of our consolidated balance sheet, and economic conditions, considerationis accreted prospectively over the remaining terms of pertinent information and related expectations. As a resultthe securities based on the timing of this process, management identifiedtheir estimated future cash flows. For other-than-temporary impairment of debt securities that it believedresults from management’s decision to sell the security prior to its recovery in value, the entire difference between the security’s fair value and its amortized cost basis is recorded in our consolidated statement of income.
The aforementioned accounting for other-than-temporary impairment was adopted by us, pursuant to new accounting standards, effective April 1, 2009. Prior to that date, we recognized losses from other-than-temporary impairment of debt and equity securities for either a change in management’s intent to hold the securities or expected credit losses, and such impairment losses, which reflected the entire difference between the fair value and amortized cost basis of each individual security, were other-than-temporarily impaired. recorded in our consolidated statement of income.
Additional information about available-for-saleinvestment securities, and the gross gains and losses that compose the net sale gains and our process to identify other-than-temporary impairment, is in the “Financial Condition” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis andprovided in note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
Gain on Sale of CitiStreet Interest, Net of Exit and Other Associated CostsPROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES
On July 1,We recorded provisions for loan losses of $149 million during 2009. Of the aggregate provisions, $124 million resulted from changes in management’s expectations with respect to future principal and interest cash flows from certain of the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 we completed the sale of our 50% joint venture interest in CitiStreet, a benefits servicing business that provides retirement plan recordkeeping and administrative services and at that date had approximately $220 billion in assets under administration on behalf of corporate and government entities, employee unions and other customers. The premium received in connection with indemnification obligations. The changes in management’s expectations were primarily based on its assessment of the sale was $407 million,impact of the deteriorating economic conditions in the commercial real estate markets on certain of these loans during 2009. Future changes in expectations with respect to collection of principal and we recorded a resulting pre-tax gain of $350 millioninterest on these loans could result in our consolidated statement of income during the third quarter of 2008, net of exit and other associated costs incurred in connection with the sale. These costs totaled $57 million, and consisted of incentive compensation of $30 million, professional fees of $10 million, and other related costs of $17 million.additional provisions for loan losses.
EXPENSES
| Years Ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | Change 2007-2008 | ||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | $ | 3,842 | $ | 3,256 | $ | 2,652 | 18 | % | ||||
Information systems and communications | 633 | 546 | 501 | 16 | ||||||||
Transaction processing services | 644 | 619 | 496 | 4 | ||||||||
Occupancy | 465 | 408 | 373 | 14 | ||||||||
Other: | ||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure | — | 600 | — | |||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | 450 | — | — | |||||||||
Restructuring charges | 306 | — | — | |||||||||
Merger and integration costs | 115 | 198 | — | (42 | ) | |||||||
Professional services | 360 | 236 | 157 | 53 | ||||||||
Amortization of other intangible assets | 144 | 92 | 43 | 57 | ||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | 200 | — | — | |||||||||
Securities processing | 187 | 79 | 37 | 137 | ||||||||
Regulator fees and assessments | 45 | 3 | 2 | |||||||||
Other | 460 | 396 | 279 | 16 | ||||||||
Total other | 2,267 | 1,604 | 518 | 41 | ||||||||
Total expenses | $ | 7,851 | $ | 6,433 | $ | 4,540 | 22 | |||||
Number of employees at year-end | 28,475 | 27,110 | 21,700 | |||||||||
| Years Ended December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | % Change 2008-2009 | ||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | $ | 3,037 | $ | 3,842 | $ | 3,256 | (21 | )% | ||||
Information systems and communications | 656 | 633 | 546 | 4 | ||||||||
Transaction processing services | 583 | 644 | 619 | (9 | ) | |||||||
Occupancy | 475 | 465 | 408 | 2 | ||||||||
Other: | ||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure | 250 | — | 600 | |||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | — | 450 | — | |||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | 306 | — | |||||||||
Merger and integration costs | 49 | 115 | 198 | (57 | ) | |||||||
Professional services | 264 | 360 | 236 | (27 | ) | |||||||
Amortization of other intangible assets | 136 | 144 | 92 | (6 | ) | |||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | — | 200 | — | |||||||||
Securities processing | 114 | 187 | 79 | (39 | ) | |||||||
Regulator fees and assessments | 71 | 45 | 3 | 58 | ||||||||
Other | 331 | 460 | 396 | (28 | ) | |||||||
Total other | 1,215 | 2,267 | 1,604 | (46 | ) | |||||||
Total expenses | $ | 5,966 | $ | 7,851 | $ | 6,433 | (24 | ) | ||||
Number of employees at year end | 27,310 | 28,475 | 27,110 | |||||||||
The increasedecrease in salaries and employee benefits for 20082009 compared to 20072008 was driven primarily by an increasedue to the effect of approximately $172 millionour previously announced reduction in force, described below, which was substantially completed in the first quarter of salaries2009, as well as lower accruals for cash incentive compensation and benefits expense of the acquired Investors Financial business, the impact of higher staffing levels to support new business, higher average salaries and benefits expense and increasedlower contract services spending. These increases were partly offset by a decline in incentive compensation.
The increase in information systems and communications expense for 2008 included an additional $40 million in expenses from the acquired Investors Financial business compared to 2007, as well as an increase in2009 reflected higher levels of spending on telecommunications hardware and software.
Transaction processing services expenses areexpense, which is volume-related and includeincludes equity trading services and fees related to securities settlement, sub-custodian services and external contract services. The increase over 2007 resulted primarily from higher transactionservices, decreased due to lower volumes in the investment servicing business and lower costs related to external contract services, primarily in Europe.
services. Occupancy expense increased slightly from 2007, primarily due to additional leased space acquired to support growth in the hedge funds servicing and investment manager operations outsourcing businesses,2008, mainly as well asa result of higher occupancy costs domestically and in supportEurope.
The provision for legal exposure of growth in Europe, including our new facility$250 million resulted from an increase in the U.K.
During the fourth quarter ofreserve initially established in 2007 we recorded a net pre-tax charge of $467 million in connection with the establishment of a reserve to address litigation exposure and other costs associated with certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA and customer concerns as to whether the execution of these strategies was consistent with customers’ investment intent. The net charge had the following components: a provision for legal exposure of $625 million offset by $25 million of insurance coverage (net provision of $600 million); a $156 million reduction of salaries and benefits expenseSSgA. We settled regulatory inquiries related to reduced incentive compensation primarily associated with SSgA, offset by $15 million of severance costs;this exposure in February 2010. The provision and $8 million of other expenses related to professional fees. Information with respect to activitysubsequent settlement are more fully discussed in the balance sheet reserve during 2008 is provided in note 11notes 20 and 10, respectively, of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
During the fourth quarter of 2008, we elected to provide support to certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion, which resulted in a charge of $450 million. These accounts, offered to retirement plans, allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account.
During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in these accounts to the point that the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the current market environment and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. We have no ongoing commitment or intent to provide support to these accounts. The asset- and mortgage-backed securities are carried in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition.
In December 2008, we announced a plan to reduce our operating costs and support our long-term growth while aligning the organization to meet the challenges and opportunities presented by the then current market environment. As a primary component of this plan, we initiated a reduction of approximately 7%8% of our global workforce, which reduction we expect to be substantially completed byat the end of the first quarter of 2009. In connection with this plan,2009, and during the fourth quarter of 2008, we recorded
aggregate restructuring charges of $306 million. We expect that this plan will result in an annualized reduction of our expenses from operations of between $375 million and $400 million. Additional information with respect to the charges, and activity during 20082009 in the related balance sheet reserve, is provided in note 96 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
During 2008,2009, in connection with the Investors Financial acquisition, we recorded merger and integration costs of $115$49 million, compared to $198$115 million for 2007.2008. These costs consisted only of direct and incremental costs to integrate the acquired Investors Financial business into our operations, and did not include ongoing expenses of the combined organization. The costs were primarily related to employee retention and system and customer integration.
During the third quarter of 2008, we recorded a $200 million reserve to provide for our estimated net exposure on an indemnification obligation associated with collateralized repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., or Lehman Brothers. In September and October 2008, Lehman Brothers and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings. While we had no unsecured financial exposure to Lehman Brothers or its affiliates, we indemnified certain customers in connection with these and other collateralized repurchase agreements with Lehman Brothers entities. In the then current market environment, the market value of the underlying collateral had declined. To the extent that these declines resulted in collateral value falling below the indemnification obligation, we recorded a reserve. The reserve was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral. We purchased the collateral, composed of commercial real estate loans, during the fourth quarter of 2008 as described in the “Loans and Lease Financing” section of this Managements’ Discussion and Analysis.
We had other customer indemnification obligations under a collateralized repurchase agreement with another Lehman Brothers entity. In these cases, the fair value of the collateral at the time we committed to take possession of it was equal to or greater than the associated indemnification obligation and therefore no related reserve was recorded. We will continue to evaluate these assets and collateral and determine whether to dispose of them or hold them to maturity. The market value of these assets and collateral will continue to fluctuate and ultimately may be less than the value of our indemnification obligations.
The increasedecrease in aggregate other expenses (professional services, securities processing, amortization of other intangible assets, regulator fees and assessments and other) from $806 million for 2007 to $1.196$1.2 billion for 2008 to $916 million for 2009 resulted primarily from a 53% increase39% decrease in securities processing costs due to lower processing volume and a 27% decrease in professional services spending, primarily legal and consulting costs, amortization of other intangible assets for the full year in connectioncosts. This overall decrease was offset slightly by higher regulatory assessments associated with the acquisitionsincreased cost of Investors Financial and Currenex, higher securities processing costs and higher regulatory fees and assessments, the latter mainly fees and assessments paid in connection with our participation in certain federal government and banking regulatory agency programs described earlier in the “Impact of Securities Markets Disruption and Government Actions” section.deposit insurance.
Income Taxes
Income tax expense before the extraordinary loss totaled $1.031 billion$722 million for 2008,2009, compared to $642 million from continuing operations$1.03 billion a year ago. Our overall effective tax rate for 20082009 was 36.2%28.6%, compared to 33.7%36.2% for 2007.2008. The increasedecline in both income tax expense and the effective rate was generally the result of a higher levelan increase in the proportion of pre-tax earnings for 2008, partly offset by a net income tax benefit related to the aggregate pre-tax impact of the significant transactions outside of the ordinary coursefrom certain of our non-U.S. subsidiaries, where management’s intention is to reinvest those earnings indefinitely overseas. Our intent to reinvest these earnings overseas is consistent with our business described earlier under “Financial Highlights.”strategy to pursue growth in non-U.S. markets, and allowed us to reduce taxes accrued with respect to 2009 earnings, as well as certain taxes accrued in prior periods.
Information about income tax contingencies related to our leveragedSILO lease portfoliotransactions is provided in note 1110 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
LINE OF BUSINESS INFORMATION
We reporthave two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management. Given our services and management organization, the results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry. Information about revenue, expenserevenues, expenses and capital allocation methodologies with respect to these lines of business is provided in note 2423 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
The following is a summary of our line of business results. The amounts in the “Divestitures” columns represent the operating results of our joint venture interest in CitiStreet prior to theour sale of that interest in July 2008. The amounts presented in the “Other” column for 2009 represent net interest revenue earned in connection with our participation in the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, the provision for loan losses associated with the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 and merger and integration costs recorded in connection with our July 2007 acquisition of Investors Financial. The amounts in the “Other” column for 2008 represent the net interest revenue associated with our participation in the AMLF; the gain on the sale of our joint venture interest in CitiStreet; the restructuring charges recorded primarily in connection with our plan to reduce our expenses from operations; the provision related to our estimated net exposure for customer indemnification associated with collateralized repurchase agreements; and the merger and integration costs recorded in connection with our acquisition ofthe Investors Financial.Financial acquisition. The amounts in the “Other” column for 2007 amount represents therepresent merger and acquisition costs recorded in connection with the acquisition of Investors Financial.Financial acquisition. The amounts in the “Divestitures” and “Other” columns were not allocated to State Street’s business lines.
| Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Divestitures | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management fees | — | — | — | $ | 1,028 | $ | 1,141 | $ | 943 | 1,028 | 1,141 | 943 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | — | — | — | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 900 | 518 | 292 | 330 | 163 | 94 | 1,230 | 681 | 386 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 200 | 196 | 208 | 85 | 73 | 56 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 2 | $ | 8 | 277 | 271 | 272 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 6,312 | 5,254 | 4,085 | 1,443 | 1,377 | 1,093 | (8 | ) | 2 | 8 | 7,747 | 6,633 | 5,186 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,472 | 1,573 | 986 | 104 | 135 | 104 | 6 | 22 | 20 | $ | 68 | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue after provision for loan losses | 2,472 | 1,573 | 986 | 104 | 135 | 104 | 6 | 22 | 20 | 68 | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 350 | 350 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 8,730 | 6,800 | 5,086 | 1,547 | 1,512 | 1,197 | (2 | ) | 24 | 28 | 418 | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 5,642 | 4,787 | 3,742 | 1,133 | 974 | 791 | 5 | 7 | 7 | — | 6,780 | 5,768 | 4,540 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | — | (47 | ) | — | — | 514 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 467 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | — | — | — | 450 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 306 | 306 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 200 | 200 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 115 | $ | 198 | 115 | 198 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 5,642 | 4,740 | 3,742 | 1,583 | 1,488 | 791 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 621 | 198 | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes | $ | 3,088 | $ | 2,060 | $ | 1,344 | $ | (36 | ) | $ | 24 | $ | 406 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 17 | $ | 21 | $ | (203 | ) | $ | (198 | ) | $ | 2,842 | $ | 1,903 | $ | 1,771 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-tax margin | 35 | % | 30 | % | 26 | % | (2 | )% | 2 | % | 34 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average assets (in billions) | $ | 157.9 | $ | 120.0 | $ | 103.4 | $ | 3.3 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 2.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 161.7 | $ | 123.5 | $ | 106.4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Divestitures | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years ended December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management fees | — | — | — | $ | 824 | $ | 1,028 | $ | 1,141 | 824 | 1,028 | 1,141 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | — | — | — | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 387 | 900 | 518 | 183 | 330 | 163 | 570 | 1,230 | 681 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 72 | 200 | 196 | 99 | 85 | 73 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 2 | 171 | 277 | 271 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 4,829 | 6,312 | 5,254 | 1,106 | 1,443 | 1,377 | (8 | ) | 2 | 5,935 | 7,747 | 6,633 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,489 | 2,472 | 1,573 | 68 | 104 | 135 | 6 | 22 | $ | 7 | $ | 68 | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 350 | — | 350 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 7,459 | 8,730 | 6,800 | 1,174 | 1,547 | 1,512 | (2 | ) | 24 | 7 | 418 | 8,640 | 10,693 | 8,336 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 24 | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | 124 | — | 149 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 4,867 | 5,642 | 4,787 | 800 | 1,133 | 974 | 5 | 7 | — | — | 5,667 | 6,780 | 5,768 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | — | — | (47 | ) | 250 | — | 514 | — | — | — | — | 250 | — | 467 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 306 | — | 306 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 200 | — | 200 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 49 | 115 | $ | 198 | 49 | 115 | 198 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 4,867 | 5,642 | 4,740 | 1,050 | 1,583 | 1,488 | 5 | 7 | 49 | 621 | 198 | 5,966 | 7,851 | 6,433 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income (Loss) from continuing operations before income taxes | $ | 2,568 | $ | 3,088 | $ | 2,060 | $ | 123 | $ | (36 | ) | $ | 24 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 17 | $ | (166 | ) | $ | (203 | ) | $ | (198 | ) | $ | 2,525 | $ | 2,842 | $ | 1,903 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-tax margin | 34 | % | 35 | % | 30 | % | 10 | % | (2 | )% | 2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average assets (in billions) | $ | 143.4 | $ | 157.9 | $ | 120.0 | $ | 3.4 | $ | 3.3 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 146.8 | $ | 161.7 | $ | 123.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment Servicing
Total revenue for 2009 decreased 15% from 2008, increased 28% primarily due to increaseswith decreases in servicingall fee revenue line items, generally reflective of the impact of the ongoing global financial markets disruption. Servicing fees trading services and securities finance revenue, as welldecreased partly as a 57% increaseresult of the impact of declines in net interest revenue.
Servicing fees increased primarily due to the contributionequity markets, partly offset by the impact of fees from the acquired Investors Financial business, increases from net new business from existing and new customers and higher customer transaction volumes.on current-period revenue. The increasedecrease in trading services revenue primarily reflected an increasea decrease in foreign exchange trading revenue, as we benefitedcaused primarily by lower levels of volatility and customer volumes, partly offset by higher revenue from the continued disruption in the global securities markets
transition management and the resulting increase in currency volatility,higher levels of fees from electronic trading attributable to higher volumes. Securities finance revenue decreased primarily due to compression of credit spreads as well as increases in electronic trading revenues from the acquired Currenex businesslower volumes of assets on loan. Processing fees and from our Global Link product. Securities financeother revenue increaseddeclined primarily as a result of wider credit spreads across all lending programs, as well as the impactMay 2009 consolidation of the acquired Investors Financial business, offset by a decrease in lending volumes.conduits, as fees generated from administrative services provided to the conduits were no longer recorded subsequent to the consolidation.
Servicing fees, trading services revenue and gains (losses) related to investment securities, net, for our Investment Servicing business line are identical to the respective consolidated results. Refer to the “Servicing Fees,” “Trading Services” and “Gains (Losses) Related to Investment Securities, Net” captions in the “Total Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for a more in-depth discussion. A discussion of processing fees and other revenue is provided under the caption “Processing Fees and Other” in the “Total Revenue” section.
Net interest revenue increased 57% from 2007 dueremained relatively flat compared to wider spreads2008, as the negative impact of lower rates on fixed- andthe yields generated by floating-rate investment securities and tax-exempt investment securities, as well as added interest-earning assets and related net interest revenue fromwas offset by discount accretion recorded subsequent to the acquired Investors Financial business.consolidation of the conduits. A portion of net interest revenue is recorded in the Investment Management business line based on the volume of customer liabilities attributable to that business.
ExpensesTotal expenses declined 14% from operations increased from 2007,2008, primarily attributable to increaseddriven by the reduction in the accrual of cash incentive compensation, lower levels of salaries and benefits costs which reflected the expenses of the acquired Investors Financial business, as well as increase in staffing levelsand lower costs related to support business growth, and higher levels of professional services spending. Information systems and communications expenses increased due to additional expenses from the acquired Investors Financial business, as well as higher spending on telecommunications and higher software amortization costs. Other expenses increased due to higher levels of professional services spending, increased amortization of other intangible assets that resulted from the Investors Financial acquisition and regulatory fees and assessments associated with our participation in certain government programs.contract services.
Investment Management
Total revenue for 2009 decreased 24% compared to 2008, increased 2% from 2007, reflecting the impact of a 102% increase23% decrease in securities financetotal fee revenue partly offset byand a 10%34% decrease in net interest revenue. The 20% decline in management fees, and a 23% declinegenerated by SSgA, resulted primarily from the impact of declines in net interestequity market valuations, partly offset by the impact of new business on current-period revenue. Securities finance revenue decreased primarily due to compression of credit spreads as well as lower volumes of assets on loan. Management fees for the Investment Management business line are identical to the respective consolidated results. Refer to the “Management Fees” caption in the “Total Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis for a more in-depth discussion. Increase in securities finance revenue benefited primarily from wider credit spreads.
Expenses from operations of $1.13 billion increased 16%declined 29% from 2007,2008, primarily due to lower accruals of cash incentive compensation and reductions in staffing levels, as well as lower levels of professional fees. The $250 million and $450 million provisions for legal exposure and investment account infusion, respectively, are discussed in the cost“Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
Certain funds managed by SSgA that engage in securities lending continue to invest in cash collateral pools underlying these funds, the net asset values of which remain less than $1.00 per unit. These funds have imposed limitations on participant redemptions. Our continuation of the limitations on participant redemptions and the difference between the net asset value used for purchase and redemption transactions ($1.00 per unit) and the net asset value of the pools could, if either or both continue, adversely effect SSgA’s reputation, the marketing of its lending funds and its future results of operations. Refer to a discussion of the funds and the underlying cash collateral pools in the Risk Factors section included under Item 1A.
Purported class actions have been filed regarding certain collateral pools underlying funds managed by SSgA, and we are responding to inquiries from the SEC and other regulatory authorities in connection with our cash collateral pools. Refer to the Risk Factors and Legal Proceedings sections included under Items 1A and 3, respectively.
COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2007
OVERVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | % Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | |||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 7,747 | $ | 6,633 | 17 | % | |||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 53 | ||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | |||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | |||||||||
Total revenue | 10,693 | 8,336 | 28 | ||||||||
Total expenses | 7,851 | 6,433 | 22 | ||||||||
Income before income tax expense | 2,842 | 1,903 | 49 | ||||||||
Income tax expense | 1,031 | 642 | 61 | ||||||||
Net income | 1,811 | 1,261 | 44 | ||||||||
Adjustment to net income (loss)(1) | (22 | ) | — | ||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | 42 | ||||||
Earnings per common share: | |||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | 24 | ||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 25 | ||||||||
Earnings per common share: | |||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | |||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | |||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity | 14.8 | % | 13.4 | % | |||||||
(1) Adjustment was related to preferred stock issued in connection with the U.S. Treasury’s TARP Program. |
| ||||||||||
TOTAL REVENUE
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | % Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | |||||||||||
Fee revenue: | |||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | 11 | % | |||||
Management fees | 1,028 | 1,141 | (10 | ) | |||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 27 | ||||||||
Securities finance | 1,230 | 681 | 81 | ||||||||
Processing fees and other | 277 | 271 | 2 | ||||||||
Total fee revenue | 7,747 | 6,633 | 17 | ||||||||
Net interest revenue: | |||||||||||
Interest revenue | 4,879 | 5,212 | (6 | ) | |||||||
Interest expense | 2,229 | 3,482 | (36 | ) | |||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 53 | ||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | |||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | |||||||||
Total revenue | $ | 10,693 | $ | 8,336 | 28 | ||||||
The increase in total revenue for 2008 compared to 2007 reflected growth in fee revenue, primarily trading services and securities finance, with almost 78% of the overall growth in fee revenue generated from these two activities.
The growth in trading services revenue was the result of higher levels of currency volatility in foreign exchange trading, as well as the contribution of revenue of both the acquired Investors Financial business (with
respect to foreign exchange) and the acquired Currenex business (with respect to brokerage and other) for a full year. Brokerage and other trading revenue increased 10% from 2007 to 2008, due to higher revenues from electronic trading, both from the acquired Currenex business and from our Global Link product, as well as an increase in brokerage revenue, principally transition management and equity trading.
Securities finance revenue for 2008 was up 81% compared to 2007, primarily as a result of wider credit spreads across all lending programs. Spreads benefited from the Federal Reserve’s aggregate 400-basis-point reduction in the federal funds rate during 2008, as well as from the continued disruption of the global fixed-income securities markets. The increases were offset partially by a decline in lending volumes.
The 11% increase in servicing fees was the result of the inclusion of servicing fee revenue from the acquired Investor Financial business for a full year, the impact of new business on 2008 revenue and higher transaction volumes. Approximately 41% of our servicing fees were derived from non-U.S. customers in each of 2008 and 2007.
Management fees decreased 10% from 2007 to 2008, $1.14 billion to $1.03 billion respectively, primarily from the impact of declines in average month-end equity market valuations and performance fees. Approximately 40% of our management fees were derived from customers outside the U.S. in 2008, down from 41% for 2007. Assets under management decreased to $1.44 trillion at December 31, 2008, down $535 billion from $1.98 trillion a year earlier, as we experienced a net loss of business and, more significantly, market depreciation.
The increase in net interest revenue was the result of several favorable trends. Interest-earning assets and related net interest revenue from the acquired Investors Financial business and widening spreads on fixed-rate and tax-exempt investment securities were the primary reasons for the growth. In addition, transaction deposit volume increased, particularly with respect to non-U.S. deposits.
EXPENSES
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | % Change | ||||||
(Dollars in millions) | |||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | $ | 3,842 | $ | 3,256 | 18 | % | |||
Information systems and communications | 633 | 546 | 16 | ||||||
Transaction processing services | 644 | 619 | 4 | ||||||
Occupancy | 465 | 408 | 14 | ||||||
Provision for legal exposure | — | 600 | |||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | 450 | — | |||||||
Restructuring charges | 306 | — | |||||||
Merger and integration costs | 115 | 198 | (42 | ) | |||||
Professional services | 360 | 236 | 53 | ||||||
Amortization of other intangible assets | 144 | 92 | 57 | ||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | 200 | — | |||||||
Other | 692 | 478 | 45 | ||||||
Total expenses | $ | 7,851 | $ | 6,433 | 22 | ||||
The increase in salaries and employee benefits for 2008 compared to 2007 was driven primarily by the contribution of a full year of salaries and benefits expense from the acquired Investors Financial business, the impact of higher staffing levels to support new business, higher average salaries and benefits expense and increased contract services spending. The increases were offset by a decline in accruals for cash incentive compensation.
Information systems and communications expense increased due to the addition of expenses from the acquired Investors Financial business, as well as increased spending on telecommunications hardware and software. Transaction processing services expenses increased over 2007, and resulted primarily from higher transaction volumes and costs of external contract services, primarily in Europe.
The increase in occupancy expense from 2007 to 2008 was primarily the result of leased space acquired to support growth in business,the alternative investments servicing and investment manager operations outsourcing businesses, as well as higher occupancy costs and related increases in information systems and communications expenses.support of growth in Europe, including our then new facility in the U.K.
During the fourth quarter of 2008, we elected to provide support to certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion, which resulted in a chargean income statement provision of $450 million. These accounts, offered to retirement plans, enter into contractual arrangements with third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfallThis change is more fully described in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account. During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely impacted the market valuenote 20 of the securities in these accountsNotes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
In 2008, we announced a plan to reduce our operating costs and support our long-term growth while aligning the point thatorganization to meet the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of
securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk inchallenges and opportunities presented by the current market environment, and to contribute ansubsequently recorded aggregate restructuring charges of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio$306 million. This change is more fully described in note 6 of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdingsNotes to the book value of the accounts. More information about these charges areConsolidated Financial Statements included in the “Consolidated Results of Operations—Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.under Item 8.
In 2007, the net pre-tax charge of $514 million ($467 million excluding related reduction of incentive compensation of $47 million allocated to Investment Servicing) was recordedFor 2008, in connection with the establishment of a reserve to address legal exposure and other costs associated with the under-performance of certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA and customer concerns as to whether the execution of these strategies was consistent with the customers’ investment intent. The net charge had the following components: a provision for legal exposure of $625 million offset by $25 million of insurance coverage; a $109 million reduction of salaries and benefits expense related to reduced incentive compensation offset by $15 million of severance costs; and $8 million of other expenses related to professional fees. More information about the consolidated net pre-tax charge of $467 million is included in the “Consolidated Results of Operations—Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
The pre-tax margin for Investment Management, which is the percentage of the business line’s pre-tax income to its total revenue, was (2)% for 2008 compared to 2% for 2007 and 34% for 2006. The significant decreases in margin were the result of the impact of the charges described above. Without the charges, Investment Management’s pre-tax income for 2008 and 2007 would have been $414 million ($(36) million plus $450 million) and $538 million ($24 million plus $514 million), and its pre-tax margin would have been 27% for 2008 and 36% for 2007.
COMPARISON OF 2007 AND 2006
OVERVIEW OF CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
| Years ended December 31, | 2007 | 2006 | % Change | ||||||||
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | |||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 6,633 | $ | 5,186 | 28 | % | |||||
Net interest revenue | 1,730 | 1,110 | 56 | ||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (27 | ) | 15 | ||||||||
Total revenue | 8,336 | 6,311 | 32 | ||||||||
Total expenses | 6,433 | 4,540 | 42 | ||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense | 1,903 | 1,771 | 7 | ||||||||
Income tax expense from continuing operations | 642 | 675 | (5 | ) | |||||||
Income from continuing operations | 1,261 | 1,096 | 15 | ||||||||
Income from discontinued operations | — | 10 | — | ||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | 14 | ||||||
Earnings per common share from continuing operations: | |||||||||||
Basic | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.31 | 6 | ||||||
Diluted | 3.45 | 3.26 | 6 | ||||||||
Earnings per common share: | |||||||||||
Basic | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.34 | |||||||
Diluted | 3.45 | 3.29 | |||||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity from continuing operations | 13.4 | % | 16.2 | % | |||||||
Return on common shareholders’ equity | 13.4 | % | 16.4 | % | |||||||
The income from discontinued operations in 2006 of $10 million, or $.03 per share, resulted from the finalization of legal, selling and other costs recorded in connection with our previously disclosed divestiture of Bel Air Investment Advisers LLC.
TOTAL REVENUE
| Years ended December 31, | 2007 | 2006 | % Change | |||||||
(Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||
Fee revenue: | ||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | 24 | % | ||||
Management fees | 1,141 | 943 | 21 | |||||||
Trading services | 1,152 | 862 | 34 | |||||||
Securities finance | 681 | 386 | 76 | |||||||
Processing fees and other | 271 | 272 | — | |||||||
Total fee revenue | 6,633 | 5,186 | 28 | |||||||
Net interest revenue: | ||||||||||
Interest revenue | 5,212 | 4,324 | 21 | |||||||
Interest expense | 3,482 | 3,214 | 8 | |||||||
Net interest revenue | 1,730 | �� | 1,110 | 56 | ||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (27 | ) | 15 | |||||||
Total revenue | $ | 8,336 | $ | 6,311 | 32 | |||||
The increase in total revenue for 2007 compared to 2006 primarily reflected growth in fee revenue, which mainly reflected growth in servicing and management fees, with almost 60% of the overall growth in fee revenue generated from these two services.
The increase in servicing fees was the result of the inclusion of servicing fee revenue from the acquired Investors Financial business, the impact of net new business from existing and new customers, higher average equity market valuations and higher customer transaction volumes. Approximately 41% of our servicing fees were derived from non-U.S. customers in 2007, down from 44% in 2006. The decrease in the non-U.S. proportion reflected the contribution of servicing fees from the acquired Investors Financial business, which are generated predominately in the U.S. Assets under custody increased to $15.30 trillion at December 31, 2007, up 29% from $11.85 trillion a year earlier, with the majority of the increase the result of the addition of assets under custody of the acquired Investors Financial business.
The increase in management fees from 2006 primarily resulted from the impact of net new business on 2007 revenue and higher equity market valuations. Approximately 41% of management fees were derived from customers outside the U.S. in 2007, up from 32% for 2006. Assets under management increased to $1.98 trillion at December 31, 2007, up $230 billion from $1.75 trillion a year earlier.
The growth in trading services revenue, which includes foreign exchange trading and brokerage and other trading revenue, reflected an increase in foreign exchange trading revenue of $191 million, primarily due to increased customer volumes, but also the result of the inclusion of $43 million of foreign exchange revenue from the acquired Investors Financial business. Brokerage and other fees increased from $251 million in 2006, up 39% to $350 million in 2007 due to the contribution of revenue from the acquired Currenex business and an increase in revenue from transition management.
The increase in securities finance revenue reflected the effect of increased loan volumes resulting from both new customer demands and increased demand from existing customers. Spreads also increased, primarily in the domestic and non-U.S. equity portfolios and the corporate bond and fixed-income portfolios. Spreads benefited from reductions in federal funds rates during 2007.
The increase in net interest revenue was the result of several favorable trends. Transaction deposit volume increased, particularly with respect to non-U.S. deposits. Volume increases resulted from net new business in non-U.S. assets under custody, and spreads increased because deposit rates lagged rate increases by foreign central banks during 2007. The acquired Investors Financial business added interest-earning assets and related net interest revenue. Finally, as fixed-rate investment securities matured, they were replaced by higher yielding investments.
EXPENSES
| Years ended December 31, | 2007 | 2006 | % Change | ||||||
(Dollars in millions) | |||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | $ | 3,256 | $ | 2,652 | 23 | % | |||
Information systems and communications | 546 | 501 | 9 | ||||||
Transaction processing services | 619 | 496 | 25 | ||||||
Occupancy | 408 | 373 | 9 | ||||||
Provision for legal exposure | 600 | — | |||||||
Merger and integration costs | 198 | — | |||||||
Professional services | 236 | 157 | 50 | ||||||
Amortization of other intangible assets | 92 | 43 | 114 | ||||||
Other | 478 | 318 | 50 | ||||||
Total expenses | $ | 6,433 | $ | 4,540 | 42 | ||||
The increase in salaries and employee benefits was driven primarily by the inclusion of salaries and benefits expense of the acquired Investors Financial and Currenex businesses, higher incentive compensation costs due to improved performance, which were offset by the reduction of incentive compensation recorded as part of the net
pre-tax charge related to SSgA and the impact of higher staffing levels associated with the growth of our Investment Servicing business, particularly in Europe, and in our Investment Management business, as well as in information technology and risk management.
Information systems and communications expense increased due to the addition of expenses of the acquired Investors Financial business as well as increased spending internationally to support growth.
Transaction processing services expenses, which in large part are volume-related, include equity trading services and fees related to securities settlement, sub-custodian fees and external contract services. The increase resulted from the addition of approximately $39 million of expenses from the acquired Investors Financial business, specifically sub-custody costs, as well as higher transaction volumes, and external contract services, primarily in Europe.
Occupancy expense increased primarily due to additional leased space acquired as part of the Investors Financial acquisition, as well as higher occupancy costs in support of growth in Europe.
During the fourth quarter of 2007, we recorded a net pre-tax charge of $467 million in connection with the establishment of a reserve to address litigation exposure and other costs associated with certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA and customer concerns as to whether the execution of these strategies was consistent with customers’ investment intent.
In connection with the Investors Financial acquisition, we recorded merger and integration costs of $115 million, compared to $198 million in the second half offor 2007. These costs consisted only of direct and incremental costs to integrate the acquired Investors Financial business into our operations, and did not include ongoing expenses of the combined organization. The costs were primarily related to employee retention and system and customer integration.
During 2008, we recorded a $200 million provision related to our estimated net exposure on an indemnification obligation associated with collateralized repurchase agreements. The reserve was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral. This provision is more fully described in note 20 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
The increase in aggregate other expenses was primarily due to the acquired Investors Financial business, increasesresulted from a 53% increase in professional services securities processingspending, primarily legal and consulting costs, higher sales promotion costs and increased amortization of intangibles that resulted fromother intangible assets for the acquisitionfull year in connection with the acquisitions of the Investors Financial and Currenex, businesses.higher securities processing costs and higher regulatory fees and assessments, the latter mainly fees and assessments paid in connection with our participation in certain federal government and banking regulatory agency programs.
Income Taxes
The decreaseincrease in income tax expense from continuing operations for 20072008 compared to 20062007 resulted from the absencea higher level of pre-tax earnings for 2008, partially offset by a net benefit related to the aggregate pre-tax impact of federal tax legislation that increased income tax expense for 2006.significant transactions outside the ordinary course of our business. The overall effective tax rate for 20072008 was 33.7%36.2% compared to 38.1%33.7% for 2006.2007.
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP.GAAP, and we apply accounting policies that affect the determination of amounts reported in these financial statements. Our significant accounting policies are described in note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
The majority of these accounting policies do not involve difficult, subjective or complex judgments or estimates in their application, or the variability of the estimates is not material to the consolidated financial statements. However, certain of these accounting policies, by their nature, require management to make judgments, involving significant estimates and assumptions, about the effects of matters that are inherently uncertain. These estimates and assumptions are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements, and changes in this information over time could materially affect the amounts of assets, liabilities, equity, revenue and expenses reported in subsequent financial statements.
Based on the sensitivity of reported financial statement amounts to the underlying policies, estimates and assumptions, the relatively more significant accounting policies applied by State Street have been identified by management as accounting forthose associated with fair value measurements; accounting for special purpose entities;interest revenue recognition and accounting forother-than-temporary impairment;
and goodwill and other intangible assets. These accounting policies require the most subjective or complex judgments, and relatedunderlying estimates and assumptions could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available. An understanding of the judgments, estimates and assumptions underlying these accounting policies is essential in order to understand our reported consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
operations and financial condition.
The following is a brief discussion of the above-mentioned significant accounting policies. Management of State Street has discussed these significant accounting estimates with the Examining and Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.
Fair Value Measurements
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis, including trading account assets, investment securities available for sale and various types of derivative instruments.
As discussed in further detail below, changes in the fair value of these financial assets and liabilities are recorded either as components of our consolidated statement of income, or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders’ equity in our consolidated statement of condition. In addition to those financial assets and liabilities that are carried at fair value in our consolidated financial statements, we disclose the estimated fair value in the notes to the consolidated financial statements of certain other of our financial assets and liabilities that are carried at amortized cost in our consolidated statement of condition. We estimate the fair value of all of these financial assets and liabilities using the definition of fair value described below.
At December 31, 2008,2009, approximately $66.92$77.36 billion of our financial assets and approximately $12.36$4.77 billion of our financial liabilities were carried at fair value, compared to $75.43$66.92 billion and $4.57$12.36 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2007.2008. The amounts at December 31, 20082009 represented approximately 39%49% of our consolidated total assets and approximately 8%3% of our consolidated total liabilities, compared to 53%39% and 3%8%, respectively, at December 31, 2007.2008. The increase in the relative percentage of consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2009 resulted primarily from the addition of investment securities in connection with the conduit consolidation and portfolio purchases of investment securities. The decrease in the relative percentagespercentage of consolidated total liabilities as of December 31, 2008, compared to December 31, 2007,2009 resulted primarily from a significant increase in our consolidated total assets, which increase was mostly due to the impact of higherlower levels of customer deposits and the purchase of asset-backed commercial paper under the previously-discussed AMLF during 2008, neither of which is carried at fair value.derivatives related to our foreign exchange activities.
As described in more detail in note 1413 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8, we adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157,Fair Value Measurements,new accounting standards that govern fair value measurement effective January 1, 2008. The standard doesThese accounting standards do not require the measurement ofus to measure our financial assets and liabilities at fair value, but providesprovide a consistent definition of fair value and establishesprovide a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with GAAP. Effective January 1, 2008,These standards also provided for the election of a fair value option for assets and liabilities not previously carried at fair value on a recurring basis. In connection with our application of these accounting standards, we adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 159,The Fair Value Option forFinancial Assets and Financial Liabilities. We have not elected the fair value option for any of our financial assets or financial liabilities since our adoption, of the standard, although we may do so in the future.
SFAS No. 157 definesThe accounting standards define fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an “exit price”) in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. When we measure fair value for our financial assets and liabilities, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which we would transact, and we consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to measure the fair value of identical, or similar, financial assets or liabilities. When identical financial assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market-observable data for similar assets and liabilities. In some instances, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets, and as a result we use alternative valuation techniques to measure their fair value.
In accordance with the standard,standards, we categorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition on a recurring basis based upon the standard’sstandards’ three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3). We categorized approximately 15%13% of our financial assets carried at fair value in level 1, 70%77% in level 2 and 15%10% in level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, including the effect of master netting agreements. We categorized approximately 93%97% of our financial liabilities carried at fair value in level 2, with the remaining 7%3% in level 3, including the effect of master netting agreements.
The fair value of the investment securities categorized in level 1 was composed of U.S. Treasury securities, specifically Treasury bills, which have a maturity of one year or less. Fair value was measured by management using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.
The fair value of the investment securities categorized in level 2 was measured by management primarily using information obtained from independent third parties. Information obtained from third parties is subject to review by management as part of a continuous validation process. Management has developedutilizes a process to review information provided by third parties, including an understanding of underlying assumptions and the level of market participant information used to support those assumptions. In addition, management compares significant assumptions used by third parties to available market information. Such information may include known trades or, to the extent that trading activity is limited, comparisons to market research information pertaining to credit expectations, execution prices and the timing of cash flows.
The fair value of the derivative instruments categorized in level 2 predominantly represented foreign exchange contracts used in our trading activities, for which fair value was measured by management using discounted cash flow techniques with inputs consisting of observable spot and forward points, as well as observable interest rate curves. With respect to derivative instruments, we evaluated the impact on valuation of the credit risk of our counterparties and our own credit. We considered factors such as the likelihood of default by us and our counterparties, our current and potential future net exposures and remaining maturities in determining the appropriate measurements of fair value. Valuation adjustments associated with these factors were not significant for 2009 or 2008.
While the substantial majority of our financial assets categorized in level 3 were composed of asset-backed securities available for sale, primarily securities collateralized by student loans, level 3 also included trading account assets, composed of corporate debt securities, and foreign exchange options. The categorization of asset-backed securities in level 3 as of December 31, 2008 was significantly influenced by current conditions, including reduced levels of liquidity, in the fixed-income securities markets. Little or no market activity for these securities occurred during the fourth quarter of 2008, and as a result of the lack of price transparency, we measured their fair value using unobservable pricing inputs, such as spread indices and non-binding quotes received directly from third parties. These inputs were subject to management’s review and were determined to be appropriate based on individual facts and circumstances. Generally, we obtain non-binding quotes from market specialists for each individual security as necessary. Given the unique nature of each underlying security structure, it is not practical or useful to obtain multiple quotes for individual securities.
derivatives. The aggregate fair value of our financial assets and liabilities categorized in level 3 as of December 31, 2008,2009, compared to January 1,December 31, 2008, increaseddecreased approximately 48%. The change resulted29%, and was primarily from purchasescomposed of corporate debttransfers of asset-backed securities, and transfers in of investment securities available for sale, principally those collateralized by student loan-backed securities, partly offset by unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities recorded in other comprehensive income and the reclassification of certain classes of mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligationsloans, to level 2.
Special Purpose EntitiesInterest Revenue Recognition and Other-Than-Temporary Impairment
InA significant portion of the normal courseassets carried in our consolidated balance sheet is our portfolio of business, we utilize three typesfixed-income investment securities. At December 31, 2009, this portfolio included securities added as a result of special purpose entities, referred to as SPEs. One type of SPE is utilized in connection with our involvement as collateral managerthe May 2009 conduit consolidation. Additional information with respect to managed investment vehicles,the conduits and is not recorded in our consolidated financial statements. A second type of SPE is utilized in connection with our tax-exempt investment program, and is recorded in our consolidated financial statements, since we treat the underlying transactions as secured borrowings, not as sales. Additional information about the activities of these SPEsconsolidation is provided in notesnote 11 and 12 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
As discussed below, the estimation of future cash flows from the securities is a significant factor in the recognition of both interest revenue and other-than-temporary impairment with respect to our fixed-income investment securities.
Expectations of defaults and prepayments are the most significant estimates underlying our determination of expected future cash flows. In determining these estimates, management relies on relevant and reliable information, including but not limited to deal structure, including optional and mandatory calls, market interest rate curves, industry standard asset-class-specific prepayment models, recent prepayment history, independent credit ratings, and recent actual and projected credit losses. Management considers this information based on its relevance and uses its best judgment in order to determine its assumptions for underlying cash flow expectations and resulting estimates. Management reviews its underlying assumptions and determines expected future cash flow estimates at least quarterly. Additional information aboutdetail with respect to the third typesensitivity of SPE, usedthese default and prepayment assumptions is provided in the “Financial Condition—Investment Securities” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Interest Revenue Recognition
Our investment portfolio, excluding the conduit assets, consists of securities which were not typically acquired at significant discounts or premiums to their face amount. In connection with our commercial paper program,the conduit consolidation, we recorded certain of the conduits’ investment securities at a significant discount to their face amount. To the extent that future cash flows from these securities is provided below.
In our role as a financial intermediary, we administer four third-party asset-backed commercial paper conduits, which are structured as bankruptcy-remote, limited liability companies, and which areexpected to exceed their recorded carrying amounts, the portion of the discount not includedrelated to credit will be accreted into interest revenue in our consolidated financial statements. These conduits purchasestatement of income over the securities’ remaining lives. As a varietyresult of financial assets from third-party financial institutions,the magnitude of the discount, the estimates associated with the timing and fundamount of the accretion of these purchases by issuing commercial paper. The financial assets purchased by
A portion of the conduitsconduit securities, primarily asset-backed securities, had expected credit losses on the date of consolidation, or were considered to be certain beneficial interests in a securitization that are not originated by us,of high credit quality, and we do not hold any equity ownershiptherefore are accounted for pursuant to specific accounting guidance. As a result, interest revenue recognition for these securities differs from the accounting for the remainder of our portfolio. The accounting for these securities requires an estimation of the timing and amount of each of the securities’ expected future principal, interest and other contractual cash flows, and the calculation of an effective yield based upon these estimates is used to record interest revenue. Generally, the timing and amount of these securities’ future cash flows are inherently uncertain, due to the unknown timing and amount of principal payments (including potential credit losses) and the variability of future interest rates.
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment
Existing accounting standards also require the use of cash flow estimates to evaluate other-than-temporary impairment of our investment securities. The amount and timing of expected cash flows is a significant estimate in the conduits. Detaileddetermination of other-than-temporary impairment. Additional information about the conduits and their business activitieswith respect to management’s assessment of impairment is provided in note 123 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
During the first quarter of 2008, pursuant to the contractual terms of our liquidity asset purchase agreements with the four unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer, we were required to purchase $850 million of conduit assets. The purchase was the result of various factors, including the continued illiquidity in the commercial paper markets. The securities were purchased at prices determined in accordance with existing contractual terms in the liquidity asset purchase agreements, and which exceeded their fair value. Accordingly, during the first quarter of 2008, the securities were written down to fair value through a $12 million reduction of processing fees and other revenue in our consolidated statement of income, and are carried at fair value in securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition. None of our liquidity asset purchase agreements with the conduits was drawn upon during the remainder of 2008, and no draw-downs on the standby letters of credit occurred during 2008.
We sometimes purchase commercial paper from the conduits to support their liquidity. As the disruption in the financial markets continued through 2008, our support of the conduits’ liquidity resulted in our purchasing historically high levels of commercial paper from them. On December 31, 2008 and 2007, we held $230 million and $2 million, respectively, of commercial paper issued by the conduits in trading account assets in our consolidated balance sheet. The amount held at December 31, 2008 did not include $5.70 billion sold by the conduits to the Federal Reserve’s CPFF. The highest total overnight position (including AMLF) in the conduits’ commercial paper held by us during the year ended December 31, 2008, was approximately $9.22 billion. The average total overnight position (including AMLF) for the same period was approximately $2.27 billion. As of February 25, 2009, we held $5.97 billion of the conduits’ commercial paper and $7.70 billion had been sold by the conduits to the Federal Reserve’s CPFF. The CPFF is currently scheduled to expire for new issuances on October 30, 2009. The weighted-average maturity of the conduits’ commercial paper in the aggregate was approximately 25 days as of December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 20 days as of December 31, 2007.
Our accounting for the conduits’ activities, and our conclusion that we are not required to include each or all of the conduits’ assets and liabilities in our consolidated financial statements, is based on our application of the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 46(R), which governs our accounting for the conduits and which is discussed in more detail in note 12. Expected losses, which we estimate using a financial model as described below, form the basis for our application of the provisions of FIN 46(R). Expected losses, as defined by FIN 46(R), are not economic losses. Instead, expected losses are calculated by comparing projected possible cash flows, which are probability-weighted, with expected cash flows for the risk(s) the entity was designed to create and distribute; they represent the variability in potential cash flows of the entity’s designated risks. We believe that credit risk is the predominant risk that is designed to be created and distributed by these entities. The conduits also have a modest amount of basis risk. Basis risk arises when commercial paper funding costs change at a different rate than the comparable floating-rate asset benchmark rates (generally LIBOR). This risk is managed through the use of derivative instruments, principally basis swaps, which mitigate this variability for each conduit.
Any credit losses of the conduits would be absorbed by (1) investors in the subordinated debt, commonly referred to as “first-loss notes,” issued by the conduits; (2) State Street or other providers of liquidity or credit enhancement; and (3) the holders of the conduits’ commercial paper, in that order of priority. The investors in the first-loss notes, which are independent third parties, would absorb the first dollar of any credit loss on the conduits’ assets. If credit losses exceeded the first-loss notes, we would absorb credit losses through our credit facilities provided to the conduits. The commercial paper holders would absorb credit losses after the first-loss notes and State Street’s and other providers’ credit facilities have been exhausted. We have developed a financial model to estimate and allocate each conduit’s expected losses. This model has determined that, as of December 31, 2008, the amount of first-loss notes of each conduit held by the third-party investors causes them to absorb a majority of each conduit’s expected losses, as defined by FIN 46(R), and, accordingly, the investors in the first-loss notes are considered to be the primary beneficiary of the conduits. The aggregate amount of first-loss notes issued by the conduits totaled approximately $67 million as of December 31, 2008.
In order to estimate expected losses as required by FIN 46(R), we estimate possible defaults of the conduits’ assets. These expected losses are allocated to the conduits’ variable interest holders based on the order in which actual losses would be absorbed, as described above. We use the model to estimate expected losses based on hundreds of thousands of probability-weighted loss scenarios. These simulations incorporate published credit rating agency data to estimate expected losses due to credit risk. Primary assumptions incorporated into the financial model relative to credit risk variability, such as default probabilities and loss severities, are directly linked to the conduits’ underlying assets. These default probabilities and loss severity assumptions vary by asset class and ratings of individual conduit assets. Accordingly, the model’s calculation of expected losses is significantly affected by the credit ratings and asset mix of each conduit’s assets. These statistics are periodically reviewed by management. If downgrades and asset mix change significantly, or if defaults occur on the conduits’ underlying assets, we may conclude that the current level of first-loss notes is insufficient to absorb a majority of the conduits’ expected losses.
We perform stress tests and sensitivity analyses on each conduit individually, to model potential scenarios that could cause the amount of first-loss notes to be insufficient to absorb the majority of the conduits’ expected losses. As part of these analyses, we have identified certain conduit assets that could be more susceptible to credit downgrade because of their underlying credit characteristics. Our scenario testing specifically addresses asset classes that have experienced significant price erosion and/or have little observed market activity. Examples of scenarios that are designed to measure the sensitivity of the sufficiency of the first-loss notes include performing a downgrade of all assets which have underlying monoline insurance provider support, and a downgrade scenario on certain other conduit securities where our analysis of the timing and amount of expected cash flows for selected security default expectations does not re-affirm the security’s current external credit rating. These simulations do not include a scenario whereby all positions are simultaneously downgraded, the possibility of which we consider remote. In addition, a scenario could arise where one or more defaults could be so severe that the associated losses would exhaust the conduits’ total first-loss notes currently outstanding.
Certain of the conduits hold asset-backed securities that have the benefit of a third-party guarantee from a financial guaranty insurance company. The aggregate amortized cost of securities with underlying guarantees was approximately $2.49 billion at December 31, 2008 and $3.51 billion at December 31, 2007. Certain of these securities, which totaled approximately $730 million at December 31, 2008, are currently drawing on the underlying guarantees in order to make contractual principal and interest payments to the conduits. In these cases, the performance of the underlying security is highly dependent on the performance of the guarantor. In calculating expected losses, these securities carry the higher of the underlying security rating or the rating of the third-party guarantor. During 2008, many of these guarantors experienced ratings downgrades. The credit ratings of the guarantors ranged from “AAA” to “CCC” as of December 31, 2008. None of these securities are in default.
In the future, as a result of our stress tests, if the determination and allocation of conduit expected losses by the financial model indicates that the then-existing level of first-loss notes would be insufficient to absorb a majority of the conduits’ expected losses, we would be required to either (1) issue additional first-loss notes to third parties; (2) change the composition of conduit assets; or (3) take other actions in order to avoid being determined to be the primary beneficiary of the conduits on the date of determination.
Under existing accounting standards, if we were determined to be the primary beneficiary of the conduits and were required to consolidate the conduits into our consolidated financial statements, based on changes in assumptions or future events, the conduits’ assets and liabilities would be consolidated at their respective fair values. We would recognize a loss if the fair value of the conduits’ aggregate liabilities and first-loss notes exceeded the fair value of their aggregate assets. Management believes that this loss would be recovered in future periods; as with our investment securities portfolio, we expect that we would collect substantially all principal and interest on the assets according to their underlying contractual terms. The fair value of the conduits’ aggregate liabilities and first-loss notes exceeded the fair value of their aggregate assets by $3.56 billion after-tax at December 31, 2008.
Based on the difference in the fair value of the conduits’ aggregate liabilities and first-loss notes and their aggregate assets of $3.56 billion after-tax, the consolidation of the conduits’ assets would reduce our tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios. The impact of consolidation on our tier 1 leverage ratio would be more significant,
but the degree of impact would depend on how and when consolidation occurred, since this ratio is a function of our consolidated total average assets over an entire quarter. For illustrative purposes, assuming estimated fair values of the conduits’ assets as of December 31, 2008, if all of the conduits’ assets and liabilities were consolidated onto our consolidated balance sheet on December 31, 2008, the following table presents the estimated impact on State Street’s and State Street Bank’s regulatory capital ratios as of that date.
| State Street | State Street Bank | |||||||||||
| Reported as of December 31, 2008 | Adjusted for Conduit Consolidation as of December 31, 2008 | Reported as of December 31, 2008 | Adjusted for Conduit Consolidation as of December 31, 2008 | |||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio | 7.8 | % | 5.5 | % | 7.6 | % | 5.3 | % | ||||
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio | 20.3 | 14.4 | 19.8 | 13.9 | ||||||||
Total risk-based capital ratio | 21.6 | 15.8 | 21.3 | 15.5 | ||||||||
The conduits do not regularly trade their assets. That is, the design of the conduits is such that conduit assets are purchased with the intent to hold them to their maturities. Accordingly, changes in the fair values of the conduits’ assets do not impact the day-to-day management of the conduits. We believe the fair values of the conduits’ assets are affected by a number of factors, including the lack of liquidity of mortgage- and asset-backed securities, supply and demand imbalance in the market, and a risk aversion premium being demanded by investors for certain asset types. The aggregate fair value of the conduits’ assets at December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $17.75 billion and $27.95 billion, respectively.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill is created when the purchase price exceeds the assigned value of net assets of acquired businesses, and represents the value attributable to unidentifiable intangible elements being acquired. Other acquired identifiable intangible assets are recorded at their estimated fair value. Goodwill is not amortized. Other intangible assets are amortized over their estimated useful lives, and both goodwill and other intangible assets are subject to an impairment adjustment if events or circumstances indicate the potential inability to realize the carrying amount. WeAs required by GAAP, we evaluate goodwill and other intangible assets for impairment annually, based on undiscounted cash flows. AlmostSubstantially all of the goodwill and other intangible assets recorded in our consolidated statement of condition have resulted from business acquisitions of our Investment Servicing line of business. The remainder have beenis recorded by Investment Management.
The sustained value of the majority of goodwill is supported ultimately by revenue from our investment servicing business. A decline in earnings as a result of a lack of growth, or our inability to deliver cost-effective services over sustained periods, could lead to a perceived impairment of goodwill, which would be evaluated and, if necessary, be recorded as a write-down of the reported amount of goodwill through a charge to earnings in our consolidated statement of income.
On an annual basis, or more frequently if circumstances dictate, management reviews goodwill and evaluates events or other developments that may indicate impairment in the carrying amount. We perform this evaluation at the reporting unit level, which is one level below our two major business lines. The evaluation methodology for potential impairment is inherently complex and involves significant management judgment in the use of estimates and assumptions.
We evaluate goodwill for impairment using a two-step process. First, we compare the aggregate fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value exceeds the carrying amount, no impairment exists. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit exceeds the fair value, then we compare the “implied” fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill with its carrying amount. If the carrying amount of the goodwill exceeds the implied fair value, then goodwill impairment is recognized by writing the goodwill down to the implied fair value. The implied fair value of the goodwill is determined by allocating the fair value of the reporting unit to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit, as if the unit had been acquired in a business combination and the overall fair value of the unit was the purchase price.
To determine the aggregate fair value of the reporting unit being evaluated for goodwill impairment, we use one of two principal methodologies—external or independent valuation, using quoteda market pricesapproach, based on a comparison of the reporting unit to publicly-traded companies in active markets;similar lines of business; or an analysisincome approach, based on the value of comparable recent external sales or market data, such as multiples of earnings or similar performance measures. In limited circumstances, these methodologies are not available, and as such, we estimate futurethe cash flows using present-value techniques.the business can be expected to generate in the future.
Events that may indicate impairment include significant or adverse changes in the business, economic or political climate; an adverse action or assessment by a regulator; unanticipated competition; and a more-likely-than-not expectation that we will sell or otherwise dispose of a business to which the goodwill or other intangible assets relate. Additional information about goodwill and other intangible assets, including information by line of business, is provided in note 5 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K.8.
Our evaluation of goodwill and other intangible assets for impairment for 2008in 2009 indicated that none of our goodwill was impaired. For 2008, we recorded approximately $27 million of impairment associated withGoodwill and other intangible assets, $23 million of which was recorded as a component of the restructuring charges described in the “Expenses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis and in note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. Goodwill recorded in our consolidated statement of condition at December 31, 2008 totaled approximately $4.53 billion. Other intangible assets recorded in our consolidated statement of condition at December 31, 20082009 totaled approximately $1.85 billion.$4.55 billion and $1.81 billion, respectively.
FINANCIAL CONDITION
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 Average Balance | 2007 Average Balance | 2009 Average Balance | 2008 Average Balance | ||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 24,003 | $ | 7,433 | $ | 24,162 | $ | 24,003 | ||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements | 10,195 | 12,466 | 3,701 | 10,195 | ||||||||
Federal funds sold | 2,700 | 1,936 | 68 | 2,700 | ||||||||
Trading account assets | 2,423 | 972 | 1,914 | 2,423 | ||||||||
Investment securities | 72,227 | 70,990 | 81,190 | 72,227 | ||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF(1) | 9,193 | — | ||||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF(1) | 882 | 9,193 | ||||||||||
Loans | 11,884 | 10,753 | 9,703 | 11,884 | ||||||||
Other earning assets | 1,303 | — | ||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | 132,625 | 104,550 | 122,923 | 132,625 | ||||||||
Cash and due from banks | 5,096 | 3,272 | 2,237 | 5,096 | ||||||||
Other assets | 23,976 | 15,660 | 21,650 | 23,976 | ||||||||
Total assets | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | $ | 146,810 | $ | 161,697 | ||||
Liabilities and shareholders’ equity: | ||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||
U.S. | $ | 11,216 | $ | 7,557 | $ | 7,616 | $ | 11,216 | ||||
Non-U.S. | 68,291 | 60,663 | 61,551 | 68,291 | ||||||||
Total interest-bearing deposits | 79,507 | 68,220 | 69,167 | 79,507 | ||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 14,261 | 16,132 | 11,065 | 14,261 | ||||||||
Federal funds purchased | 1,026 | 1,667 | 956 | 1,026 | ||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF(1) | 9,170 | — | ||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF(1) | 877 | 9,170 | ||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 5,996 | 4,225 | 16,847 | 5,996 | ||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,106 | 3,402 | 7,917 | 4,106 | ||||||||
Other interest-bearing liabilities | 1,131 | — | ||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | 114,066 | 93,646 | 107,960 | 114,066 | ||||||||
Noninterest-bearing deposits | 20,609 | 10,640 | ||||||||||
Non-interest-bearing deposits | 15,443 | 20,609 | ||||||||||
Other liabilities | 14,614 | 9,769 | 10,090 | 14,614 | ||||||||
Shareholders’ equity | 12,408 | 9,427 | 13,317 | 12,408 | ||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | $ | 146,810 | $ | 161,697 | ||||
| (1) | Amounts represent averages of asset-backed commercial paper purchases and related borrowings in connection with our participation in the AMLF. Additional information about the AMLF, which recently expired, is provided in note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included |
Overview of Consolidated Statement of Condition
The structure of our consolidated statement of condition, or balance sheet, is primarily driven by the liabilities generated by our core Investment Servicing and Investment Management businesses. As our customers execute their worldwide cash management and investment activities, they use short-term investments and deposits that constitute the majority of our liabilities. These liabilities are generally in the form of non-interest-bearing demand deposits; interest-bearing transaction account deposits, which are denominated in a variety of currencies; and repurchase agreements, which generally serve as short-term investment alternatives for our customers.
Our customers’ needs and our operating objectives determine the volume, mix and currency denomination of our consolidated balance sheet. Deposits and other liabilities generated by customer activities are invested in assets that generally match the liquidity and interest-rate characteristics of the liabilities. As a result, our assets consist primarily of securities held in our available-for-sale or held-to-maturity portfolios and short-term money-market instruments, such as interest-bearing deposits, federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale
agreements. The actual mix of assets is determined by the characteristics of the customer liabilities and our desire to maintain a well-diversified portfolio of high-quality assets. Managing our consolidated balance sheet structure is conducted within specific Board-approved policies for interest-rate risk, credit risk and liquidity.
For 2008, the growth in average interest-bearing liabilities of $20.4 billion was primarily composed of an $11.3 billion increase in customer deposits, $7.6 billion of which were foreign, partially offset by a decline in repurchase agreements of $1.9 billion. Average interest-earning assets in 2008 increased $28.1 billion from 2007, primarily the result of higher levels of interest-bearing deposits with domestic and foreign central banks related to the investment of excess cash generated from customers’ accumulation of liquidity, as well as our purchase of asset-backed commercial paper under the AMLF. Additional information about our average balance sheet, primarily our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, is included in the “Consolidated Results of Operations—Net Interest Revenue” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis.
Investment Securities
The carrying values of investment securities by type were as follows as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||
Available for sale: | |||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | |||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 11,579 | $ | 8,181 | $ | 7,612 | |||
Mortgage-backed securities | 10,798 | 14,585 | 11,454 | ||||||
Asset-backed securities | 19,424 | 25,069 | 25,634 | ||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1,441 | 11,892 | 8,476 | ||||||
State and political subdivisions | 5,712 | 5,813 | 3,749 | ||||||
Other debt investments | 4,723 | 4,041 | 3,027 | ||||||
Money-market mutual funds | 344 | 243 | 201 | ||||||
Other equity securities | 142 | 502 | 292 | ||||||
Total | $ | 54,163 | $ | 70,326 | $ | 60,445 | |||
Held to maturity purchased under AMLF: | |||||||||
Asset-backed commercial paper | $ | 6,087 | |||||||
Held to maturity: | |||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | |||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 501 | $ | 757 | $ | 846 | |||
Mortgage-backed securities | 810 | 940 | 1,084 | ||||||
Asset-backed securities | 3,986 | — | — | ||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 9,979 | 2,190 | 2,357 | ||||||
State and political subdivisions | 382 | 180 | 183 | ||||||
Other investments | 109 | 166 | 77 | ||||||
Total | $ | 15,767 | $ | 4,233 | $ | 4,547 | |||
We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated balance sheet. The portfolio continues to be concentrated in securities with high credit quality, with approximately 89% of the carrying value of the portfolio “AAA” or “AA” rated. The percentages of the carrying value of the investment securities portfolio by external credit rating, excluding securities purchased under the AMLF, were as follows as of December 31:
| 2008 | 2007 | |||||
AAA(1) | 78 | % | 89 | % | ||
AA | 11 | 6 | ||||
A | 5 | 3 | ||||
BBB | 4 | 1 | ||||
BB | 1 | — | ||||
Non-rated | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 100 | % | 100 | % | |||
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||
Available for sale: | |||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | |||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 11,162 | $ | 11,579 | $ | 8,181 | |||
Mortgage-backed securities | 14,936 | 10,798 | 14,585 | ||||||
Asset-backed securities: | |||||||||
Credit cards | 6,607 | 3,090 | 3,276 | ||||||
Student loans(1) | 11,928 | 7,860 | 9,006 | ||||||
Sub-prime | 3,197 | 3,859 | 5,683 | ||||||
Other | 2,797 | 1,464 | 2,067 | ||||||
Total asset-backed | 24,529 | 16,273 | 20,032 | ||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 2,409 | 1,441 | 11,892 | ||||||
State and political subdivisions | 5,937 | 5,712 | 5,813 | ||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 10,311 | 5,714 | 6,766 | ||||||
Other debt securities | 2,234 | 2,160 | 2,312 | ||||||
Money-market mutual funds | 1,110 | 344 | 243 | ||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | 35 | 123 | 320 | ||||||
Other equity securities | 36 | 19 | 182 | ||||||
Total | $ | 72,699 | $ | 54,163 | $ | 70,326 | |||
Held to maturity purchased under AMLF: | |||||||||
Asset-backed commercial paper | $ | — | $ | 6,087 | $ | — | |||
Held to maturity: | |||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | |||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 500 | $ | 501 | $ | 757 | |||
Mortgage-backed securities | 620 | 810 | 940 | ||||||
Asset-backed securities: | |||||||||
Credit cards | 20 | — | — | ||||||
Other | 447 | 321 | — | ||||||
Total asset-backed | 467 | 321 | — | ||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | �� | 8,262 | 9,979 | 2,190 | |||||
State and political subdivisions | 206 | 382 | 180 | ||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 10,822 | 3,774 | 166 | ||||||
Total | $ | 20,877 | $ | 15,767 | $ | 4,233 | |||
| (1) | Substantially composed of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to the payment of principal and interest. |
The investment securities portfolio is also diversified with respect to asset class. The majority of the portfolio is composed of mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities. The largely floating-rate asset-backed portfolio consists of home-equity loan, credit card, auto- and student loan-backed securities. Mortgage-backed securities are split between securities of Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and large-issuer collateralized mortgage obligations. As of December 31, 2008, the asset-backed securities in the portfolio included $5.8 billion collateralized by sub-prime mortgages. Of this total, 38% were “AAA” rated and 32% were “AA” rated.
We had $6.62 billion of net pre-tax unrealized losses on available-for-sale investment securities at December 31, 2008, or $4.06 billion after-tax. This unrealized loss excludes the unrealized loss of $2.27 billion, or $1.39 billion after-tax, related to securities available for sale that were reclassified to securities held to maturity during the fourth quarter of 2008, which are discussed below. Net pre-tax unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2007 were $1.105 billion, or $678 million after-tax. Excluding the securities for which $122 million of other-than-temporary impairment was recorded during 2008, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining securities and the resulting net unrealized losses to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Management continues to believe that it is probable that we will collect all principal and interest according to underlying contractual terms, and has the ability and the intent to hold the securities until recovery in market value.
During the fourth quarter of 2008, management reassessed its classification of certain asset- and mortgage-backed securities carried in the available-for-sale portfolio, and reclassified securities with an amortized cost of $14.6 billion and a fair value of $12.3 billion to securities held to maturity. No gain or loss was recognized at the time of reclassification. The related pre-tax unrealized loss of $2.27 billion, or $1.39 billion after-tax, recorded in other comprehensive income, or OCI, remained in OCI and is being amortized as an adjustment of the yield of the reclassified securities over their remaining terms. The securities were reclassified at their then fair value of $12.3 billion, and this fair value was established as the adjusted amortized cost of the reclassified securities. The resulting discount is being accreted as an adjustment of the yield of the reclassified securities over their remaining terms. As a result, the reclassification will have no ultimate impact on our consolidated results of operations. Management considers the held-to-maturity classification to be appropriate because it has the ability and the intent to hold these securities to their maturity.
We intend to continue managingmanage our investment securities portfolio to align with interest-rate and duration characteristics of our customer liabilities and in the context of our overall balance sheet structure, which is maintained within internally approved risk limits, and in consideration of the global interest-rate environment. Even
We consider a well-diversified, high-credit quality investment securities portfolio to be an important element in the management of our consolidated balance sheet. The portfolio continues to be concentrated in securities with material changes in unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities, we may not experience material changes in our interest-rate risk profile, or experience a material impact on our net interest revenue. Additional information about these and other unrealized losses is in notes 3 and 13high credit quality, with approximately 80% of the Notescarrying value of the portfolio “AAA” or “AA” rated. The percentages of the carrying value of the investment securities portfolio by external credit rating, excluding securities purchased under the AMLF for 2008, were as follows as of December 31:
| 2009 | 2008 | |||||
AAA(1)(2) | 69 | % | 78 | % | ||
AA | 11 | 11 | ||||
A | 7 | 5 | ||||
BBB | 4 | 4 | ||||
BB(2) | 8 | 1 | ||||
Non-rated | 1 | 1 | ||||
| 100 | % | 100 | % | |||
| (1) | Includes U.S. Treasury securities. |
| (2) | Change in percentage compared to 2008 generally resulted from downgrades of securities. |
The investment portfolio of approximately 9,700 securities is also diversified with respect to Consolidated Financial Statementsasset class. Approximately 73% of the carrying value of the portfolio is composed of mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities. The largely floating-rate asset-backed portfolio consists primarily of credit card- and student loan-backed securities. Mortgage-backed securities are split between securities of Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and U.S. and non-U.S. large-issuer collateralized mortgage obligations. During 2009, 1,259 securities were downgraded. The 2009 downgrades included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
425 municipal securities (state and political subdivisions), 272 of which were based on downgrades of the underlying third-party financial guarantor.
The carrying amounts, by contractual maturity, of debt securities available for sale and held to maturity, and the related weighted-average contractual yields, were as follows as of December 31, 2008:2009:
| Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | ||||||||||||||||
Available for sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 10,615 | 0.98 | % | $ | 88 | 3.77 | % | $ | 212 | 5.32 | % | $ | 664 | 4.75 | % | ||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 129 | 4.17 | 2,755 | 4.42 | 2,314 | 5.16 | 5,600 | 4.13 | ||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 545 | 2.05 | 9,449 | 1.98 | 5,153 | 2.98 | 4,277 | 3.33 | ||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1 | 4.75 | 577 | 5.64 | 94 | 5.83 | 769 | 5.75 | ||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 289 | 5.08 | 2,322 | 5.20 | 1,624 | 5.35 | 1,477 | 5.96 | ||||||||||||||||
Other investments | 2,171 | 4.33 | 1,814 | 5.09 | 646 | 5.39 | 92 | 4.17 | ||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 13,750 | $ | 17,005 | $ | 10,043 | $ | 12,879 | ||||||||||||||||
Held to maturity purchased under AMLF: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities(3) | $ | 6,087 | 3.02 | % | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||
Held to maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 501 | 4.38 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | — | — | $ | 32 | 5.00 | % | $ | 778 | 5.13 | % | ||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | $ | 269 | 0.84 | % | 3,061 | 2.93 | 5 | 0.97 | 651 | 4.94 | ||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 403 | 4.44 | 4,208 | 4.93 | 1,861 | 4.40 | 3,507 | 4.05 | ||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 100 | 3.36 | 264 | 5.39 | 15 | 4.31 | 3 | 5.53 | ||||||||||||||||
Other investments | 105 | 0.50 | 4 | 3.06 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 877 | $ | 8,038 | $ | 1,913 | $ | 4,939 | ||||||||||||||||
| Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | Amount | Yield | ||||||||||||||||
Available for sale(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 10,001 | — | $ | 398 | 1.02 | % | $ | 183 | 3.72 | % | $ | 580 | 3.13 | % | |||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 89 | 4.16 | % | 582 | 4.27 | 8,489 | 3.99 | 5,776 | 2.95 | |||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 569 | 1.36 | 10,304 | 0.76 | 8,545 | 0.64 | 5,111 | 0.74 | ||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 58 | 5.26 | 656 | 5.13 | 199 | 5.61 | 1,496 | 2.02 | ||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 354 | 6.65 | 2,168 | 6.45 | 2,126 | 6.14 | 1,289 | 5.88 | ||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 2,899 | 3.34 | 1,896 | 1.45 | 1,509 | 1.69 | 4,007 | 0.94 | ||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities | 303 | 5.22 | 1,240 | 5.38 | 657 | 5.32 | 34 | 0.84 | ||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 14,273 | $ | 17,244 | $ | 21,708 | $ | 18,293 | ||||||||||||||||
Held to maturity(1): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 500 | 4.38 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | — | — | $ | 48 | 4.46 | % | $ | 199 | 4.88 | % | $ | 373 | 5.38 | % | ||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 49 | 0.46 | 79 | 0.83 | 112 | 1.71 | 227 | 0.94 | ||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 600 | 4.71 | 2,945 | 4.94 | 1,904 | 4.10 | 2,813 | 4.07 | ||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 56 | 5.76 | 135 | 7.47 | 14 | 6.39 | 1 | 7.25 | ||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 1,214 | 1.10 | 2,912 | 1.07 | 411 | 3.66 | 6,285 | 2.66 | ||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 2,419 | $ | 6,119 | $ | 2,640 | $ | 9,699 | ||||||||||||||||
| (1) | The maturities of mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations are based upon |
| (2) | Yields have been calculated on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, using applicable federal and state income tax rates. |
Impairment
Net unrealized losses on securities available for sale were as follows as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
Fair value | $ | 72,699 | $ | 54,163 | ||||
Amortized cost | 74,843 | 60,786 | ||||||
Net unrealized loss, pre-tax | $ | (2,144 | ) | $ | (6,623 | ) | ||
Net unrealized loss, after-tax | $ | (1,316 | ) | $ | (4,057 | ) | ||
The above net unrealized loss amounts at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 excluded the remaining net unrealized loss of $1.01 billion, or $635 million after-tax, and $2.27 billion, or $1.39 billion after-tax, respectively, related to reclassifications of securities available for sale to securities held to maturity. These after-tax amounts are recorded in other comprehensive income. The decline in the remaining after-tax unrealized loss amounts related to transferred securities resulted from amortization and from the recognition of losses from other-than-temporary impairment on certain of the securities.
We conduct periodic reviews of individual securities to assess whether other-than-temporary impairment exists. To the extent that other-than-temporary impairment is identified, the impairment is broken into a credit component and a non-credit component. The credit component is recognized in our consolidated statement of income, and the non-credit component is recognized in other comprehensive income to the extent that management does not intend to sell the security (see note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8).
The assessment of other-than-temporary impairment involves an evaluation of economic and security-specific factors, which are more fully described in note 3. Such factors are based upon estimates, derived by management, which contemplate current market conditions and security-specific performance. To the extent that market conditions are worse than management’s expectations, other-than-temporary impairment could increase, in particular the credit component that would be recognized in our consolidated statement of income.
National housing prices, according to the Case-Shiller National HPI, have declined to date approximately 30% peak-to-current. Management currently estimates that national housing prices will continue to decline and bottom out during the second half of 2010, consistent with a peak-to-trough housing price decline of approximately 37%. As an indication of the sensitivity of our portfolio with respect to our more significant assumptions underlying our assessment of impairment, if we were to increase our default estimates to 110% of management’s current expectations with a corresponding slowing of prepayment speeds to 90% of management’s current expectations, credit-related other-than-temporary impairment could increase by approximately $120 million to $125 million, which impairment would be recorded in our consolidated statement of income.
Excluding the securities for which other-than-temporary impairment was recorded, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining securities and the resulting net unrealized losses to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about our assessment of impairment is provided in note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
Loans and Lease Financing
U.S. and non-U.S. loans and lease financing, and average loans and lease financing, were as follows for the years ended December 31 (excluding the allowance for losses):
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||||||
U.S.: | |||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | $ | 6,397 | $ | 9,402 | $ | 3,480 | $ | 2,298 | $ | 1,826 | |||||
Lease financing | 407 | 396 | 415 | 404 | 373 | ||||||||||
Total U.S. | 6,804 | 9,798 | 3,895 | 2,702 | 2,199 | ||||||||||
Non-U.S.: | |||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | 890 | 4,420 | 3,137 | 1,854 | 526 | ||||||||||
Lease financing | 1,437 | 1,584 | 1,914 | 1,926 | 1,904 | ||||||||||
Total non-U.S. | 2,327 | 6,004 | 5,051 | 3,780 | 2,430 | ||||||||||
Total loans | $ | 9,131 | $ | 15,802 | $ | 8,946 | $ | 6,482 | $ | 4,629 | |||||
Average loans and lease financing | $ | 11,884 | $ | 10,753 | $ | 7,670 | $ | 6,013 | $ | 5,689 | |||||
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | ||||||||||
U.S.: | |||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | $ | 6,239 | $ | 6,397 | $ | 9,402 | $ | 3,480 | $ | 2,298 | |||||
Purchased receivables | 786 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||
Lease financing | 408 | 407 | 396 | 415 | 404 | ||||||||||
Total U.S. | 7,433 | 6,804 | 9,798 | 3,895 | 2,702 | ||||||||||
Non-U.S.: | |||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | 471 | 890 | 4,420 | 3,137 | 1,854 | ||||||||||
Purchased receivables | 1,596 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||
Lease financing | 1,308 | 1,437 | 1,584 | 1,914 | 1,926 | ||||||||||
Total non-U.S. | 3,375 | 2,327 | 6,004 | 5,051 | 3,780 | ||||||||||
Total loans | $ | 10,808 | $ | 9,131 | $ | 15,802 | $ | 8,946 | $ | 6,482 | |||||
Average loans and lease financing | $ | 9,703 | $ | 11,884 | $ | 10,753 | $ | 7,670 | $ | 6,013 | |||||
U.S. commercial and financial loans at December 31, 2009 and 2008 included approximately $600 million and $800 million, respectively, of commercial real estate loans purchased from certain customersacquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman Brothers. We recorded a reserve of $200 million associated with performance under the indemnification agreement during the third quarter of 2008, representing the difference between our indemnification obligation and the fair value of the loans acquired. We paid $1.00 billion to settle the indemnification obligations, and the acquired loans had an estimated fair value of $800 million. The contractual legal balance of the acquired loans is approximately $1.24 billion.
Lehman. The loans, which are primarily collateralized by direct and indirect interests in commercial real estate, were recorded at their then current fair value. The accounting for substantially all of these loans is governed by AICPA Statement of Position, or SOP, No. 03-3,Accounting for Certain Loans or Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer. SOP No. 03-3 applies to loans with evidence of credit deterioration since origination for which it is probable,value on the date acquired. Fair value represented management’s expectation, as of the date of acquisition, of the loans, that all contractual payments will not be collected. Pursuant to SOP No. 03-3, management will periodically reassess these cash flow assumptions, and the impact of any changes in expectations will be recognized in results of operations through an adjustment to a fair value allowance and, in some cases, an adjustment to the yield of the loans. Fair value represented management’s expectation with respect to future collection of principal and interest, using appropriate market discount rates as of the date of acquisition. No
As of the date of acquisition, management considered it probable that all contractual payments would not be collected, and accordingly reflected that assumption in the measurement of the loans’ aggregate fair value. Pursuant to current accounting standards, management is required to periodically reassess its cash flow expectations with respect to these loans, and recognize the impact of any changes in expected future cash flows in consolidated results of operations through an adjustment to a valuation allowance and, in some cases, an adjustment to the yield of the loans. If expected future cash flows from these loans are adversely affected by further deterioration of conditions in the commercial real estate markets or by other factors, we could be required to record additional adjustments to the valuation adjustmentsallowance in our consolidated results of operations.
We define past-due loans as loans on which principal or provisionsinterest payments are over 90 days delinquent, but for loss were recorded since the initial acquisitionwhich interest continues to be accrued. Although a portion of these loans.commercial real estate loans is 90 days or more contractually past-due, we do not report them as past-due loans, because under current accounting standards, the interest earned on these loans is based on an accretable yield resulting from management’s expectations with respect to the future cash flows for each loan relative to both the timing and collection of principal and interest as of the reporting date, not the loans’ contractual payment terms. These cash flow estimates are updated quarterly to reflect changes in management’s expectations, which consider market conditions.
We generally place loans on non-accrual status once principal or interest payments are 60 days past due, or earlier if management determines that full collection is not probable. Loans 60 days past due, but considered both well-secured and in the process of collection, may be excluded from non-accrual status. For loans placed on non-accrual status, revenue recognition is suspended.
At December 31, 2009, approximately $2.3 million of the aforementioned commercial real estate loans had been placed by management on non-accrual status, as the yield associated with these loans, determined when the loans were acquired, was deemed to be non-accretable. This determination was based on management’s expectations of the future collection of principal and interest from the loans. Future changes in expectations with respect to collection of principal and interest on these loans could result in additional non-accrual loans and provisions for loan losses. There were no non-accrual loans at year-end 2008, approximately 5% of our consolidated total assets consisted of2007, 2006 or 2005.
The aggregate increase in loans and lease financing. The aggregate decreasefinancing from 2008 reflected the addition of $2.38 billion of structured asset-backed loans, presented in loans from 2007 reflectedthe preceding table as purchased receivables, in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation, partially offset by a decrease in overdrafts,short-duration advances, which result primarily from securities settlement activities of our customers. OverdraftsSuch advances included in loans were $4.64$2.07 billion and $11.65$4.64 billion at December 31, 20082009 and December 31, 2007,2008, respectively. Average overdraftsadvances were approximately $8.00$2.97 billion and $7.53$8.00 billion for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The lower levels of these advances for 2009 resulted from a decrease in customer demand and 2007, respectively.not a reduction in credit availability from, or committed lines provided by, State Street. As transaction flows returned to more normalized levels compared to the extraordinarily high levels experienced in 2008, customer demand for such short-term advances declined. These balancesadvances do not represent significant credit risk because of their short-term nature, which is generally overnight, the lack of significant concentration, and their occurrence in the normal course of the cash and securities settlement process.
As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, unearned income included in lease financing was $1.04 billion$907 million and $1.29$1.04 billion for non-U.S. leases, respectively, and $199$183 million and $212$199 million for U.S. leases, respectively.
Maturities for loan and lease financing categories were as follows as of December 31, 2008:2009:
| YEARS | YEARS | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Total | Under 1 | 1 to 5 | Over 5 | Total | Under 1 | 1 to 5 | Over 5 | ||||||||||||||||
U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | $ | 6,397 | $ | 6,357 | $ | 21 | $ | 19 | $ | 6,239 | $ | 5,844 | $ | 324 | $ | 71 | ||||||||
Purchased receivables | 786 | 786 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Lease financing | 407 | — | 7 | 400 | 408 | — | — | 408 | ||||||||||||||||
Total U.S. | 6,804 | 6,357 | 28 | 419 | 7,433 | 6,630 | 324 | 479 | ||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial | 890 | 890 | — | — | 471 | 471 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||
Purchased receivables | 1,596 | 1,561 | — | 35 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Lease financing | 1,437 | — | 19 | 1,418 | 1,308 | — | 20 | 1,288 | ||||||||||||||||
Total non-U.S. | 2,327 | 890 | 19 | 1,418 | 3,375 | 2,032 | 20 | 1,323 | ||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 9,131 | $ | 7,247 | $ | 47 | $ | 1,837 | $ | 10,808 | $ | 8,662 | $ | 344 | $ | 1,802 | ||||||||
The following table presents the classification of loans and leases due after one year according to sensitivity to changes in interest rates as of December 31, 2008:2009:
| (In millions) | ||||||
Loans and leases with predetermined interest rates | $ | 1,844 | $ | 1,716 | ||
Loans and leases with floating or adjustable interest rates | 40 | 430 | ||||
Total | $ | 1,884 | $ | 2,146 | ||
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the allowance for loan losses was $79 and $18 million, respectively. Changes in the allowance for loan losses were as follows for the years ended December 31:
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | |||||||||||||
U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 17 | $ | 14 | ||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 149 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Loan charge-offs—commercial and financial | (91 | ) | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||
Recoveries—commercial and financial | 3 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Reclassification | — | — | — | 1 | 3 | |||||||||||||
Balance at end of year—U.S. | 79 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 17 | |||||||||||||
Non-U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | — | — | — | 1 | 4 | |||||||||||||
Reclassification | — | — | — | (1 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||||||
Balance at end of year—Non-U.S. | — | — | — | — | 1 | |||||||||||||
Total balance at end of year | $ | 79 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | ||||||||
Of the aggregate provision for loan losses recorded in 2009, $124 million was associated with certain of the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnification obligations. This portion of the provision was reflective of changes in management’s expectations with respect to future principal and interest cash flows from these loans. The changes in expectations were primarily based on the assessment of the impact of the deteriorating economic conditions in the commercial real estate markets on these loans during 2009. Of the remaining provision of $25 million, $16 million related to the results of the Federal Reserve’s Shared National Credit review. The charge-offs of $91 million in 2009 primarily related to the commercial real estate loans, as management considered certain of these loans no longer collectible.
Cross-Border Outstandings
Cross-border outstandings, as defined by bank regulatory rules, are amounts payable to State Street by residents of foreign countries, regardless of the currency in which the claim is denominated, and local country claims in excess of local country obligations. These cross-border outstandings consist primarily of deposits with banks, loan and lease financing and investment securities.
In addition to credit risk, cross-border outstandings have the risk that, as a result of political or economic conditions in a country, borrowers may be unable to meet their contractual repayment obligations of principal and/or interest when due because of the unavailability of, or restrictions on, foreign exchange needed by borrowers to repay their obligations.
Cross-border outstandings to countries in which we do business which amounted to at least 1% of our consolidated total assets were as follows as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
United Kingdom | $ | 5,836 | $ | 5,951 | $ | 5,531 | $ | 8,116 | $ | 5,836 | $ | 5,951 | ||||||
Australia | 2,044 | 3,567 | 1,519 | 5,767 | 2,044 | 3,567 | ||||||||||||
Canada | — | 4,565 | — | 2,322 | — | 4,565 | ||||||||||||
Netherlands | 1,783 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Germany | — | 2,944 | 2,696 | 1,623 | — | 2,944 | ||||||||||||
Total cross-border outstandings | $ | 7,880 | $ | 17,027 | $ | 9,746 | $ | 19,611 | $ | 7,880 | $ | 17,027 | ||||||
The total cross-border outstandings presented in the table represented 5%12%, 12%9% and 9%12% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Aggregate cross-border outstandings to
countries which totaled between .75% and 2006, respectively.1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2006 amounted to $1.05 billion (Canada).
Capital
RegulatoryThe management of regulatory and economic capital management both useinvolve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives.
Regulatory Capital
Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders willis expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our capital position relative to our peers, regulatory capital requirements, and the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt.debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies.
The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act
of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company.
Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31:
| REGULATORY GUIDELINES | STATE STREET | STATE STREET BANK | REGULATORY GUIDELINES | STATE STREET | STATE STREET BANK | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Minimum | Well Capitalized | 2008(2) | 2007 | 2008(2) | 2007 | Minimum | Well Capitalized | 2009 | 2008(2) | 2009 | 2008(2) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Regulatory capital ratios: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 risk-based capital | 4 | % | 6 | % | 20.3 | % | 11.2 | % | 19.8 | % | 11.2 | % | 4 | % | 6 | % | 17.7 | % | 20.3 | % | 17.3 | % | 19.8 | % | ||||||||||||
Total risk-based capital | 8 | 10 | 21.6 | 12.7 | 21.3 | 12.7 | 8 | 10 | 19.1 | 21.6 | 19.0 | 21.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 4 | 5 | 7.8 | 5.3 | 7.6 | 5.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio(1) | 4 | 5 | 8.5 | 7.8 | 8.2 | 7.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. |
| (2) | Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. |
At December 31, 2008,2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s regulatorytier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios increaseddecreased compared to year-end 2007. The increases for2008. With respect to State Street, resulted primarilythe loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the issuanceU.S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of capital-eligible debt securities in January 2008, the June 2008May 2009 public offering
of our common stock and our participation in2009 net income before the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program in October 2008 described further below, as well as 2008 net income.conduit loss, reduced tier 1 and total risk-based capital. With respect to State Street Bank, the parent company contributed an aggregateloss associated with the conduit consolidation, partly offset by the impact of approximately $4.68 billion to State Street Bank during 2008 to enhance its equity2009 net income before the conduit loss, reduced tier 1 and total risk-based capital. For State Street
The impact on the ratios of the decreases in tier 1 and State Street Bank, thesetotal risk-based capital described above was partly offset by decreases in total risk-weighted assets for both entities, as increases in capitalinvestment securities from both the conduit consolidation and our investment portfolio re-investment program were more than offset increasesby a reduction in on- and off-balance risk-weightedaggregate balance sheet assets, primarily associated with the impactgenerally due to lower levels of increases inexcess liquidity, as noninterest-bearing customer deposits and higher volumesreturned to more normal levels during the second half of foreign exchange derivative contracts.2009 as market conditions stabilized. All ratios for State Street and State Street Bank exceeded the regulatory minimum and well-capitalized thresholds.
In January 2008, State Street Capital Trust III, a Delaware statutory trust wholly owned by the parent company, issued $500 million in aggregate liquidation amount of 8.250% fixed-to-floating rate normal automatic preferred enhanced capital securities, referred to as “normal APEX,” and used the proceeds to purchase a like amount of remarketable 6.001% junior subordinated debentures due 2042 from the parent company. In addition, the trust entered into stock purchase contracts with the parent company under which the trust agrees to purchase, and the parent company agrees to sell, on the stock purchase date, a like amount in aggregate liquidation amount of the parent company’s non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, series A, $100,000 liquidation preference per share. State Street will make contract payments to the trust at an annual rate of 2.249% of the stated amount of $100,000 per stock purchase contract. The normal APEX are beneficial interests in the trust. The trust will pass through, as distributions on or the redemption price of normal APEX, amounts that it receives on its assets that are the corresponding assets for the normal APEX. The corresponding assets for each normal APEX, $1,000 liquidation amount, initially are $1,000 principal amount of the 6.001% junior subordinated debentures and a 1/100th, or a $1,000, interest in a stock purchase contract for the purchase and sale of one share of the Series A preferred stock for $100,000. The stock purchase date is expected to be March 15, 2011, but it may occur on an earlier date or as late as March 15, 2012. From and after the stock purchase date, the corresponding asset for each normal APEX will be a 1/100th, or a $1,000, interest in one share of the Series A preferred stock. In accordance with existing accounting standards, we did not record the trust in our consolidated financial statements. The 6.001% junior debentures qualify for inclusion in tier 1 regulatory capital.
Capital PurchaseProgram
OnIn October 28, 2008, in connection with the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program, we issued 20,000 shares of our Series B fixed-rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, $100,000 liquidation preference per share, and a warrant to purchase 5,576,208 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $53.80 per share, to Treasury, and received aggregate proceeds of $2 billion.
The aggregate proceeds were allocated to the preferred stock and the warrant based on their relative fair values on the date of issuance. As a result, approximately $1.88 billion and $121 million, respectively, were allocated to the preferred stock and the warrant. The difference between the initial value of $1.88 billion allocated to the preferred stock and the liquidation amount of $2 billion was intended to be charged to retained earnings and credited to the preferred stock over the period that the preferred stock was outstanding, using the effective yield method.
The preferred shares which qualifyqualified as tier 1 regulatory capital, payand paid cumulative quarterly dividends at a rate of 5% per year for the first five years, and 9% per year thereafter. The preferred shares are non-voting, other than class voting rights on certain matters that could adversely affect the shares. We can redeem the preferred shares at par after December 15, 2011. Prior to this date, we can only redeem the preferred shares at par in an amount up to the cash proceeds (minimum $500 million) from qualifying equity offerings of any tier 1-eligible perpetual preferred or common stock. Any redemption is subject to the consent of the Federal Reserve. Until October 28, 2011, or such earlier time as the preferred stock has been redeemed or transferred by Treasury, we are not permitted, without Treasury’s consent, to increase the quarterly dividend per share on our common stock above $0.24 per share, or to repurchase our common stock.
year. The warrant iswas immediately exercisable, and hasoriginally had a 10-year term. The exercise price of $53.80 per share was based upon the average of the closing prices of our common stock during the 20-trading day period ended October 10, 2008, the last trading day prior to our election to participate in the program.
In June 2009, subsequent to the May 2009 public offering described below under “Common Stock,” we repaid the full amount of Treasury’s $2 billion equity investment by redeeming all of the outstanding shares of the Series B preferred stock at its aggregate liquidation amount plus accrued dividends, or approximately $2 billion. The exercise priceexcess of the aggregate liquidation amount over the then $1.89 billion carrying value of the preferred stock, which totaled approximately $106 million, was prepaid and recorded as a reduction of retained earnings.
In July 2009, we repurchased the common stock warrant, issued to Treasury as part of its overall investment, at its fair value of $60 million. The number of common shares subject to the warrant are both subject to anti-dilution adjustments. If we receive aggregate gross cash proceeds of at least $2 billion from one or more qualifying equity offerings of tier 1-eligible perpetual preferred or common stock on or prior to December 31, 2009, the number of shares of common stock underlying the warrant then held by Treasury will behad been reduced by one-half of the original number of common shares considering all adjustments, underlying the warrant.warrant as a result of the May 2009 public offering described below under “Common Stock.” The repurchase of the warrant reduced shareholders’ equity, because it was recorded as a reduction of surplus.
Common Stock
OnIn May 2009, we completed a public offering of approximately 58.97 million shares of our common stock. The offering price was $39 per share, and aggregate proceeds from the offering, net of underwriting commissions and related offering costs, totaled approximately $2.23 billion. Underwriting commissions totaled approximately $69 million.
In June 3, 2008, we completed a public offering of approximately 40.540.55 million shares of our common stock. The public offering price was $70 per share, and aggregate proceeds from the offering, net of underwriting commissions and related offering costs, totaled approximately $2.75 billion. Underwriting commissions totaled approximately $85 million. Of the total shares issued, approximately 7.47.39 million shares were issued out of treasury stock, and the remaining 33.133.16 million shares were newly issued. We executed
No shares of our common stock were purchased during 2009 under existing Board authorization. As of December 31, 2009, approximately 13.25 million shares remained available for future purchase under the offering pursuant to our current universal shelf registration statement filed with the SEC.
Board authorization. In January 2008, under an existing authorization by our Board of Directors, we repurchased purchased
552,000 shares of our common stock, at an average historical cost per share of approximately $75, in connection with a $1 billion accelerated share repurchase program that concluded on January 18, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, approximately 13,245,000 shares remained available for future purchase under the Board authorization. We generally employ third-party broker/dealers to acquire shares on the open market in connection with our common stock purchase program.
Funds for cash distributions to our shareholders by the parent company are derived from a variety of sources. The level of dividends to shareholders on our common stock, which totaled $400$20 million ($0.950.04 per share) in 20082009 (compared to $320$400 million and $0.88$0.95 per share in 2007)2008), is reviewed regularly and determined by the Board of Directors considering our liquidity, capital adequacy and recent earnings history and prospects, as well as economic conditions and other factors deemed relevant. During the first quarter of 2009, in light of the continued disruption in the global capital markets experienced since the middle of 2007, and as part of a plan to strengthen our tangible common equity, we announced a reduction of our quarterly dividend on our common stock to $0.01 per share.
Federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by subsidiary banks to the parent holding company. In addition, banking regulators have the authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends if they deem such payment to be an unsafe or unsound practice. Information concerning limitations on dividends from our subsidiary banks is provided in note 1615 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
During the first quarter of 2009, in light of the continued disruption in the global capital markets experienced since the middle of 2007, and as part of a plan to strengthen our tangible common equity, we announced a temporary reduction of our quarterly dividend on our common stock to $0.01 per share.
Other
The current minimum regulatory capital requirements enforced by the U.S. banking regulators are based on a 1988 international accord, commonly referred to as Basel I, which was developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. In 2004, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released the final version of its new capital adequacy framework, referred to as “BaselBasel II.” Basel II governs the capital adequacy of large, internationally active banking organizations, such as State Street, that generally rely on sophisticated risk management and measurement systems, and requires these organizations to enhance their measurement and management of the risks underlying their business activities and to better align regulatory capital requirements with those risks.
Basel II comprises a three-pillar framework for addressing capital adequacy—minimum regulatory capital requirements, which incorporate the measurement of credit risk, market risk and operational risk; supervisory review, which addresses the need for a banking organization to assess its capital adequacy position relative to its overall risk profile, including additional risks related to interest rate sensitivity, business model strategies and overall diversification benefits, rather than only with respect to its minimum capital requirements; and market discipline, which imposes more detailed public disclosure requirements on a banking organization intended to allow the assessment of key information about the organization’s risk profile and its associated level of regulatory capital.
In 2006, the fourDecember 2007, U.S. banking regulatory agenciesregulators jointly issued their second draft of implementation rules, with industry comment provided by the end of March 2007. Additional
supervisory guidance from the agencies was released late in February 2007; comments to the agencies were provided by the end of May 2007, and the final rules were released on December 7, 2007,to implement the Basel II framework in the U.S. Implementation is subject to multi-year transition periods during which floors are established to limit the amounts by which minimum required capital may decrease. The framework does not supersede or change the existing prompt corrective action and leverage capital requirements applicable to banking organizations in the U.S., and explicitly preserves the regulators’ authority to require organizations to hold additional capital where appropriate. Basel II’s global regulatory reach, combined with recent market dynamics affecting a stated effective datebroad spectrum of April 1, 2008. financial institutions worldwide, make it likely further regulatory changes will be proposed in the future.
State Street previouslyhas established a comprehensive implementation program to ensure theseimplement the Basel II framework and underlying regulatory requirements are met within the prescribed timeframes.time frames. We anticipate adopting the most advanced approaches for assessing our capital adequacy.adequacy under the requirements.
Economic Capital
We define economic capital as the capital required to protect holders of our senior debt, and obligations higher in priority, against unexpected economic losses over a one-year period at a level consistent with the solvency of a firm with our target “AA” senior debt rating. Economic capital requirements are one of several important measures used by management and the Board to assess the adequacy of our capital levels in relation to State Street’s risk profile. Our Capital Committee is responsible for overseeing our economic capital process.
The framework and methodologies used to quantify economic capital for each of the risk types described below have been developed by our Enterprise Risk Management, Global Treasury and Corporate Finance groups and are designed to be generally consistent with our risk management principles and the new Basel II regulatory capital rules.adequacy framework. This economic capital framework has been approved by senior management and the ExecutiveRisk and Capital Committee of the Board of Directors.Board. Due to the evolving nature of quantification techniques, we expect to periodically refine the methodologies, assumptions, and data used to estimate our economic capital requirements, which could result in a different amount of capital needed to support our business activities.
We quantify capital requirements for the risks inherent in our business activities and group them into one of the following broadly-defined categories:
Market risk: the risk of adverse financial impact due to fluctuations in market prices, primarily as they relate to our trading activities;
Interest-rate risk: the risk of loss in non-trading asset and liability management positions, primarily the impact of adverse movements in interest rates on the repricing mismatches that exist between balance sheet assets and liabilities;
Credit risk: the risk of loss that may result from the default or downgrade of a borrower or counterparty;
Operational risk: the risk of loss from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or from external events, which is consistent with the Basel II definition; and
Business risk: the risk of negative earnings resulting from adverse changes in business factors, including changes in the competitive environment, changes in the operational economics of our business activities, and the effect of strategic and reputation risks.
Economic capital for each of these five categories is estimated on a stand-alone basis using statistical modeling techniques applied to internally-generated and, in some cases, external data. These individual results are then aggregated at the State Street consolidated level. A capital reduction, or diversification benefit, is then applied to reflect the unlikely event of experiencing an extremely large loss in each risk type at the same time.
Liquidity
The objective of liquidity management is to ensure that we have the ability to meet our financial obligations in a timely and cost-effective manner, and that we maintain sufficient flexibility to fund strategic corporate initiatives as they arise. Effective management of liquidity involves assessing the potential mismatch between the future cash needs of our customers and our available sources of cash under normal and adverse economic and business conditions. Significant uses of liquidity, described more fully below, consist primarily of meeting deposit withdrawals and funding outstanding commitments to extend credit or to purchase securities as they are drawn upon. Liquidity is provided by the maintenance of broad access to the global capital markets and by our consolidated balance sheet asset structure.
Our Global Treasury group is responsible for the day-to-day management of our global liquidity position, which is conducted within risk guidelines established and monitored by ALCO. Management maintains a liquidity
measurement framework to assess the sources and uses of liquidity that is monitored by Global Treasury and our Enterprise Risk Management group. Embedded in this framework is a process that outlines several levels of potential risk to our liquidity and identifies “triggers” that we use as early warning signals of a possible difficulty. These triggers are a combination of internal and external measures of potential increases in cash needs or decreases in available sources of cash and possible impairment of our ability to access the global capital markets. Another important component of the framework is a contingency funding plan that is designed to identify and manage through a potential liquidity crisis. The plan defines roles, responsibilities and management actions to be undertaken in the event of deterioration in our liquidity profile caused by either a State Street-specific event or a broader disruption in the capital markets. Specific actions are linked to the levels of “triggers.”
We generally manage our liquidity risk on a global basis at the consolidated level. We also manage parent company liquidity, and in certain cases branch liquidity, separately. State Street Bank generally has broader
access to funding products and markets limited to banks, specifically the federal funds market and the Federal Reserve’s discount window and term auction facility. The parent company is managed to a more conservative liquidity profile, reflecting narrower market access. We typically hold enough cash, primarily in the form of interest-bearing deposits with subsidiary banks, to meet current debt maturities and cash needs, as well as those projected over the next one-year period.
Sources of liquidity come from two primary areas: access to the global capital markets and liquid assets maintainedcarried on our consolidated balance sheet. Our ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors in the capital markets is the first source of liquidity we would tap to accommodate the uses of liquidity described below. On-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. Each of these sources of liquidity is used in the management of daily cash needs and in a crisis scenario, wherein which we would need to accommodate potential large, unexpected demand for funds.
Uses of liquidity result from the following: withdrawals of unsecured customer deposits; draw-downs on unfunded commitments to extend credit or to purchase securities, generally provided through lines of credit; overdraft facilities; liquidity asset purchase agreements supporting the four unconsolidated asset-backed commercial paper conduits that we administer, and purchases by us of commercial paper issued by the conduits to support their liquidity.short-duration advance facilities. Customer deposits are generated largely from our investment servicing activities, and are invested in a combination of term investment securities and short-term money market assets whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. Most of the customer deposits are payable upon demand or are short-term in nature, which means that withdrawals can potentially occur quickly and in large amounts. Similarly, customers can request disbursement of funds under commitments to extend credit, or can overdraw deposit accounts rapidly and in large volumes. In addition, a large volume of unanticipated funding requirements, such as under liquidity asset purchase agreements that have met draw-down conditions, or large draw-downs of existing lines of credit, could require additional liquidity.
Material risks to sources of short-term liquidity could include, among other things, adverse changes in the perception in the financial markets of our financial condition or liquidity needs, and downgrades by major independent credit rating agencies of our deposits and our debt securities, which would restrict our ability to access the capital markets and could lead to withdrawals of unsecured deposits by our customers.
In managing our liquidity, we have issued term wholesale certificates of deposit and invested those funds in short-term money market assets where they would be available to meet cash needs. This portfolio stood at $5.74 billion at December 31, 2009, compared to $1.93 billion at December 31, 2008, compared to $4.57 billion at December 31, 2007.2008. In conjunctionconnection with our management of liquidity where we seek to maintain access to sources of back-up liquidity at reasonable costs, we have participated in the Federal Reserve’s term auction facility, or TAF, which is a secured lending program available to financial institutions that was established in December 2007.institutions. As of December 31, 2008,2009, State Street Bank’s borrowings under the term auction facilityTAF totaled $2.0 billion, compared to $5.0 billion which represented the highest levelas of State Street Bank’s borrowings under this facility forDecember 31, 2008. The aggregate certificate-of-deposit and term auction facilityhighest TAF balances were higher at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007, asborrowed by State Street Bank held greater
liquidity in lightThe higher aggregate certificate of deposit and TAF balances as of December 31, 2009 were attributable to the impact of the continued disruption inMay 2009 conduit consolidation. Prior to the financial markets. We did not experience any net deterioration in our customer deposit base during 2008.consolidation, the conduits funded their asset purchases through the issuance of asset-backed commercial paper. Subsequent to the consolidation, State Street Bank has funded the conduits’ assets with the aforementioned sources, as well as the issuance of conduit asset-backed commercial paper. As of December 31, 2009, asset-backed commercial paper issued to third parties by the conduits totaled approximately $12.07 billion.
While maintenance of our high investment-grade credit rating is of primary importance to our liquidity management program, on-balance sheet liquid assets represent significant liquidity that we can directly control, and provide a source of cash in the form of principal maturities and the ability to borrow from the capital markets using our securities as collateral. Our liquid assets consist primarily of cash balances at central banks in excess of regulatory requirements and other short-term liquid assets, such as federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits with banks, the latter of which are multicurrency instruments invested with major multinational banks; and high-quality, marketable investment securities not already pledged, which generally are more liquid than other types of assets and can be sold or borrowed against to generate cash quickly. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the cash
value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $85.81$75.98 billion, compared to $55.14$85.81 billion as of December 31, 2007.2008. The increasedecrease was mainly the result ofattributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits induring the third quartersecond half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us. The vast majority ofus, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at year-endDecember 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly.
Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these incremental customer deposits, we chose to maintainmaintained approximately $48.64$22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2008,2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, compared to $39.84 billion as of December 31, 2007, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. The liquid assets and pledged securities described above excluded securities purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure ourState Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2008,2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window.
Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 20082009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers.
As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates.
The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 27, 2009.22, 2010.
| Standard & Poor’s | Moody’s Investors Service | Fitch | DBRS | |||||
State Street Corporation: | ||||||||
Short-term commercial paper | A-1 | P-1 | F1+ | |||||
Senior debt | A+ | A1 | A+ | AA (low) | ||||
Subordinated debt | A | A2 | A | A | ||||
Capital securities | BBB+ | A2 | A (high) | |||||
State Street Bank: | ||||||||
Short-term deposits | A-1+ | P-1 | F1+ | |||||
Long-term deposits | Aa2 | AA | ||||||
Senior debt | Aa2 | A+ | AA | |||||
Subordinated debt | A+ | Aa3 | A | AA (low) | ||||
Outlook | Negative | Negative | Stable | Negative |
We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have, as discussed previously, issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to the shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors.
We currently maintain a corporate commercial paper program, unrelated to the conduits’ asset-backed commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3 billion with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issue. At December 31, 2008,2009, we had $2.59$2.78 billion of commercial paper outstanding, compared to $2.36$2.59 billion at December 31, 2007.2008. Additional information about our corporate commercial paper program is provided in note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
In connection with our participation in the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP, in which we elected to participate in December 2008, we canthe parent company was eligible to issue up to approximately $1.67 billion, and State Street Bank can issue up to $2.48 billion of unsecured senior debt through June 30,during 2009, which will be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. As of December 31, 2009, the parent company’s outstanding unsecured senior debt issued under the TLGP was $1.5 billion. Additional information with respect to this outstanding debt is provided in note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. The guarantee of this unsecured senioroutstanding debt under the TLGP expires on the earlier ofApril 30, 2012, the maturity date of the debt or June 30, 2012. No debt was outstanding under this guarantee program as of December 31, 2008. During the first quarter of 2009, State Street issued unsecured senior debt totaling $155 million, composed of commercial paper issued under our program described in the preceding paragraph, which is backed by this guarantee.debt.
State Street Bank currently has Board authority to issue bank notes up to an aggregate of $5 billion, including up to $2.48 billion of senior notes under the above-described FDIC Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program and up to $1 billion of subordinated bank notes. AtIn connection with State Street Bank’s participation in the TLGP, in which State Street Bank elected to participate in December 2008, State Street Bank was eligible to issue up to approximately $2.48 billion of unsecured senior notes during 2009, backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. As of December 31, 2008, no2009, State Street Bank’s outstanding unsecured senior notes payable wereissued under the TLGP, and pursuant to the aforementioned Board authority, totaled $2.45 billion. Additional information with respect to these outstanding bank notes is provided in note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8. The guarantee of State Street Bank’s outstanding debt under the TLGP expires on the maturity date of each respective debt issuance, as follows—$1 billion on March 15, 2011, and all $5$1.45 billion was available for issuance.on September 15, 2011.
State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately USD $657$761 million as of December 31, 2008,2009, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2008,2009, no balance was outstanding on this line of credit.
CONTRACTUAL CASH OBLIGATIONS
| PAYMENTS DUE BY PERIOD | PAYMENTS DUE BY PERIOD | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2008 (In millions) | Total | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt(1) | $ | 7,473 | $ | 189 | $ | 653 | $ | 570 | $ | 6,061 | ||||||||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2009 (In millions) | Total | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt(1) | $ | 10,981 | $ | 529 | $ | 4,561 | $ | 797 | $ | 5,094 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Operating leases | 1,651 | 232 | 412 | 393 | 614 | 1,033 | 229 | 342 | 240 | 222 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Capital lease obligations | 1,192 | 73 | 148 | 140 | 831 | 1,151 | 74 | 147 | 145 | 785 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total contractual cash obligations | $ | 10,316 | $ | 494 | $ | 1,213 | $ | 1,103 | $ | 7,506 | $ | 13,165 | $ | 832 | $ | 5,050 | $ | 1,182 | $ | 6,101 | ||||||||||
| (1) | Long-term debt |
The obligations presented in the table above are recorded in our consolidated statement of condition at December 31, 2008.2009, except for interest on long-term debt. The table does not include obligations which will be settled in cash, primarily in less than one year, such as deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings. Additional information about deposits, federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements and other short-term borrowings is provided in notes 7 and 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
The table does not include obligations related to derivative instruments, because the amounts included in our consolidated statement of condition at December 31, 20082009 related to derivatives do not represent the amounts that may ultimately be paid under the contracts.contracts upon settlement. Additional information about derivative contracts is provided in note 1716 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8. We have obligations under pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, which are more fully described in note 1918 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8, which are not included in the above table.
Additional information about contractual cash obligations related to long-term debt and operating and capital leases is provided in notes 109 and 2019 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.Statements included under Item 8. The consolidated statement of cash flows, also included in this Form 10-K under Item 8, provides additional liquidity information.
OTHER COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS
| TENURE OF COMMITMENT | DURATION OF COMMITMENT | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2008 (In millions) | Total amounts committed(1) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
As of December 31, 2009 (In millions) | Total amounts committed(1) | Less than 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | Over 5 years | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Indemnified securities financing | $ | 324,590 | $ | 324,590 | $ | 365,251 | $ | 365,251 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Liquidity asset purchase agreements | 28,408 | 24,259 | $ | 1,813 | $ | 1,668 | $ | 668 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset purchase agreements | 7,819 | 3,597 | $ | 2,516 | $ | 1,658 | $ | 48 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Unfunded commitments to extend credit | 20,924 | 16,938 | 2,051 | 1,910 | 25 | 18,046 | 14,633 | 3,204 | 184 | 25 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Standby letters of credit | 6,061 | 1,372 | 2,779 | 1,600 | 310 | 4,390 | 1,365 | 2,688 | 228 | 109 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Purchase obligations(2) | 92 | 34 | 23 | 18 | 17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total commercial commitments | $ | 379,983 | $ | 367,159 | $ | 6,643 | $ | 5,178 | $ | 1,003 | $ | 395,598 | $ | 384,880 | $ | 8,431 | $ | 2,088 | $ | 199 | ||||||||||
| (1) | Total amounts committed are reported net of participations to independent third parties. |
| (2) | Amounts represent obligations pursuant to legally binding agreements, where we have agreed to purchase products or services with a specific minimum quantity defined at a fixed, minimum or variable price over a specified period of time. |
Additional information about the commercial commitments disclosed in this section is provided in note 1110 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
Risk Management
The global scope of our business activities requires that we balance what we perceive to be the primary risks in our businesses with a comprehensive and well-integrated risk management function. The measurement, monitoring and mitigation of risks are essential to the financial performance and successful management of our businesses. These risks, if not effectively managed, can result in current losses to State Street as well as erosion of our capital and damage to our reputation. Our systematic approach also allows for a more precise assessment of risks within a framework for evaluating opportunities for the prudent use of capital.
We have a disciplined approach to risk management that involves all levels of management. The Board of Directors provides extensive review and oversight of our overall risk management programs, including the approval of key risk management policies and the periodic review of State Street’s key risk indicators. These indicators are designed to identify major business activities of State Street with significant risk content, and to establish quantifiable thresholds for risk measurement. Key risk indicators are reported regularly to the ExecutiveRisk and Capital Committee of the Board and are reviewed periodically for appropriateness. Modifications to the indicators are made to reflect changes in our business activities or refinements to existing measurements. Enterprise Risk Management, or ERM, a dedicated corporate group, provides oversight, support and coordination across business units and is responsible for the formulation and maintenance of enterprise-wide risk management policies and guidelines. In addition, ERM establishes and reviews approved limits, and with business line management, monitors key risks. The head of ERMChief Risk Officer meets regularly with the Board or a Board committee, as appropriate, and has the authority to escalate issues as necessary.
The execution of duties in the management of people, products, business operations and processes is the responsibility of business unit managers. The function of risk management is responsible for designing, orchestrating and directing the implementation of risk management programs and processes consistent with corporate and regulatory standards. Accordingly, risk management is a shared responsibility between ERM and the business lines and requires joint efforts in goal setting, program design and implementation, resource management, and performance evaluation between business and functional units.
Responsibility for risk management is overseen by a series of management committees. The Major Risk Committee, or MRC, is responsible for the formulation and recommendation of policies, and the approval of guidelines and programs governing the identification, analysis, measurement and control of material risks across State Street. Chaired by the head of ERM,Chief Risk Officer, the MRC focuses on the review of business activities with significant risk content and the assessment of risk management programs and initiatives. Our Capital Committee, chaired by our Chief Financial Officer, oversees the management of our regulatory and economic capital, the determination of the framework for capital allocation and strategies for capital structure and debt and equity issuances. ALCO, chaired by the Treasurer, oversees the management of our consolidated balance sheet, including management of our global liquidity and interest-rate risk positions. The Fiduciary Review Committee reviews the criteria for the acceptance of fiduciary duties, and assists our business lines with their fiduciary responsibilities executed on behalf of customers. The Credit Committee, chaired within ERM, acts as the credit policy committee for State Street. The Operational Risk Committee, chaired within ERM,by the Chief Risk Officer, provides cross-business oversight of operational risk to identify, measure, manage and control operational risk in an effective and consistent manner across State Street. The Model Assessment Committee, chaired within ERM, provides recommendations concerning technical modeling issues and independently validates qualifying financial models utilized by our businesses. Several other committees with specialized risk management functions report to the MRC.
Corporate Audit serves in a complementary role to our program of risk management, providing the Board and management with continuous monitoring and control audits to assess adherence to State Street’s policies and procedures and the effectiveness of its system of internal controls. Additionally, the internal control environment is evaluated through external examinations and regulatory compliance efforts. The Corporate Compliance, Regulatory and Industry Affairs, and Legal groups also serve essential roles in risk management. Corporate Compliance is responsible for the design, implementation and oversight of policies, guidelines and programs to support our compliance with applicable laws and regulations wherever we conduct business. The Regulatory and Industry Affairs group monitors proposed changes in rules and legislation, and the Legal group provides counsel that enables us to deal with complex legal and regulatory environments, maximize business opportunities and minimize legal, regulatory and other risks.
While we believe that our risk management program is effective in managing the risks in our businesses, external factors may create risks that cannot always be identified or anticipated.
Market Risk
Market risk is defined as the risk of adverse financial impact due to fluctuations in interest rates, foreign exchange rates and other market-driven factors and prices. State Street is exposed to market risk in both its
trading and non-trading, or asset and liability management, activities. The market risk management processes related to these activities, discussed in further detail below, apply to both on-balance sheet and off-balance sheet exposures.
We primarily engage in trading and investment activities to serve our customers’ needs and to contribute to overall corporate earnings and liquidity. In the conduct of these activities, we are subject to, and assume, market risk. The level of market risk that we assume is a function of our overall objectives and liquidity needs, customer requirements and market volatility. Interest-rate risk, a component of market risk, is more thoroughly discussed in the “Asset and Liability Management” portion of this “Market Risk” section.
Trading Activities
Market risk associated with foreign exchange and other trading activities is managed through corporate guidelines, including established limits on aggregate and net open positions, sensitivity to changes in interest rates, and concentrations, which are supplemented by stop-loss thresholds. We use a variety of risk management tools and methodologies, including value-at-risk, to measure, monitor and manage market risk. All limits and measurement techniques are reviewed and adjusted as necessary on a regular basis by business managers, the market risk management group and the Trading and Market Risk Committee.
We use a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our customers’ needs, conduct trading activities and manage our interest-rate and currency risk. These activities are designed to create trading revenue and to hedge potential earnings volatility. In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our customers use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With the growth of cross-border investing, customers have an increasing need for foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward contracts and options in support of these customer needs.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest-rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and using derivatives, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest-rate options and interest-rate swaps. As of December 31, 2008,2009, the aggregate notional amount of these derivatives was $742.84$588.86 billion, of which $688.81$565.66 billion were foreign exchange forward and spot contracts. In the aggregate, long and short foreign exchange forward positions are closely matched to minimize currency and interest-rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates. Additional information about trading derivatives is provided in note 1716 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
As noted above, we use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including value-at-risk, or VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk measurement system to estimate VaR daily. We have adopted standards for estimating VaR, and we maintain capital for market risk in accordance with applicable regulatory guidelines. VaR is estimated for a 99% one-tail confidence interval and an assumed one-day holding period using a historical observation period of greater than two years. A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses should not exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year. The methodology uses a simulation approach based on historically observed changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates (domestic and foreign) and foreign exchange implied volatilities, and takes into account the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions.
Like all quantitative risk measures, VaR is subject to limitations and assumptions inherent in our methodology. Our methodology gives equal weight to all market-rate observations regardless of how recently the market rates were observed. The estimate is calculated using static portfolios consisting of trading positions held at the end of each business day. Therefore, implicit in the VaR estimate is the assumption that no intraday actions are taken by management during adverse market movements. As a result, the methodology does not include risk associated with intraday changes in positions or intraday price volatility.
The following table presents VaR with respect to our trading activities, for trading positions held during the periods indicated, as measured by our VaR methodologymethodology. The generally lower total VaR amounts compared to component VaR amounts primarily relate to diversification benefits across risk types. Amounts presented for the periods indicated:2008 have been restated to conform to current-year methodology.
VALUE-AT-RISK
| 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, (In millions) | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | ||||||||||||
Foreign exchange products | $ | 1.8 | $ | 4.7 | $ | .3 | $ | 1.8 | $ | 4.0 | $ | .7 | ||||||
Interest-rate products | 1.1 | 2.4 | .6 | 1.4 | 3.7 | .1 | ||||||||||||
| 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, (In millions) | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | ||||||||||||
Foreign exchange rates | $ | 3.1 | $ | 9.7 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 1.8 | $ | 4.7 | $ | 0.3 | ||||||
Interest-rates | 1.8 | 4.1 | 0.6 | 1.1 | 2.4 | 0.6 | ||||||||||||
Total VaR for trading assets | 3.7 | 9.2 | 1.2 | 2.3 | 5.0 | 1.1 | ||||||||||||
We back-test the estimated one-day VaR on a daily basis. This information is reviewed and used to confirm that all relevant trading positions are properly modeled. For the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, we did not experience any actual trading losses in excess of our end-of-day VaR estimate.
During 2009, our VaR measurement methodology was extended to measure VaR associated with certain assets classified as trading account assets in our consolidated balance sheet. These assets are not held in connection with typical trading activities, and thus are not reflected in the foregoing VaR table. In the table below, the VaR associated with these investments is reported as “VaR for non-trading assets.” “Total regulatory VaR” is calculated as the sum of the VaR for trading assets and the VaR for non-trading assets, with no diversification benefits recognized. The average, maximum and minimum amounts are calculated for each line item separately.
Total Regulatory VALUE-AT-RISK
| 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, (In millions) | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | Annual Average | Maximum | Minimum | ||||||||||||
VaR for trading assets | $ | 3.7 | $ | 9.2 | $ | 1.2 | $ | 2.3 | $ | 5.0 | $ | 1.1 | ||||||
VaR for non-trading assets | 2.1 | 3.2 | 1.6 | nm | nm | nm | ||||||||||||
Total regulatory VaR | 4.8 | 10.4 | 1.2 | 2.3 | 5.0 | 1.1 | ||||||||||||
nm–not measured for the period.
Asset and Liability Management Activities
The primary objective of asset and liability management is to provide sustainable and growing net interest revenue, or NIR, under varying economic environments, while protecting the economic values of our balance sheet assets and liabilities from the adverse effects of changes in interest rates. Most of our NIR is earned from the investment of deposits generated by our core Investment Servicing and Investment Management businesses. We structure our balance sheet assets to generally conform to the characteristics of our balance sheet liabilities, but we manage our overall interest-rate risk position in the context of current and anticipated market conditions and within internally-approved risk guidelines.
Our overall interest-rate risk position is maintained within a series of policies approved by the Board and guidelines established and monitored by ALCO. Our Global Treasury group has responsibility for managing State Street’s day-to-day interest-rate risk. To effectively manage the consolidated balance sheet and related NIR, Global Treasury has the authority to take a limited amount of interest-rate risk based on market conditions and its views about the direction of global interest rates over both short-term and long-term time horizons. Global Treasury manages our exposure to changes in interest rates on a consolidated basis organized into three regional treasury units, North America, Europe and Asia/Pacific, to reflect the growing, global nature of our exposures and to capture the impact of change in regional market environments on our total risk position.
Our investment activities and our use of derivative financial instruments are the primary tools used in managing interest-rate risk. We invest in financial instruments with currency, repricing, and maturity characteristics we consider appropriate to manage our overall interest-rate risk position. In addition to on-balance sheet assets, we use certain derivatives, primarily interest-rate swaps, to alter the interest-rate characteristics of specific balance sheet assets or liabilities. The use of derivatives is subject to ALCO-approved guidelines. Additional information about our use of derivatives is provided in note 1716 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
As a result of growth in our non-U.S. operations, non-U.S. dollar denominated customer liabilities are a significant portion of our consolidated balance sheet. This growth results in exposure to changes in the shape and level of non-U.S. dollar yield curves, which we include in our consolidated interest-rate risk management process.
Because no one individual measure can accurately assess all of our exposures to changes in interest rates, we use several quantitative measures in our assessment of current and potential future exposures to changes in
interest rates and their impact on net interest revenue and balance sheet values.Net interest revenue simulation is the primary tool used in our evaluation of the potential range of possible net interest revenue results that could occur under a variety of interest-rate environments. We also usemarket valuation andduration analysis to assess changes in the economic value of balance sheet assets and liabilities caused by assumed changes in interest rates. Finally,gap analysis—the difference between the amount of balance sheet assets and liabilities re-pricing within a specified time period—is used as a measurement of our interest-rate risk position.
To measure, monitor, and report on our interest-rate risk position, we use (1) NIR simulation, or NIR-at-risk, which measures the impact on NIR over the next twelve months to immediate, or “rate shock,” and gradual, or “rate ramp,” changes in market interest rates; and (2) economic value of equity, or EVE, which measures the impact on the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows of an immediate change in interest rates. NIR-at-risk is designed to measure the potential impact of changes in market interest rates on NIR in the short term. EVE, on the other hand, is a long-term view of interest-rate risk, but with a view toward liquidation of State Street. Both of these measures are subject to ALCO-established guidelines, and are monitored regularly, along with other relevant simulations, scenario analyses and stress tests by both Global Treasury and ALCO.
In calculating our NIR-at-risk, we start with a base amount of NIR that is projected over the next twelve months, assuming that the then-current yield curve remains unchanged over the period. Our existing balance sheet assets and liabilities are adjusted by the amount and timing of transactions that are forecasted to occur over the next twelve months. That yield curve is then “shocked,” or moved immediately, ±100 basis points in a parallel fashion, or at all points along the yield curve. Two new twelve-month NIR projections are then developed using the same balance sheet and forecasted transactions, but with the new yield curves, and compared to the base scenario. We also perform the calculations using interest rate ramps, which are ±100 basis point changes in interest rates that are assumed to occur gradually over the next twelve-month period, rather than immediately as we do with interest-rate shocks.
EVE is based on the change in the present value of all NIR-related principal and interest cash flows for changes in market rates of interest. The present value of existing cash flows with a then-current yield curve serves as the base case. We then apply an immediate parallel shock to that yield curve of ±200 basis points and recalculate the cash flows and related present values. A large shock is used to better capture the embedded option risk in our mortgage-backed securities that results from the borrower’s prepayment opportunity.
Key assumptions used in the models described above include the timing of cash flows; the maturity and repricing of balance sheet assets and liabilities, especially option-embedded financial instruments like mortgage-backed securities; changes in market conditions; and interest-rate sensitivities of our customer liabilities with respect to the interest rates paid and the level of balances. These assumptions are inherently uncertain and, as a result, the models cannot precisely predict future NIR or predict the impact of changes in interest rates on NIR and economic value. Actual results could differ from simulated results due to the timing, magnitude and frequency of changes in interest rates and market conditions, changes in spreads and management strategies, among other factors. Projections of potential future streams of NIR are assessed as part of our forecasting process.
The following table presents the estimated exposure of NIR for the next twelve months, calculated as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, due to an immediate ± 100±100 basis point shift in then-current interest rates. Estimated incremental exposures presented below are dependent on management’s assumptions about asset and liability sensitivities under various interest-rate scenarios, such as those previously discussed, and do not reflect any actions management may undertake in order to mitigate some of the adverse effects of interest-rate changes on State Street’s financial performance.
NIR-AT-RISK
| Estimated Exposure to Net Interest Revenue | Estimated Exposure to Net Interest Revenue | |||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
Rate change: | ||||||||||||||||
+100 bps shock | $ | 7 | $ | (98 | ) | $ | (165 | ) | $ | 7 | ||||||
-100 bps shock | (439 | ) | 7 | (330 | ) | (439 | ) | |||||||||
+100 bps ramp | (29 | ) | (44 | ) | (128 | ) | (29 | ) | ||||||||
-100 bps ramp | (166 | ) | 20 | (112 | ) | (166 | ) | |||||||||
The NIR-at-risk exposure tomore significant NIR sensitivity over the next 12 months for an immediate 100 bp increase in market interest rates changed from negativeupward-100-bp shock at December 31, 20072009 compared to slightly positiveDecember 31, 2008 was primarily the result of expected purchases of fixed-rate investment securities associated with the aforementioned proposed acquisition of Intesa Sanpaola and the expected addition of fixed-to-floating interest-rate swaps to hedge long-term debt. NIR sensitivity to a downward-100-bp shock became less sensitive at December 31, 2008, while the NIR-at-risk exposure2009 compared to December 31, 2008. Contributing factors included growth in average noninterest-bearing deposits and less responsiveness in non-U.S. deposit yields to a 100 bp downward shock in rates changed from slightly positive to significantly negative. These changes were the result of two factors. First, the level of on-balance sheet liquid assets was increased during 2008 in response to the
disruption in the financial markets, resulting in NIR-at-risk exposures becoming more asset-sensitive compared to 2007. Second, with market interest rates and liability yields both well below 1.00% at December 31, 2008, the downward 100 bp shock produced balance sheet spread compression, as liability yields were prevented from repricing lower to the full extent of the rate shock. With central bank-administered interest rates worldwide already at historically low levels, however, we are positioned to benefit from rising interest rates going forward.
The year-over-year changes in NIR-at-risk exposure to +100upward-100-bp and -100 bpdownward-100-bp ramps were directionally the same as for the +/- 100 bp shocks, with exposure to rising rates becoming less negative, and exposure to declining rates changing to negative, although the change was less pronounced, due to the gradual shift in market rates inherent in the ramp scenarios.
Other important factors that impact the levels of NIR are balance sheet size and mix; interest-rate spreads; the slope and interest-rate level of U.S. dollar and non-U.S. dollar yield curves and the relationship between them; the pace of change in market interest rates; and management actions taken in response to the preceding conditions.
The following table presents estimated EVE exposures, calculated as of December 31, 20082009 and December 31, 2007,2008, assuming an immediate and prolonged shift in interest rates, the impact of which would be spread over a number of years.
ECONOMIC VALUE OF EQUITY
| Estimated Exposure to Economic Value of Equity | Estimated Exposure to Economic Value of Equity | |||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
Rate change: | ||||||||||||||||
+200 bps shock | $ | (1,873 | ) | $ | (1,195 | ) | $ | (1,205 | ) | $ | (1,873 | ) | ||||
- 200 bps shock | (740 | ) | 48 | (434 | ) | (740 | ) | |||||||||
The change in EVE results presented above indicate exposure to rising interest ratessensitivity for both periods, although the magnitude of the exposure as ofan upward-200-bp shock at December 31, 2008 increased2009 compared to December 31, 2007. In addition,2008 was mainly attributable to maturities and sales of fixed-rate investment securities coupled with our re-investment in floating-rate investment securities, which reduced overall portfolio duration. With respect to the exposure to falling interest rates became negative at December 31, 2008. Both of these changes reflect the significantly lower market interest rateschange in EVE sensitivity for a downward-200-bp shock at December 31, 2008 compared to December 31, 2007. The December 31, 2008 rate environment, with U.S.2009, deposit yields and short-term market interest rates near zero, preventsmoved lower during 2009, preventing the downward 200 bpseffect of the shock from fully occurring, as market rates are not allowed to fall below zero, and reduceslimiting the benefit of lower rates on marketthe estimated fair value of the investment portfolio. The increase in exposure for the rising rate scenario primarily reflects increased duration extension on mortgage-backed securities in a rising rate environment relative to the base scenario, due to lower absolute levels of interest rates in the base scenario at December 2008 compared to December 2007.customer deposits.
Credit Risk
Credit and counterparty risk is defined as the risk of financial loss if a borrower or counterparty is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with contractual terms. We assume credit and counterparty risk on both our on- and off-balance sheet exposures. The extension of credit and the acceptance of counterparty risk by State Street are governed by corporate guidelines based on the prospective customer’s risk profile, the markets served, counterparty and country concentrations, and regulatory compliance. Our focus on large institutional investors and their businesses requires that we assume concentrated credit risk infor a variety of forms.products and durations. We maintain comprehensive guidelines and procedures to monitor and manage all aspects of credit and counterparty risk that we undertake. Counterparties are evaluated on an individual basis at least annually, while significant exposures to counterparties are reviewed daily. Processes for credit approval and monitoring are in place for all credit extensions. As part of the approval and renewal process, due diligence is conducted based on the size and term of the exposure, as well as the qualitycreditworthiness of the counterparty. At any point in time, having one or more counterparties to which our exposure exceeds 10% of our consolidated total shareholders’ equity, exclusive of unrealized gains or losses, is not unusual. Exposure to these entities are aggregated and evaluated by ERM.
We provide, on a limited basis, traditional loan products and services to key customers and prospects in a manner that is intended to enhance customer relationships, increase profitability and minimizemanage risk. We employ a relationship model in which credit decisions are based upon credit quality and the overall institutional relationship. This model is typical of financial institutions that provide credit to institutional customers in the markets that we serve.
An allowance for loan losses is maintained to absorb probable credit losses in the loan and lease portfolio that can be estimated, and is reviewed regularly by management for adequacy. An internal rating system is used to assess potential risk of loss. State Street’s risk ratingrisk-rating process incorporates the use of risk rating tools informed byin conjunction with management’s judgment. Qualitative and quantitative inputs are captured in a transparent and replicable manner, and following a formal review and approval process, an internal credit rating based on State Street’s credit scale is assigned. The provision for loan losses is a charge to current earnings to maintain the overall allowance for loan losses at a level considered adequate relative to the level of credit risk in the loan and lease portfolio. No provisionInformation about provisions for loan losses was recorded in 2008, 2007 or 2006.
At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the allowance for loan losses was $18 million. Changesis included in the allowance“Provision for loan losses were as follows for the years ended December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004(1) | |||||||||||||
U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 17 | $ | 14 | $ | 43 | ||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | (15 | ) | ||||||||||||
Loan charge-offs—commercial and financial | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Recoveries—commercial and financial | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||
Reclassification | — | — | 1 | 3 | (14 | ) | ||||||||||||
Balance at end of year—U.S. | 18 | 18 | 18 | 17 | 14 | |||||||||||||
Non-U.S.: | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | — | — | 1 | 4 | 18 | |||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | (3 | ) | ||||||||||||
Reclassification | — | — | (1 | ) | (3 | ) | (11 | ) | ||||||||||
Balance at end of year—Non-U.S. | — | — | — | 1 | 4 | |||||||||||||
Total balance at end of year | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | ||||||||
Past-due loans are loans on which principal or interest payments are over 90 days delinquent, but where interest continues to be accrued. An aggregate of approximately $219 million of loans were past-due as of December 31, 2008, composed of commercial real estate loans purchased from certain customers pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman Brothers. These loans continued to accrue interest, and no additional valuation adjustments or provisions for loss were recorded since their initial acquisition. Additional information about these loans is provided in the “Financial Condition—Loans and Lease Financing”Loan Losses” section of this Management’s Discussion and Analysis. There were no past-due loans as of December 31, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
We generally place loans on non-accrual status once principal or interest payments are 60 days past due, or earlier if management determines that full collection is not probable. Loans 60 days past due, but considered both well-secured and in the process of collection, may be excluded from non-accrual status. For loans placed on non-accrual status, revenue recognition is suspended. There were no non-accrual loans at year-end 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
We purchase securities under agreements to resell. Risk is managed through a variety of processes, including establishing the acceptability of counterparties; limiting purchases largely to low-risk U.S. government securities; taking possession or control of transaction assets; monitoring levels of underlying collateral; and limiting the duration of the agreements. Securities are revalued daily to determine if we believe that additional collateral is necessary from the borrower. Most repurchase agreements are short-term, with maturities of less than 90 days.
We also provide customers with off-balance sheet liquidity and credit enhancement facilities in the form of letters of credit,and lines of credit and liquidity asset purchase agreements.credit. These exposures are subject to an initial credit analysis, with detailed approval and review processes. These facilities are also actively monitored and reviewed annually. We maintain a separate reserve for probable credit losses related to certain of these off-balance sheet activities. Management reviews the adequacy of this reserve on a regular basis.
On behalf of our customers, we lend their securities to creditworthy banks, broker/dealers and other institutions. In most circumstances, we indemnify our customers for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Though these transactions are collateralized, the substantial volume of these activities necessitates detailed credit-based underwriting and monitoring processes. The aggregate amount of indemnified securities on loan totaled $365.25 billion at December 31, 2009, and $324.59 billion at December 31, 2008, and $558.37 billion at December 31, 2007.2008. We require the borrowers to provide collateral in an amount equal to or in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. Collateral received in connection with our securities lending services is held by us as agent and is not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. The securities on loan and the collateral are revalued daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary. We held, as agent, cash and securities totaling $333.07$375.92 billion and $572.93$333.07 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, respectively.
The collateral held by us is invested on behalf of our customers. In certain cases, the collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the customer against loss of the principal invested. We require the repurchase agreement counterparty to provide collateral in an amount equal to or in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. The indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $375.92 billion at December 31, 2009 and $333.07 billion at December 31, 2008 and $572.93referenced above, $77.73 billion at December 31, 2007 referenced above,2009 and $68.37 billion at December 31, 2008 and $106.13 billion at December 31, 2007 werewas invested in indemnified repurchase agreements. We held, as agent, $71.87$82.62 billion and $111.02$71.87 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements at December 31, 20082009 and December 31, 2007,2008, respectively.
Processes for credit approval and monitoring are in place for other credit extensions. As part of the approval and renewal process, due diligence is conducted based on the size and term of the exposure, as well as the quality of the counterparty. Exposures to these entities are aggregated and evaluated by ERM.
Investments in debt and equity securities, including investments in affiliates, are monitored regularly by Corporate Finance and ERM. Procedures are in place for evaluating potentiallyassessing impaired securities, as discussed in notes 1 and 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
Operational Risk
We define operational risk as the potential for loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or from external events. As a leading provider of services to institutional investors, we conductprovide a broad array of complexservices, including research, investment management, trading services and specialized assetinvestment servicing, processing and fiduciary activities that give rise to operational risk. Consequently, active management of operational risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business. Our Operational Risk Policy Statement defines operational risk and details roles and responsibilities for managing operational risk. The Policy Statement is reinforced by the Operational Risk Guidelines, which codify our approach to operational risk. The Guidelines document our practices and provide a mandate within which programs, processes, and regulatory elements are implemented to ensure that operational risk is identified, measured, managed and controlled in a consistent manner across State Street. Responsibility for the management of operational risk lies with every individual at State Street.
We maintain an operational risk governance structure designed to ensure that responsibilities are clearly defined and to provide independent oversight of operational risk management. The ExecutiveRisk and Capital Committee of the Board sets operational risk policy and oversees implementation of the operational risk framework. ERM develops corporate programs to manage operational risk and oversees the overall operational risk program. BusinessesBusiness units take responsibility for their own operational risk and periodically review the status of the business controls, which are designed to provide a sound operational environment. The businessesbusiness units also identify, manage, and report on operational risk. The MRC and the Operational Risk Committee review operational risk related information and policies, provide oversight designed to ensure compliance withof the operational risk program, and escalate operational risk issues of note to the Executive Committee of the Board.Risk and Capital Committee. Corporate Audit performs independent reviews of the application of operational risk management practices and methodologies and reports to the Examining and Audit Committee of the Board.
Our discipline in managing operational risk, which is a result of this emphasis on policy, guidelines, oversight, and independent review, provides the structure to identify, evaluate, control, monitor, measure, mitigate and report operational risk.
Business Risk
We define business risk as the risk of adverse changes in our earnings related to business factors, including changes in the competitive environment, changes in the operational economics of business activities and the potential effect of strategic and reputation risks, not already captured as market, interest-rate, credit or operational risks. We incorporate business risk into our assessment of our economic capital needs. Active management of business risk is an integral component of all aspects of our business, and responsibility for the management of business risk lies with every individual at State Street.
Separating the effects of a potential material adverse event into operational and business risk is sometimes difficult. For instance, the direct financial impact of an unfavorable event in the form of fines or penalties would be classified as an operational risk loss, while the impact on our reputation and the potential loss of customers
and corresponding decline in revenue would be classified as a business risk loss. An additional example of business risk is the integration of a major acquisition. Failure to successfully integrate the operations of an acquired business, and the resultant inability to retain customers, would be classified as a business risk loss.
Business risk is managed with a long-term focus. Techniques include the development of business plans and appropriate management oversight. The potential impact of the various elements of business risk is difficult to quantify with any degree of precision. We use a combination of historical earnings volatility, scenario analysis, stress-testing and management judgment to help assess the potential effect on State Street attributable to business risk. Management and control of business risks are generally the responsibility of the business units as part of their overall and strategic planning and internal risk management processes.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
In the normal course of our business, we utilize three types of special purpose entities, referred to as SPEs. One type of SPE is utilized in connection with our involvement as collateral manager with respect to managed investment vehicles. Since we have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of these managed investment vehicles under existingcurrent accounting standards, we do not record these vehicles in our consolidated financial statements. A second type of SPE is utilized in connection with our asset-backed commercial paper program, under which conduits administered by us sell commercial paper to our institutional customers, primarily mutual fund customers, as short-term investments. In May 2009, as a result of actions we elected to take, we determined that we were the primary beneficiary of these conduits under current accounting standards, and were required by these standards to consolidate them into our consolidated financial statements. A third type of SPE is utilized in connection with our tax-exempt investment program, under which partnership trusts structure and sell certificated interests in pools of tax-exempt investment-grade assets to our mutual fund customers. These trusts are recorded in our consolidated financial statements, since we treat the underlying transactions as secured borrowings, not as sales. A third type of SPE is utilized in connection with our asset-backed commercial paper program, under which we administer four third-party asset-backed commercial paper conduits, which sell commercial paper to our institutional customers, primarily mutual fund customers, as short-term investments. Since we have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of these conduits under existing accounting standards, we do not record the conduits in our consolidated financial statements.
Additional information about the activities of the above-described SPEs, including information with respect to the consolidation of the conduits, is provided in note 1211 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
In the normal course of our business, we hold assets under custody and administration and assets under management in a custodial or fiduciary capacity for our customers, and, in accordance with GAAP, we do not record these assets in our consolidated statement of condition. Similarly, collateral funds associated with our securities finance activities are held by us as agent; therefore, we do not record these assets in our consolidated statement of condition. Additional information about these and other off-balance sheet activities is provided in note 1110 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
In the normal course of our business, we utilize derivative financial instruments to support our customers’ needs, to conduct our trading activities and to manage our interest-rate and foreign currency risk. Additional information about our use of derivativesderivative instruments is provided in note 1716 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
RECENT ACCOUNTING DEVELOPMENTS
Information with respect to recent accounting developments is provided in note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-K under Item 8.
| ITEM 7A. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
The information set forth in the “Market Risk” section of “Management’sManagement’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” included in this Form 10-K under Item 7, is incorporated by reference herein.
| ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA |
Additional information about restrictions on the transfer of funds from State Street Bank to the parent company is included in this Form 10-K under Item 5, and in the “Financial Condition—Capital” section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included under Item 7.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
THE SHAREHOLDERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
STATE STREET CORPORATION
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statement of condition of State Street Corporation as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008.2009. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Corporation’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these 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, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of State Street Corporation at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008,2009, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), State Street Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 26, 200922, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Boston, Massachusetts
February 26, 200922, 2010
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Consolidated Statement of Income
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | |||||||||||
Management fees | 1,028 | 1,141 | 943 | 824 | 1,028 | 1,141 | |||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | |||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 1,230 | 681 | 386 | 570 | 1,230 | 681 | |||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 277 | 271 | 272 | 171 | 277 | 271 | |||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 7,747 | 6,633 | 5,186 | 5,935 | 7,747 | 6,633 | |||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest revenue | 4,879 | 5,212 | 4,324 | 3,286 | 4,879 | 5,212 | |||||||||||||||||
Interest expense | 2,229 | 3,482 | 3,214 | 722 | 2,229 | 3,482 | |||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | |||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net gains from sales of available-for-sale securities | 368 | 68 | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Losses from other-than-temporary impairment | (1,155 | ) | (122 | ) | (34 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
Losses not related to credit | 928 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue after provision for loan losses | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | |||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | 350 | — | — | — | 350 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | 8,640 | 10,693 | 8,336 | |||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 149 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | 3,842 | 3,256 | 2,652 | 3,037 | 3,842 | 3,256 | |||||||||||||||||
Information systems and communications | 633 | 546 | 501 | 656 | 633 | 546 | |||||||||||||||||
Transaction processing services | 644 | 619 | 496 | 583 | 644 | 619 | |||||||||||||||||
Occupancy | 465 | 408 | 373 | 475 | 465 | 408 | |||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure | — | 600 | — | 250 | — | 600 | |||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | 450 | — | — | — | 450 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | 306 | — | — | — | 306 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | 115 | 198 | — | 49 | 115 | 198 | |||||||||||||||||
Professional services | 360 | 236 | 157 | 264 | 360 | 236 | |||||||||||||||||
Amortization of other intangible assets | 144 | 92 | 43 | 136 | 144 | 92 | |||||||||||||||||
Other | 892 | 478 | 318 | 516 | 892 | 478 | |||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | 5,966 | 7,851 | 6,433 | |||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations before income tax expense | 2,842 | 1,903 | 1,771 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense from continuing operations | 1,031 | 642 | 675 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense and extraordinary loss | 2,525 | 2,842 | 1,903 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense | 722 | 1,031 | 642 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income from continuing operations | 1,811 | 1,261 | 1,096 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income from discontinued operations before income tax expense | — | — | 16 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense from discontinued operations | — | — | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income before extraordinary loss | 1,803 | 1,811 | 1,261 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss, net of taxes | (3,684 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Income from discontinued operations | — | — | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (1,881 | ) | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | |||||||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders | $ | 1,640 | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | |||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders | $ | (2,044 | ) | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | ||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share from continuing operations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share before extraordinary loss: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.31 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | |||||||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.26 | 3.46 | 4.30 | 3.45 | |||||||||||||||||
Income per common share from discontinued operations: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | — | — | $ | .03 | |||||||||||||||||||
Diluted | — | — | .03 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings (Loss) per common share: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.34 | $ | (4.32 | ) | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | ||||||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | (4.31 | ) | 4.30 | 3.45 | ||||||||||||||||
Average common shares outstanding (in thousands): | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | 413,182 | 360,675 | 331,350 | 470,602 | 413,182 | 360,675 | |||||||||||||||||
Diluted | 416,100 | 365,488 | 335,732 | 474,003 | 416,100 | 365,488 | |||||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Consolidated Statement of Condition
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | ||||||||||||||||
Assets | ||||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks | $ | 3,181 | $ | 4,041 | $ | 2,641 | $ | 3,181 | ||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banks | 55,733 | 6,271 | 26,632 | 55,733 | ||||||||||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements | 1,635 | 19,133 | 2,387 | 1,635 | ||||||||||||
Federal funds sold | — | 4,540 | ||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | 815 | 589 | 148 | 815 | ||||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale | 54,163 | 70,326 | 72,699 | 54,163 | ||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility (fair value of $6,100) | 6,087 | — | ||||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity (fair value of $14,311 and $4,225) | 15,767 | 4,233 | ||||||||||||||
Loans and leases (less allowance for losses of $18) | 9,113 | 15,784 | ||||||||||||||
Premises and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation of $2,758 and $2,653) | 2,011 | 1,894 | ||||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility (fair value of $6,100 in 2008) | — | 6,087 | ||||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity (fair value of $20,928 and $14,311) | 20,877 | 15,767 | ||||||||||||||
Loans and leases (less allowance for losses of $79 and $18) | 10,729 | 9,113 | ||||||||||||||
Premises and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation of $3,046 and $2,758) | 1,953 | 2,011 | ||||||||||||||
Accrued income receivable | 1,738 | 2,096 | 1,497 | 1,738 | ||||||||||||
Goodwill | 4,527 | 4,567 | 4,550 | 4,527 | ||||||||||||
Other intangible assets | 1,851 | 1,990 | 1,810 | 1,851 | ||||||||||||
Other assets | 17,010 | 7,079 | 12,023 | 17,010 | ||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 173,631 | $ | 142,543 | $ | 157,946 | $ | 173,631 | ||||||||
Liabilities | ||||||||||||||||
Deposits: | ||||||||||||||||
Noninterest-bearing | $ | 32,785 | $ | 15,039 | $ | 11,969 | $ | 32,785 | ||||||||
Interest-bearing—U.S. | 4,558 | 14,790 | 5,956 | 4,558 | ||||||||||||
Interest-bearing—Non-U.S. | 74,882 | 65,960 | 72,137 | 74,882 | ||||||||||||
Total deposits | 112,225 | 95,789 | 90,062 | 112,225 | ||||||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 11,154 | 14,646 | 10,542 | 11,154 | ||||||||||||
Federal funds purchased | 1,082 | 425 | 4,532 | 1,082 | ||||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | 6,042 | — | — | 6,042 | ||||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 11,555 | 5,557 | 20,200 | 11,555 | ||||||||||||
Accrued taxes and other expenses | 408 | 4,392 | ||||||||||||||
Other liabilities | 13,972 | 6,799 | ||||||||||||||
Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 9,281 | 14,380 | ||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,419 | 3,636 | 8,838 | 4,419 | ||||||||||||
Total liabilities | 160,857 | 131,244 | 143,455 | 160,857 | ||||||||||||
Commitments and contingencies (note 11) | ||||||||||||||||
Commitments and contingencies (note 10) | ||||||||||||||||
Shareholders’ equity | ||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock, no par: 3,500,000 shares authorized; 20,000 shares issued and outstanding | 1,883 | — | ||||||||||||||
Common stock, $1 par: 750,000,000 shares authorized; 431,976,032 and 398,366,326 shares issued | 432 | 398 | ||||||||||||||
Preferred stock, no par: 3,500,000 shares authorized; 20,000 shares issued and outstanding in 2008 | — | 1,883 | ||||||||||||||
Common stock, $1 par: 750,000,000 shares authorized; 495,365,571 and 431,976,032 shares issued | 495 | 432 | ||||||||||||||
Surplus | 6,992 | 4,630 | 9,180 | 6,992 | ||||||||||||
Retained earnings | 9,135 | 7,745 | 7,071 | 9,135 | ||||||||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (5,650 | ) | (575 | ) | (2,238 | ) | (5,650 | ) | ||||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (418,354 and 12,081,863 shares) | (18 | ) | (899 | ) | ||||||||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (431,832 and 418,354 shares) | (17 | ) | (18 | ) | ||||||||||||
Total shareholders’ equity | 12,774 | 11,299 | 14,491 | 12,774 | ||||||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 173,631 | $ | 142,543 | $ | 157,946 | $ | 173,631 | ||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity
(Dollars in millions, except per share amounts, shares in thousands) | PREFERRED STOCK | COMMON STOCK | Surplus | Retained Earnings | Accumulated Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income | TREASURY STOCK | PREFERRED STOCK | COMMON STOCK | Surplus | Retained Earnings | Accumulated Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income | TREASURY STOCK | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares | Amount | Shares | Amount | Total | Shares | Amount | Shares | Amount | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2005 | 337,126 | $ | 337 | $ | 266 | $ | 6,189 | $ | (231 | ) | 3,501 | $ | (194 | ) | $ | 6,367 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | 1,106 | 1,106 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gains/losses on available-for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $40 and reclassification adjustment | 58 | 58 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation, net of related taxes of $56 | 124 | 124 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries, net of related taxes of $(10) | (18 | ) | (18 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in minimum pension liability, net of related taxes | 4 | 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on cash flow hedges, net of related taxes of $2 | 3 | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total comprehensive income | 1,106 | 171 | 1,277 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjustment to apply provisions of SFAS No. 158, net of related taxes of $(109) | (164 | ) | (164 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends declared—$.80 per share | (265 | ) | (265 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock acquired | 5,782 | (368 | ) | (368 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock received under COVERS contracts | 30 | 1,199 | (26 | ) | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and common stock options exercised, including tax benefit of $43 | 103 | (5,782 | ) | 300 | 403 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | (12 | ) | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2006 | 337,126 | 337 | 399 | 7,030 | (224 | ) | 4,688 | (290 | ) | 7,252 | 337,126 | $ | 337 | $ | 399 | $ | 7,030 | $ | (224 | ) | 4,688 | $ | (290 | ) | $ | 7,252 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjustment for effect of applying provisions of FASB Staff Position No. FAS 13-2 | (226 | ) | (226 | ) | (226 | ) | (226 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjusted balance at January 1, 2007 | 337,126 | 337 | 399 | 6,804 | (224 | ) | 4,688 | (290 | ) | 7,026 | 337,126 | 337 | 399 | 6,804 | (224 | ) | 4,688 | (290 | ) | 7,026 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | 1,261 | 1,261 | 1,261 | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gains/losses on available-for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $(276) and reclassification adjustment | (451 | ) | (451 | ) | (451 | ) | (451 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gains/losses on fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $(37) | (55 | ) | (55 | ) | (55 | ) | (55 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation, net of related taxes of $62 | 134 | 134 | 134 | 134 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on cash flow hedges, net of related taxes of $(7) | (11 | ) | (11 | ) | (11 | ) | (11 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries, net of related taxes of $(4) | (8 | ) | (8 | ) | (8 | ) | (8 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in minimum pension liability, net of related taxes of $28 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 40 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total comprehensive income | 1,261 | (351 | ) | 910 | 1,261 | (351 | ) | 910 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends declared—$.88 per share | (320 | ) | (320 | ) | (320 | ) | (320 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock acquired | 13,369 | (1,002 | ) | (1,002 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and common stock options exercised, including tax benefit of $52 | 401 | — | 65 | (5,975 | ) | 393 | 458 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock acquired ($75 per share) | 13,369 | (1,002 | ) | (1,002 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and options exercised, including tax benefit of $52 | 401 | — | 65 | (5,975 | ) | 393 | 458 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock issued in connection with acquisition | 60,839 | 61 | 4,166 | 4,227 | 60,839 | 61 | 4,166 | 4,227 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2007 | 398,366 | 398 | 4,630 | 7,745 | (575 | ) | 12,082 | (899 | ) | 11,299 | 398,366 | 398 | 4,630 | 7,745 | (575 | ) | 12,082 | (899 | ) | 11,299 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | 1,811 | 1,811 | 1,811 | 1,811 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gains/losses on available-for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $(2,866) and reclassification adjustment | (4,527 | ) | (4,527 | ) | (4,527 | ) | (4,527 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized gains/losses on fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $(116) | (187 | ) | (187 | ) | (187 | ) | (187 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation, net of related taxes of $(91) | (263 | ) | (263 | ) | (263 | ) | (263 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on cash flow hedges, net of related taxes of $(10) | (16 | ) | (16 | ) | (16 | ) | (16 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in unrealized gains/losses on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries, net of related taxes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in minimum pension liability, net of related taxes of $(48) | (83 | ) | (83 | ) | (83 | ) | (83 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total comprehensive income | 1,811 | (5,075 | ) | (3,264 | ) | 1,811 | (5,075 | ) | (3,264 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock and common stock warrant issued | 1,879 | 121 | 2,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock and common stock warrant issued under TARP | $ | 1,879 | 121 | 2,000 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock—$.95 per share | (400 | ) | (400 | ) | (400 | ) | (400 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock | (18 | ) | (18 | ) | (18 | ) | (18 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Accretion of preferred stock discount | 4 | (4 | ) | — | 4 | (4 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock acquired | 552 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock issued | 33,156 | 34 | 2,181 | (7,391 | ) | 538 | 2,753 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock acquired ($75 per share) | 552 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock issued in public offering | 33,156 | 34 | 2,181 | (7,391 | ) | 538 | 2,753 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Contract payments to State Street Capital Trust III | (36 | ) | (36 | ) | (36 | ) | (36 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and common stock options exercised, including tax benefit of $52 | 454 | 96 | 1 | (4,825 | ) | 343 | 440 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and options exercised, including tax benefit of $52 | 454 | — | 96 | 1 | (4,825 | ) | 343 | 440 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 1,883 | 431,976 | $ | 432 | $ | 6,992 | $ | 9,135 | $ | (5,650 | ) | 418 | $ | (18 | ) | $ | 12,774 | 1,883 | 431,976 | 432 | 6,992 | 9,135 | (5,650 | ) | 418 | (18 | ) | 12,774 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss | (1,881 | ) | (1,881 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities, net of reclassification adjustment and losses from other-than-temporary impairment related to factors other than credit, net of related taxes of $2,158 | 3,410 | 3,410 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized loss on fair value hedges of available –for-sale securities, net of related taxes of $82 | 129 | 129 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Losses from other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities related to factors other than credit, net of related taxes of $(237) | (387 | ) | (387 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation, net of related taxes of $(96) | 213 | 213 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in net unrealized losses on cash flow hedges, net of related taxes of $7 | 10 | 10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Change in minimum pension liability, net of related taxes of $23 | 37 | 37 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total comprehensive income | (1,881 | ) | 3,412 | 1,531 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock—$.04 per share | (20 | ) | (20 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock | (46 | ) | (46 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Accretion of preferred stock discount | 11 | (11 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prepayment of preferred stock discount | 106 | (106 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock issued in public offering | 58,974 | 59 | 2,172 | 2,231 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Redemption of TARP preferred stock investment | (2,000 | ) | (2,000 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Repurchase of TARP common stock warrant | (60 | ) | (60 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock awards and options exercised, including related taxes of $(52) | 4,416 | 4 | 76 | 80 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | 14 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ | — | 495,366 | $ | 495 | $ | 9,180 | $ | 7,071 | $ | (2,238 | ) | 432 | $ | (17 | ) | $ | 14,491 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (1,881 | ) | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash adjustments for depreciation, amortization, accretion and deferred income tax expense (benefit) | (282 | ) | 130 | 385 | (2,284 | ) | (282 | ) | 130 | |||||||||||||||
Income from discontinued operations | — | — | (16 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
(Gains) losses related to investment securities, net | 54 | 27 | (15 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss | 6,096 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
(Gains) Losses related to investment securities, net | (141 | ) | 54 | 27 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Change in trading account assets, net | (689 | ) | 195 | (179 | ) | 366 | (689 | ) | 195 | |||||||||||||||
Other, net | (2,850 | ) | 1,326 | (300 | ) | (6,425 | ) | (2,850 | ) | 1,326 | ||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities | (1,956 | ) | 2,939 | 981 | (4,269 | ) | (1,956 | ) | 2,939 | |||||||||||||||
Investing Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net (increase) decrease in interest-bearing deposits with banks | (49,462 | ) | (799 | ) | 5,809 | 29,222 | (49,462 | ) | (799 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net (increase) decrease in federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements | 22,038 | (2,832 | ) | (5,999 | ) | (752 | ) | 22,038 | (2,832 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Proceeds from sales of available-for-sale securities | 5,408 | 4,731 | 3,571 | 8,274 | 5,408 | 4,731 | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from maturities of available-for-sale securities | 32,291 | 21,750 | 16,602 | 43,995 | 32,291 | 21,750 | ||||||||||||||||||
Purchases of available-for-sale securities | (41,044 | ) | (27,578 | ) | (23,920 | ) | (58,780 | ) | (41,044 | ) | (27,578 | ) | ||||||||||||
Purchases under money market liquidity facility, net | (5,818 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net decrease (increase) in securities related to AMLF | 6,111 | (5,818 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from maturities of held-to-maturity securities | 1,766 | 859 | 1,590 | 4,498 | 1,766 | 859 | ||||||||||||||||||
Purchases of held-to-maturity securities | (1,062 | ) | (539 | ) | (1,246 | ) | (1,600 | ) | (1,062 | ) | (539 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net (increase) decrease in loans | 6,532 | (6,226 | ) | (2,464 | ) | 800 | 6,532 | (6,226 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Proceeds from sale of joint venture investment | 464 | — | — | — | 464 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Business acquisitions, net of cash acquired | (38 | ) | (647 | ) | — | — | (38 | ) | (647 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Purchases of equity investments and other long-term assets | (242 | ) | (192 | ) | (168 | ) | (241 | ) | (242 | ) | (192 | ) | ||||||||||||
Purchases of premises and equipment | (681 | ) | (476 | ) | (310 | ) | (325 | ) | (681 | ) | (476 | ) | ||||||||||||
Other, net | 278 | 95 | 114 | 430 | 278 | 95 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net cash used in investing activities | (29,570 | ) | (11,854 | ) | (6,421 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities | 31,632 | (29,570 | ) | (11,854 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Financing Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in time deposits | (13,988 | ) | 4,158 | (1,261 | ) | 1,267 | (13,988 | ) | 4,158 | |||||||||||||||
Net increase in all other deposits | 30,416 | 14,617 | 7,258 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase in short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | 6,139 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in all other deposits | (23,408 | ) | 30,416 | 14,617 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in short-term borrowings related to AMLF | (6,042 | ) | 6,139 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in short-term borrowings | 3,163 | (7,794 | ) | (653 | ) | (4,163 | ) | 3,163 | (7,794 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of issuance costs | 493 | 1,488 | — | 4,435 | 493 | 1,488 | ||||||||||||||||||
Payments for long-term debt and obligations under capital leases | (44 | ) | (533 | ) | (16 | ) | (29 | ) | (44 | ) | (533 | ) | ||||||||||||
Proceeds from public offering of common stock, net of issuance costs | 2,251 | — | — | 2,231 | 2,251 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock | 1,879 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of TARP preferred stock | — | 1,879 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of warrant to purchase common stock | 121 | — | — | — | 121 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Purchases of common stock | — | (1,002 | ) | (368 | ) | — | — | (1,002 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Redemption of TARP preferred stock investment | (2,000 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Repurchase of TARP common stock warrant | (60 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock for stock awards and options exercised | 12 | — | — | 34 | 12 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuances of treasury stock | 623 | 185 | 193 | — | 623 | 185 | ||||||||||||||||||
Payments for cash dividends | (399 | ) | (301 | ) | (259 | ) | (168 | ) | (399 | ) | (301 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net cash provided by financing activities | 30,666 | 10,818 | 4,894 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities | (27,903 | ) | 30,666 | 10,818 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) | (860 | ) | 1,903 | (546 | ) | (540 | ) | (860 | ) | 1,903 | ||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks at beginning of year | 4,041 | 2,138 | 2,684 | 3,181 | 4,041 | 2,138 | ||||||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks at end of year | $ | 3,181 | $ | 4,041 | $ | 2,138 | $ | 2,641 | $ | 3,181 | $ | 4,041 | ||||||||||||
Supplemental disclosure: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest paid | $ | 2,302 | $ | 3,403 | $ | 3,177 | $ | 722 | $ | 2,302 | $ | 3,403 | ||||||||||||
Income taxes paid | 1,118 | 593 | 533 | 884 | 1,118 | 593 | ||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash acquisitions of investment securities | 14,111 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash acquisitions of loans | 2,510 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash investments in premises and equipment and capital leases | 48 | 194 | 109 | 126 | 48 | 194 | ||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash acquisitions of investment securities available for sale | — | — | 1,464 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Non-cash additions of short-term borrowings | 20,919 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accounting and financial reporting policies of State Street Corporation conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, referred to as GAAP. State Street Corporation, the parent company, is a financial holding company headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts. Unless otherwise indicated or unless the context requires otherwise, all references in these Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements to “State Street,” “we,” “us,” “our” or similar references mean State Street Corporation and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. The parent companyOur principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank and Trust Company, is a financial holding company headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.referred to as State Street Bank. We reporthave two lines of business:
Investment Servicing provides services for U.S. mutual funds, collective investment funds and other investment pools, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations and endowments worldwide. Products include custody, product- and participant-level accounting; daily pricing and administration; master trust and master custody; recordkeeping; foreign exchange, brokerage and other trading services; securities finance; deposit and short-term investment facilities; loans and lease financing; investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing; and performance, risk and compliance analytics to support institutional investors.
Investment Management offers a broad array of services for managing financial assets, including investment management and investment research services, primarily for institutional investors worldwide. These services include passive and active U.S. and non-U.S. equity and fixed-income strategies, and other related services, such as securities finance.
The preparation of consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions in the application of certain of our accounting policies that materially affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses. As a result of unanticipated events or circumstances, actual results could differ from those estimates. Events occurring subsequent to the date of our consolidated statement of condition were evaluated for potential recognition or disclosure in our consolidated financial statements through February 22, 2010, the date we filed this Form 10-K with the SEC.
The following is a summary of our significant accounting policies.
Basis of Presentation:
Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the parent company and its majority-ownedmajority- and wholly-owned subsidiaries, including its principal banking subsidiary, State Street Bank, as well as the four asset-backed commercial paper conduits which we consolidated in May 2009 and Trust Company, referred to as State Street Bank.the partnership trusts utilized in connection with our tax-exempt investment program. All material inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated. Certain previously reported amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation.
We consolidate subsidiaries in which we hold a majority of the voting rights or exercise control. Investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, recorded in other assets, are generally accounted for using the equity method of accounting if we have the ability to exercise significant influence over the operations of the investee. For investments accounted for under the equity method, our share of income or loss is recorded in processing fees and other revenue.revenue in our consolidated statement of income. Investments not meeting the criteria for equity method treatment are accounted for using the cost method of accounting.
Foreign Currency Translation:
The assets and liabilities of our operations with functional currencies other than the U.S. dollar are translated at month-end exchange rates, and revenue and expenses are translated at rates that approximate average monthly exchange rates. Gains or losses from the translation of the net assets of subsidiaries with functional currencies other than the U.S. dollar, net of related taxes, are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income.income, a component of shareholders’ equity in our consolidated statement of condition.
Cash and Cash Equivalents:
For purposes of the consolidated statement of cash flows, we have defined cash and cash equivalents are defined as cash and due from banks.
Securities Purchased Under Resale Agreements and Securities Sold Under Repurchase Agreements:
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities, referred to as “U.S. government securities,” purchased under resale agreements or sold under repurchase agreements are treated as collateralized financing transactions, and are recorded in our consolidated statement of condition at the amounts at which the securities will be subsequently resold or repurchased, plus accrued interest. Our policy is to take possession or control of securities underlying resale agreements, allowing borrowers the right of collateral substitution and/or short-notice termination. We revalue these securities daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary from the borrower to protect us against credit exposure. We can use these securities as collateral for repurchase agreements. For securities sold under repurchase agreements collateralized by our U.S. government securities portfolio, the dollar value of the U.S. government securities remains in investment securities in our consolidated statement of condition. Where a master netting agreement exists or both parties are members of a common clearing organization, resale and repurchase agreements with the same counterparty or clearing house and maturity date are reported on a net basis.
Investment Securities:
Investment securities held by us are classified as either trading account assets, investment securities available for sale or investment securities held to maturity at the time of purchase, based on management’s intentions.
Trading account assets are debt and equity securities that are purchased in connection with our trading activities and, as such, are expected to be sold in the near term. Our trading activities typically involve active and frequent buying and selling with the objective of generating profits on short-term movements and for resale to customers.movements. Securities available for sale are those that we intend to hold for an indefinite period of time. Available-for-sale securities include securities utilized as part of our asset and liability management activities that may be sold in response to changes in interest rates, pre-payment risk, liquidity needs or other similar factors. Securities held to maturity are debt securities that management has the intent and the ability to hold to maturity.
Trading account assets are carried at fair value. Both realized and unrealized gains and losses on trading account assets are recorded in trading services revenue in our consolidated statement of income. Debt and marketable equity securities classified as available for sale are carried at fair value, and after-tax net unrealized gains and losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income, a component of shareholders’ equity.income. Gains or losses realized on sales of available-for-sale securities are computed using the specific identification method and are recorded in gains (losses) related to investment securities, net, in our consolidated statement of income. Securities held to maturity are carried at cost, adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts.
Management reviews the fair values of investment securities at least quarterly, and evaluates individual securities for declines in fair valueimpairment that may be deemed to be other than temporary, considering factors such as current and expected future interest rates, external credit ratings, dividend payments, the performance of underlying collateral, if any, the financial health of the issuer and other pertinent information. In addition, the length of timetemporary. For impaired securities that a security’s cost basis has exceeded its fair value, as well as management’s intent and abilitywe plan to holdsell, or when it is more likely than not that we will be forced to sell, the security, until recovery in market value, are considered. If declines in fair value arethe impairment is deemed to be other than temporary, an impairment loss is recognized in results of operations andtemporary. Otherwise, management determines whether or not it expects to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security, is written downprimarily by comparing the present value of expected future principal, interest and other contractual cash flows to its current fair value, which becomes the newamortized cost basis. Other-than-temporaryWhen management concludes that other-than-temporary impairment write-downs are recordedexists, the impairment is separated into the amount related to credit losses and the amount related to factors other than credit. The amount related to credit losses is recognized in our consolidated statement of income in gains (losses) related to investment securities, net.net, and the amortized cost basis of the security is written down by this amount. The portion of impairment related to all other factors is recognized in other comprehensive income.
Interest revenue for debt securities is recognized in our consolidated statement of income using the interest method, or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the contractual or estimated life of the security. The level rate of return considers any nonrefundable fees or costs, as well as purchase premiums or discounts, resulting in amortization or accretion accordingly.
With respect to debt securities acquired, for those which management considers it probable as of the date of acquisition that we will be unable to collect all contractually required principal, interest and other payments, the excess of management’s estimate of undiscounted future cash flows from these securities over their initial recorded investment is accreted into interest revenue on a level-yield basis over the securities’ estimated remaining terms. Subsequent decreases in these securities’ expected future cash flows are either recognized prospectively through an adjustment of the yields on the securities over their remaining terms, or are evaluated for other-than-temporary impairment as described above. Increases in expected future cash flows are recognized prospectively over the securities’ estimated remaining terms through the recalculation of their yields.
With respect to debt securities acquired which are considered to be beneficial interests in securitized financial assets, for certain of these beneficial interests, the excess of management’s estimate of undiscounted future cash flows from these securities over their initial recorded investment is accreted into interest revenue on a level-yield basis over the securities’ estimated remaining terms. Subsequent decreases in these securities’ expected future cash flows are either recognized prospectively through an adjustment of the yields on the securities over their remaining terms, or are evaluated for other-than-temporary impairment as described above. Increases in expected future cash flows are recognized prospectively over the securities’ estimated remaining terms through the recalculation of their yields.
Loans and Lease Financing:
Loans generally are generally recorded at their principal amount outstanding, net of the allowance for loan losses, unearned income, and any net unamortized deferred loan origination fees. Acquired loans are recorded at fair value, based on management’s expectation with respect to future principal and interest collection as of the date of acquisition. The carrying valueamount of theacquired loans is evaluated periodically using a discounted cash flow model, which incorporates management expectations of future principal and interest collection. The impact of any changes in expectations is recognized in our consolidated results of operations through either a fair value allowance and, in some cases,provision for loan losses or an adjustment to the yield of the loans.
Loans acquired with evidence of deterioration in credit quality subsequent to origination, and for which it is probable on the date of acquisition that we will be unable to collect all contractually required payments, are recorded at the lower of cost or fair value. The excess of expected future cash flows from these loans over their initial recorded investment is accreted into interest revenue on a level yield basis over the remaining life of the loans. The carrying amount of acquired loans is assessed on an ongoing basis using a discounted cash flow model, which incorporates management expectations of prepayments. Subsequent decreases in expected cash flows result in an increase to the related valuation allowance to allow the loan to maintain its level yield. Increases in expected cash flows are recognized, first, as a reduction of any remaining valuation allowance, and then recognized prospectively over the remaining life of the loan through a recalculation of the loan’s level yield.
Interest revenue for loans is recognized in our consolidated statement of income using the interest method or on a basis approximating a level rate of return over the term of the loan. Fees received for providing loan commitments and letters of credit that we anticipate will result in loans typically are deferred and amortized to interest revenue over the life of the related loan, beginning with the initial borrowing. Fees on commitments and letters of credit are amortized to processing fees and other revenue over the commitment period when funding is not known or expected.
Loans are placed on non-accrual status when they become 60 days past-due as to either principal or interest, or earlier when full collection of principal or interest is not considered probable. Loans 60 days past-due, but considered both well secured and in the process of collection, are treated as exceptions and may be excluded from non-accrual status. When we place a loan on non-accrual status, the accrual of interest is discontinued and previously recorded but unpaid interest is reversed and generally charged against net interest revenue. For loans on non-accrual status, revenue is recognized on a cash basis after recovery of principal, if and when interest payments are received.
Leveraged lease investments are reported at the aggregate of lease payments receivable and estimated residual values, net of non-recourse debt and unearned income. Lease residual values are reviewed regularly for other-than-temporary impairment, with valuation adjustments recorded currently against processing fees and other revenue. Unearned income is recognized to yield a level rate of return on the net investment in the leases. Gains and losses on residual values of leased equipment sold are recorded in processing fees and other revenue.
Allowance for Loan Losses:
The adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, recorded in our consolidated statement of condition, is evaluated on a regular basis by management. Factors considered in evaluating the adequacy of the allowance include previous loss experience, current economic conditions and adverse situations that may affect the borrower’s ability to repay, the estimated value of the underlying collateral, if any, and the performance of individual credits in relation to contract terms, and other relevant factors. The provision for loan losses, charged to earningsrecorded in our consolidated statement of income, is based upon management’s estimate of the amount necessary to maintain the allowance at a level adequate to absorb estimated probable credit losses.
Loans are charged off to the allowance for loan losses in the reporting period in which either an event occurs that confirms the existence of a loss or a loan or a portion of a loan is determined to be uncollectible. Recoveries are recorded as additions to the allowance on a cash basis.
In addition, we maintain a reserve for off-balance sheet credit exposures that is recorded in other liabilities.liabilities in our consolidated statement of condition. The adequacy of this reserve is subject to the same considerations and review as the allowance for loan losses. Provisions to change the level of this reserve are recorded in other expenses.expenses in our consolidated statement of income.
Premises and Equipment:
Buildings, leasehold improvements, computers, software and other equipment are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization, recorded in operating expensesoccupancy expense and information systems and communications expense in our consolidated statement of income, are computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets or the remaining terms of the leases, generally 3 to 40 years. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred, while major leasehold improvements are capitalized and expensed over their estimated useful lives or terms of the lease. For premises held under leases infor which we have an obligation to restore the facilities to their original condition upon expiration of the lease, we expense the anticipated related costs over the term of the lease.
Costs related to internal-use software development projects that provide significant new functionality are capitalized. We consider projects for capitalization that are expected to yield long-term operational benefits, such as applications that result in operational efficiencies and/or incremental revenue streams. Software customization costs relating to specific customer enhancements are expensed as incurred.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets:
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and other intangible assets acquired. Other intangible assets represent purchased assets that can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual rights or because the asset can be exchanged on its own or in combination with a
related contract, asset or liability. Goodwill is not amortized, but is subject to annual impairment tests.evaluation for impairment. Other intangible assets related to customer relationships generally are amortized on a straight-line basis over periods ranging from twelve to twenty years, and core deposit intangible assets over twenty-two years, with amortization expense recorded in other expenses. Impairment of goodwill is deemed to exist if the carrying value of a reporting unit, including its allocation of goodwill and other intangible assets, exceeds its estimated fair value. Impairment of other intangible assets is deemed to exist if the balance of the other intangible asset exceeds the cumulative expected net cash inflows related to the asset over its remaining estimated useful life. If these reviews determine that goodwill or other intangible assets are impaired, the value of the goodwill or the other intangible asset is written down through a charge to other expenses.
Fee and Net Interest Revenue:
Fees from investment servicing, investment management, securities finance, trading services and certain types of processing fees and other revenue are recorded in our consolidated statement of income based on estimates or specific contractual terms as transactions occur or services are rendered, provided that persuasive evidence exists, the price to the customer is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Amounts accrued at period-end are recorded in accrued income receivable in our consolidated statement of condition. Performance fees from Investment Managementinvestment management are recorded when earned, based on predetermined benchmarks associated with the applicable fund’s performance.
Interest revenue on interest-earning assets and interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities are recorded in our consolidated statement of income and are generally based on the effective yield of the related financial instrument.asset or liability.
Employee Benefits Expense:
Employee benefits expense, recorded in our consolidated statement of income, includes costs of certain pension and other post-retirement benefit plans related to prior and current service, which are accrued on a current basis, as well as contributions associated with defined contribution savings plans, unrestricted cash and stock awards under other employee incentive compensation plans, and the amortization of restricted stock awards.
Equity-Based Compensation:
We record compensation expense equal to the estimated fair value on the grant date of common stock options granted to employees in our consolidated statement of income, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting period. We record compensation expense for equity-based awards other than stock options based on the timing of vesting.
We use a Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of the options granted. The fair values of equity-based awards other than options, such as restricted stock and deferred stock, are based on the price of our common stock on the date of grant, adjusted if appropriate based upon the award’s eligibility to receive dividends. The option pricing model utilizes weighted-average assumptions regarding the period of time that options granted are expected to be outstanding. This model is based primarily on the historical exercise behavior attributable to previous option grants, the estimated yield from dividends paid on our common stock over the expected term of the options, the expected volatility of the price of our common stock over a period equal to the expected term of the options, and a risk-free interest rate based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve at the time of grant for a period equal to the expected term of the options granted.
Compensation expense for equity-based awards with terms that provide for a graded vesting schedule, for which portions of the award vest in increments over the required service period, is recognized on a straight-line basis over the required service period for the entire award. The expense is adjusted for assumptions with respect to the estimated amount of awards that will be forfeited prior to vesting.vesting, and for employees who have met certain retirement eligibility criteria. Dividend equivalents for certain equity-based awards are paid on stock units on a current basis prior to vesting and distribution.
Income Taxes:
We use an asset and liability approach to account for income taxes. Our objective is to recognize the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year through charges or credits to the current tax provision, and to
recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the future tax consequences resulting from temporary differences between the amounts reported in theour consolidated financial statements and their respective tax bases. The measurement of tax assets and liabilities is based on enacted tax laws and applicable tax rates. The effects of a tax position on theour consolidated financial statements are recognized when we believe it more likely than not that the position will be sustained. A deferred tax valuation allowance is established if it is considered more likely than not that all or a portion of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.
Earnings Per Share:
Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividingpursuant to the “two-class” method, using net income available to common shareholders byand the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding forduring the period, including participating securities. Participating securities are composed of unvested restricted stock and director stock awards, which excludesare unvested shares of restricted stock.equity-based awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends, and are considered to participate with common shareholders in undistributed earnings. Diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period and the shares representing the dilutive effect of stock options and awards and other equity-related financial instruments. The effect of stock options and restricted stock outstanding is excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per share in periods in which their effect would be antidilutive.
Fair Value Measurements:
We carry certain of our financial assets and liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis. These financial assets and liabilities are composed of trading account assets, investment securities available for sale and various types of derivative financial instruments. In addition, we measure certain assets, such as goodwill and other long-lived assets, at fair value on a non-recurring basis to evaluate those assets for potential impairment. Fair value is defined 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.
In accordance with SFAS No. 157,Fair Value Measurements, which we adopted effective January 1, 2008, weWe categorize our financial assets and liabilities into the following fair value hierarchy:
Level 1 – Financial assets and liabilities with values based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in an active market. Examples of level 1 financial instruments include active exchange-traded equity securities and certain U.S. government securities.
Level 2 – Financial assets and liabilities with values based on quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability. Examples of level 2 financial instruments include commercial paper purchased from the State Street-administered asset-backed commercial paper conduits, various types of fixed-income investment securities and interest-rate and foreign exchange derivative instruments, and various types of fixed-income investment securities.instruments. Pricing models are utilized to estimate fair value for certain financial assets and liabilities categorized in level 2.
Level 3 – Financial assets and liabilities with values based on prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable in the market and significant to the overall fair value measurement. These inputs reflect management’s judgment about the assumptions that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability, and are based on the best available information, some of which is internally developed. Examples of level 3 financial instruments include certain corporate debt, asset- and mortgage-backed securities and certain derivative instruments with little or no market activity and a resulting lack of price transparency.
When determining the fair value measurements for financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value on a recurring basis, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which we would transact and consider assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability. When possible, we look to active and observable markets to price identical assets or liabilities. When identical assets and liabilities are not traded in active markets, we look to market observable data for similar assets and liabilities. Nevertheless, certain assets and liabilities are not actively traded in observable markets, and we use alternative valuation techniques to derive fair value measurements.
Special Purpose Entities:
We are involved with various types of special purpose entities, or SPEs, in the normal course of our business.
We use trusts to structure and sell certificated interests in pools of tax-exempt investment-grade assets principally to our mutual fund customers. These trusts are recorded in our consolidated financial statements. We
transfer assets to these trusts, which are legally isolated from us, from our investment securities portfolio at book value. The trusts finance the acquisition of these assets by selling certificated interests issued by the trusts to third-party investors. The investment securities of the trusts are carried in investment securities available for sale at fair value. The certificated interests are carried in other short-term borrowings in our consolidated statement of financial condition at the amount owed to the third-party investors. The interest revenue and interest expense generated by the investments and certificated interests, respectively, are recorded in net interest revenue when earned or incurred.
We use conduits in connection with an asset-backed commercial paper program that provides short-term investments for our customers. The conduits, which are administered by us, are third-party owned and are structured as bankruptcy-remote limited liability companies. The conduits purchase financial assets with various asset classifications from a variety of independent third parties and fund those purchases by issuingthrough our customer deposit base, the issuance of commercial paper.paper to independent third parties or other short-term sources of liquidity. We do not sell our own assets to these conduits, and we hold no direct or indirect ownership interest in them. These conduits meet the definition of a variable interest entity, or VIE, as defined by FASB Interpretation No. 46(R),Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (revised December 2003)—an interpretation of ARB No. 51.existing accounting standards. We have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of the conduits, as defined by FIN 46(R),existing accounting standards, and do not record themthe conduits are recorded in our consolidated financial statements.
The primary beneficiary is the party that has one or more variable interests that will absorb a majority of a VIE’s expected losses, receive a majority of the VIE’s expected residual returns, or both. If we were to determine that we were the primary beneficiary of the conduits, we would consolidate them. We periodically re-assess our determination using a financial model, referred to as an expected loss model, to ensure that consolidation is not required pursuant to FIN 46(R).
We receive fees for providing administrative services to the conduits, as well as liquidity and direct credit support, all of which are based on market price and are recorded in processing fees and other revenue when earned.
We manage the collateral in certain third-party investment vehicles, referred to as CDOs, which structure and sell debt and equity securities to investors. These CDOs purchase a portfolio of diversified assets and fund these asset purchases through the issuance of several tranches of debt and equity, the repayment and return of which are linked to the performance of the assets in the CDO. Typically, our involvement is only as collateral manager. We may also invest in a small percentage of the debt issued by the CDO. These CDOs typically meet the definition of a VIE as defined by FIN 46(R).VIE. We have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of these CDOs, and do not record them in our consolidated financial statements. We receive fees for asset management services provided to the CDOs, which are based on market price and are recorded in processing fees and other revenue when earned.
Derivative Financial Instruments:
A derivative financial instrument is a financial instrument or other contract which has one or more underlyingreferenced indices and one or more notional amounts, either no initial net investment or a smaller initial net investment than would be expected for similar types of contracts, and which requires or permits net settlement. Derivatives that we enter into include forwards, futures, swaps, options and other instruments with similar characteristics.
We record derivatives in our consolidated statement of condition at their fair value. On the date a derivative contract is entered into, we designate the derivative as: (1) a hedge of the fair value of a recognized fixed-rate asset or liability or of an unrecognized firm commitment (a “fair value” hedge); (2) a hedge of a forecasted transaction or of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized variable-rate asset or liability (a “cash flow” hedge); (3) a foreign currency fair value or cash flow hedge (a “foreign currency” hedge); (4) a hedge of a net investment in a non-U.S. operation; or (5) held for trading purposes (“trading” instruments).
Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective—and that is designated and qualifies as a fair value hedge—are recorded currently in processing fees and other revenue, along with the changes in fair value of the hedged asset or liability attributable to the hedged risk. Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective—and that is designated and qualifies as a cash flow hedge—are recorded, net of tax, in other comprehensive income, until earnings are affected by the hedged cash flows (e.g., when periodic settlements on a variable-rate asset or liability are recorded in earnings). Cash flow hedge ineffectiveness, defined as the extent to which the changes in fair value of the derivative exceed the variability of cash flows of the forecasted transaction, is recorded in processing fees and other revenue.
Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is highly effective—and that is designated and qualifies as a foreign currency hedge—are recorded currently either in processing fees and other revenue or in other comprehensive income, net of tax, depending on whether the hedge transaction meets the criteria for a fair value or a cash flow hedge. If, however, a derivative is used as a hedge of a net investment in a non-U.S. operation, its changes in fair value, to the extent effective as a hedge, are recorded, net of tax, in the foreign currency
translation component of other comprehensive income. Lastly, entire changes in the fair value of derivatives classified as trading instruments are recorded in trading services revenue.
At both the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis, we formally assess and document the effectiveness of a derivative designated as a hedge in offsetting changes in the fair value of hedged items and the likelihood that the derivative will be an effective hedge in future periods. We discontinue hedge accounting prospectively when we determine that the derivative will not remainis no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of the underlying risk being hedged, the derivative expires, terminates or is sold, or management discontinues the hedge designation.
Unrealized gains and losses on foreign exchange and interest-rate contracts are reported at fair value in theour consolidated statement of condition as a component of other assets and other liabilities, respectively, on a gross basis, except where such gains and losses arise from contracts covered by qualifying master netting agreements.
Recent Accounting Developments:
In JanuaryJune 2009, the FASB issued a proposed Staff Position, FAS 107-bnew accounting standard related to accounting for VIEs. This new standard will amend existing GAAP, will eliminate the exception for qualifying SPEs, and APB 28-a,Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments. This proposed FSP would amend SFAS No. 107,Disclosures About Fair Value of FinancialInstruments, and Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 28,Interim FinancialReporting, to require disclosures about fair value of financial instruments in all interim financial statements.will modify the characteristics that identify a VIE. The FSP’s disclosure requirements with respect to fair value of financial instruments would be effective as of March 31, 2009, and would not require comparative disclosuresnew standard also provides new criteria for earlier periods presented.
In December 2008,determining whether an entity is the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 132(R)-1,Employer’s Disclosures about Postretirement Benefit Plan Assets. This FSP amends SFAS No. 132 (Revised 2003),Employers’ Disclosures about Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits, by requiring employer disclosures about the assetsprimary beneficiary of a defined benefit pension or other post-retirement plan. VIE, and increases the frequency of required assessments to determine whether an entity is the primary beneficiary.
The FSP’s disclosure requirements with respectnew standard is effective, for State Street, on January 1, 2010. Significant State Street and industry efforts are currently underway to plan assets will be effective as of December 31, 2009.
In September 2008,interpret the FASB issued, for comment, revisions to FASB Interpretation No. 46, as revised,Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, referred to as FIN 46(R). The proposed revisions include the removalnew standard and its impact. Management expects, based on current interpretations of the scope exception for qualified special purpose entities, or QSPEs; a revisionnew standard and proposed additional guidance related to the applicability of the current risks-and-rewards-based consolidation modelnew standard to a qualitative model based on control; and a requirementcollective investment funds, that consolidation of VIEs be reevaluated on an ongoing basis. Although the proposed revisions have not yet been finalized, these changes may have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements, as we maywill be required to consolidate VIEs that are not currently consolidated under FIN 46(R). The proposed revisions would be effective beginning January 1, 2010.
In June 2008, the FASB issued FSP EITF 03-6-1, Determining Whether Instruments Grantedadditional entities upon adoption, including certain asset-backed securitization trusts in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities.The FSP addresses whether instruments granted in share-based payment transactions are participating securities prior to vesting and, therefore, need to be included in the earnings allocation in computing basic earnings per share under the two-class method as described in
SFAS No. 128,Earnings per Share. Under the guidance in the FSP, unvested share-based payment awards that contain non-forfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall be included in the computation of basic earnings per share pursuantwhich we have investments significant to the two-class method. The FSP is effective beginning January 1, 2009,trusts and for interim periods within each year, andcorresponding unilateral servicer removal rights. Currently, management expects that adoption will require all prior period basic earnings per common share information presented to be adjusted retrospectively. Our adoption of the FSP’s provisions is not expected to materially affect our reported basic earnings per common share for any prior period.
In April 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets. This FSP eliminates the requirement of SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, that an entity consider, when determining the useful life of an acquired intangible asset, whether the intangible asset can be renewed without substantial cost orhave a material modifications to the existing terms and conditions associated with the intangible asset. Instead, the FSP replaces the above-described useful life assessment criteria with a requirement that an entity consider its own experience in renewing similar arrangements. If the entity has no relevant experience, it would consider market participant assumptions regarding renewal. The provisions of the FSP are effective beginning January 1, 2009. We are currently evaluating the potential impact of application of the FSP’s provisionseffect on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161,Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. The new standard requires specific disclosures with respect to the classification and amounts of derivativeoperations or financial instruments in a company’s financial statements; the accounting treatment for derivative instruments and related hedged items; and the impact of derivative instruments and related hedged items on a company’s financial condition, financial performance and cash flows. The provisions of this new standard are effective beginning January 1, 2009. Because the new standard impacts our disclosure and not our accounting treatment for derivative instruments and related hedged items, our adoption of the standard for the first quarter of 2009 will not affect our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51. SFAS No. 160 will change the accounting and reporting for minority interests, which will be recharacterized as “noncontrolling interests” and classified as a component of equity. This new consolidation method will significantly change the accounting for transactions with minority interest holders. The provisions of this standard are effective beginning January 1, 2009. We are currently evaluating the potential impact of adoption of this standard on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations. SFAS No. 141(R) will significantly change the accounting for business combinations in a number of areas. Specifically, contingent consideration and acquired contingencies, if they can be reasonably estimated, must be recorded at fair value on the acquisition date, with subsequent changes in fair value generally recognized in current earnings. In addition, acquisition costs and most restructuring costs will be expensed as incurred. Finally, changes after the measurement period in deferred tax asset valuation allowances and income tax uncertainties recorded in connection with an acquisition will be recorded in income tax expense. The provisions of SFAS No. 141(R) are effective prospectively beginning January 1, 2009 for business combinations completed after that date, and our adoption of the standard is expected to have a significant impact on goodwill recorded in connection with future acquisitions and on our earnings subsequent to an acquisition.condition.
Note 2. Acquisitions and Divestitures
OnIn July 1, 2008, we completed the sale of our 50% joint venture interest in CitiStreet, a benefits servicing business that provides retirement plan recordkeeping and administrative services and at that date had approximately $220 billion inof assets under administration on behalf of corporate and government entities, employee unions and other customers. The premium received in connection with the sale was $407 million, and we recorded a resulting pre-tax gain of $350 million in our consolidated statement of income, during the third quarter of 2008, net of exit and other associated costs incurred in connection with the sale. These costs totaled $57 million, and consisted of incentive compensation of $30 million, professional fees of $10 million, and other related costs of $17 million.
In July 2007, we completed our acquisition of Investors Financial Services Corp., a bank holding company based in Boston, Massachusetts with approximately $17 billion in total assets and approximately $1.9 trillion in assets under custody at that date. We exchanged approximately 60.8 million shares of our common stock, with an aggregate value of approximately $4.2 billion, for all of the outstanding common stock of Investors Financial. Financial results of the acquired business were included in our consolidated financial statements beginning on July 2, 2007.
The aggregate purchase price of $4.4 billion was allocated to the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed based on their fair values as of the acquisition date. Goodwill of approximately $2.71 billion was recorded in connection with the allocation, as were customer relationship, core deposit and other intangible assets of approximately $1.43 billion.
During 2008, in connection with the acquisition, we incurred and recorded merger and integration costs of approximately $115 million in our consolidated statement of income, compared to approximately $198 million during the second half of 2007. These costs consisted only of direct and incremental costs to integrate the acquired Investors Financial business into our operations, and did not include ongoing expenses of the combined organization.
In connection with the acquisition, we recorded liabilities for exit and termination costs related to the acquired Investors Financial business of approximately $67 million as additional goodwill. Payment of liabilities associated with contract terminations and severance was substantially completed by the end of 2008. The liability related to lease abandonments will be amortized over the terms of the related leases, which is approximately twelve years.
The following table presents the activity related to these liabilities for 2007 and 2008.
(In millions) | Contract terminations | Severance | Lease abandonments | Total | |||||||||||
Balance on July 2, 2007 | $ | 10 | $ | 26 | $ | 31 | $ | 67 | |||||||
Payments | — | (6 | ) | — | (6 | ) | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2007 | $ | 10 | $ | 20 | $ | 31 | $ | 61 | |||||||
Payments | (10 | ) | (6 | ) | — | (16 | ) | ||||||||
Other adjustments | — | (8 | ) | 4 | (4 | ) | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | — | $ | 6 | $ | 35 | $ | 41 | ||||||||
In March 2007, we completed our acquisition of Currenex, Inc., an independently owned electronic foreign exchange trading platform. We paid approximately $564 million, net of liabilities assumed, and recorded the following significant assets: goodwill—$437 million; customer relationship and other intangible assets—$174 million; and other tangible assets—$25 million. The customer relationship and other intangible assets are being amortized on a straight-line basis over periods ranging from eight to twelve years. Financial results of the acquired business were included in our consolidated financial statements beginning on March 2, 2007.
Note 3. Investment Securities
| As of December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Amortized Cost | Gross Unrealized | Fair Value | Amortized Cost | Gross Unrealized | Fair Value | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2008 | 2007 | Gains | Losses | Gains | Losses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Gross Unrealized | Gross Unrealized | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Amortized Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | Amortized Cost | Gains | Losses | Fair Value | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 11,577 | $ | 21 | $ | 19 | $ | 11,579 | $ | 8,163 | $ | 32 | $ | 14 | $ | 8,181 | $ | 11,164 | $ | 6 | $ | 8 | $ | 11,162 | $ | 11,577 | $ | 21 | $ | 19 | $ | 11,579 | ||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 10,775 | 129 | 106 | 10,798 | 14,631 | 54 | 100 | 14,585 | 14,895 | 94 | 53 | 14,936 | 10,775 | 129 | 106 | 10,798 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 25,049 | 8 | 5,633 | 19,424 | 26,100 | 2 | 1,033 | 25,069 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Credit cards | 6,515 | 192 | 100 | 6,607 | 4,045 | 3 | 958 | 3,090 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student loans(1) | 12,652 | 128 | 852 | 11,928 | 9,785 | 2 | 1,927 | 7,860 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sub-prime | 5,054 | 12 | 1,869 | 3,197 | 5,834 | 1 | 1,976 | 3,859 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | 2,581 | 400 | 184 | 2,797 | 1,817 | 1 | 354 | 1,464 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total asset-backed | 26,802 | 732 | 3,005 | 24,529 | 21,481 | 7 | 5,215 | 16,273 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1,837 | 7 | 403 | 1,441 | 12,018 | 41 | 167 | 11,892 | 2,477 | 203 | 271 | 2,409 | 1,837 | 7 | 403 | 1,441 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 6,230 | 105 | 623 | 5,712 | 5,756 | 79 | 22 | 5,813 | 5,954 | 221 | 238 | 5,937 | 6,230 | 105 | 623 | 5,712 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt investments | 4,816 | 51 | 144 | 4,723 | 4,041 | 27 | 27 | 4,041 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 10,210 | 283 | 182 | 10,311 | 6,123 | 28 | 437 | 5,714 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities | 2,161 | 94 | 21 | 2,234 | 2,261 | 24 | 125 | 2,160 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Money-market mutual funds | 344 | — | — | 344 | 243 | — | — | 243 | 1,110 | �� | — | — | 1,110 | 344 | — | — | 344 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | 31 | 4 | — | 35 | 131 | 2 | 10 | 123 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other equity securities | 158 | 3 | 19 | 142 | 479 | 24 | 1 | 502 | 39 | — | 3 | 36 | 27 | 1 | 9 | 19 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 60,786 | $ | 324 | $ | 6,947 | $ | 54,163 | $ | 71,431 | $ | 259 | $ | 1,364 | $ | 70,326 | $ | 74,843 | $ | 1,637 | $ | 3,781 | $ | 72,699 | $ | 60,786 | $ | 324 | $ | 6,947 | $ | 54,163 | ||||||||||||||||
Held to maturity purchased under AMLF: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed commercial paper(1) | $ | 6,087 | $ | 13 | — | $ | 6,100 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed commercial paper | $ | 6,087 | $ | 13 | $ | — | $ | 6,100 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Held to maturity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 501 | $ | 27 | $ | 528 | $ | 757 | $ | 9 | $ | 1 | $ | 765 | $ | 500 | $ | 13 | $ | 513 | $ | 501 | $ | 27 | $ | 528 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 810 | 17 | 827 | 940 | 7 | 6 | 941 | 620 | 33 | 653 | 810 | 17 | 827 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 3,986 | 38 | $ | 412 | 3,612 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Credit cards | 20 | — | $ | 2 | 18 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | 447 | — | 68 | 379 | 321 | — | $ | 54 | 267 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total asset-backed | 467 | — | 70 | 397 | 321 | — | 54 | 267 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 9,979 | 29 | 1,159 | 8,849 | 2,190 | 5 | 24 | 2,171 | 8,262 | 249 | 504 | 8,007 | 9,979 | 29 | 1,159 | 8,849 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 382 | 4 | — | 386 | 180 | 2 | — | 182 | 206 | 6 | — | 212 | 382 | 4 | — | 386 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other investments | 109 | — | — | 109 | 166 | — | — | 166 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 10,822 | 569 | 245 | 11,146 | 3,774 | 38 | 358 | 3,454 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 15,767 | $ | 115 | $ | 1,571 | $ | 14,311 | $ | 4,233 | $ | 23 | $ | 31 | $ | 4,225 | $ | 20,877 | $ | 870 | $ | 819 | $ | 20,928 | $ | 15,767 | $ | 115 | $ | 1,571 | $ | 14,311 | ||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Substantially composed of securities guaranteed by the |
During the fourth quarter of 2008, management reassessed its classification of certain asset- and mortgage-backed securities carried in theour available-for-sale portfolio, and reclassified these securities available for sale with an amortized cost of $14.6 billion and a fair value of $12.3 billion to securities held to maturity. No gain or loss was recognized at the time of reclassification. Thereclassification, and the related pre-tax unrealized loss of $2.27 billion, or $1.39 billion after-tax, recorded in other comprehensive income, or OCI, remained in OCI and is being amortized as an adjustment of the yield of the reclassified securities over their remaining terms. As of December 31, 2009, approximately $635 million of after-tax unrealized loss related to transferred securities remained in OCI. See note 12 for more information.
The securities were reclassified at their then fair value of $12.3 billion, and this fair value was established as the adjusted amortized cost basis of the reclassified securities. The resulting discount is being accreted as an adjustment of the yield of the reclassified securities over their remaining terms. As a result, the reclassification will have no ultimate impact on our consolidated results of operations. Management considers the held-to-maturity classification to be appropriate because it has the ability and the intent to hold these securities to their maturity. Information with respect to the after-tax unrealized loss related to the reclassified securities recorded in OCI is provided in note 13.
Aggregate investment securities carried at $42.74$40.96 billion and $39.84$42.74 billion at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, short-term borrowings and for other purposes as provided by law.
Contractual maturities of debt investment securities were as follows as of December 31, 2009:
| (In millions) | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | ||||||||
Available for sale: | ||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 10,001 | $ | 398 | $ | 183 | $ | 580 | ||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 89 | 582 | 8,489 | 5,776 | ||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 569 | 10,304 | 8,545 | 5,111 | ||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 58 | 656 | 199 | 1,496 | ||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 354 | 2,168 | 2,126 | 1,289 | ||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 2,899 | 1,896 | 1,509 | 4,007 | ||||||||
Other debt securities | 303 | 1,240 | 657 | 34 | ||||||||
Total | $ | 14,273 | $ | 17,244 | $ | 21,708 | $ | 18,293 | ||||
Held to maturity: | ||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 500 | ||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | — | $ | 48 | $ | 199 | $ | 373 | |||||
Asset-backed securities | 49 | 79 | 112 | 227 | ||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 600 | 2,945 | 1,904 | 2,813 | ||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 56 | 135 | 14 | 1 | ||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 1,214 | 2,912 | 411 | 6,285 | ||||||||
Total | $ | 2,419 | $ | 6,119 | $ | 2,640 | $ | 9,699 | ||||
The contractual maturities presented above do not represent management’s estimate of expected future cash flows from the securities. The maturities of asset-backed securities, mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations are based upon contractual principal payments.
Impairment:
Gross pre-tax unrealized losses on investment securities on a pre-tax basis consisted of the following as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008:
| Less than 12 continuous months | 12 continuous months or longer | Total | Less than 12 months | 12 months or longer | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2009 (In millions) | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 753 | $ | 8 | $ | 456 | $ | 11 | $ | 1,209 | $ | 19 | $ | 775 | $ | 8 | $ | 775 | $ | 8 | ||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 1,395 | 30 | 1,479 | 76 | 2,874 | 106 | $ | 3,272 | $ | 32 | 1,366 | 21 | 4,638 | 53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 7,003 | 908 | 15,135 | 5,137 | 22,138 | 6,045 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Credit cards | 908 | 8 | 2,696 | 92 | 3,604 | 100 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Student loans(1) | 934 | 38 | 8,301 | 814 | 9,235 | 852 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sub-prime | 12 | 5 | 3,071 | 1,864 | 3,083 | 1,869 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | 367 | 18 | 496 | 166 | 863 | 184 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total asset-backed | 2,221 | 69 | 14,564 | 2,936 | 16,785 | 3,005 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 4,648 | 878 | 3,622 | 684 | 8,270 | 1,562 | 267 | 33 | 727 | 238 | 994 | 271 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 2,010 | 515 | 317 | 108 | 2,327 | 623 | 647 | 231 | 293 | 7 | 940 | 238 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt investments | 1,516 | 80 | 262 | 64 | 1,778 | 144 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 3,443 | 40 | 723 | 142 | 4,166 | 182 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities | 113 | 1 | 99 | 20 | 212 | 21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other equity securities | 132 | 17 | 11 | 2 | 143 | 19 | 37 | 3 | — | — | 37 | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 17,457 | $ | 2,436 | $ | 21,282 | $ | 6,082 | $ | 38,739 | $ | 8,518 | $ | 10,000 | $ | 409 | $ | 18,547 | $ | 3,372 | $ | 28,547 | $ | 3,781 | ||||||||||||
Held to maturity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Credit cards | $ | 18 | $ | 2 | $ | 18 | $ | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | — | — | $ | 221 | $ | 68 | 221 | 68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total asset-backed | 18 | 2 | 221 | 68 | 239 | 70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1,366 | 53 | 2,549 | 451 | 3,915 | 504 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 1,905 | 61 | 1,145 | 184 | 3,050 | 245 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 3,289 | $ | 116 | $ | 3,915 | $ | 703 | $ | 7,204 | $ | 819 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
We
| Less than 12 months | 12 months or longer | Total | ||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2008 (In millions) | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | Fair Value | Gross Unrealized Losses | ||||||||||||
Available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 753 | $ | 8 | $ | 456 | $ | 11 | $ | 1,209 | $ | 19 | ||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 1,342 | 30 | 1,464 | 76 | 2,806 | 106 | ||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||
Credit cards | 512 | 139 | 2,454 | 819 | 2,966 | 958 | ||||||||||||
Student loans(1) | 2,345 | 455 | 5,420 | 1,472 | 7,765 | 1,927 | ||||||||||||
Sub-prime | 413 | 77 | 3,402 | 1,899 | 3,815 | 1,976 | ||||||||||||
Other | 723 | 47 | 546 | 307 | 1,269 | 354 | ||||||||||||
Total asset-backed | 3,993 | 718 | 11,822 | 4,497 | 15,815 | 5,215 | ||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1,107 | 313 | 84 | 90 | 1,191 | 403 | ||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 2,003 | 515 | 317 | 108 | 2,320 | 623 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 2,855 | 185 | 670 | 252 | 3,525 | 437 | ||||||||||||
Other debt securities | 1,072 | 61 | 262 | 64 | 1,334 | 125 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | 113 | 8 | 11 | 2 | 124 | 10 | ||||||||||||
Other equity securities | 18 | 9 | — | — | 18 | 9 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 13,256 | $ | 1,847 | $ | 15,086 | $ | 5,100 | $ | 28,342 | $ | 6,947 | ||||||
Held to maturity: | ||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities: | ||||||||||||||||||
Other | $ | 8 | $ | 1 | $ | 259 | $ | 53 | $ | 267 | $ | 54 | ||||||
Total asset-backed | 8 | 1 | 259 | 53 | 267 | 54 | ||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 3,541 | 564 | 3,539 | 595 | 7,080 | 1,159 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. securities | 592 | 24 | 2,383 | 334 | 2,975 | 358 | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 4,141 | $ | 589 | $ | 6,181 | $ | 982 | $ | 10,322 | $ | 1,571 | ||||||
| (1) | Substantially composed of securities guaranteed by the federal government with respect to the payment of principal and interest. |
In connection with our assessment of impairment we recorded gross other-than-temporary impairment of $1.15 billion for 2009, compared to $122 million for 2008, compared2008. Of the total recorded, $227 million related to $34credit and was recognized in our consolidated statement of income. The remaining $928 million related to factors other than credit, more fully discussed below, and was recognized, net of related taxes, in OCI in our consolidated statement of condition. The $227 million was composed of $151 million associated with expected credit losses, $54 million related to management’s decision to sell the impaired securities prior to their recovery in value, and $22 million related to adverse changes in the timing of expected future cash flows from the securities. The majority of the impairment losses related to non-agency securities collateralized by mortgages, for 2007, which resulted from our impairment analysis process.management concluded had experienced credit losses based on the present value of the securities’ expected future cash flows. These securities are classified as asset-backed securities in the foregoing investment securities tables. As described in note 1, management regularlyperiodically reviews the fair values of investment securities to determine if other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. This review encompasses all investment securities and includes such quantitative factors as current and expected future interest rates and the length of time that a security’s cost basis has exceeded its fair value, and includes all investment securities for which we have issuer-specific concerns regardless of quantitative factors.
Gains and losses related to investment securities were as follows for the years ended December 31:
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||
Gross gains from sales of available-for-sale securities | $ | 418 | $ | 100 | $ | 24 | ||||||
Gross losses from sales of available-for-sale securities | (50 | ) | (32 | ) | (17 | ) | ||||||
Gross losses from other-than-temporary impairment | (1,155 | ) | (122 | ) | (34 | ) | ||||||
Losses not related to credit(1) | 928 | — | — | |||||||||
Net impairment losses | (227 | ) | (122 | ) | (34 | ) | ||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | $ | 141 | $ | (54 | ) | $ | (27 | ) | ||||
| (1) | These losses were recognized as a component of OCI; see note 12. |
We conduct periodic reviews to evaluate each security that is impaired. Impairment exists when the current fair value of an individual security is below its amortized cost basis. For debt securities available for sale and held to maturity, other-than-temporary impairment is recorded in our consolidated statement of income when management intends to sell (or may be required to sell) securities before they recover in value, or when management expects the present value of cash flows expected to be collected to be less than the amortized cost of the impaired security (a credit loss).
Our review of impaired securities generally includes:
the identification and evaluation of securities that have indications of possible other-than-temporary impairment, such as issuer-specific concerns including deteriorating financial condition or bankruptcy;
the analysis of expected future cash flows of securities, based on quantitative and qualitative factors;
the analysis of the collectability of those future cash flows, including information about past events, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts;
the analysis of individual impaired securities, including consideration of the length of time the security has been in an unrealized loss position and the anticipated recovery period;
the discussion of evidential matter, including an evaluation of factors or triggers that could cause individual securities to be deemed other-than-temporarily impaired and those that would not support other-than-temporary impairment; and
documentation of the results of these analyses.
Factors considered in determining whether impairment is other than temporary include:
the length of time the security has been impaired;
the severity of the impairment;
the cause of the impairment and the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer;
activity in the market of the issuer which may indicate adverse credit conditions; and
our intention not to sell, and the likelihood that we will not be required to sell, the security for a period of time sufficient to allow for recovery in value.
The majority of our investment securities are in the form of debt securities. Debt securities that are not deemed to be credit-impaired are subject to additional management analysis to assess whether it intends to sell, or, more likely than not, would not be required to sell, the security before the expected recovery to its amortized cost basis. In most cases, management has no intent to sell and believes that it is more likely than not that it will not be required to sell the security before recovery to its amortized cost basis. Where the decline in the security’s fair value is deemed to be other than temporary, the loss is recorded in our consolidated statement of income.
A critical component of the evaluation for other-than-temporary impairment of our debt securities is the identification of credit-impaired securities, where management does not expect to receive cash flows sufficient to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. The following describes our process for identifying credit impairment in security types with the most significant unrealized losses as of December 31, 2009.
Mortgage- and Asset-Backed Securities
For recent vintages of U.S. mortgage-backed securities (in particular, sub-prime first-lien mortgages, “Alt-A” mortgages, and home equity lines of credit (2006 and 2007 originations) that have significant unrealized losses as a percentage of their amortized cost), credit impairment is assessed using cash flow models, tailored for each security, that estimate the future cash flows on the underlying mortgages, using the security-specific collateral and transaction structure. Estimates of future cash flows are subject to management’s judgment. The future cash flows and performance of our portfolio of U.S. mortgage-backed securities are a function of a number of factors, including but not limited to the condition of the U.S. economy, the condition of the U.S. residential markets, the level of loan defaults, prepayments and loss severities. Management’s estimates of future losses also consider the underwriting and historical performance of our specific securities.
Loss rates are determined for each security and take into consideration collateral type, vintage, borrower profile, third-party guarantees, current levels of subordination, geography and other factors. By using these factors, management develops a roll-rate analysis to gauge future expected credit losses based upon current delinquencies and expected future loss trends. Critical estimates with respect to the aforementioned 2006 and 2007 originations include:
| Sub-Prime | Alt-A | Non-Agency Prime | |||||||
December 31, 2009: | |||||||||
Prepayment rate | 5 | % | 5 | % | 10 | % | |||
Cumulative loss estimates | 41 | 14 | 8 | ||||||
Loss severity(1) | 70 | 41 | 40 | ||||||
Peak-to-trough housing price decline(2) | 37 | 37 | 37 | ||||||
| Sub-Prime | Alt-A | Non-Agency Prime | |||||||
December 31, 2008: | |||||||||
Prepayment rate | 5 | % | 10 | % | 10 | % | |||
Cumulative loss estimates | 26 | 6 | 5 | ||||||
Loss severity(1) | 60 | 41 | 40 | ||||||
Peak-to-trough housing price decline(2) | 34 | 34 | 34 | ||||||
| (1) | Loss severity rates consider the initial loan-to-value ratio, lien position, geography, expected collateral value and other factors. |
| (2) | Measured by the Case-Shiller National HPI. |
In addition to the above analysis, management performs stress tests which contain more severe loss assumptions. These analyses provide further insight into the expected credit performance of these securities and are integral to the assessment of whether a security is other-than-temporarily impaired.
Unsecured Obligations
Unsecured obligations generally consist of corporate bonds. Credit analysis is largely dependent on third-party credit ratings and, to the extent possible, a detailed analysis of the borrower’s financial condition. Individual bond positions must meet minimum rating requirements, which vary based on the sector of the bond issuer. Fundamental inputs to the impairment assessment include downgrades in ratings and/or management’s assessment of the financial condition of the borrower. These and other factors are used in determining if an expected shortfall in contractual cash flows is expected.
After a full review of all investment securities, taking into consideration current economic conditions, adverse situations that might affect our ability to fully collect interest and principal, the timing of future payments, the credit quality and performance of the underlying collateral ofunderlying asset-backed securities, and other relevant factors, and excluding the securities for which other-than-temporary impairment was recorded during 2008,2009, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining securities and the resulting gross pre-tax unrealized losses of $8.52$4.60 billion related to 3,1062,260 securities at December 31, 20082009 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Management continues
The following table presents activity with respect to believe that it is probable that we will collect allcredit-related losses recognized in our consolidated statement of income associated with securities considered other-than-temporarily impaired:
| (In millions) | Total | |||
Balance at April 1, 2009 | $ | — | ||
Plus credit-related losses for which other-than-temporary impairment was not previously recognized | 214 | |||
Less: | ||||
Losses realized for securities sold | (17 | ) | ||
Losses related to securities intended or required to be sold | (22 | ) | ||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ | 175 | ||
Certain asset-backed and municipal (state and political subdivisions) securities have the benefit of third-party guarantees from financial guaranty insurance companies. The aggregate amortized cost of securities with underlying guarantees was approximately $4.96 billion at December 31, 2009 and $6.53 billion at December 31, 2008. Asset-backed securities comprised approximately $1.31 billion of the total at December 31, 2009, of which approximately $223 million are currently drawing on the underlying guarantees in order to make contractual principal and interest accordingpayments to State Street. In these cases, the performance of the underlying contractual terms,security is highly dependent on the performance of the guarantor. During 2008 and has2009, many of these guarantors experienced ratings downgrades. The credit ratings of the ability and the intentguarantors ranged from “AA” to hold the securities until recovery in market value.
Gains and losses related to investment securities were as follows for the years indicated:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | |||||||||
Gross gains from sales of available-for-sale securities | $ | 100 | $ | 24 | $ | 33 | ||||||
Gross losses from sales of available-for-sale securities | (32 | ) | (17 | ) | (18 | ) | ||||||
Other-than-temporary impairment write-downs | (122 | ) | (34 | ) | — | |||||||
Net gains (losses) | $ | (54 | ) | $ | (27 | ) | $ | 15 | ||||
Contractual maturities of debt investment securities were as follows“D” as of December 31, 2008:2009.
Conduit Consolidation:
The May 2009 consolidation of the asset-backed commercial paper conduits, more fully discussed in note 11, added debt securities to our investment securities portfolio. We account for these securities under specialized accounting standards based on specific characteristics of the securities.
Securities with Evidence of Credit Deterioration
Of the debt securities added, $343 million had evidence of deterioration in credit quality since their issuance, and management considered it probable, as of the date of consolidation, that we would be unable to collect all contractually required payments from the securities. As a result, these securities are accounted for pursuant to the provisions of ASC Topic 310-30,Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit
Quality (formerly AICPA Statement of Position No. 03-3,Accounting for Certain Loans or DebtSecurities Acquired in a Transfer). Pursuant to the provisions of ASC Topic 310-30, the excess of management’s estimate of undiscounted future principal, interest and other contractual cash flows from these securities over their initial recorded investment is accreted into interest revenue on a level-yield basis over the securities’ estimated remaining terms. On a quarterly basis, management updates its expected cash flow assumptions. Subsequent decreases in these securities’ expected future cash flows are either recognized prospectively through an adjustment of the yields on the securities over their remaining terms, or are evaluated for other-than-temporary impairment. During 2009, subsequent to the consolidation of the conduits, we recorded losses from other-than-temporary impairment of these securities of $16 million, with $8 million related to credit. Increases in expected future cash flows will be recognized prospectively over the securities’ estimated remaining term through a recalculation of their yields.
The following table presents information with respect to the acquired debt securities as of the date of consolidation.
| (In millions) | Under 1 Year | 1 to 5 Years | 6 to 10 Years | Over 10 Years | ||||||||
Available for sale: | ||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 10,615 | $ | 88 | $ | 212 | $ | 664 | ||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 129 | 2,755 | 2,314 | 5,600 | ||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 545 | 9,449 | 5,153 | 4,277 | ||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 1 | 577 | 94 | 769 | ||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 289 | 2,322 | 1,624 | 1,477 | ||||||||
Other investments | 2,171 | 1,814 | 646 | 92 | ||||||||
Total | $ | 13,750 | $ | 17,005 | $ | 10,043 | $ | 12,879 | ||||
Held to maturity purchased under AMLF: | ||||||||||||
Asset-backed commercial paper | $ | 6,087 | — | — | — | |||||||
Held to maturity: | ||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||
Direct obligations | $ | 501 | ||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | — | $ | 32 | $ | 778 | |||||||
Asset-backed securities | $ | 269 | 3,061 | 5 | 651 | |||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 403 | 4,208 | 1,861 | 3,507 | ||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 100 | 264 | 15 | 3 | ||||||||
Other investments | 105 | 4 | — | — | ||||||||
Total | $ | 877 | $ | 8,038 | $ | 1,913 | $ | 4,939 | ||||
| (In millions) | |||
Contractually required payments including interest | $ | 1,365 | |
Less: Nonaccretable difference | 440 | ||
Cash flows expected to be collected | 925 | ||
Less: Accretable yield | 582 | ||
Fair value of securities as of date of consolidation | $ | 343 | |
The maturitiesexcess of asset-backedthe securities’ expected future cash flows as of the date of the acquisition over their then-recorded fair value is referred to as the accretable yield, and is recognized in interest revenue over the securities’ estimated remaining terms. The difference as of the date of the acquisition between contractually required payments and the cash flows expected to be collected is referred to as the non-accretable difference. Changes in expected future principal cash flows subsequent to the date of acquisition will either affect the accretable yield or will result in a loss from other-than-temporary impairment. Changes in expected future cash flows will result in reclassifications to/from the non-accretable difference.
The following table presents activity subsequent to the date of consolidation in the accretable yield, presented in the above table, related to the acquired debt securities.
| (In millions) | ||||
Accretable yield as of date of consolidation | $ | 582 | ||
Accretion | (57 | ) | ||
Sales | (113 | ) | ||
Additional principal losses | (133 | ) | ||
Accretable yield, December 31, 2009 | $ | 279 | ||
Beneficial Interests in a Securitization
Of the aforementioned debt securities mortgage-backedadded in connection with the conduit consolidation, $4.34 billion were considered to be beneficial interests in a securitization that are not of high credit quality. As a result, these securities are accounted for pursuant to the provisions of ASC Topic 325-40,Beneficial Interests in Securitized Financial Assets (formerly FASB Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 99-20,Recognition of Interest Income and collateralized mortgage obligationsImpairment on Purchased Beneficial Interests and Beneficial Interests That Continue to Be Held by a Transferor in Securitized Financial Assets). Pursuant to the provisions of ASC Topic 325-40, the excess of management’s estimate of undiscounted future principal, interest and other contractual cash flows from these securities over their initial recorded investment is accreted into interest revenue on a level-yield basis over the securities’ estimated remaining terms. Subsequent decreases in these securities’ expected future cash flows are based uponeither recognized prospectively through an adjustment of the yields on the securities over their remaining terms,
or are evaluated for other-than-temporary impairment. During 2009, we recorded losses from other-than-temporary impairment of these securities of $50 million, with $20 million related to credit. Increases in expected principal payments.future cash flows are recognized prospectively over the securities’ estimated remaining term through a recalculation of their yields.
Note 4. Loans and Lease Financing
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
Commercial and financial: | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. | $ | 6,239 | $ | 6,397 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 471 | 890 | ||||||||||||||
Purchased receivables: | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. | $ | 6,397 | $ | 9,402 | 786 | — | ||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 890 | 4,420 | 1,596 | — | ||||||||||||
Lease financing: | ||||||||||||||||
U.S. | 407 | 396 | 408 | 407 | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 1,437 | 1,584 | 1,308 | 1,437 | ||||||||||||
Total loans | 9,131 | 15,802 | 10,808 | 9,131 | ||||||||||||
Less allowance for loan losses | (18 | ) | (18 | ) | (79 | ) | (18 | ) | ||||||||
Net loans | $ | 9,113 | $ | 15,784 | $ | 10,729 | $ | 9,113 | ||||||||
U.S. commercial and financial loans at December 31, 2009 and 2008 included approximately $600 million and $800 million, respectively, of commercial real estate loans purchased from certain customersacquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman Brothers.Lehman. The loans, which are primarily collateralized by direct and indirect interests in commercial real estate, were recorded at their then currentthen-current fair value, based on management’s expectation with respect to future collection of principal and interest using appropriate market discount rates as of the date of acquisition. No additional valuation adjustments or provisions for loss were recorded since the initial acquisition of these loans. An aggregate of approximately $219 million of these loans were past-due and still accruing interest as of December 31, 2008.
Aggregate short-duration advances related to securities settlement advances and overdraftsactivities of our customers included in commercial and financial loans in the table above were $4.64$2.07 billion and $11.65$4.64 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Although a portion of the aforementioned commercial real estate loans is 90 days or more contractually past-due, we do not report them as past-due loans, because under current accounting standards, the interest earned on these loans is based on an accretable yield resulting from management’s expectation of the future cash flows for each loan relative to both the timing and 2007, respectively. There were nocollection of principal and interest as of the reporting date, not the loans’ contractual payment terms. These cash flow estimates are updated quarterly to reflect changes in management’s expectations, which consider market conditions. At December 31, 2009, approximately $2.3 million of these commercial real estate loans had been placed by management on non-accrual status, as the allowance for loan losses for anyyield associated with certain of the years endedloans, determined when the loans were acquired, was deemed to be non-accretable. This determination was based on management’s expectation of the future collection of principal and interest on the loans.
At December 31, 2008, 2007 or 2006.2009, we held structured asset-backed loans, presented in the preceding table as purchased receivables, that were added in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation. These loans represent undivided interests in securitized pools of underlying third-party receivables.
The components of the net investment in leveraged leases were as follows as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
Net rental income receivable | $ | 2,929 | $ | 3,264 | $ | 2,677 | $ | 2,929 | ||||||||
Estimated residual values | 156 | 222 | 129 | 156 | ||||||||||||
Unearned income | (1,241 | ) | (1,506 | ) | (1,090 | ) | (1,241 | ) | ||||||||
Investment in leveraged leases | 1,844 | 1,980 | 1,716 | 1,844 | ||||||||||||
Less related deferred income taxes | (535 | ) | (1,177 | ) | (505 | ) | (535 | ) | ||||||||
Net investment in leveraged leases | $ | 1,309 | $ | 803 | $ | 1,211 | $ | 1,309 | ||||||||
The following table represents activity in the allowance for loan losses for the years ended December 31:
| 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||
Beginning balance | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | ||||
Provision for loan losses: | ||||||||||
Commercial real estate loans | 124 | — | — | |||||||
Other | 25 | — | — | |||||||
Charge-offs: | ||||||||||
Commercial real estate loans | (72 | ) | — | — | ||||||
Other | (19 | ) | — | — | ||||||
Recoveries: | ||||||||||
Commercial real estate loans | 3 | — | — | |||||||
Total | $ | 79 | $ | 18 | $ | 18 | ||||
Of the aggregate provision for loan losses recorded in 2009, $124 million was associated with certain of the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnification obligations. This portion of the provision was reflective of changes in management’s expectations with respect to future principal and interest cash flows from these loans. The changes in expectations were primarily based on the assessment of the impact of the deteriorating economic conditions in the commercial real estate markets on these loans during 2009. Of the remaining provision of $25 million, $16 million related to the results of the Federal Reserve’s Shared National Credit review. The charge-offs of $91 million in 2009 primarily related to the commercial real estate loans, as management considered certain of these loans no longer collectible.
Note 5. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Changes in the carrying amount of goodwill were as follows for the years ended December 31:
| (In millions) | Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Total | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2006 | $ | 1,376 | $ | 8 | $ | 1,384 | ||||||
Acquisition of Currenex | 437 | — | 437 | |||||||||
Acquisition of Investors Financial | 2,710 | — | 2,710 | |||||||||
Other acquisitions | 26 | — | 26 | |||||||||
Foreign currency translation adjustments | 10 | — | 10 | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2007 | $ | 4,559 | $ | 8 | $ | 4,567 | ||||||
Acquisitions | 59 | — | 59 | |||||||||
Adjustments of goodwill previously recorded | (28 | ) | — | (28 | ) | |||||||
Foreign currency translation and other adjustments, net | (69 | ) | (2 | ) | (71 | ) | ||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 4,521 | $ | 6 | $ | 4,527 | ||||||
| (In millions) | Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Total | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2007 | $ | 4,559 | $ | 8 | $ | 4,567 | ||||||
Acquisitions | 59 | — | 59 | |||||||||
Reduction of goodwill previously recorded | (28 | ) | — | (28 | ) | |||||||
Impairment | (27 | ) | — | (27 | ) | |||||||
Foreign currency translation and other adjustments, net | (42 | ) | (2 | ) | (44 | ) | ||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 4,521 | $ | 6 | $ | 4,527 | ||||||
Reduction of goodwill previously recorded | (16 | ) | — | (16 | ) | |||||||
Foreign currency translation | 39 | — | 39 | |||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ | 4,544 | $ | 6 | $ | 4,550 | ||||||
The 2008 adjustmentsreduction of goodwill previously recorded resulted primarily from changes in purchase accounting associated with the acquisitions of Investors Financial and Currenex. The 2009 reduction of goodwill previously recorded was associated with a refund of foreign income taxes during the year that was originally paid in connection with a previous acquisition.
The gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of other intangible assets were as follows as of December 31:
| 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Gross Carrying Amount | Accumulated Amortization | Net Carrying Amount | Gross Carrying Amount | Accumulated Amortization | Net Carrying Amount | Gross Carrying Amount | Accumulated Amortization | Net Carrying Amount | Gross Carrying Amount | Accumulated Amortization | Net Carrying Amount | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Customer relationships | $ | 1,573 | $ | (277 | ) | $ | 1,296 | $ | 1,695 | $ | (253 | ) | $ | 1,442 | $ | 1,628 | $ | (409 | ) | $ | 1,219 | $ | 1,573 | $ | (277 | ) | $ | 1,296 | ||||||||||||
Core deposits | 500 | (34 | ) | 466 | 500 | (11 | ) | 489 | 500 | (57 | ) | 443 | 500 | (34 | ) | 466 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other | 170 | (81 | ) | 89 | 75 | (16 | ) | 59 | 243 | (95 | ) | 148 | 170 | (81 | ) | 89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 2,243 | $ | (392 | ) | $ | 1,851 | $ | 2,270 | $ | (280 | ) | $ | 1,990 | $ | 2,371 | $ | (561 | ) | $ | 1,810 | $ | 2,243 | $ | (392 | ) | $ | 1,851 | ||||||||||||
Amortization expense related to other intangible assets was $136 million, $144 million $92 million and $43$92 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 2006,2007, respectively. Expected amortization expense for other intangible assets held at December 31, 20082009 is $136 million for 2009, $132$138 million for 2010, $130$135 million for 2011, $129$134 million for 2012 and $127$132 million for 2013.each of 2013 and 2014.
Note 6. Other Assets and Other Liabilities
Other Assets:
Other assets consisted of the following as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||
Unrealized gains on derivative financial instruments | $ | 11,943 | $ | 4,513 | $ | 4,511 | $ | 11,943 | ||||
Collateral deposits | 2,709 | 25 | 1,351 | 2,709 | ||||||||
Equity investments in joint ventures and other unconsolidated entities | 412 | 398 | 492 | 412 | ||||||||
Deferred tax assets | 3,973 | — | ||||||||||
Other | 1,946 | 2,143 | 1,696 | 1,946 | ||||||||
Total | $ | 17,010 | $ | 7,079 | $ | 12,023 | $ | 17,010 | ||||
Accrued Expenses and Other Liabilities:
In December 2008, we implemented a plan to reduce our expenses from operations and support our long-term growth. In connection with this plan, we recorded aggregate restructuring charges of $306 million in our 2008 consolidated statement of income. The primary component of the plan was an involuntary reduction of our global workforce, which was substantially completed by the end of the first quarter of 2009. Other components of the plan included costs related to lease and software license terminations, restructuring of agreements with technology providers and other costs.
The following table presents activity related to these liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2009, during which time approximately 1,590 employees were involuntarily terminated and left State Street.
| (In millions) | Severance | Lease and Asset Write-Offs | Other | Total | ||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 230 | $ | 17 | $ | 3 | $ | 250 | ||||||||
Payments and write-offs | (214 | ) | (14 | ) | (3 | ) | (231 | ) | ||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ | 16 | $ | 3 | $ | — | $ | 19 | ||||||||
In 2007, in connection with the Investors Financial acquisition, we recorded liabilities for exit and termination costs of approximately $67 million. These costs were composed of liabilities for severance
associated with Investors Financial employees, abandonment of Investors Financial operating leases, and termination of service and other contracts executed by Investors Financial with third parties. These costs were recorded as part of the purchase price, and resulted in additional goodwill. The liability related to the lease abandonments is expected to be reduced over the terms of the related leases, which as of December 31, 2009 is approximately eleven years.
The following table presents activity related to these liabilities for the year ended December 31, 2009.
| (In millions) | Severance | Lease Abandonments | Total | ||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 6 | $ | 35 | $ | 41 | |||||
Payments and other adjustments | (4 | ) | 1 | (3 | ) | ||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 | $ | 2 | $ | 36 | $ | 38 | |||||
Note 7. Deposits
At December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, we had $6.91$8.17 billion and $20.90$6.91 billion, respectively, of time deposits outstanding. Non-U.S. time deposits were $4.80$2.39 billion and $3.71$4.80 billion at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively. Substantially all U.S. and non-U.S. time deposits were in amounts of $100,000 or more. The scheduled maturities of aggregate U.S. and non-U.S. time deposits were as follows at December 31, 2008:2009:
| (In millions) | ||||||
2009 | $ | 6,898 | ||||
2010 | 7 | $ | 8,132 | |||
2011 | — | 43 | ||||
2012 | 3 | |||||
2013 | — | |||||
After 2013 | — | |||||
Total | $ | 6,908 | $ | 8,175 | ||
At December 31, 2008,2009, the scheduled maturities of U.S. time deposits were as follows:
| (In millions) | ||||||
3 months or less | $ | 1,425 | $ | 4,566 | ||
4 months to a year | 682 | 1,177 | ||||
Over one year | 3 | 43 | ||||
Total | $ | 2,110 | $ | 5,786 | ||
Note 8. Short-Term Borrowings
Our short-term borrowings include securities sold under repurchase agreements, federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings, including non-recourse borrowings associated with the AMLF, discussed further in this note, borrowings associated with our tax-exempt investment program, more fully discussed in note 12,11, commercial paper issued by us, andunder our corporate program, borrowings under the Federal Reserve’s term auction facility.facility and commercial paper issued by the conduits. Collectively, these short-term borrowings had weighted-average interest rates of 2.21%.73% and 4.36%2.21% for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, respectively.
The following table presentstables present the amounts outstanding and weighted-average interest rates of the primary components of short-term borrowings as of and for the years ended December 31:
| Federal Funds Purchased | Securities Sold Under Repurchase Agreements | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31 | $ | 1,082 | $ | 425 | $ | 2,147 | $ | 11,154 | $ | 14,646 | $ | 19,147 | ||||||||||||
Maximum outstanding at any month end | 4,853 | 5,007 | 8,040 | 17,274 | 20,108 | 23,024 | ||||||||||||||||||
Average outstanding during the year | 1,026 | 1,667 | 2,777 | 14,261 | 16,132 | 20,883 | ||||||||||||||||||
Weighted average interest rate at end of year | .01 | % | 3.06 | % | 5.18 | % | .01 | % | 3.40 | % | 4.43 | % | ||||||||||||
Weighted average interest rate during the year | 1.77 | 5.15 | 5.04 | 1.24 | 4.35 | 4.38 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-Exempt Investment Program | Commercial Paper | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31 | $ | 2,858 | $ | 3,082 | $ | 1,786 | $ | 2,588 | $ | 2,355 | $ | 998 | ||||||||||||
Maximum outstanding at any month end | 3,068 | 3,129 | 1,786 | 2,588 | 2,355 | 1,366 | ||||||||||||||||||
Average outstanding during the year | 2,946 | 2,556 | 636 | 1,784 | 1,478 | 1,211 | ||||||||||||||||||
Weighted average interest rate at end of year | 2.80 | % | 3.62 | % | 4.01 | % | .82 | % | 4.23 | % | 5.24 | % | ||||||||||||
Weighted average interest rate during the year | 3.73 | 3.46 | 3.38 | 2.78 | 5.12 | 5.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
Balance at December 31 Maximum outstanding at any month end Average outstanding during the year Weighted-average interest rate at end of year Weighted-average interest rate during the year Balance at December 31 Maximum outstanding at any month end Average outstanding during the year Weighted-average interest rate at end of year Weighted-average interest rate during the year Securities Sold Under
Repurchase Agreements Federal Funds Purchased (Dollars in millions) 2009 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007 $ 10,542 $ 11,154 $ 14,646 $ 4,532 $ 1,082 $ 425 12,993 17,274 20,108 7,166 4,853 5,007 11,065 14,261 16,132 956 1,026 1,667 .03 % .01 % 3.40 % .01 % .01 % 3.06 % .03 1.24 4.35 .04 1.77 5.15 Tax-Exempt
Investment Program Corporate Commercial Paper
Program (Dollars in millions) 2009 2008 2007 2009 2008 2007 $ 2,736 $ 2,858 $ 3,082 $ 2,777 $ 2,588 $ 2,355 2,838 3,068 3,129 2,851 2,588 2,355 2,774 2,946 2,556 1,993 1,784 1,478 .33 % 2.80 % 3.62 % .21 % .82 % 4.23 % .47 3.73 3.46 .30 2.78 5.12
| Conduit Commercial Paper Program | ||||
| (Dollars in millions) | 2009 | |||
Balance at December 31 | $ | 12,071 | ||
Maximum outstanding at any month end(1) | 15,645 | |||
Average outstanding during the year(1) | 10,691 | |||
Weighted-average interest rate at end of year | 1.31 | % | ||
Weighted-average interest rate during the year(1) | 1.26 | |||
| (1) | Amounts relate to the period subsequent to consolidation of the conduits. |
Securities sold under repurchase agreements included the following at December 31, 2008:2009:
| (In millions) | ||||||
Collateralized with securities purchased under resale agreements | $ | 65 | $ | 1,475 | ||
Collateralized with investment securities | 11,089 | 9,067 | ||||
Total | $ | 11,154 | $ | 10,542 | ||
The obligations to repurchase securities sold are recorded as a liability in our consolidated statement of condition. U.S. government securities with a fair value of $11.38$9.25 billion underlying the repurchase agreements remained in investment securities.securities at December 31, 2009. Information about these U.S. government securities and the related repurchase agreements, including accrued interest, as of December 31, 2008,2009, is presented in the following table. The table excludes repurchase agreements collateralized with securities purchased under resale agreements.
| U.S. Government Securities Sold | Repurchase Agreements | U.S. Government Securities Sold | Repurchase Agreements | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Amortized Cost | Fair Value | Amortized Cost | Rate | Amortized Cost | Fair Value | Amortized Cost | Rate | ||||||||||||||||
Overnight maturity | $ | 11,243 | $ | 11,376 | $ | 11,089 | .01 | % | $ | 9,230 | $ | 9,255 | $ | 9,067 | .03 | % | ||||||||
We have entered into an agreement with a clearing organization that enables us to net all securities purchased under resale agreements and sold under repurchase agreements with counterparties that are also members of this organization. As a result of netting, the average balances of securities purchased under resale agreements and securities sold under repurchase agreements were each reduced by $14.82 billion for 2009 and $17.52 billion for 2008.
We maintain a corporate commercial paper program, unrelated to the conduits’ asset-backed commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issue. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, $2.78 billion and $13.38$2.59 billion, for 2007.respectively, of commercial paper was outstanding under our corporate program.
In September 2008, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston instituted the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, or AMLF. The AMLF, iswhich was designed to assist in restoring liquidity to the asset-backed commercial paper markets and assist registered money market mutual funds in maintaining adequate liquidity to meet investor redemption demand. The facility isdemand, was authorized by federal regulations which permitpermitted the Federal Reserve, in unusual circumstances, to authorize Reserve Banks to extend credit to certain parties that arewere unable to obtain adequate credit accommodations.
The AMLF, which was originally intended to expire on January 30, 2009, but was extended by the Federal Reserve to April 30, 2009, allows arecently expired, allowed depository institutioninstitutions or bank holding companycompanies to borrow funds on a non-recourse basis from the Federal Reserve Bank’s discount window in order to fund purchases of qualifying asset-backed commercial paper from an eligible money market mutual fund or other eligible entity under certain conditions. BorrowingsThe fixed interest rates on borrowings under the facility, are extended on a non-recourse basis at fixed interest ratesset by the Federal Reserve Bank, were equal to the Federal Reserve Bank’s primary credit rate in effect at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston at the time of the borrowing. The terms and conditions of the AMLF stipulatestipulated that the term of the borrowing must equal the maturity of the eligible asset-backed commercial paper collateralizing the borrowing.
We participated in the AMLF primarily during the third and fourth quarters of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009 to provide liquidity to certain eligible unaffiliated money market mutual funds. As of December 31, 2008, we carried asset-backed commercial paper of $6.09 billion purchased under this facility was carried in investment securities held to maturity, and corresponding outstanding short-term borrowings totaling $6.04 billion were carried in our consolidated statement of condition, and had corresponding outstanding borrowings under the AMLF totaling $6.04 billion. For the period from commencement ofcondition. In connection with our participation in the AMLF, through December 31, 2008, the average asset-backed commercial paper purchased and corresponding outstanding borrowings were approximately $33.31 billion and $33.23 billion, respectively. The commercial paper is purchased at the fund’s cost, and an adjustment to the commercial paper purchased for the difference between its purchase price and its fair value at the time of purchase is recorded in our consolidated statement of income, with an offsetting adjustment to the corresponding borrowing. As a result, there is no net impact on our results of operations. Thereafter, the purchase discount or premium is accreted or amortized into results of operations over the term of the commercial paper as a yield adjustment to the carrying value of the asset. The commercial paper is reported separately in our consolidated statement of condition in investment securities held to maturity. The corresponding short-term borrowings are also reported separately.
As described above, the borrowings are extended on a non-recourse basis. As such, there is no credit or market risk exposure to us on the assets, and as a result the terms of the AMLF permit exclusion of the assets from regulatory leverage and risk-based capital calculations. The interest rate on the borrowings is set by the Federal Reserve Bank, and we earnearned net interest revenue in 2009 and 2008, generated by earning athe spread on the difference between the yield we earnearned on the assets and the rate we paypaid on the borrowings. For 2008, we earned net interest revenue associated with this facilityborrowings, of approximately $7 million and $68 million.million, respectively.
Separately, we currently maintain a commercial paper program under which we can issue up to $3 billion with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issue. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, $2.59 billion and $2.36 billion, respectively, of commercial paper were outstanding. In addition, State Street Bank currently has Board authority to issue bank notes up to an aggregate of $5 billion, including up to $2.48 billion of senior notes under the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, instituted by the FDIC in October 2008 for qualified senior debt issued through June 30, 2009, and up to $1 billion of subordinated bank notes (see note 10).notes. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, no2009, $2.45 billion of bank notes payable werewas outstanding and(see note 9), compared to none at December 31, 2008, all $5 billion was available for issuance.
2008. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit of CAD $800 million, or approximately $657$761 million, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. At December 31, 2008,2009, no balance was dueoutstanding on this line of credit.
Note 9. Restructuring Charges
In December 2008, we implemented a plan to reduce our expenses from operations and support our long-term growth. In connection with this plan, we recorded aggregate restructuring charges of $306 million in our consolidated statement of income. The primary component of the plan was an involuntary reduction of approximately 7% of our global workforce, which reduction we expect to be substantially completed by the end of the first quarter of 2009. Other components of the plan included costs related to lease and software license terminations, restructuring of agreements with technology providers and other costs.
Of the aggregate restructuring charges of $306 million, $243 million related to severance, a portion of which will be paid in a lump sum or over a defined period, and a portion of which will provide related benefits and outplacement services for approximately 2,100 employees identified for involuntary termination in connection with the plan; $49 million related to future lease obligations and write-offs of capitalized assets, including $23 million for impairment of other intangible assets; $10 million of costs associated with information technology and $4 million of other restructuring costs. The severance component included $47 million related to accelerated vesting of equity-based compensation. In December 2008, approximately 620 employees were involuntarily terminated and left State Street.
The following table presents the activity in the related balance sheet reserve for 2008.
| (In millions) | Severance | Lease and Asset Write-Offs | Information Technology | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||
Initial accrual | $ | 250 | $ | 42 | $ | 10 | $ | 4 | $ | 306 | ||||||||||
Payments and adjustments | (20 | ) | (25 | ) | (10 | ) | (1 | ) | (56 | ) | ||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 | $ | 230 | $ | 17 | — | $ | 3 | $ | 250 | |||||||||||
Note 10. Long-Term Debt
| (Dollars in millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||
Statutory business trusts: | ||||||||||||
Floating-rate subordinated notes due to State Street Capital Trust IV in 2037 | $ | 800 | $ | 800 | ||||||||
8.25% fixed-to-floating-rate subordinated notes due to State Street Capital Trust III in 2042 | $ | 500 | 500 | 500 | ||||||||
Floating-rate subordinated notes due to State Street Capital Trust IV in 2067 | 800 | $ | 800 | |||||||||
Floating-rate subordinated notes due to State Street Capital Trust I in 2028 | 155 | 155 | 155 | 155 | ||||||||
9.77% subordinated notes due to Investors Capital Trust I in 2027 | — | 25 | ||||||||||
Parent company and non-banking subsidiary issuances: | ||||||||||||
2.15% notes due 2012(1) | 1,498 | — | ||||||||||
Long-term capital leases | 746 | 486 | 751 | 746 | ||||||||
4.30% notes due 2014 | 500 | — | ||||||||||
5.375% notes due 2017 | 450 | 450 | 450 | 450 | ||||||||
7.65% subordinated notes due 2010(1) | 313 | 304 | ||||||||||
7.65% subordinated notes due 2010(2) | 305 | 313 | ||||||||||
Floating-rate notes due 2012 | 250 | 250 | 250 | 250 | ||||||||
7.35% notes due 2026 | 150 | 150 | 150 | 150 | ||||||||
9.50% mortgage note due 2009 | 1 | 3 | — | 1 | ||||||||
State Street Bank issuances: | ||||||||||||
5.25% subordinated notes due 2018(1) | 455 | 413 | ||||||||||
Floating-rate notes due 2011(1) | 1,450 | — | ||||||||||
1.85% notes due 2011(1) | 1,000 | — | ||||||||||
5.25% subordinated notes due 2018(2) | 430 | 455 | ||||||||||
5.30% subordinated notes due 2016 | 399 | 400 | 399 | 399 | ||||||||
Floating-rate subordinated notes due 2015(2) | 200 | 200 | ||||||||||
Floating-rate subordinated notes due 2015(3) | 200 | 200 | ||||||||||
Total long-term debt | $ | 4,419 | $ | 3,636 | $ | 8,838 | $ | 4,419 | ||||
| (1) | Notes are guaranteed by the FDIC under the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP. |
| (2) | We have entered into |
We have entered into interest-rate swap |
See note 1716 for additional information about derivatives.
We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof.
Statutory Business Trusts:
As of December 31, 2008,2009, we had three statutory business trusts, State Street Capital Trusts I, III and IV, which as of December 31, 2008,2009, collectively had issued $1.45 billion of trust preferred capital securities.
Proceeds received by each of the trusts from their capitalization and from their capital securities issuances are invested in junior subordinated debentures issued by the parent company. The junior subordinated debentures are the sole assets of the trusts. Each of the trusts is wholly-owned by us; however, we do not record the trusts in our consolidated financial statements under existing accounting standards.
Payments made by the trusts on the capital securities are dependent on our payments made to the trusts on the junior subordinated debentures. Our fulfillment of these commitments has the effect of providing a full,
irrevocable and unconditional guarantee of the trusts’ obligations under the capital securities. While the capital securities issued by the trusts are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition, the junior subordinated debentures qualify for inclusion in tier 1 regulatory capital under federal regulatory capital guidelines. Information about restrictions on our ability to obtain funds from our subsidiary banks is provided in note 16.15.
Interest paid on the debentures is recorded in interest expense. Distributions on the capital securities are payable from interest payments received on the debentures and are due quarterly by State Street Capital Trusts I and IV, subject to deferral for up to five years under certain conditions. The capital securities are subject to mandatory redemption in whole at the stated maturity upon repayment of the debentures, with an option by us to
redeem the debentures at any time upon the occurrence of certain tax events or changes to tax treatment, investment company regulation or capital treatment; or at any time after May 15, 2008 for the Capital Trust I securities and any time after June 15, 2012 for the Capital Trust IV securities. Redemptions are subject to federal regulatory approval.
In January 2008,With respect to the 8.25% fixed-to-floating rate subordinated notes due to State Street Capital Trust III a Delaware statutory trust wholly owned by the parent company,in 2042, State Street Capital Trust III issued $500 million in aggregate liquidation amount of 8.250% fixed-to-floating rate8.25% fixed-to-floating-rate normal automatic preferred enhanced capital securities, referred to as normal APEX, and used the proceeds to purchaseinvest in a like amount of remarketable 6.001% junior subordinated debentures due 2042 from the parent company. In addition, the trust entered into stock purchase contracts with the parent company under which the trust agrees to purchase, and the parent company agrees to sell, on the stock purchase date, a like amount in aggregate liquidation amount of the parent company’s non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, series A, $100,000 liquidation preference per share. State Street will make contract payments to the trust at an annual rate of 2.249% of the stated amount of $100,000 per stock purchase contract.
The normal APEX are beneficial interests in the trust. The trust will pass through, as distributions on or the redemption price of normal APEX, amounts that it receives on its assets that are the corresponding assets for the normal APEX. The corresponding assets for each normal APEX, $1,000 liquidation amount, initially are $1,000 principal amount of the 6.001% junior subordinated debentures and a 1/100,th, or a $1,000, interest in a stock purchase contract for the purchase and sale of one share of the Series A preferred stock for $100,000. The stock purchase date is expected to be March 15, 2011, but it may occur on an earlier date or as late as March 15, 2012. From and after the stock purchase date, the corresponding asset for each normal APEX will be a 1/100,th, or a $1,000, interest in one share of the Series A preferred stock. In accordance with existing accounting standards, we did not record the trust in our consolidated financial statements. The junior subordinated debentures qualify for inclusion in tier 1 regulatory capital.capital under federal regulatory capital guidelines.
Interest paid on the debentures is recorded in interest expense. Distributions on the normal APEX are payable from interest payments received on the debentures and are due semi-annually by State Street Capital Trust III through the later of March 15, 2011 and the stock purchase date and quarterly thereafter, subject to deferral for up to five years under certain conditions. The normal APEX are perpetual, and the trust will redeem them only to the extent that we redeem the preferred stock or, prior to the stock purchase date, if we redeem the debentures under certain conditions. Redemptions are subject to federal regulatory approval.
Parent Company and Non-Banking Subsidiary Issuances:
In May 2009, we issued $500 million of 4.30% fixed-rate senior notes that mature on May 30, 2014, with interest payable semi-annually in arrears on May 30 and November 30 of each year, beginning on November 30, 2009. We cannot redeem the notes prior to maturity. We incurred costs of approximately $1.7 million in connection with the issuance, primarily composed of underwriting, legal and SEC registration fees. We completed the issuance primarily in connection with our intention to redeem the U.S. Treasury’s preferred equity investment received in October 2008 under the TARP Capital Purchase Program.
In March 2009, we issued an aggregate of $1.5 billion of 2.15% fixed-rate senior notes that mature on April 30, 2012, with interest payable semi-annually in arrears on April 30 and October 30 of each year, beginning on April 30, 2009. We have the option to redeem the notes before their maturity if we become obligated to pay certain additional amounts because of changes in the laws or regulations of any U.S. taxing authority. These senior notes are guaranteed by the FDIC under the TLGP. If we fail to make a timely payment of any principal or interest, the FDIC is obligated to make such payment following required notification. The FDIC’s guarantee of the notes will expire upon their redemption or on April 30, 2012. We incurred costs of approximately $5 million in connection with the issuance, primarily composed of underwriting, legal and SEC registration fees. Upon issuance of the senior notes, we paid the FDIC approximately $47.5 million to utilize the guarantee. The aggregate of the FDIC guarantee fee and other issuance costs will be amortized as a reduction of net interest revenue in our consolidated statement of income over the term of the notes.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, $470$452 million and $486$470 million, respectively, were included in long-term debt related to the capital leases for One Lincoln Street and the One Lincoln Street parking garage. In addition, at December 31, 2009 and 2008, long-term debt included $290 million and $263 million related to an office facility in the U.K. See note 2019 for additional information. The 7.65% subordinated notes due 2010 qualify as tier 2 regulatory capital under federal regulatory capital guidelines. The 7.35% notes are unsecured. The 9.50% mortgage note, which is fully collateralized by property, will be entirely paid off in 2009.
State Street Bank Issuances:
In March 2009, State Street Bank currently has Board authority to issue up toissued an aggregate of $2.45 billion of fixed- and floating-rate senior notes. Of the total notes issued, $1 billion of subordinated1.85% fixed-rate senior notes mature on March 15, 2011, and interest is payable semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning on September 15, 2009. In addition, $1.45 billion of floating-rate senior notes mature on September 15, 2011, and interest is payable quarterly at the three-month LIBOR rate plus 20 basis points on March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning on June 15, 2009. The interest on the floating-rate senior notes will reset quarterly on each interest payment date each year, beginning on June 15, 2009.
State Street Bank has the option to redeem the notes before their maturity if it becomes obligated to pay additional interest because of changes in the laws or zero-coupon bankregulations of any U.S. taxing authority. The aggregate senior notes are guaranteed by the FDIC under the TLGP. If State Street Bank fails to make a timely payment of any principal or interest, the FDIC is obligated to make such payment following required notification. The FDIC’s guarantee of the notes will expire upon redemption of the notes or on each of the notes’ respective maturities. Upon issuance of the senior notes, State Street Bank paid the FDIC approximately $56 million to utilize the guarantee. State Street Bank incurred costs of approximately $5 million in connection with the issuance, primarily composed of underwriting and legal fees. The aggregate of the FDIC guarantee fee and other issuance costs will be amortized as a maturityreduction of five to fifteen years. net interest revenue in our consolidated statement of income over the term of the notes.
With respect to the 5.25% subordinated bank notes due 2018, State Street Bank is required to make semi-annual interest payments on the outstanding principal balance of the notes on April 15 and October 15 of each year, and the notes qualify for inclusion in tier 2 regulatory capital.
With respect to the 5.30% subordinated notes due 2016 and the floating-rate subordinated notes due 2015, State Street Bank is required to make semi-annual interest payments on the outstanding principal balance of the 5.30% notes on January 15 and July 15 of each year, and quarterly interest payments on the outstanding principal balance of the floating-rate notes on March 8, June 8, September 8 and December 8 of each year. The notes qualify for inclusion in tier 2 regulatory capital.
Note 11.10. Commitments and Contingencies
Credit-Related Commitments and Contingencies:
Credit-related financial instruments, which are off-balance sheet, include indemnified securities financing, unfunded commitments to extend credit or purchase assets, and standby letters of credit. The total potential loss onassociated with indemnified securities financing, unfunded commitments and standby letters of credit is equal to the total gross contractual amount, which does not consider the value of any collateral.
The following table summarizes the total gross contractual amountamounts of credit-related off-balance sheet financial instruments at December 31. Amounts reported do not reflect participations to independent third parties.
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||
Indemnified securities financing | $ | 324,590 | $ | 558,368 | $ | 365,251 | $ | 324,590 | ||||
Liquidity asset purchase agreements | 28,800 | 35,339 | ||||||||||
Asset purchase agreements(1) | 8,211 | 31,780 | ||||||||||
Unfunded commitments to extend credit | 20,981 | 17,533 | 18,078 | 20,981 | ||||||||
Standby letters of credit | 6,061 | 4,711 | 4,784 | 6,061 | ||||||||
| (1) | Amount for 2009 excludes agreements related to the commercial paper conduits, which were consolidated in May 2009; see note 11. |
Approximately 81% of the unfunded commitments to extend credit expire within one year from the date of issue. Since many of thethese commitments are expected to expire or renew without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts doamount does not necessarily represent future cash requirements.
Securities Finance:
On behalf of our customers, we lend their securities to creditworthy brokers and other institutions. We generally indemnify our customers for the fair market value of those securities against a failure of the borrower to return such securities. Collateral funds received in connection with our securities finance services are held by us as agent and are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. We require the borrowers to provide collateral in an amount equal to or in excess of 100% of the fair market value of the securities borrowed. The borrowed securities are revalued daily to determine if additional collateral is necessary. In this regard, we held, as agent, cash and U.S. government securities with an aggregate fair value of $333.07$375.92 billion and $572.93$333.07 billion as collateral for indemnified securities on loan at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively, presented in the table above.
The collateral held by us is invested on behalf of our customers.customers in accordance with their guidelines. In certain cases, the collateral is invested in third-party repurchase agreements, for which we indemnify the customer against loss of the principal invested. We require the repurchase agreement counterparty to provide collateral in an amount equal to or in excess of 100% of the amount of the repurchase agreement. The indemnified repurchase agreements and the related collateral are not recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. Of the collateral of $375.92 billion at December 31, 2009 and $333.07 billion at December 31, 2008 and $572.93referenced above, $77.73 billion at December 31, 2007 referenced above,2009 and $68.37 billion at December 31, 2008 and $106.13 billion at December 31, 2007 was invested in indemnified repurchase agreements. We held, as agent, cash and securities with an aggregate fair value of $71.87$82.62 billion and $111.02$71.87 billion as collateral for indemnified investments in repurchase agreements at December 31, 20082009 and December 31, 2007,2008, respectively.
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Program:
In the normal course of our business, we provide liquidity and credit enhancement to an asset-backed commercial paper program sponsored and administered by us, described in note 12. The commercial paper issuances and commitments of the commercial paper conduits to provide funding are supported by liquidity asset purchase agreements and back-up liquidity lines of credit, the majority of which are provided by us. In addition, we provide direct credit support to the conduits in the form of standby letters of credit. Our commitments under liquidity asset purchase agreements and back-up lines of credit totaled $23.59 billion at December 31, 2008, and are included in the preceding table. Our commitments under standby letters of credit totaled $1.00 billion at December 31, 2008, and are also included in the preceding table.
Legal Proceedings:
Several customers have filed litigation claims against us, someIn the ordinary course of which are putative class actions purportedly on behalf of customers invested in certain of State Street Global Advisors’, or SSgA’s, active fixed-income strategies. These claims related to investment losses in one or more of SSgA’s strategies that included sub-prime investments. In 2007,business, we established a reserve of approximately $625 million to address legal exposure associated with the under-performance of certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA and customer concerns as to whether the execution of these strategies was consistent with the customers’ investment intent. These strategies were adversely impacted by exposure to, and the lack of liquidity in,
sub-prime mortgage markets that resulted from the disruption in the global securities markets during the second half of 2007. After aggregate payments of $417 million for settlement agreements, the reserve totaled approximately $208 million at December 31, 2008.
Weour subsidiaries are involved in variousdisputes, litigation and regulatory governmental and law enforcement inquiries and subpoenas, as well as legalinvestigations, both pending and threatened. These matters, if resolved adversely against us, may result in monetary damages, fines and penalties or require changes in our business practices. The resolution of these proceedings is inherently difficult to predict. However, we do not believe that arise in the normal courseamount of business. In the opinion of management, after discussion with counsel and based on the information currently available, these regulatory, governmental and law enforcement inquiries and subpoenas and legal proceedings can be defendedany judgment, settlement or resolved withoutother action arising from any pending proceeding will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, oralthough the outcome of certain of the matters described below may have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations for the period in which such matter is resolved
or a reserve is determined to be required. We may be subject to proceedings in the future that, if adversely resolved, would have a material adverse effect on our businesses or on our future consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
On February 4, 2010, we announced that we had entered into settlements with the SEC, the Massachusetts Attorney General and the Massachusetts Securities Division of the Office of the Secretary of State to resolve their investigations into losses incurred by, and disclosures made with respect to, certain active fixed-income strategies managed by SSgA during 2007 and earlier periods. In reaching these settlements, we neither admitted nor denied the allegations made by the regulators. Under the terms of the agreements, we agreed to establish a $313 million fair fund, which includes a fine of $50 million and disgorgement of advisory fees and interest of approximately $8 million. The fair fund will be distributed to affected investors in the active fixed-income strategies. The settlement with the SEC is subject to approval by a federal court. Combined with approximately $350 million in prior customer settlements, the total compensation to investors will total approximately $663 million. Under the settlements with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, we agreed to pay $10 million to each of the Massachusetts Secretary of State and the Massachusetts Attorney General. Our previously established legal reserve will fully cover the cost of these regulatory settlements.
The SEC had previously requested information regarding two registered funds that invested in sub-prime securities. These funds were not covered by this settlement and the SEC staff has declined to advise us of the status of its inquiry with regard to those funds. As of June 30, 2007, these funds had net assets of less than $300 million, and the net asset value per share of the funds experienced an average decline of approximately 7.23% during the third quarter of 2007. Average returns for industry peer funds were positive during the same period. The U.S. Attorney’s office in Boston has also requested information in connection with our active-fixed income strategies. Several customers who invested in the SSgA active fixed-income strategies covered by the settlement with the SEC have filed litigation claims against us. Of the seven lawsuits filed, we have settled three, including an $89.75 million ERISA class action settlement.
Our U.K. affiliate is currently engaged in an arbitration proceeding in the U.K. arising from its conduct as investment manager of a separate investment account. The claimants allege that we breached certain investment guidelines applicable to the accounts, resulting in alleged losses of approximately €132 million.
An indirect participant in certain of the collective funds managed by SSgA which engage in securities lending commenced during 2009 a putative class action on behalf of all investors in such funds that are ERISA benefit plans. Such action alleges, among other things, that we failed to exercise prudence in the management of our collateral pools in which the collective funds had invested cash collateral from securities lending. A second, related class action complaint was filed in December 2009 by a direct investor in an SSgA lending fund. The complaint additionally alleges that investors in the SSgA lending funds were injured as a result of the limitations on withdrawals from our lending programs imposed in October 2008. In addition, two participants in our securities lending program have brought suit in Missouri challenging actions taken by us in response to their withdrawal from the program. We believe that the withdrawals were unauthorized and that we acted in the best interests of all program participants. In February 2010, one of these customers threatened to commence litigation against us. As previously disclosed, we have also been responding to inquiries from the SEC in connection with our cash collateral pools.
The Attorney General of the State of California has commenced an action under the California False Claims Act and California Business and Professional Code related to services State Street provides to California state pension plans. The California Attorney General asserts that the pricing of certain foreign exchange transactions for these pension plans was not consistent with the terms of the applicable custody contracts and related disclosures to the plans, and that, as a result, State Street made false claims and engaged in unfair competition. The Attorney General asserts actual damages of $56 million for periods from 2001 to 2007 and seeks additional penalties. A similar action has been commenced in the District of Columbia by an anonymous whistleblower who purports to sue on behalf of DC public pension funds. We provide custody and foreign exchange services to government pension plans in other jurisdictions, and attorneys general from a number of these other jurisdictions, as well as the U.S. Attorney General’s office, have requested information in connection with inquiries into our foreign exchange pricing.
Two related securities class actions against us were commenced between December 2009 and January 2010. In addition, two participants in the State Street Salary Savings Program have filed class action complaints purportedly on behalf of participants and beneficiaries who invested in the program’s State Street stock option. Those complaints were filed in May 2009 and February 2010. The complaints, all of which are pending in federal court in Boston, allege violations of the federal securities laws and ERISA in connection with our foreign exchange trading business, our investment securities portfolio and our asset-backed commercial paper conduits program. In addition, two State Street shareholders have filed a shareholder derivative complaint in Massachusetts state court alleging fiduciary breaches by present and former directors and officers of State Street in connection with the SSgA active fixed-income matters discussed above. We have moved to dismiss the complaint based on the Board of Directors’ consideration and rejection of the shareholders’ original demand letter.
We managed, through SSgA, four common trust funds for which, in our capacity as manager and trustee, we appointed Lehman as prime broker. As of September 15, 2008 (the date two of the Lehman entities involved entered insolvency proceedings), these funds had cash and securities held by Lehman with net asset values of approximately $312 million. Some customers who invested in the funds managed by us brought litigation against us seeking compensation and additional damages, including double or treble damages, for their alleged losses in connection with our prime brokerage arrangements with Lehman’s entities. A total of seven customers were invested in such funds, of which four currently have suits pending against us. Three cases are pending in federal court in Boston and the fourth is pending in Nova Scotia. We have entered into settlements with two customers, one of which was entered into after the customer obtained a €42 million judgment from a Dutch court. At September 15, 2008, the five customers with whom we have not entered into settlement agreements had approximately $180 million invested in the funds at issue.
Tax Contingencies:
In the normal course of our business, we are subject to challenges from U.S. and non-U.S. income tax authorities regarding the amount of taxes due. These challenges may result in adjustments to the timing or amount of taxable income or deductions or the allocation of taxable income among tax jurisdictions.
The IRS has completed its review of our 2000 — 2000—2003 income tax returns. During those years, we entered into leveraged leases known as sale-in, lease-out, or SILO, transactions, which the IRS has since classified as tax shelters. The IRS has disallowed tax losses resulting from these leases. During the second quarter of 2008, while we were engaged in settlement discussions with them, the IRS won a court victory in a SILO case involving other taxpayers. Shortly after that decision, the IRS suspended all SILO settlement discussions and during the third quarter of 2008, issued a standard SILO settlement offer to most taxpayers that had entered into such transactions. After reviewing the settlement offer, we decided not to accept it but to continue to pursue our appeal rights within the IRS. We believe that we reported the tax effects of all SILO lease transactions properly based upon applicable statutes, regulations and case law in effect at the time we entered into them.
In accordance with SFAS No. 13,Accounting for Leases,weWe originally recorded net interest revenue and deferred tax liabilities with respect to our SILO transactions based on projected pre-tax and tax cash flows. In consideration of the terms of the settlement offer and the context in which it was issued, during the third quarter of 2008, we revised our projections of the timing and amount of tax cash flows and reflected those revisions in our leveraged lease accounting under FSP FAS No. 13-2, A Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction.(see note 17). We also substantially reserved for tax-related interest expense that we may be incurredincur upon resolution of this matter.
While it is unclear whether we will be able to reach an acceptable resolution with the IRS, management believes we are sufficiently accrued as of December 31, 20082009 for tax exposures, including exposures related to SILO transactions, and related interest expense. If management revises its evaluation of this tax position in a future period, the effect of the revision will be recorded in income tax expense in that period.
Other Contingencies:
In the normal course of our business, we offer products that provide book valuebook-value protection primarily to plan participants in stable value funds managed by non-affiliated investment managers of postretirement defined
contribution benefit plans, particularly 401(k) plans. The book valuebook-value protection is provided on portfolios of intermediate, investment grade fixed-income securities, and is intended to provide safety and stable growth of principal invested. The protection is intended to cover any shortfall in the event that a significant number of plan participants withdraw funds when book value exceeds market value and the liquidation of the assets is not sufficient to redeem the participants. To manage our exposure associated with this contingency, we impose significant restrictions and constraints on the timing and cause of the withdrawals, the manner in which the portfolio is liquidated and the funds are accessed, and the investment parameters of the underlying portfolio. These constraints, combined with structural protections, are designed to provide adequate cushion and guard against payments even under extreme stress scenarios.
As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and 2007, the aggregate notional amount of these guaranteescontingencies, which are individually accounted for as derivative financial instruments, totaled $51.00$52.95 billion and $44.99$54.83 billion, respectively. The notional amounts of these contingencies are presented as trading derivatives, specifically written options, in the table of aggregate notional amounts of derivative financial instruments in note 16. As of December 31, 2008,2009, we have not made a payment under these products, and managementcontingencies. Management believes that the probability of material payment under these guaranteescontingencies is remote.
In the normal course of our business, we hold assets under custody and management in a custodial or fiduciary capacity. Management conducts regular reviews of its responsibilities in this regard and considers the results in preparing the consolidated financial statements. In this regard, in the opinion of management, no contingent liabilities existed at December 31, 2008,2009, that would have had a material adverse effect on State Street’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.operations or financial condition.
Note 12.11. Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities
Tax-Exempt Investment Program:
In the normal course of our business, we structure and sell certificated interests in pools of tax-exempt investment-grade assets, principally to our mutual fund customers. We structure these pools as partnership trusts, and the trusts are recorded in our consolidated statement of condition as investment securities available for sale and other short-term borrowings. We may also provide liquidity and re-marketing services to the trusts. As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, we carried investment securities available for sale, composed of securities related to state and political subdivisions, with a fair value of $3.05$3.13 billion and $3.52$3.05 billion, respectively, and other short-term borrowings (see note 8) of $2.86$2.74 billion and $3.08$2.86 billion, respectively, in our consolidated statement of condition in connection with these trusts.
We transfer assets to the trusts from our investment securities portfolio at adjusted book value, and the trusts finance the acquisition of these assets by selling certificated interests issued by the trusts to third-party investors and to State Street as residual holder. These transfers do not meet the de-recognition criteria of SFAS No. 140,current GAAPAccounting for the Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities,, and therefore are recorded in our consolidated financial statements. The trusts had a weighted-average life of approximately 8.1 years at December 31, 2009, compared to approximately 8.3 years at December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 8.6 years at December 31, 2007.2008. Under separate legal agreements, we provide standby bond purchase agreements to these trusts, which obligate State Street to acquire the certificated interests at par value in the event that the re-marketing agent is unable to place the certificated interests with investors. Our obligations as standby bond purchase agreement provider terminate in the event of the following credit events: payment default, bankruptcy of the issuer or credit enhancement provider, the imposition of taxability, or the downgrade of an asset held by the trust below investment grade. Our commitments to the trusts under these standby bond purchase agreements totaled $2.98$2.83 billion at December 31, 2008,2009, none of which werewas utilized at period-end. In the event that our obligations under these agreements are triggered, no material impact to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations or financial condition is expected to occur, because the securities are already recorded at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition.
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Program:
In the normal course of our business, we sponsor and administer four multi-seller asset-backed commercial paper programs, or conduits, which had aggregate total assets of approximately $23.89 billion at December 31, 2008, and $28.76 billion at December 31, 2007.conduits. The conduits obtain funding through our customer deposit base, the issuance of
commercial paper principally to independent third parties including the Federal Reserve’s Commercial Paper Funding Facility, or CPFF,other short-term sources of liquidity, and hold diversified investments, which are primarily mortgage- and asset-backed securities purchased from independent third parties. The investments areparties, collateralized by mortgages, student loans, automobile and equipment loans and credit card receivables, among others.other asset types.
We provide administrative servicesIn May 2009, we elected to eachtake action that resulted in the consolidation onto our consolidated balance sheet, for financial reporting purposes, of all of the assets and liabilities of the conduits. The consolidation was required by GAAP following the voluntary redemption by us, as administrator of the conduits, of the conduits’ aggregate outstanding subordinated debt, or first-loss notes, of approximately $67 million. We consolidated the conduits only for accounting purposes and did not legally acquire all of their assets and liabilities.
Pursuant to the provisions of current GAAP which govern the accounting for SPEs, our redemption of the first-loss notes resulted in our determination that we earn fees that generally representwere the residual earningsprimary beneficiary of the conduits, afterand as a result we were required to consolidate them. As required by GAAP, we recorded the paymentconduits’ aggregate assets and liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet at their estimated fair values on the date of interest on outstanding commercial paperconsolidation, and other fees to independent third parties. We earned fee revenuerecorded a pre-tax extraordinary loss of approximately $59 million for 2008, $63 million for 2007 and $62 million for 2006, which we recorded in processing fees and other revenue$6.10 billion, or approximately $3.68 billion after-tax, in our consolidated statement of income.
The following tables present additional information with respect This loss was primarily related to the composition of the conduits’ asset portfolios, in the aggregate, as of December 31, 2008 and 2007. The weighted-average maturity of the conduits’ assets in the aggregate was approximately four years.
CONDUIT ASSETS BY COLLATERAL TYPE
| 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | ||||||||
Australian residential mortgage-backed securities | $ | 3.03 | 13 | % | $ | 4.71 | 16 | % | ||||
European residential mortgage-backed securities | 3.88 | 16 | 4.70 | 16 | ||||||||
U.S. residential mortgage-backed securities | 3.49 | 15 | 4.17 | 15 | ||||||||
United Kingdom residential mortgage-backed securities | 1.57 | 7 | 2.26 | 8 | ||||||||
Student loans | 2.94 | 12 | 3.30 | 11 | ||||||||
Automobile and equipment loans | 2.72 | 11 | 2.80 | 10 | ||||||||
Credit cards | 1.96 | 8 | 2.02 | 7 | ||||||||
Other(1) | 4.30 | 18 | 4.80 | 17 | ||||||||
Total conduit assets | $ | 23.89 | 100 | % | $ | 28.76 | 100 | % | ||||
CONDUIT ASSETS BY CREDIT RATING
| 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | ||||||||
AAA/Aaa | $ | 12.16 | 51 | % | $ | 17.65 | 61 | % | ||||
AA/Aa | 4.36 | 18 | 4.51 | 16 | ||||||||
A/A | 2.10 | 9 | 2.26 | 8 | ||||||||
BBB/Baa | 2.05 | 9 | 1.51 | 5 | ||||||||
BB/Ba | 0.11 | 0 | 0.03 | 0 | ||||||||
B/B | 0.23 | 1 | — | 0 | ||||||||
CCC/Caa | 0.41 | 2 | — | 0 | ||||||||
Not rated(2) | 2.47 | 10 | 2.80 | 10 | ||||||||
Total conduit assets | $ | 23.89 | 100 | % | $ | 28.76 | 100 | % | ||||
CONDUIT ASSETS BY ASSET ORIGIN
| 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||
| (Dollars in billions) | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | Amount | Percent of Total Conduit Assets | ||||||||
United States | $ | 11.09 | 46 | % | $ | 12.14 | 42 | % | ||||
Australia | 4.30 | 17 | 6.10 | 21 | ||||||||
Great Britain | 1.97 | 8 | 2.93 | 10 | ||||||||
Spain | 1.71 | 7 | 1.90 | 7 | ||||||||
Italy | 1.66 | 7 | 1.86 | 7 | ||||||||
Portugal | 0.62 | 3 | 0.70 | 2 | ||||||||
Germany | 0.57 | 3 | 0.70 | 2 | ||||||||
Netherlands | 0.40 | 2 | 0.55 | 2 | ||||||||
Belgium | 0.29 | 1 | 0.31 | 1 | ||||||||
Greece | 0.27 | 1 | 0.31 | 1 | ||||||||
Other | 1.01 | 5 | 1.26 | 5 | ||||||||
Total conduit assets | $ | 23.89 | 100 | % | $ | 28.76 | 100 | % | ||||
The conduits meet the definition of a VIE, as defined by FIN 46(R). We have determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of the conduits, as defined by FIN 46(R), and do not record them in our consolidated financial statements. We hold no direct or indirect ownership interest in the conduits, but we provide subordinated financial support to them through contractual arrangements. Standby letters of credit absorb certain actual credit losses from the conduit assets; our commitment under these letters of credit totaled $1.00 billion and $1.04 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Liquidity asset purchase agreements provide liquidity to the conduits in the event they cannot place commercial paper in the ordinary course of their business; these facilities, which require us to purchase assets from the conduits at par, would provide the needed liquidity to repay maturing commercial paper if there was a disruption in the asset-backed commercial paper market. The aggregate commitment under the liquidity asset purchase agreements was approximately $23.59 billion and $28.37 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We did not accrue for any losses associated with either our commitment under the standby letters of credit or the liquidity asset purchase agreements in our consolidated statement of condition at December 31, 2008 or 2007.
During the first quarter of 2008, pursuant to the contractual terms of our liquidity asset purchase agreements with the conduits, we were required to purchase $850 million of conduit assets. The purchase was the result of various factors, including the continued illiquidity in the commercial paper markets. The securities were purchased at prices determined in accordance with existing contractual terms in the liquidity asset purchase agreements, and which exceeded their fair value. Accordingly, during the first quarter of 2008, the securities were written down to their fair value through a $12 million reduction of processing fees and other revenue in our consolidated statement of income, and are carried at fair value in securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition. None of our liquidity asset purchase agreements with the conduits were drawn upon during the remainder of 2008, and no draw-downs on the standby letters of credit occurred during 2008.
The conduits generally sell commercial paper to independent third-party investors. However, we sometimes purchase commercial paper from the conduits. As of December 31, 2008, we held an aggregate of approximately $230 million of commercial paper issued by the conduits, and $2 million at December 31, 2007. In addition, approximately $5.70 billion of U.S. conduit-issued commercial paper had been sold to the CPFF. The CPFF is scheduled to expire on October 31, 2009. The weighted-average maturity of the conduits’ commercial paper in the aggregate was approximately 25 days as of December 31, 2008, compared to approximately 20 days as of December 31, 2007.
Each of the conduits has issued first-loss notes to independent third parties, which third parties absorb first-dollar losses related to credit risk. Aggregate first-loss notes outstanding at December 31, 2008 for the four conduits totaled $67 million, compared to $32 million at December 31, 2007. Actual credit losses of the conduits
would be absorbed by (1) the first-loss note holders; (2) State Street or other providers of credit enhancement, pursuant to contractual requirements; and (3) the holders of the conduits’ commercial paper.
In accordance with FIN 46(R), expected losses, as defined, are estimated using a financial model which develops default and loss-given-default scenarios associated with the conduits’ assets. Expected losses are allocated to the conduits’ variable interest holders based on the order in which actual losses would be absorbed, as described previously. The financial model calculates a probability of default based on specific scenarios. The model also estimates the loss-given-default for the various conduit asset classes. The probability-of-default estimates, coupled with the loss-given-default estimates, form the basis on which expected losses are calculated. The model derives the probability-of-default and loss-given-default factors used to estimate expected losses from information provided by independent third-party rating agencies. Based on the determination and allocation of expected losses at December 31, 2008, State Street does not absorb a majority of the expected losses for any of the conduits and, therefore, does not consolidate any of them.
The probability-of-default and loss-given-default estimates vary by conduit asset class and the credit ratings of individual conduit assets, and are not necessarily affected by the current fair value of these assets, which also reflect liquidity risk. If rating downgrades occur, the asset composition changes significantly. In addition, if defaults occur on the conduits’ assets, the current level of first-loss notes may be insufficient to absorb a majority of the conduits’ expected losses. Similarly, if a conduit asset would experience a default or credit rating downgrade, subject to certain conditions, the liquidity asset purchase agreements could be invoked by the conduit, requiring State Street to purchase the assets from the conduits at prices which may exceed the assets’ fair values. If that occurred, we would be required to recognize a loss upon purchase of the assets. Any loss from a credit default would first be offset by the level of funding provided by the first-loss note holders. The aggregate fair value of the conduits’ assets at December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $17.75 billion and $27.95 billion, respectively.
We have entered into derivative financial instruments, composed of interest-rate contracts and foreign exchange forward contracts, with certain of the conduits. The purpose of these derivatives is generally to mitigate basis and foreign exchange risk, respectively, for the conduits. The interest-rate contracts, which are primarily basis swaps, mitigate the differentialdifference between the commercial paper funding costs and comparable floating-rate asset benchmark rates (generally LIBOR), and the foreign exchange contracts align the currencies of the assets and their corresponding commercial paper funding. The total notional amounts of the interest-rate basis swap and foreign exchange contracts totaled $13.15 billion and $13.44 billion at December 31, 2008 and $11.00 billion and $8.92 billion at December 31, 2007, respectively. The notional amounts of these derivatives are included in the table of notional amounts of derivative financial instruments presented in note 17.
Certain of the conduits hold asset-backed securities that have the benefit of a third-party guarantee from a financial guaranty insurance company. The aggregate amortized cost of securities with underlying guarantees was approximately $2.49 billion at December 31, 2008 and $3.51 billion at December 31, 2007. Certain of these securities, which totaled approximately $730 million at December 31, 2008, are currently drawing on the underlying guarantees in order to make contractual principal and interest payments to the conduits. In these cases, the performance of the underlying security is highly dependent on the performance of the guarantor. In calculating expected losses, these securities carry the higher of the underlying security rating or the rating of the third-party guarantor. During 2008, many of these guarantors experienced ratings downgrades. The credit ratings of the guarantors ranged from “AAA” to “CCC” as of December 31, 2008. None of these securities are in default.
Under existing accounting standards, if we were required to consolidate the conduits into our consolidated financial statements, based on changes in assumptions or future events, the conduits’ assets and liabilities would be consolidated at their respective fair values. We would recognize a loss if the fair value of the conduits’ aggregate assets, primarily mortgage- and asset-backed securities, and the conduits’ aggregate liabilities, and first-loss notes exceededprimarily short-term borrowings composed of commercial paper issued by the fair value of theirconduits.
The difference between the aggregate assets. Management believes that this loss would be recovered in future periods because we expect that we would collect substantially all principal and interest on the assets according to their underlying contractual terms. The fair value of the conduits’ aggregate liabilitiesinvestment securities and first-loss notes exceededtheir par value on the fair valuedate of consolidation created a discount. Based on a detailed security-by-security analysis, we believe that the vast majority of this discount is related to factors other than credit. To the extent that the projected future cash flows from the securities exceed their aggregate assets by $3.56 billion after-tax and $530recorded carrying amounts, the portion of the discount not related to credit will accrete into interest revenue over the securities’ remaining terms. Subsequent to the consolidation, we recorded accretion of approximately $621 million after-tax at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
in net interest revenue in our 2009 consolidated statement of income.
Collateralized Debt Obligations:Obligations
We manage a series of collateralized debt obligations, referred to as CDOs. A CDO is a managed investment vehicle which purchases a portfolio of diversified assets. A CDO funds purchases through the issuance of several tranches of debt and equity, the repayment and return of which are linked to the performance of the assets in the CDO. Typically, our involvement is as collateral manager. We may also invest in a small percentage of the debt issued. These entities typically meet the definition of a variable interest entity as defined by FIN 46(R).current GAAP. We are not the primary beneficiary of these CDOs, as defined by FIN 46(R),GAAP, and do not record these CDOs in our consolidated financial statements. At both December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, total assets in these CDOs were $2.00 billion and $6.73 billion, respectively.billion. We did not acquire or transfer any investment securities to a CDO during 20082009 or 2007.2008.
Note 13.12. Shareholders’ Equity
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss:
Accumulated other comprehensive loss included the following components as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation | $ | 68 | $ | 331 | $ | 197 | $ | 281 | $ | 68 | $ | 331 | ||||||||||||
Unrealized gain (loss) on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries | (14 | ) | (15 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities | (5,205 | ) | (678 | ) | (227 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities | (242 | ) | (55 | ) | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Net unrealized loss on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries | (14 | ) | (14 | ) | (15 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities | (1,636 | ) | (5,205 | ) | (678 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net unrealized loss on fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities | (113 | ) | (242 | ) | (55 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Losses from other-than-temporary impairment on available-for-sale securities related to factors other than credit | (159 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Losses from other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities related to factors other than credit | (387 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Minimum pension liability | (229 | ) | (146 | ) | (186 | ) | (192 | ) | (229 | ) | (146 | ) | ||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on cash flow hedges | (28 | ) | (12 | ) | (1 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net unrealized loss on cash flow hedges | (18 | ) | (28 | ) | (12 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | (5,650 | ) | $ | (575 | ) | $ | (224 | ) | $ | (2,238 | ) | $ | (5,650 | ) | $ | (575 | ) | ||||||
The net after-tax unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities of $1.64 billion and $5.21 billion as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, included $635 million and $1.39 billion, respectively, of net after-tax unrealized losses related to securities reclassified during 2008 from securities available for sale to securities held to maturity. The decrease in the losses related to transfers compared to December 31, 2008 resulted from amortization and from the recognition of losses from other-than-temporary impairment on certain of the securities. Additional information is provided in note 3.
For the year ended December 31, 2009, we realized net gains of $368 million from sales of available-for-sale securities. Unrealized pre-tax gains of $46 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2008, net of deferred taxes of $18 million, related to these sales.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we realized net gains of $68 million onfrom sales of available-for-sale securities. Unrealized pre-tax gains of $71 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2007, net of deferred taxes of $28 million, related to these sales.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, we realized net gains of $7 million on sales of available-for-sale securities. Unrealized pre-tax losses of $32 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2006, net of deferred taxes of $13 million, related to these sales.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, we realized net gains of $15 million on sales of available-for-sale securities. Unrealized losses of $7 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2005, net of deferred taxes of $3 million, related to these sales.
Preferred Stock:
OnIn October 28, 2008, in connection with the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program, we issued 20,000 shares of our Series B fixed-rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, $100,000 liquidation preference per share, and a warrant to purchase 5,576,208 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $53.80 per share, to Treasury, and received aggregate proceeds of $2 billion.
The aggregate proceeds were allocated to the preferred stock and the warrant based on their relative fair values on the date of issuance. As a result, approximately $1.88 billion wasand $121 million, respectively, were allocated to the preferred stock and approximately $121 million was allocated to the warrant. The difference between the initial value of $1.88 billion allocated to the preferred stock and the liquidation valueamount of $2 billion willwas intended to be charged to retained earnings and credited to the preferred stock over the first five yearsperiod that the preferred stock iswas outstanding, using the effective yield method. This chargeFor 2008 and 2009, these charges to retained earnings will reducereduced net income available to common shareholders by $4 million and $11 million, respectively, and reduced basic and diluted earnings per common share for each reported period. For 2008, net income available to common shareholders was reduced by a charge to retained earnings of $4 million in calculating earnings per common share. The calculation isthose periods. These calculations are presented in note 23.
22.
The preferred shares which qualifyqualified as tier 1 regulatory capital, payand paid cumulative quarterly dividends at a rate of 5% per year foryear. For 2008 and 2009, the first five years, and 9% per year thereafter. Dividends accruedaccrual of dividends on the preferred shares will reducereduced net income available to common shareholders by $18 million and $46 million, respectively, and reduced basic and diluted earnings per common share for each reported period. For 2008, net income available to common shareholders was reduced by $18 million in calculating earnings per common share. The calculation isthose periods. These calculations are presented in note 23. The preferred shares are non-voting, other than class voting rights on certain matters that could adversely affect the shares. We can redeem the preferred shares at par after December 15, 2011. Prior to this date, we can only redeem the preferred shares at par in an amount up to the cash proceeds (minimum $500 million) from qualifying equity offerings of any tier 1-eligible perpetual preferred or common stock. Any redemption is subject to the consent of the Federal Reserve.
22. The warrant iswas immediately
exercisable, and hasoriginally had a 10-year term. The exercise price of $53.80 per share was based upon the average of the closing prices of our common stock during the 20-trading day period ended October 10, 2008, the last trading day prior to our election to participate in the program. The exercise price and number of common shares subject
In June 2009, subsequent to the warrant are both subject to anti-dilution adjustments. IfMay 2009 public offering described below under “Common Stock,” we receive aggregate gross cash proceedsrepaid the full amount of at leastTreasury’s $2 billion from oneequity investment by redeeming all of the outstanding shares of the Series B preferred stock at its aggregate liquidation amount plus accrued dividends, or more qualifying equity offeringsapproximately $2 billion. The excess of tier 1-eligible perpetualthe aggregate liquidation amount over the then $1.89 billion carrying value of the preferred orstock, which totaled approximately $106 million, was prepaid and recorded as a reduction of retained earnings, and thus affected earnings available to common shareholders for 2009. The effect of the prepayment of the preferred stock discount on earnings available to common shareholders is presented in note 22.
In July 2009, we repurchased the common stock on or priorwarrant, originally issued to December 31,Treasury as part of its overall investment, at its fair value of $60 million. As a result of the May 2009 public offering described below under “Common Stock,” the number of shares of common stock underlying the warrant then held by Treasury will bewas reduced by one-half of the original number of common shares considering all adjustments, underlying the warrant. While the repurchase of the warrant reduced shareholders’ equity, it did not affect our earnings available to common shareholders, because it was recorded as a reduction of surplus.
Common Stock:
OnIn May 2009, we completed a public offering of approximately 58.97 million shares of our common stock. The offering price was $39 per share, and aggregate proceeds from the offering, net of underwriting commissions and related offering costs, totaled approximately $2.23 billion. Underwriting commissions totaled approximately $69 million. We completed the offering pursuant to our current universal shelf registration statement filed with the SEC.
In June 3, 2008, we completed a public offering of approximately 40.540.55 million shares of our common stock. The public offering price was $70 per share, and aggregate proceeds from the offering, net of underwriting commissions and related offering costs, totaled approximately $2.75 billion. Underwriting commissions totaled approximately $85 million. Of the total shares issued, approximately 7.47.39 million shares were issued out of treasury stock, and the remaining 33.133.16 million shares were newly issued. We executed the offering pursuant to our current universal shelf registration statement filed with the SEC.
No shares of our common stock were purchased during 2009 under existing Board authorization. As of December 31, 2009, approximately 13.25 million shares remained available for future purchase under the Board authorization. In January 2008, under an existing authorization by our Board of Directors, we purchased 552,000 shares of our common stock, at an average historical cost per share of approximately $75, in connection with a $1 billion accelerated share repurchase program that concluded on January 18, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, approximately 13,245,000 shares remained available for future purchase under the Board authorization. During 2007, under the then-existing authorization by the Board, we purchased 13.4 million shares of our common stock, at an average historical cost per share of approximately $75, in connection with the above-described accelerated share repurchase program. We generally employ third-party broker/dealers to acquire shares on the open market in connection with our common stock purchase program.
During 2008, 2007 and 2006, we purchased and recorded as treasury stock a total of 552,000 shares, 13.4 million shares and 5.8 million shares, respectively, at an average historical cost per share of approximately $75, $75 and $63, respectively.
In connection with our participation in the capital purchase program described under “Preferred Stock,” until October 28, 2011, or such earlier time as the preferred stock has been redeemed or transferred by Treasury, we are not permitted, without Treasury’s consent, to repurchase our common stock.
Our common shares may be acquired for other deferred compensation plans, held by an external trustee, that are not part of our common stock purchase program. As of December 31, 2008,2009, on a cumulative basis, approximately 418,354431,832 shares have been purchased and are held in trust. These shares are recorded as treasury stock in our consolidated statement of condition.
Note 14.13. Fair Value
Fair Value Measurements:
Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisionsWe carry trading account assets, investment securities available for sale and various types of SFAS No. 159,The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. We have not elected the fair value option for any of ourderivative financial assets or financial liabilities since adoption of the standard, although we may do so in the future.
Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157,Fair Value Measurements. This standard provides a consistent definition of fair value, establishes a framework for measuringinstruments at fair value in accordance with GAAP and requires expanded disclosures about fair value measurements. Prior to the standard, definitionsour consolidated statement of fair value varied and guidance for applying those definitions under GAAP was limited. In addition, the guidance was dispersed among the many accounting pronouncements that require fair value measurements. We did not apply the provisions of the standard to our non-financial assets and liabilities, pursuant to FASB Staff Position No. 157-2,Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157.This FSP, issued in February 2008, deferred the effective date of SFAS No. 157 to January 1, 2009 for non-financial assets and liabilities, except for those recognized or reported at fair valuecondition on a recurring basis. This deferral affects non-financial assets, such as goodwill, that require impairment analysis usingChanges in fair value measurements. We do not expect the application of this FSP to have a material impact on our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.
SFAS No. 157 is intended to increase consistency and comparability in, and disclosures about, fair value measurements, by providing users with better information about the extent to which fair value is used to measurethese financial assets and liabilities the inputs used to develop those measurements and the effectare recorded either as components of the measurements, if any, on financial condition and resultsour consolidated statement of operations. The standard definesincome or as components of other comprehensive income within shareholders’ equity in our consolidated statement of condition.
We measure fair value asfor the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an “exit price”)above-described financial assets and liabilities in the principal or most advantageous market for an asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants onaccordance with accounting standards which govern the measurement date. In addition, the standard establishes a hierarchy for measuring fair value. The fair value hierarchy is based on the observability of inputs to the valuation of a financial asset or liability as of the measurement date. In addition, the standard requires the recognition of trading gains or losses related to certain derivative transactions whose fair value has been determined using unobservable market inputs, which nullifies the guidance in Emerging Issues Task Force Issue,
or EITF, No. 02-3, Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy Trading and Risk Management Activities. This EITF prohibited the recognition of trading gains or losses for such derivative transactions when determining the fair value of instruments not traded in an active market.
financial instruments. Management believes that its valuation techniques and underlying assumptions used to measure fair value conform to the provisions of the standard.these standards. We have categorizedcategorize the financial assets and liabilities that we carry at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition based upon the standard’sa prescribed three-level valuation hierarchy. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1) and the lowest priority to valuation methods using significant unobservable inputs (level 3). If the inputs used to measure a financial asset or liability cross different levels of the hierarchy, categorization is based on the lowest levellowest-level input that is significant to the fair value measurement. Management’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the overall fair value measurement of a financial asset or liability requires judgment, and considers factors specific to that asset or liability. The three levels are described below:below.
Level 1. Financial assets and liabilities with values based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in an active market. Examples of level 1 financial instruments include active exchange-traded equity securities and certain U.S. government securities. We categorized approximately $10.12$10.06 billion of our financial assets, substantially composed of U.S. government securities, and $5 million of our financial liabilities in level 1 at December 31, 2008, substantially composed of U.S. government securities.2009.
Level 2.Financial assets and liabilities with values based on quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability. Level 2 inputs include the following:
| a) | Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; |
| b) | Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in non-active markets; |
| c) | Pricing models whose inputs are observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability; and |
| d) | Pricing models whose inputs are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market information through correlation or other means for substantially the full term of the asset or liability. |
Our level 2 financial assets predominately included commercial paper purchased from the State Street-administered asset-backed commercial paper conduits, various types of interest-rate and foreign exchange derivative instruments and various types of fixed-income investment securities. We categorized approximately $53.37$61.61 billion of trading account assets, investment securities available for sale and derivative instruments, and approximately $18.09$6.48 billion of derivative instruments, in level 2 financial assets and liabilities, respectively, at December 31, 2008.2009.
Level 3.Financial assets and liabilities with values based on prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable in the market and significant to the overall fair value measurement. These inputs reflect management’s judgment about the assumptions that a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability, and are based on the best available information, some of which is internally developed. The following provides a more detailed discussion of our financial assets and liabilities that we may categorize in level 3 and the related valuation methodology.
For certain corporate debt securities carried in trading account assets, fair value was measured using information obtained from independent third parties or through the use of pricing models. Management evaluated its methodologies used to determine fair value, but considered the level of market-observable information to be insufficient, given the lack of trading activity, to categorize the securities in level 2.
For certain investment securities available for sale, fair value was measured using information obtained from third-party sources or through the use of pricing models. Management evaluated its methodologies used to determine fair value, but considered the level of market-observable information to be insufficient to categorize the securities in level 2.
Foreign exchange contracts carried in other assets and other liabilities were primarily composed of forward contracts and options. The fair value of foreign exchange forward contracts was measured using discounted cash flow techniques. However, in certain circumstances, extrapolation was required to develop certain forward points, which were not observable. The fair value of foreign exchange options was measured using an option pricing model. Because of a limited number of observable transactions, certain model inputs were unobservable, such as volatilities which were based on historical experience.
The fair value of certain interest-rate caps with long-dated maturities, also carried in other assets and other liabilities, was measured using a matrix pricing approach. Observable market prices were not available for these derivatives, so extrapolation was necessary to value these instruments, since they had a strike and/or maturity outside of the matrix.
We categorized approximately $10.01$7.56 billion of investment securities available for sale, primarily asset-backed securities, as well as derivative instruments, and $857$147 million of derivative instruments, in level 3 financial assets and liabilities, respectively, at December 31, 2008.
In October 2008, the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 157-3,Determining Fair Value in a Market That Is Not Active, to help entities measure fair value in markets that are not active. The FSP provides clarification of guidance with respect to the determination of fair value pursuant to SFAS No. 157 when markets are inactive. The FSP reiterates current accounting standards that require us to carry certain of our investment securities at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition. Fair value continues to be defined as the price at which a transaction would occur between willing market participants on the measurement date. Consistent with the FSP, we continue to assess the amount and quality of market information that supports our estimate of the fair value of the above-mentioned investment securities in our portfolio. Given current market illiquidity, we will continue to assess our portfolio valuations to determine the most appropriate method for estimating fair value.
2009.
The following table presentstables present information with respect to our financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value in our consolidated statement of condition as of December 31, 2009 and 2008.
| Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis as of December 31, 2008 | Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis as of December 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Quoted Market Prices in Active Markets (Level 1) | Pricing Methods with Significant Observable Market Inputs (Level 2) | Pricing Methods with Significant Unobservable Market Inputs (Level 3) | Impact of Netting(1) | Total Net Carrying Value in Consolidated Statement of Condition | Quoted Market Prices in Active Markets (Level 1) | Pricing Methods with Significant Observable Market Inputs (Level 2) | Pricing Methods with Significant Unobservable Market Inputs (Level 3) | Impact of Netting(1) | Total Net Carrying Value in Consolidated Statement of Condition | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | $ | 28 | $ | 421 | $ | 366 | $ | 815 | $ | 53 | $ | 95 | $ | 148 | ||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Direct obligations | 10,096 | 1,483 | — | 11,579 | 10,004 | 1,158 | 11,162 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | — | 10,796 | 2 | 10,798 | — | 14,878 | $ | 58 | 14,936 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | — | 10,715 | 8,709 | 19,424 | — | 19,140 | 5,389 | 24,529 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | — | 1,437 | 4 | 1,441 | — | 2,210 | 199 | 2,409 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | — | 5,711 | 1 | 5,712 | — | 5,935 | 2 | 5,937 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other investments | — | 5,038 | 171 | 5,209 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | — | 8,534 | 1,777 | 10,311 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities | — | 2,231 | 3 | 2,234 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Money-market mutual funds | — | 1,110 | — | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. equity securities | — | 35 | — | 35 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other equity securities | — | 36 | — | 36 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total investment securities available for sale | 10,096 | 35,180 | 8,887 | 54,163 | 10,004 | 55,267 | 7,428 | 72,699 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other assets | — | 17,769 | 760 | $ | (6,586 | ) | 11,943 | — | 6,251 | 128 | $ | (1,868 | ) | 4,511 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total assets carried at fair value | $ | 10,124 | $ | 53,370 | $ | 10,013 | $ | (6,586 | ) | $ | 66,921 | $ | 10,057 | $ | 61,613 | $ | 7,556 | $ | (1,868 | ) | $ | 77,358 | ||||||||||
Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other liabilities | $ | 18,085 | $ | 857 | $ | (6,586 | ) | $ | 12,356 | $ | 5 | $ | 6,483 | $ | 147 | $ | (1,868 | ) | $ | 4,767 | ||||||||||||
Total liabilities carried at fair value | — | $ | 18,085 | $ | 857 | $ | (6,586 | ) | $ | 12,356 | $ | 5 | $ | 6,483 | $ | 147 | $ | (1,868 | ) | $ | 4,767 | |||||||||||
| (1) | Represents counterparty |
Assets: Trading account assets Investment securities available for sale: U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: Direct obligations Mortgage-backed securities Asset-backed securities Collateralized mortgage obligations State and political subdivisions Non U.S. debt securities Other debt securities Money-Market mutual funds Non-U.S. equity securities Other equity securities Total investment securities available for sale Other assets Total assets carried at fair value Liabilities: Other liabilities Total liabilities carried at fair value Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis
as of December 31, 2008(In millions) Quoted Market
Prices in Active
Markets
(Level 1) Pricing Methods
with Significant
Observable Market
Inputs (Level 2) Pricing Methods with
Significant
Unobservable Market
Inputs (Level 3) Impact of
Netting(1) Total Net
Carrying Value
in Consolidated
Statement of
Condition $ 28 $ 421 $ 366 $ 815 10,096 1,483 — 11,579 — 10,796 2 10,798 — 8,432 7,841 16,273 — 1,437 4 1,441 — 5,711 1 5,712 — 4,703 1,011 5,714 — 2,132 28 2,160 — 344 — 344 — 123 — 123 — 19 — 19 10,096 35,180 8,887 54,163 — 17,769 760 $ (6,586 ) 11,943 $ 10,124 $ 53,370 $ 10,013 $ (6,586 ) $ 66,921 — $ 18,085 $ 857 $ (6,586 ) $ 12,356 — $ 18,085 $ 857 $ (6,586 ) $ 12,356
| (1) | Represents counterparty netting against level 2 financial assets and liabilities, where a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists between State Street and the counterparty. |
The following tables present activity related to our financial assets and liabilities categorized in level 3 of the valuation hierarchy for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008. Transfers out of level 3 during the year ended December 31, 2008.2009 were substantially related to asset-backed securities, for which fair value was measured using prices for which market-observable information became available.
| Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs Year Ended December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) | Purchases, Issuances and Settlements, Net | Transfers Into and/ or Out of Level 3 | Fair Value at December 31, 2008 | Change in Unrealized Gains (Losses) Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Fair Value at January 1, 2008 | Recorded in Revenue | Recorded in Other Comprehensive Income | |||||||||||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | $ | 366 | $ | 366 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | $ | 327 | (1 | ) | $ | (324 | ) | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 5,721 | $ | 120 | $ | (1,861 | ) | 621 | 4,108 | 8,709 | $ | 2 | |||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 459 | — | (1 | ) | 5 | (459 | ) | 4 | — | |||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Other investments | 53 | 32 | 18 | 64 | 4 | 171 | — | |||||||||||||||||
Total investment securities available for sale: | 6,560 | 152 | (1,844 | ) | 689 | 3,330 | 8,887 | 2 | ||||||||||||||||
Other assets | 374 | 524 | — | (132 | ) | (6 | ) | 760 | 385 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 6,934 | $ | 676 | $ | (1,844 | ) | $ | 923 | $ | 3,324 | $ | 10,013 | $ | 387 | |||||||||
| Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs Year Ended December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) | Purchases, Issuances and Settlements, Net | Transfers Into and/ or Out of Level 3 | Fair Value at December 31, 2009 | Change in Unrealized Gains (Losses) Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Fair Value at December 31, 2008 | Recorded in Revenue | Recorded in Other Comprehensive Income | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | $ | 366 | $ | (366 | ) | $ | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities | 2 | $ | 56 | — | 58 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Asset-backed securities | 7,841 | $ | 281 | 288 | (3,021 | ) | 5,389 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Collateralized mortgage obligations | 4 | $ | (119 | ) | (6 | ) | 324 | (4 | ) | 199 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 1 | — | — | 2 | (1 | ) | 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. debt securities | 1,011 | 18 | 1,051 | 1,071 | (1,374 | ) | 1,777 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other debt securities | 28 | — | — | (25 | ) | — | 3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total investment securities available for sale: | 8,887 | (101 | ) | 1,326 | 1,716 | (4,400 | ) | 7,428 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other assets | 760 | (366 | ) | — | (266 | ) | — | 128 | $ | (71 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 10,013 | $ | (467 | ) | $ | 1,326 | $ | 1,450 | $ | (4,766 | ) | $ | 7,556 | $ | (71 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs Year Ended December 31, 2008 | Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs Year Ended December 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Realized and Unrealized (Gains) Losses | Purchases, Issuances and Settlements, Net | Transfers Into and/ or Out of Level 3 | Fair Value at December 31, 2008 | Change in Unrealized (Gains) Losses Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2008 | Total Realized and Unrealized (Gains) Losses | Purchases, Issuances and Settlements, Net | Transfers Into and/ or Out of Level 3 | Fair Value at December 31, 2009 | Change in Unrealized (Gains) Losses Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Fair Value at January 1, 2008 | Recorded in Revenue | Recorded in Other Comprehensive Income | Fair Value at December 31, 2008 | Recorded in Revenue | Recorded in Other Comprehensive Income | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other liabilities | $ | 399 | $ | 567 | — | $ | (108 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | $ | 857 | $ | 431 | $ | 857 | $ | (445 | ) | — | $ | (265 | ) | — | $ | 147 | $ | (116 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Total liabilities | $ | 399 | $ | 567 | — | $ | (108 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | $ | 857 | $ | 431 | $ | 857 | $ | (445 | ) | — | $ | (265 | ) | — | $ | 147 | $ | (116 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Assets: Trading account assets Investment securities available for sale: U.S. Treasury and federal agencies: Mortgage-backed securities Asset-backed securities Collateralized mortgage obligations State and political subdivisions Non-U.S. debt securities Other debt securities Total investment securities available for sale: Other assets Total assets Liabilities: Other liabilities Total liabilities Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Fair Value at
January 1,
2008 Total Realized and
Unrealized Gains (Losses) Purchases,
Issuances
and
Settlements,
Net Transfers
Into and/
or Out of
Level 3 Fair Value at
December 31,
2008 Change in
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
Related to
Financial
Instruments
Held at
December 31,
2008(In millions) Recorded
in
Revenue Recorded in
Other
Comprehensive
Income $ 366 $ 366 $ 327 (1 ) $ (324 ) 2 1,911 $ 124 $ (1,624 ) 783 6,647 7,841 459 — (1 ) 5 (459 ) 4 — — — — 1 1 3,863 28 (223 ) (119 ) (2,538 ) 1,011 $ 2 — — 4 21 3 28 — 6,560 152 (1,844 ) 689 3,330 8,887 2 374 524 — (132 ) (6 ) 760 385 $ 6,934 $ 676 $ (1,844 ) $ 923 $ 3,324 $ 10,013 $ 387 Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Fair Value at
January 1,
2008 Total Realized and
Unrealized (Gains) Losses Purchases,
Issuances
and
Settlements,
Net Transfers
Into and/
or Out of
Level 3 Fair Value at
December 31,
2008 Change in
Unrealized
(Gains) Losses
Related to
Financial
Instruments
Held at
December 31,
2008(In millions) Recorded
in
Revenue Recorded in
Other
Comprehensive
Income $ 399 $ 567 — $ (108 ) $ (1 ) $ 857 $ 431 $ 399 $ 567 — $ (108 ) $ (1 ) $ 857 $ 431
For our financial assets and liabilities categorized in level 3, total realized and unrealized gains and losses for the yearyears ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 were recorded in revenue as follows:
| Year Ended December 31, 2009 | |||||||
| (In millions) | Total Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Revenue(1) | Change in Unrealized Gains (Losses) Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2009 | |||||
Fee revenue: | |||||||
Trading services | $38 | $ | (5 | ) | |||
Processing fees and other | 50 | 50 | |||||
Total fee revenue | 88 | 45 | |||||
Net interest revenue | (101 | ) | — | ||||
Total revenue | $(13 | ) | $ | 45 | |||
| (1) | Excludes unrealized losses on written options related to book-value protection provided to stable value funds, which are recorded in other expenses in our consolidated statement of income, and totaled $9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. |
| Year Ended December 31, 2008 | ||||||||
| (In millions) | Total Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) Recorded in Revenue | Change in Unrealized Gains (Losses) Related to Financial Instruments Held at December 31, 2008 | ||||||
Fee revenue: | ||||||||
Trading services | $ | (19 | ) | $ | (22 | ) | ||
Processing fees and other | (32 | ) | (24 | ) | ||||
Total fee revenue | (51 | ) | (46 | ) | ||||
Net interest revenue | 162 | — | ||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (2 | ) | 2 | |||||
Total revenue | $ | 109 | $ | (44 | ) | |||
Transfers out of level 3 during the year ended December 31, 2008 related to mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations, for which fair value was measured using prices for which market-observable information became available. Transfers into level 3 during the year ended December 31, 2008 substantially related to asset-backed securities, for which management believed that market-observable information was not sufficient, generally as a result of market illiquidity.
Fair Values of Financial Instruments:
Fair value estimates for financial instruments not carried at fair value on a recurring basis in our consolidated statement of condition, as defined by SFAS No. 107,Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments,current accounting standards, are generally subjective in nature, and are made as of a specific point in time based on the characteristics of the financial instruments and relevant market information. Disclosure of fair valuesvalue estimates is not required by SFAS No. 107these standards for certain items, such as lease financing, equity method investments, obligations for pension and other post-retirement plans, premises and equipment, other intangible assets and income tax assets and liabilities. Accordingly, aggregate fair value amountsestimates presented do not purport to represent, and should not be considered representative of, our underlying “market” or franchise value. In addition, because of potential differences in methodologies and assumptions used to estimate fair values, our fair valuesvalue estimates should not be compared to those of other financial institutions.
We use the following methods to estimate the fair value of financial instruments:
For financial instruments that have quoted market prices, those quoted prices are used to determineestimate fair value.
Financial instruments that have no defined maturity, have a remaining maturity of 180 days or less, or reprice frequently to a market rate, are assumed to have a fair value that approximates reported value, after taking into consideration any applicable credit risk.
IfFor financial instruments where no quoted market prices are available, financial instruments are valuedfair value is estimated using information obtained from third parties, or by discounting the expected cash flow(s) using an estimated current market interest rate for the financial instrument.
The short duration of our assets and liabilities results in a significant number of financial instruments for which fair value equals or closely approximates the valueamount reported in our consolidated statement of condition. These financial instruments are reported in the following captions in our consolidated statement of condition: cash and due from banks; interest-bearing deposits with banks; securities purchased under resale agreements; accrued income receivable; deposits; securities sold under repurchase agreements; federal funds purchased; and short-term borrowings. In addition, due to the relatively short-term natureshort duration of a portion of our net loans (excluding leases), the vast majority of which have short durations, we have determined that theirconsider fair value approximatesfor these loans to approximate their reported value. The fair value of other types of loans, such as the structured asset-backed loans added in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnification obligations, is estimated by discounting expected future cash flows using current rates at which similar loans would be made to borrowers with similar credit ratings for the same remaining maturities. Loan commitments have no reported value because terms are at prevailing market rates.
The reported amounts and estimated fair values for financial instruments defined by SFAS No. 107,current accounting standards, excluding the above-describedaforementioned short-term financial instruments and excluding financial instrumentsassets and liabilities carried at fair value on a recurring basis, were as follows as of December 31:31, 2009 and 2008:
| (In millions) | Reported Value | Fair Value | Reported Amount | Fair Value | ||||||||
2009: | ||||||||||||
Financial Assets: | ||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity | $ | 20,877 | $ | 20,928 | ||||||||
Net loans (excluding leases) | 9,013 | 8,729 | ||||||||||
Financial Liabilities: | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 8,838 | 8,461 | ||||||||||
2008: | ||||||||||||
Financial Assets: | ||||||||||||
Investment securities: | ||||||||||||
Purchased under money market liquidity facility | $ | 6,087 | $ | 6,101 | $ | 6,087 | $ | 6,101 | ||||
Held to maturity | 15,767 | 14,311 | 15,767 | 14,311 | ||||||||
Net loans (excluding leases) | 7,269 | 7,269 | 7,269 | 7,269 | ||||||||
Financial Liabilities: | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,419 | 3,510 | 4,419 | 3,510 | ||||||||
2007: | ||||||||||||
Financial Assets: | ||||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity | $ | 4,233 | $ | 4,225 | ||||||||
Net loans (excluding leases) | 13,804 | 13,804 | ||||||||||
Financial Liabilities: | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 3,636 | 3,446 | ||||||||||
Note 15.14. Equity-Based Compensation
We have aIn May 2009, our shareholders amended the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan with 20,000,000to increase the number of shares of common stock approved for issuance for stock and stock-based awards, including stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, deferred stock and performance awards. awards, from 20,000,000 shares to 37,000,000 shares. As of December 31, 2007, 6,461,698 shares have been awarded under the 2006 Plan. As of December 31, 2008, 12,173,627 shares have been awarded under the 2006 Plan. As of December 31, 2009, 17,478,342 shares have been awarded under the 2006 Plan.
In addition, up to 8,000,000 shares from our 1997 Equity Incentive Plan thatwhich were available to issue or becomebecame available to issue due to cancellations and forfeitures, may be awarded under the 2006 Plan. The 1997 Plan expired on December 18, 2006. As of December 31, 2006, 1,305,4202009, 5,038,674 shares from the 1997 Plan have been added to, and may be awarded from, the 2006 Plan. As of December 31, 2007, 6,369,222 shares have been awarded under the 2006 Plan. As of December 31, 2008, 12,061,058 shares have been awarded under the 2006 Plan. We have stock options outstanding from previous plans, including the 1997 Plan under which no further grants can be made.
The exercise price of non-qualified and incentive stock options and stock appreciation rights may not be less than the fair value of such shares on the date of grant. Stock options and stock appreciation rights issued under
the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over two- to four-yearthree-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period.
We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted.
The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated:
| 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||
Dividend yield | 1.32 | % | 1.34 | % | 1.41 | % | 4.82 | % | 1.32 | % | 1.34 | % | ||||||
Expected volatility | 21.00 | 23.30 | 26.50 | 26.70 | 21.00 | 23.30 | ||||||||||||
Risk-free interest rate | 3.17 | 4.69 | 4.60 | 2.49 | 3.17 | 4.69 | ||||||||||||
Expected option lives (in years) | 7.8 | 7.8 | 7.8 | 7.8 | 7.8 | 7.8 | ||||||||||||
Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million $272 million and $208$272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 2006,2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excludesexcluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 9.6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and $83 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2008,2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 20072008 and 2008,2009, is presented below:
| Shares (in thousands) | Weighted Average Exercise Price | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) | Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions) | Shares (in thousands) | Weighted Average Exercise Price | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years) | Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions) | |||||||||||||||
Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 | 19,789 | $ | 46.28 | |||||||||||||||||||
Granted | 1,091 | 70.59 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Exercised | (4,415 | ) | 42.36 | |||||||||||||||||||
Forfeited or expired | (97 | ) | 47.12 | |||||||||||||||||||
Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 | 16,368 | 48.94 | 16,368 | $ | 48.94 | |||||||||||||||||
Granted | 921 | 81.71 | 921 | 81.71 | ||||||||||||||||||
Exercised | (2,926 | ) | 44.99 | (2,926 | ) | 44.99 | ||||||||||||||||
Forfeited or expired | (47 | ) | 47.40 | (47 | ) | 47.40 | ||||||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | 14,316 | $ | 51.86 | 4.62 | $ | 1 | 14,316 | 51.86 | ||||||||||||||
Granted | 516 | 19.31 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Exercised | (832 | ) | 40.57 | |||||||||||||||||||
Forfeited or expired | (833 | ) | 46.32 | |||||||||||||||||||
Exercisable at December 31, 2008 | 11,800 | $ | 47.96 | 3.88 | $ | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 | 13,167 | $ | 51.64 | 4.10 | $ | 24.8 | ||||||||||||||||
Exercisable at December 31, 2009 | 11,172 | $ | 50.12 | 3.42 | $ | 12.0 | ||||||||||||||||
The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and 2006 was $21.06, $22.44, and $21.09, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, and 2006, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, and $102 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $16$7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2221 months.
Other stock awards and related activity consisted of the following for the years ended December 31, 20072008 and 2008:2009:
| Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | |||||||||
Restricted Stock Awards | ||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 | 373 | $ | 54.42 | |||||||||
Granted | 401 | 69.06 | ||||||||||
Vested | (201 | ) | 54.75 | |||||||||
Forfeited | (19 | ) | 64.50 | |||||||||
Restricted Stock Awards: | ||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 | 554 | 64.77 | 554 | $ | 64.77 | |||||||
Granted | 219 | 81.70 | 219 | 81.70 | ||||||||
Vested | (265 | ) | 61.95 | (265 | ) | 61.95 | ||||||
Forfeited | (19 | ) | 63.03 | (19 | ) | 63.03 | ||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | 489 | $ | 73.95 | 489 | 73.95 | |||||||
Granted | 1,075 | 34.58 | ||||||||||
Vested | (279 | ) | 72.66 | |||||||||
Forfeited | (38 | ) | 22.00 | |||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 | 1,247 | $ | 41.87 | |||||||||
The weighted-average grant date fair value of restricted stock awards granted in 20062007 was $62.62$69.06 per share. The total fair value of restricted stock awards vested was $20 million, $16 million and $11 million for 2009, 2008 and $8 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. As of December 31, 2008,2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to restricted stock was $13$31 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1240 months.
| Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | |||||||||
Deferred Stock Awards | ||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 | 4,854 | $ | 54.21 | |||||||||
Granted | 3,542 | 68.33 | ||||||||||
Vested | (2,289 | ) | 52.26 | |||||||||
Forfeited | (235 | ) | 62.50 | |||||||||
Deferred Stock Awards: | ||||||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 | 5,872 | 63.26 | 5,872 | $ | 63.26 | |||||||
Granted | 3,570 | 78.62 | 3,570 | 78.62 | ||||||||
Vested | (2,665 | ) | 62.29 | (2,665 | ) | 62.29 | ||||||
Forfeited | (313 | ) | 72.98 | (313 | ) | 72.98 | ||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | 6,464 | $ | 71.59 | 6,464 | 71.59 | |||||||
Granted | 3,076 | 25.51 | ||||||||||
Vested | (2,843 | ) | 67.94 | |||||||||
Forfeited | (124 | ) | 56.73 | |||||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 | 6,573 | $ | 51.88 | |||||||||
The weighted-average grant date fair value of deferred stock awards granted in 20062007 was $60.94$68.33 per share. The total fair value of deferred stock awards vested was $193 million, $166 million and $120 million for 2009, 2008 and $56 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. As of December 31, 2008,2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to deferred stock awards was $250$183 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 3027 months.
| Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | |||||
Performance Awards | ||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 | 1,889 | $ | 53.49 | |||
Granted | 1,203 | 67.84 | ||||
Forfeited | (161 | ) | 59.23 | |||
Paid out | (673 | ) | 44.25 | |||
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 | 2,258 | 63.02 | ||||
Granted | 989 | 80.90 | ||||
Forfeited | (542 | ) | 73.76 | |||
Paid out | (425 | ) | 61.02 | |||
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | 2,280 | $ | 73.18 | |||
| Shares (in thousands) | Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value | |||||
Performance Awards: | ||||||
Outstanding at December 31, 2007 | 2,258 | $ | 63.02 | |||
Granted | 989 | 80.90 | ||||
Forfeited | (542 | ) | 73.76 | |||
Paid out | (425 | ) | 61.02 | |||
Outstanding at December 31, 2008 | 2,280 | 73.18 | ||||
Granted | 721 | 19.46 | ||||
Forfeited | (1,502 | ) | 64.96 | |||
Paid out | (1,069 | ) | 68.01 | |||
Outstanding at December 31, 2009 | 430 | $ | 24.14 | |||
The weighted-average grant date fair value of performance awards granted in 20062007 was $59.87$67.84 per share. The total fair value of performance awards paid out was $23 million, $35 million and $33 million for 2009, 2008 and $9 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. As of December 31, 2008,2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to performance awards was $39$5 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1617 months.
We may utilize either treasury shares or authorized but unissued shares to satisfy the issuance of common stock under our equity incentive plans. We do not have a specific policy concerning purchases of our common stock to satisfy stock issuances, including exercises of stock options. We have a general policy concerning purchases of stock to meet common stock issuances under our employee benefit plans, including option exercises and other corporate purposes. Various factors determine the amount and timing of our purchases of our common stock, including our capital requirements, the number of shares we expect to issue under employee benefit plans, market conditions (including the trading price of our common stock), and legal considerations. These factors can change at any time, and there can be no assurance as toneither the number of shares of common stock we willmay purchase or when we will purchase them.nor the timing of such purchases can be assured.
Note 16.15. Regulatory Matters
Regulatory Capital:
We are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on our consolidated financial condition. Under regulatory capital adequacy guidelines, we must meet specified capital requirements that involve quantitative measures of our consolidated assets, liabilities and off-balance sheet exposures calculated in accordance with regulatory accounting practices. Our capital amounts and their classification are subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings and other factors.
Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require State Street and State Street Bank to maintain minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratios as set forth in the following table. The risk-based capital ratios are tier 1 capital and total capital, each divided by adjusted total risk-weighted assets and market-risk equivalents, and the tier 1 leverage ratio is tier 1 capital divided by adjusted quarterly average assets. As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, State Street and State Street Bank met all capital adequacy requirements to which they were subject.
As of December 31, 2008,2009, State Street Bank was categorized as “well capitalized” under the regulatory capital adequacy framework. To be categorized as “well capitalized,” State Street Bank must exceed the “well capitalized” guideline ratios, as set forth in the table, and meet certain other requirements. State Street Bank exceeded all “well capitalized” requirements as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007.2008. Management believes that there are no conditions or events since December 31, 20082009 that have changed the capital category of State Street Bank.
Regulatory capital ratios and related amounts were as follows as of December 31:
| Regulatory Guidelines(1) | State Street | State Street Bank | Regulatory Guidelines(1) | State Street | State Street Bank | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions) | Minimum | Well Capitalized | 2008 | 2007 | 2008 | 2007 | Minimum | Well Capitalized | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Risk-based ratios(2) : | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Risk-based ratios(2): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 capital | 4 | % | 6 | % | 20.3 | % | 11.2 | % | 19.8 | % | 11.2 | % | 4 | % | 6 | % | 17.7 | % | 20.3 | % | 17.3 | % | 19.8 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total capital | 8 | 10 | 21.6 | 12.7 | 21.3 | 12.7 | 8 | 10 | 19.1 | 21.6 | 19.0 | 21.3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio(2) | 4 | 5 | 7.8 | 5.3 | 7.6 | 5.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 leverage ratio(2) | 4 | 5 | 8.5 | 7.8 | 8.2 | 7.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total shareholders’ equity | $ | 12,774 | $ | 11,299 | $ | 13,339 | $ | 11,932 | $ | 14,491 | $ | 12,774 | $ | 14,668 | $ | 13,339 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Capital trust securities | 1,450 | 975 | — | — | 1,450 | 1,450 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities and cash flow hedges | 5,458 | 744 | 5,453 | 750 | 2,313 | 5,458 | 2,309 | 5,453 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deferred tax liability associated with acquisitions | 560 | 526 | 560 | 526 | 521 | 560 | 521 | 560 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Recognition of pension plan funded status | 227 | 145 | 227 | 145 | 168 | 227 | 168 | 227 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Less: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Goodwill | 4,527 | 4,567 | 4,370 | 4,480 | 4,550 | 4,527 | 4,387 | 4,370 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other intangible assets | 1,851 | 1,990 | 1,787 | 1,958 | 1,810 | 1,851 | 1,716 | 1,787 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other deductions | 1 | 1 | — | — | 578 | 1 | 185 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 1 capital | 14,090 | 7,131 | 13,422 | 6,915 | 12,005 | 14,090 | 11,378 | 13,422 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Qualifying subordinated debt | 1,058 | 1,118 | 998 | 998 | 999 | 1,058 | 999 | 998 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Allowances for on- and off-balance sheet credit exposures | 38 | 31 | 38 | 31 | 104 | 38 | 104 | 38 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale equity securities | — | 3 | — | 2 | 1 | — | 1 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tier 2 capital | 1,096 | 1,152 | 1,036 | 1,031 | 1,104 | 1,096 | 1,104 | 1,036 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deduction for investments in finance subsidiaries | (156 | ) | (212 | ) | — | (68 | ) | (148 | ) | (156 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total capital | $ | 15,030 | $ | 8,071 | $ | 14,458 | $ | 7,878 | $ | 12,961 | $ | 15,030 | $ | 12,482 | $ | 14,458 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjusted total risk-weighted assets and market-risk equivalents: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On-balance sheet(2) | $ | 45,855 | $ | 42,968 | $ | 44,212 | $ | 41,283 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On-balance sheet(2) | $ | 56,780 | $ | 45,855 | $ | 54,832 | $ | 44,212 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Off-balance sheet | 23,364 | 20,248 | 23,415 | 20,254 | 10,159 | 23,364 | 10,159 | 23,415 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Market-risk equivalents | 366 | 321 | 303 | 317 | 752 | 366 | 703 | 303 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 69,585 | $ | 63,537 | $ | 67,930 | $ | 61,854 | $ | 67,691 | $ | 69,585 | $ | 65,694 | $ | 67,930 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjusted quarterly average assets(2) | $ | 179,905 | $ | 135,686 | $ | 175,858 | $ | 126,746 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adjusted quarterly average assets(2) | $ | 140,978 | $ | 179,905 | $ | 138,914 | $ | 175,858 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | State Street Bank must meet the regulatory designation of “well capitalized” in order for us to maintain our status as a financial holding company, including maintaining a minimum tier 1 risk-based capital ratio (tier 1 capital divided by adjusted total risk-weighted assets and market-risk equivalents) of 6%, a minimum total risk-based capital ratio (total capital divided by adjusted total risk-weighted assets and market-risk equivalents) of 10%, and a tier 1 leverage ratio (tier 1 capital divided by adjusted quarterly average assets) |
of 5%. The “well capitalized” designation requires us to maintain a minimum tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6% and a minimum total risk-based capital ratio of 10%. |
| (2) | Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios, as well as on-balance sheet risk-weighted assets and |
| (3) | Amounts for 2009 include deferred tax assets not eligible for inclusion in capital. |
Cash, Dividend, Loan and Other Restrictions:
During 2008,2009, our banking subsidiaries were required by the Federal Reserve to maintain average aggregate cash balances of $2.84approximately $1.21 billion to satisfy reserve requirements. In addition, federal and state banking regulations place certain restrictions on dividends paid by banking subsidiaries to a parent company. For 2009, aggregatecompany, and therefore dividends by State Street Bank withoutto the parent company may be subject to prior regulatory approval are limited to approximately $2.99 billion of its undistributed earnings at December 31, 2008, plus an additional amount equal to its net profits, as defined, for 2009 up to the date of any dividend.approval.
The Federal Reserve Act requires that extensions of credit by State Street Bank to certain affiliates, including the parent company, be secured by specific collateral, that the extension of credit to any one affiliate be limited to 10% of State Street Bank’s capital and surplus, (as defined),as defined, and that extensions of credit to all such affiliates be limited to 20% of State Street Bank’s capital and surplus.
As a result of our participation in the U.S. Treasury’s capital purchase program, described in note 13, we are not currently permitted, without Treasury’s consent, to increase the quarterly dividend per share on our common stock above $0.24 per share. In February 2009, in light of the impact of the continued disruption in the global capital markets experienced since the middle of 2007, and as part of a plan to strengthen our tangible common equity, we announced a temporary reduction of the quarterly dividend on our common stock to $0.01 per share.
At December 31, 2008,2009, our consolidated retained earnings included $337$374 million representing undistributed earnings of unconsolidated entities that are accounted for using the equity method.
Note 17.16. Derivative Financial Instruments
We use derivative financial instruments to support our customers’ needs, conduct our trading activities, and manage our interest-rate and currency risk.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in both the foreign exchange and interest-rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and using derivative financial instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest-rate options, and interest-rate swaps. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Interest-rate contracts involve an agreement with a counterparty to exchange cash flows based on the movement of an underlying interest-rate index. An interest-rate swap agreement involves the exchange of a series of interest payments, either at a fixed or variable rate, based upon the notional amount without the exchange of the underlying principal amount. An interest-rate option contract provides the purchaser, for a premium, the right, but not the obligation, to receive an interest rate based upon a predetermined notional value during a specified period. An interest-rate futures contract is a commitment to buy or sell, at a future date, a financial instrument at a contracted price; it may be settled in cash or through the delivery of the contracted instrument.
Foreign exchange contracts involve an agreement to exchange one currency for another currency at an agreed-upon rate and settlement date. Foreign exchange contracts generally consist of cross-currency swap agreements and foreign exchange forward and spot contracts and option contracts.
Derivative financial instruments involve the management of interest-rate and foreign currency risk, and involve, to varying degrees, market risk and credit and counterparty risk (risk related to repayment). Market risk is defined as the risk of adverse financial impact due to fluctuations in interest rates, foreign exchange rates and other market-driven factors and prices. We use a variety of risk management tools and methodologies to measure, monitor and manage the market risk associated with our trading activities. One such risk-management measure is value-at-risk, or VaR. VaR is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval. We use a risk-measurement system to estimate VaR daily. We have adopted standards for estimating VaR, and we maintain capital for market risk in accordance with applicable regulatory guidelines.
Derivative financial instruments are also subject to credit and counterparty risk, which is defined as the risk of financial loss if a borrower or counterparty is either unable or unwilling to repay borrowings or settle a transaction in accordance with the underlying contractual terms. We manage credit and counterparty risk by performing credit reviews, maintaining individual counterparty limits, entering into netting arrangements and requiring the receipt of collateral. Collateral requirements are determined after a comprehensive review of the creditworthiness of each counterparty, and the collateral requirements are monitored and adjusted daily. Collateral is generally held in the form of cash or highly liquid U.S. government securities. We may be required to provide collateral to the counterparty in connection with our entry into derivative financial instruments.
We enter into master netting agreements with many of our derivative counterparties. Certain of these agreements contain credit risk-related contingent features in which the counterparty has the option to declare State Street in default and accelerate cash settlement of our net derivative liabilities with the counterparty in the event our credit rating falls below specified levels. The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit risk-related contingent features that were in a net liability position as of December 31, 2009 totaled approximately $1.13 billion, against which we had posted aggregate collateral of approximately $647 million. If State Street’s credit rating was downgraded below levels specified in the agreements, the maximum additional amount of payments related to termination events that could have been required pursuant to these contingent features as of December 31, 2009 was approximately $478 million. Accelerated settlement because of such events would not affect our consolidated results of operations.
Trading Activities:
In connection with our trading activities, we use derivative financial instruments in our role as a financial intermediary and as both a manager and servicer of financial assets, to accommodate our customers’ investment and risk management needs. In addition, we use derivative financial instruments to contribute to overall corporate earnings and liquidity. These activities are designed to generate trading revenue and to hedge volatility in net interest revenue. The level of market risk that we assume is a function of our overall objectives and liquidity needs, customer requirements and market volatility.
Our customers use derivative financial instruments to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities. With respect to cross-border investing, customers have a need for foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investment and to manage the currency risk in their investment portfolios. As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward contracts and options in support of these customer needs. As part of our trading activities, we may assume positions in both the foreign exchange and interest-rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and using derivative financial instruments, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest-rate options, and interest-rate swaps. In the aggregate, foreign exchange forward positions are matched closely to minimize currency and interest-rate risk. All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at prevailing market rates and gains or losses in the fair value of trading derivatives are recorded in trading services revenue in our consolidated statement of income.
We offer products that provide book-value protection primarily to plan participants in stable value funds managed by non-affiliated investment managers of post-retirement defined contribution benefit plans, particularly 401(k) plans. The book-value protection is intended to provide safety and stable growth of principal invested, and to cover any shortfall caused by significant withdrawals when book value exceeds market value and the liquidation of the assets is not sufficient to redeem the participants. We account for these contingencies individually as trading derivative financial instruments, specifically written options. These contracts are valued quarterly and unrealized losses, if any, are recorded in other expenses in our consolidated statement of income.
Asset and Liability Management Activities:
In connection with our asset and liability management activities, we use derivative financial instruments to manage interest-rate risk. Interest-rate risk, defined as the sensitivity of income or financial condition to variations in interest rates, is a significant non-trading market risk to which our assets and liabilities are exposed.
We manage interest-rate risk by identifying, quantifying and hedging our exposures, using fixed-rate portfolio securities and a variety of derivative financial instruments, most frequently interest-rate swaps and options (e.g., interest rate caps and floors). Interest-rate swap agreements alter the interest rate characteristics of specific balance sheet assets or liabilities. When appropriate, forward rate agreements, options on swaps, and exchange-traded futures and options are also used.
Fair value hedges
Derivatives designated as fair value hedges are utilized to mitigate the risk of changes in fair value of recognized assets and liabilities. Gains and losses on fair value hedges are recorded in net interest revenue or in processing fees and other revenue along with the gain or loss on the asset or liability attributable to the hedged risk. Differences between the gains and losses on fair value hedges and the gains and losses on the asset or liability attributable to the hedged risk represent hedge ineffectiveness, which is recorded in net interest revenue or in processing fees and other revenue. We use interest-rate swap agreements in this manner to manage our exposure to changes in the fair value of hedged items caused by changes in interest rates.
We have entered into interest-rate swap agreements to modify our interest revenue from certain available-for-sale securities from a fixed rate to a floating rate. The securities hedged have a weighted-average life of approximately 8.1 years. These securities are hedged with interest-rate swap contracts of similar maturity, repricing and fixed-rate coupons. The interest-rate swap contracts convert the interest revenue from a fixed rate to a floating rate indexed to LIBOR, thereby mitigating our exposure to fluctuations in the fair value of the securities attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate.
We have entered into interest-rate swap agreements to modify our interest expense on two subordinated notes from a fixed rate to a floating rate. One subordinated note matures in 2010 and pays fixed interest at a 7.65% annual rate, while the other subordinated note matures in 2018 and pays fixed interest at a 5.25% annual rate. These notes are hedged with interest-rate swap contracts with similar notional amounts, maturities and fixed-rate coupons. The interest-rate swap contracts convert the fixed-rate coupons to a floating rate indexed to LIBOR, thereby mitigating our exposure to fluctuations in the fair value of the subordinated notes stemming from changes in the benchmark interest rate.
Cash flow hedges
Derivatives categorized as cash flow hedges are utilized to offset the variability of cash flows to be received from or paid on a floating-rate asset or liability. Gains and losses on cash flow hedges that are considered highly effective are recorded in other comprehensive income until earnings are affected by the hedged item. When gains or losses are reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income into earnings, they are recorded in net interest revenue. The ineffectiveness of cash flow hedges, defined as the extent to which the changes in fair value of the derivative exceeded the variability of cash flows of the forecasted transaction, is recorded in processing fees and other revenue.
We have entered into interest-rate swap agreements to modify our interest revenue from certain available-for-sale securities from a floating rate to a fixed rate. The securities hedged have a weighted-average life of approximately 3.9 years. These securities are hedged with interest-rate swap contracts of similar maturities, repricing and other characteristics. The interest-rate swap contracts convert the interest revenue from a floating rate to a fixed rate, thereby mitigating our exposure to fluctuations in the cash flows of the securities attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate.
We have entered into an interest-rate swap agreement to modify our interest payments on subordinated notes from a floating rate to a fixed rate. The subordinated notes mature in 2015 and pay variable interest indexed to LIBOR. The notes are hedged with an interest-rate swap agreement with a similar notional amount and maturity. The interest-rate swap agreement converts the variable rate coupon to a fixed rate of 5.35%, thereby mitigating our exposure to fluctuations in interest payments on the subordinated notes stemming from changes in the benchmark interest rate.
The following table presents the aggregate contractual, or notional, amounts of derivative financial instruments held or issued for trading and asset and liability management activities as of December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||
Trading: | ||||||||||||
Interest-rate contracts: | ||||||||||||
Swap agreements | $ | 13,718 | $ | 11,637 | $ | 261 | $ | 13,718 | ||||
Options and caps purchased | 1,058 | 1,241 | 169 | 1,058 | ||||||||
Options and caps written | 4,590 | 5,519 | 169 | 4,590 | ||||||||
Futures | 779 | 957 | 747 | 779 | ||||||||
Options on futures purchased | 1,444 | 2,245 | — | 1,444 | ||||||||
Foreign exchange contracts: | ||||||||||||
Forward and spot | 688,812 | 732,013 | 565,661 | 688,812 | ||||||||
Options purchased | 16,183 | 21,538 | 10,977 | 16,183 | ||||||||
Options written | 16,294 | 20,967 | 10,710 | 16,294 | ||||||||
Credit derivative contracts: | ||||||||||||
Credit default swap agreements | 145 | 238 | 170 | 145 | ||||||||
Equity derivative contracts: | ||||||||||||
Swap agreements | — | 72 | ||||||||||
Other contracts: | ||||||||||||
Options written(1) | 52,948 | 54,825 | ||||||||||
Asset and liability management: | ||||||||||||
Interest-rate contracts: | ||||||||||||
Swap agreements | 3,019 | 3,494 | 2,577 | 3,019 | ||||||||
Foreign exchange contracts: | ||||||||||||
Forward | — | 146 | ||||||||||
| (1) | Notional amounts related to book-value protection provided to stable value funds; see note 10. |
In connection with our asset and liability management activities, we have executed interest-rate swap agreements designated as fair value and cash flow hedges to manage our interest-rate risk. The aggregate notional amounts of these interest-rate swap agreements and the related assets or liabilities being hedged are presented in the following table. Hedge ineffectiveness for 2008, 2007 and 2006, recorded in processing fees and other revenue, was not material.
| 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Fair Value Hedges | Cash Flow Hedges | Total | Fair Value Hedges | Cash Flow Hedges | Total | Fair Value Hedges | Cash Flow Hedges | Total | Fair Value Hedges | Cash Flow Hedges | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Available-for-sale investment securities | $ | 2,165 | $ | 36 | $ | 2,201 | $ | 2,226 | $ | 2,226 | $ | 1,707 | $ | 170 | $ | 1,877 | $ | 2,165 | $ | 36 | $ | 2,201 | ||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing time deposits(1) | 118 | — | 118 | 118 | 118 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt(2)(3) | 500 | 200 | 700 | 700 | $ | 450 | 1,150 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing time deposits(1) | — | — | — | 118 | — | 118 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt(2)(3) | 500 | 200 | 700 | 500 | 200 | 700 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 2,783 | $ | 236 | $ | 3,019 | $ | 3,044 | $ | 450 | $ | 3,494 | $ | 2,207 | $ | 370 | $ | 2,577 | $ | 2,783 | $ | 236 | $ | 3,019 | ||||||||||||
| (1) | For the |
| (2) | For the |
| (3) | For the years ended December 31, |
For cash flow hedges, any changes in the fair value of the derivative financial instruments remain in accumulated other comprehensive income and are generally recorded in our consolidated statement of income in future periods when earnings are affected by the variability of the hedged cash flow.
During the third quarter of 2008, we closed our foreign exchange forward position with an aggregate notional amount of €100 million (approximately $146 million). In connection with this hedge, we recorded a net after-tax unrealized gain of $1 million and a net after-tax unrealized loss of $8 million in other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Foreign exchange trading revenue related to foreign exchange contracts was $677 million, $1.08 billion $802 million and $611$802 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 2006,2007, respectively. Future cash requirements, if any, related to foreign exchange contracts are represented by the gross amount of currencies to be exchanged under each contract unless we and the counterparty have agreed to pay or receive the net contractual settlement amount on the settlement date.
The following table presents the fair value of the derivative financial instruments, excluding the impact of master netting agreements, recorded in our consolidated statement of condition. The impact of master netting agreements is disclosed in note 13.
Asset Derivatives | Liability Derivatives | |||||||||
December 31, 2009 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||||
| (In millions) | Balance Sheet | Fair Value | Balance Sheet | Fair Value | ||||||
Derivatives utilized in trading activities: | ||||||||||
Interest-rate contracts | Other assets | $ | 13 | Other liabilities | $ | 13 | ||||
Foreign exchange contracts | Other assets | 6,345 | Other liabilities | 6,398 | ||||||
Credit derivative contracts | Other assets | 1 | Other liabilities | 1 | ||||||
Total | $ | 6,359 | $ | 6,412 | ||||||
Derivatives designated as hedges: | ||||||||||
Interest-rate contracts | Other assets | $ | 20 | Other liabilities | $ | 206 | ||||
Total | $ | 20 | $ | 206 | ||||||
The following tables present the impact of our use of derivative financial instruments on our consolidated statement of income:
| Location of Gain (Loss) on Derivative in Consolidated Statement of Income | Amount of Gain (Loss) on Derivative Recognized in Consolidated Statement of Income | |||||
| (In millions) | Year ended December 31, 2009 | |||||
Derivatives utilized in trading activities(1): | ||||||
Interest-rate contracts | Processing fees and other revenue | $ | 5 | |||
Foreign exchange contracts | Processing fees and other revenue | (5 | ) | |||
Foreign exchange contracts | Trading services revenue | 677 | ||||
Other derivative contracts | Trading services revenue | (3 | ) | |||
Total | $ | 674 | ||||
| (1) | Unrealized losses on written options related to book-value protection provided to stable value funds are recorded in other expenses, and totaled approximately $9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. |
Derivatives designated as fair value hedges: Interest-rate contracts Interest-rate contracts Interest-rate contracts Total Location of
Gain (Loss) on
Derivative in
Consolidated
Statement of Income Amount of Gain
(Loss) on Derivative
Recognized in
Consolidated
Statement of Income Hedged Item
in Fair
Value
Hedging
Relationship Location of Gain
(Loss) on
Hedged Item in
Consolidated
Statement of
Income Amount of Gain
(Loss) on Hedged
Item Recognized in
Consolidated
Statement of Income (In millions) Year ended
December 31, 2009 Year ended
December 31, 2009 Net interest
revenue $ (30 ) Long-
term debt Net interest
revenue $ 30 Net interest
revenue (22 ) Deposits Net interest
revenue 22 Processing
fees and other
revenue 200 Available-
for-sale
securities Processing
fees and
other revenue (208 ) $ 148 $ (156 )
Differences between the gains (losses) on the derivative and the gains (losses) on the hedged item represent hedge ineffectiveness. Hedge ineffectiveness for 2008 and 2007, recorded in processing fees and other revenue, was not material.
| Amount of Gain (Loss) on Derivative Recognized in Other Comprehensive Income | Location of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from OCI to Consolidated Statement of Income | Amount of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from OCI to Consolidated Statement of Income | Location of Gain (Loss) on Derivative Recognized in Consolidated Statement of Income | Amount of Gain (Loss) on Derivative Recognized in Consolidated Statement of Income | |||||||
| (In millions) | Year ended December 31, 2009 | Year ended December 31, 2009 | Year ended December 31, 2009 | ||||||||
Derivatives designated as cash flow hedges: | |||||||||||
Interest-rate contracts | $ | 14 | Net interest revenue | — | Net interest revenue | — | |||||
Total | $ | 14 | — | — | |||||||
Note 18.17. Net Interest Revenue
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
Interest revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||
Deposits with banks | $ | 760 | $ | 416 | $ | 414 | $ | 156 | $ | 760 | $ | 416 | ||||||
Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 889 | 1,106 | 1,011 | 520 | 889 | 1,106 | ||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 246 | 205 | 88 | 225 | 246 | 205 | ||||||||||||
Other investments | 1,931 | 2,292 | 1,830 | 2,075 | 1,931 | 2,292 | ||||||||||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements and federal funds sold | 339 | 756 | 663 | 24 | 339 | 756 | ||||||||||||
Loans and leases(1) | 269 | 382 | 270 | |||||||||||||||
Loans and leases(1) | 239 | 269 | 382 | |||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | 78 | 55 | 48 | 20 | 78 | 55 | ||||||||||||
Interest revenue associated with AMLF | 367 | — | — | 25 | 367 | — | ||||||||||||
Other interest-earning assets | 2 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Total interest revenue | 4,879 | 5,212 | 4,324 | 3,286 | 4,879 | 5,212 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense: | ||||||||||||||||||
Deposits | 1,326 | 2,298 | 1,891 | 195 | 1,326 | 2,298 | ||||||||||||
Short-term borrowings | 375 | 959 | 1,145 | 205 | 375 | 959 | ||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 229 | 225 | 178 | 304 | 229 | 225 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense associated with AMLF | 299 | — | — | 18 | 299 | — | ||||||||||||
Total interest expense | 2,229 | 3,482 | 3,214 | 722 | 2,229 | 3,482 | ||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | $ | 2,650 | $ | 1,730 | $ | 1,110 | $ | 2,564 | $ | 2,650 | $ | 1,730 | ||||||
| (1) | Interest revenue for |
Note 19.18. Employee Benefits
State Street Bank and certain of its U.S. subsidiaries participate in a non-contributory, tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan. Effective January 1, 2008, this plan was amended, and employer contribution credits to the plan were discontinued as of that date. Employee account balances will continue to earn annual interest credits until the employee’s retirement. In addition to the defined benefit pension plan, we have non-qualified unfunded supplemental retirement plans, referred to as SERPs, that provide certain officers with defined pension benefits in excess of allowable qualified plan limits. Non-U.S. employees participate in local defined benefit plans.
State Street Bank and certain of its U.S. subsidiaries participate in a post-retirement plan that provides health care and insurance benefits for retired employees.
Combined information for the U.S. and non-U.S. defined benefit plans, and information for the post-retirement plan, is as follows as of the December 31 measurement date:
| Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post-Retirement Plan | Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post-Retirement Plan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Benefit obligations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Beginning of year | $ | 830 | $ | 833 | $ | 86 | $ | 90 | $ | 765 | $ | 830 | $ | 94 | $ | 86 | ||||||||||||||||
Service cost | 18 | 62 | 4 | 4 | 13 | 18 | 4 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest cost | 47 | 44 | 5 | 5 | 45 | 47 | 6 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Employee contributions | 1 | — | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plan amendments | 5 | — | — | (10 | ) | — | 5 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions and transfers in | — | 18 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actuarial losses/(gains) | (34 | ) | (42 | ) | 6 | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actuarial loss/(gains) | 14 | (34 | ) | 14 | 6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Benefits paid | (33 | ) | (44 | ) | (7 | ) | (7 | ) | (33 | ) | (33 | ) | (7 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Expenses paid | (3 | ) | (3 | ) | — | — | — | (3 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Curtailments | (22 | ) | (47 | ) | — | — | (1 | ) | (22 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Settlements | (7 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Special termination benefits | — | — | 1 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation | (44 | ) | 9 | — | — | 12 | (44 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
End of year | $ | 765 | $ | 830 | $ | 94 | $ | 86 | $ | 808 | $ | 765 | $ | 112 | $ | 94 | ||||||||||||||||
Plan assets at fair value: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Beginning of year | $ | 878 | $ | 821 | $ | 692 | $ | 878 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actual return on plan assets | (144 | ) | 60 | 113 | (144 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Employer contributions | 54 | 18 | $ | 7 | $ | 7 | 46 | 54 | $ | 7 | $ | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Acquisitions and transfers in | — | 19 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Benefits paid | (33 | ) | (44 | ) | (7 | ) | (7 | ) | (33 | ) | (33 | ) | (7 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Expenses paid | (3 | ) | (3 | ) | — | — | — | (3 | ) | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Plan settlements | (7 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation | (60 | ) | 7 | — | — | 17 | (60 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||
End of year | $ | 692 | $ | 878 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 828 | $ | 692 | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||||||||
Accrued benefit expense: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prepaid (Accrued) benefit expense: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Funded status (plan assets less benefit obligations) | $ | (73 | ) | $ | 48 | $ | (94 | ) | $ | (86 | ) | $ | 20 | $ | (73 | ) | $ | (112 | ) | $ | (94 | ) | ||||||||||
Net prepaid (accrued) benefit expense | $ | (73 | ) | $ | 48 | $ | (94 | ) | $ | (86 | ) | $ | 20 | $ | (73 | ) | $ | (112 | ) | $ | (94 | ) | ||||||||||
| Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post-Retirement Plan | Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post- Retirement Plan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amounts recognized in the consolidated statement of condition as of December 31: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-current assets | $ | 40 | $ | 93 | $ | 60 | $ | 40 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Current liabilities | (1 | ) | — | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | (2 | ) | (1 | ) | $ | (10 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | |||||||||||||
Noncurrent liabilities | (112 | ) | (45 | ) | (87 | ) | (79 | ) | (38 | ) | (112 | ) | (102 | ) | (87 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Net prepaid (accrued) amount recognized in statement of condition | $ | (73 | ) | $ | 48 | $ | (94 | ) | $ | (86 | ) | $ | 20 | $ | (73 | ) | $ | (112 | ) | $ | (94 | ) | ||||||||||
Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prior service credit | $ | (4 | ) | $ | 5 | $ | 6 | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (4 | ) | $ | 5 | $ | 5 | |||||||||||||||
Net loss | (254 | ) | $ | (110 | ) | (36 | ) | (32 | ) | (204 | ) | (254 | ) | (49 | ) | (36 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (258 | ) | (110 | ) | (31 | ) | (26 | ) | (208 | ) | (258 | ) | (44 | ) | (31 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Cumulative employer contributions in excess of net periodic benefit cost | 185 | 158 | (63 | ) | (60 | ) | 228 | 185 | (68 | ) | (63 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net asset (obligation) recognized in consolidated statement of condition | $ | (73 | ) | $ | 48 | $ | (94 | ) | $ | (86 | ) | $ | 20 | $ | (73 | ) | $ | (112 | ) | $ | (94 | ) | ||||||||||
Accumulated benefit obligation | $ | 750 | $ | 793 | $ | 796 | $ | 750 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Actuarial assumptions (U.S. Plans): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Used to determine benefit obligations as of December 31: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discount rate | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Rate of increase for future compensation | 4.50 | 4.50 | — | — | 4.50 | 4.50 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Used to determine periodic benefit cost for the years ended December 31: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Discount rate | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 5.75 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | 6.00 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Rate of increase for future compensation | 4.50 | 4.50 | — | — | 4.50 | 4.50 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expected long-term rate of return on plan assets | 7.50 | 7.50 | — | — | 7.25 | 7.50 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assumed health care cost trend rates as of December 31: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost trend rate assumed for next year | — | — | 9.0 | % | 9.5 | % | — | — | 8.40 | % | 9.00 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Rate to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline | — | — | 5.00 | 5.00 | — | — | 4.50 | 5.00 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Year that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate | — | — | 2016 | 2015 | — | — | 2028 | 2016 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expected benefit payments for the next ten years are as follows:
| (In millions) | Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Non- Qualified SERPs | Post- Retirement Plan | Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Non- Qualified SERPs | Post-Retirement Plan | ||||||||||||
2009 | $ | 36 | $ | 15 | $ | 7 | ||||||||||||
2010 | 35 | 15 | 8 | $ | 41 | $ | 24 | $ | 10 | |||||||||
2011 | 37 | 21 | 8 | 41 | 21 | 10 | ||||||||||||
2012 | 31 | 20 | 7 | 43 | 19 | 10 | ||||||||||||
2013 | 26 | 15 | 7 | 44 | 4 | 9 | ||||||||||||
2014-2017 | 126 | 70 | 31 | |||||||||||||||
2014 | 31 | 10 | 9 | |||||||||||||||
2015-2019 | 168 | 63 | 38 | |||||||||||||||
The accumulated benefit obligation for all of our U.S. defined benefit pension plans was $737$739 million and $696$737 million at December 31, 2008,2009, and 2007,2008, respectively.
To develop the assumption of the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets, we considered the historical returns and the future expectations for returns for each asset class, as well as the target asset allocation of the pension portfolio. This analysis resulted in the determination of the assumed long-term rate of return on plan assets of 7.50%7.25% for the year ended December 31, 2008.2009.
Plan Assets:
ForThe primary purpose of the tax-qualified U.S. definedinvestment policy and strategy is to invest plan assets in a manner that provides that sufficient resources will be available to meet the plan’s benefit pensionand expense obligations when due. The portfolio, together with contributions, is intended to provide adequate liquidity to make benefit payments when due while preserving principal and maximizing returns, given appropriate risk constraints. A secondary but important objective is to enhance the plan’s long-term viability through the generation of competitive returns that will limit the financial burden on State Street and contribute to our ability to maintain our retirement program.
Plan assets are managed solely in the interests of the participants and consistent with generally recognized fiduciary standards, including all applicable provisions of ERISA and other applicable laws and regulations. Management believes that its investment policy satisfies the standards of prudence and diversification prescribed by ERISA. Plan assets are diversified across asset classes to achieve a balance between risk and return and between income and growth of assets through capital appreciation, to produce a prudently well-diversified portfolio.
The fair value of the participation units owned by the plan is based on the redemption value on the last business day of the plan year, where values are based on the fair value of the underlying assets in each fund. The net asset allocationsvalue of units of participation in other funds is based on the fair value of the underlying securities in each fund.
Investments in limited liability corporations and limited liability partnerships are valued at fair value as determined by the fund managers, and represent the plan’s proportionate share of the estimated fair value of the underlying net assets of the limited liability corporations.
The methods described above may produce a fair value calculation that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. Furthermore, while the management believes that its valuation methods are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different fair value measurement as of the reporting date.
The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy prescribed by current accounting standards, the plan’s assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the strategic target allocation for 2009, by asset category, were as follows:
ASSET CATEGORY2009:
| Strategic Target Allocation | Percentage of Plan Assets at December 31, | ||||||||
| 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||
Equity securities | 43 | % | 36 | % | 46 | % | |||
Fixed-income securities | 46 | 56 | 45 | ||||||
Other | 11 | 8 | 9 | ||||||
Total | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||
| Fair Value Measurements on a Recurring Basis as of December 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Quoted Prices in Active Markets (Level 1) | Pricing Methods with Significant Observable Market Inputs (Level 2) | Pricing Methods with Significant Unobservable Market Inputs (Level 3) | Total Net Carrying Value | |||||||||||
Assets: | |||||||||||||||
U.S. Pension Plan | |||||||||||||||
Domestic large cap equity | $ | 109 | $ | 109 | |||||||||||
Domestic small cap equity | 12 | 12 | |||||||||||||
Developed international equities | 59 | 59 | |||||||||||||
Emerging markets equity | 32 | 32 | |||||||||||||
Investment grade fixed-income | 293 | 293 | |||||||||||||
High yield fixed-income | 27 | 27 | |||||||||||||
Real estate investment trusts | 22 | 22 | |||||||||||||
Alternative investments (commingled fund) | 8 | 8 | |||||||||||||
Alternative investments (fund of funds) | — | $ | 13 | 13 | |||||||||||
Private equity | — | 2 | 2 | ||||||||||||
Cash | 10 | — | 10 | ||||||||||||
Fair value at end of period | — | $ | 572 | $ | 15 | $ | 587 | ||||||||
U.K. Pension Plan | |||||||||||||||
Developed international equity | $ | 24 | $ | 24 | |||||||||||
U.K. fixed-income | 139 | 139 | |||||||||||||
Investment grade debt | 23 | 23 | |||||||||||||
Alternative investments | — | $ | 24 | 24 | |||||||||||
Total U.K. pension plan | — | $ | 186 | $ | 24 | $ | 210 | ||||||||
Other Non-U.S. Pension Plans (Excluding U.K.) | |||||||||||||||
Insurance group annuity contracts | $ | 31 | $ | 31 | |||||||||||
Total Other Non-U.S. Pension Plans (Excluding U.K.) | — | — | $ | 31 | $ | 31 | |||||||||
Total assets carried at fair value | — | $ | 758 | $ | 70 | $ | 828 | ||||||||
| Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs Year Ended December 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||||
| U.S. Pension Plan | U.S. Pension Plan | U.K. Pension Plan | Non-U.S. Pension Plans (Excluding U.K.) | ||||||||||||
| (In millions) | Alternative Investments | Private Equity | Alternative Investments | Insurance group annuity contract | |||||||||||
Assets: | |||||||||||||||
Fair value at January 1, 2009 | $ | 12 | $ | 3 | $ | 24 | $ | 34 | |||||||
Purchase and sales, net | — | — | (1 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||||
Unrealized gains (losses) | 1 | (1 | ) | 1 | — | ||||||||||
Fair value at December 31, 2009 | $ | 13 | $ | 2 | $ | 24 | $ | 31 | |||||||
The preceding strategic target asset allocation was last amended effective July 31, 2006. Consistent with that target allocation,plan’s investment strategy is intended to reduce the concentration risk of an adverse influence on investment values from the poor performance of a small number of individual investments through diversification of the assets. The significant holdings of the plan should generateare monitored each quarter so that the plan does not fall outside of the allowable maximum amount per issuer. The plan is re-balanced on a real return above inflation, and superior tomonthly basis so that actual weights of a benchmark index consisting of a combination of appropriate capital market indices weightedthe plan assets are within the allowable ranges set forth in the same proportions as theinvestment policy. The plan’s strategic target asset allocation. Equities included domestic and international publicly-traded common, preferred and convertible securities. Fixed-income securities included domestic and international corporate and government debt securities, as well as asset-backed securities and private debt. The “other” category included real estate, alternative investments andoperating cash and cash equivalents. Derivative financial instrumentsflows (benefit payments, expenses, contributions) are an acceptable alternative to investing in these types of securities, but may not be used to leveragebring the plan’s portfolio.weights back into line on a monthly basis. If these cash flows do not provide enough benefit, additional re-balancing is effected.
Expected employer contributions to the tax-qualified U.S. and Non-U.S. defined benefit pension plan, SERPs and post-retirement plan for the year ending December 31, 20092010 are $12$5 million, $15$24 million and $7$10 million, respectively.
State Street has unfunded SERPs that provide certain officers with defined pension benefits in excess of qualified plan limits imposed by U.S. federal tax law. Information for the SERPs was as follows for the years ended December 31:
| Non-Qualified SERPs | Non-Qualified SERPs | |||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||
Benefit obligations: | ||||||||||||||||
Beginning of year | $ | 211 | $ | 142 | $ | 209 | $ | 211 | ||||||||
Service cost | 4 | 12 | 2 | 4 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost | 12 | 10 | 10 | 12 | ||||||||||||
Acquisitions and transfers in | — | 9 | ||||||||||||||
Actuarial loss | (11 | ) | 85 | |||||||||||||
Actuarial gain | (16 | ) | (11 | ) | ||||||||||||
Benefits paid | (7 | ) | (6 | ) | (2 | ) | (7 | ) | ||||||||
Curtailments | — | (41 | ) | |||||||||||||
Settlements | (21 | ) | — | |||||||||||||
End of year | $ | 209 | $ | 211 | $ | 182 | $ | 209 | ||||||||
Accrued benefit expense: | ||||||||||||||||
Funded status (plan assets less benefit obligations) | $ | (209 | ) | $ | (211 | ) | $ | (182 | ) | $ | (209 | ) | ||||
Net accrued benefit expense | $ | (209 | ) | $ | (211 | ) | $ | (182 | ) | $ | (209 | ) | ||||
Amounts recognized in the consolidated statement of condition as of December 31: | ||||||||||||||||
Current liabilities | $ | (15 | ) | $ | (8 | ) | $ | (24 | ) | $ | (15 | ) | ||||
Non-current liabilities | (194 | ) | (203 | ) | (158 | ) | (194 | ) | ||||||||
Net accrued amount recognized in consolidated statement of condition | $ | (209 | ) | $ | (211 | ) | $ | (182 | ) | $ | (209 | ) | ||||
Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income: | ||||||||||||||||
Net loss | $ | (83 | ) | $ | (103 | ) | $ | (60 | ) | $ | (83 | ) | ||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (83 | ) | (103 | ) | (60 | ) | (83 | ) | ||||||||
Cumulative employer contributions in excess of net periodic benefit cost | (126 | ) | (108 | ) | (122 | ) | (126 | ) | ||||||||
Net obligation recognized in consolidated statement of condition | $ | (209 | ) | $ | (211 | ) | $ | (182 | ) | $ | (209 | ) | ||||
Accumulated benefit obligation | $ | 175 | $ | 148 | $ | 171 | $ | 175 | ||||||||
Actuarial assumptions: | ||||||||||||||||
Assumptions used to determine benefit obligations and periodic benefit costs are consistent with those noted for the post-retirement plan, with the following exceptions: | ||||||||||||||||
Rate of increase for future compensation—SERPs | 4.75 | % | 4.75 | % | 4.75 | % | 4.75 | % | ||||||||
Rate of increase for future compensation—Executive SERPs | 10.00 | % | 10.00 | % | 10.00 | 10.00 | ||||||||||
For those defined benefit plans that have accumulated benefit obligations in excess of plan assets as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the accumulated benefit obligations are $787$239 million and $192$787 million, respectively, and the plan assets are $39 million and $513 million, and $21 million, respectively.
For those defined benefit plans that have projected benefit obligations in excess of plan assets as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, the projected benefit obligations are $843$263 million and $493$843 million, respectively, and the plan assets are $521$42 million and $237$521 million, respectively.
If health care cost trend rates were increased by 1%, the post-retirement benefit obligation as of December 31, 2008,2009 would have increased 8%7%, and the aggregate expense for service and interest costs for 20082009 would have increased 9%. Conversely, if health care cost trend rates were reduced by 1%, the post-retirement benefit obligation as of December 31, 2008,2009 would have decreased 6%, and the aggregate expense for service and interest costs for 20082009 would have decreased 7%8%.
The following table presents the actuarially determined expense for our U.S. and non-U.S. defined benefit plans, post-retirement plan and SERPs for the years ended December 31:
| Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post-Retirement Plan | Primary U.S. and Non-U.S. Defined Benefit Plans | Post-Retirement Plan | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Components of net periodic benefit cost: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Service cost | $ | 18 | $ | 62 | $ | 59 | $ | 4 | $ | 3 | $ | 4 | $ | 13 | $ | 18 | $ | 62 | $ | 4 | $ | 4 | $ | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest cost | 47 | 44 | 39 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 45 | 47 | 44 | 6 | 5 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assumed return on plan assets | (59 | ) | (55 | ) | (53 | ) | — | — | — | (56 | ) | (59 | ) | (55 | ) | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of transition obligation | — | — | — | — | 1 | 1 | — | — | — | — | — | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of prior service cost | — | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | — | — | — | — | — | (2 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of net loss | 4 | 12 | 17 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net periodic benefit cost | 10 | 61 | 60 | 10 | 10 | 12 | 8 | 10 | 61 | 11 | 10 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Settlements | (1 | ) | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Curtailments | — | (19 | ) | — | — | — | — | (1 | ) | — | (19 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Special termination benefits | — | — | — | 1 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expense | $ | 10 | $ | 42 | $ | 60 | $ | 10 | $ | 10 | $ | 12 | $ | 6 | $ | 10 | $ | 42 | $ | 12 | $ | 10 | $ | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Estimated amounts that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income over the next fiscal year: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Initial net asset | $ | (1 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prior service credit | $ | 2 | $ | 1 | — | $ | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss | $ | (6 | ) | $ | (4 | ) | (14 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | (1 | ) | (1 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (6 | ) | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (2 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | (1 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Estimated amortization | $ | (6 | ) | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (12 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | — | $ | (2 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (6 | ) | $ | (4 | ) | $ | (2 | ) | $ | (1 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Non-Qualified SERPs | Non-Qualified SERPs | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||
Components of net periodic benefit cost: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Service cost | $ | 4 | $ | 12 | $ | 6 | $ | 2 | $ | 4 | $ | 12 | ||||||||||||
Interest cost | 12 | 10 | 7 | 10 | 12 | 10 | ||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of prior service cost | — | 2 | 2 | — | — | 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
Amortization of net loss | 8 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net periodic benefit cost | 24 | 29 | 19 | 15 | 24 | 29 | ||||||||||||||||||
Settlements | 4 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Curtailments | — | 13 | — | — | — | 13 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total expense | $ | 24 | $ | 42 | $ | 19 | $ | 19 | $ | 24 | $ | 42 | ||||||||||||
Estimated amounts that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income over the next fiscal year: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prior service cost | $ | (2 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (9 | ) | (4 | ) | $ | (5 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (9 | ) | |||||||
Estimated amortization | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (9 | ) | $ | (6 | ) | $ | (5 | ) | $ | (7 | ) | $ | (9 | ) | ||||||
Certain of our U.S. employees are eligible to contribute a portion of their pre-tax salary to a 401(k) savings plan, and an Employee Stock Ownership Plan, referredor post-tax Roth contributions, or both, up to as an ESOP.the annual IRS limit. Our matching portion of these contributions is paid in cash, and the related expense was $73 million for 2009, $87 million for 2008 and $25 million for 2007 and $20 million for 2006.2007. In addition, employees in certain non-U.S. offices participate in other local plans. Expenses related to these plans were $45 million, $55 million and $33 million for 2009, 2008 and $32 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Shares of common stock and interest in the savings plan may be acquired by eligible employees through the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, referred to as an ESOP. The ESOP is a non-leveraged plan. Compensation cost is equal to the contribution called for by the plan formula and is equal to the cash contributed for the purchase of common stock on the open market or the fair value of the shares contributed from treasury stock. Dividends on shares held by the ESOP are charged to retained earnings, and shares are treated as outstanding for purposesthe calculation of calculating earnings per common share.
Note 20.19. Occupancy Expense and Information Systems and Communications Expense
Occupancy expense and information systems and communications expense include expense for depreciation of buildings, leasehold improvements, computers, equipment and furniture and fixtures. Total depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 and 2006 was $394 million, $365 million $319 million and $309$319 million, respectively.
We lease approximately 872,000 square feet at One Lincoln Street, our headquarters building located in Boston, Massachusetts, and a related 366,000 square-foot underground parking garage, under 20-year, non-cancelable capital leases expiring in September 2023. In addition, we lease approximately 359,000362,000 square feet at 20 Churchill Place, an office building located in the U.K., under a 20-year capital lease expiring in December 2028, with the option to cancel the lease after the first 15 years. As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, an aggregate net book value of $660 million and $675 million, and $421 million, respectively, forrelated to the above-described capital leases was recorded in premises and equipment in our consolidated statement of condition, andwith the related liability was recorded in long-term debt. Capital lease asset amortization is recorded in occupancy expense over the respective lease terms.term. Lease payments are recorded as a reduction of the liability, with a portion recorded as imputed interest expense. For the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 and 2007, interest expense related to these capital lease obligations, recordedreflected in net interest revenue, was $47 million, $36 million for each year.and $36 million, respectively. As of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, accumulated amortization of assets underrelated to capital leases was $139$185 million and $110$139 million, respectively.
We have entered into non-cancelable operating leases for premises and equipment. Nearly all of these leases include renewal options. Costs related to operating leases for office space are recorded in occupancy expense. Costs related to operating leases for computers and equipment are recorded in information systems and communications expense.
Total rental expense, net of sublease revenue, amounted to $230 million, $241 million and $199 million in 2009, 2008 and $179 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. RentalTotal rental expense has beenwas reduced by sublease revenue of $17 million, $11 million $15 million and $13$15 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 2006,2007, respectively.
During 2007, we terminated an operating lease related to one of our office buildings in Boston. The lease was terminatedBoston, in connection with an overall evaluation of our requirements for office space as a result of our July 2007 acquisition of Investors Financial. The termination of the lease resulted in the recognition of a charge of approximately $91 million, which was included in the merger and integration costs recorded in our 2007 consolidated statement of income in connection with the acquisition.
The following istable presents a summary of future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable capital and operating leases as of December 31, 2008.2009. Future minimum rental commitments have been reduced by aggregate sublease rental commitments of $71$65 million for capital leases and $127$77 million for operating leases. The increasedecrease in future operating lease payments compared to amounts reported in prior years generally resulted from adjustments of and changes to existing leases, as well as the above-described lease for an office buildinginclusion of cancelation options related to certain leases in the U.K., which was executed in December 2008.U.S. and Europe.
| (In millions) | Capital Leases | Operating Leases | Total | |||||||
2009 | $ | 73 | $ | 232 | $ | 305 | ||||
2010 | 74 | 219 | 293 | |||||||
2011 | 74 | 193 | 267 | |||||||
2012 | 70 | 216 | 286 | |||||||
2013 | 70 | 177 | 247 | |||||||
Thereafter | 831 | 614 | 1,445 | |||||||
Total minimum lease payments | 1,192 | $ | 1,651 | $ | 2,843 | |||||
Less amount representing interest payments | (446 | ) | ||||||||
Present value of minimum lease payments | $ | 746 | ||||||||
| (In millions) | Capital Leases | Operating Leases | Total | |||||||
2010 | $ | 74 | $ | 229 | $ | 303 | ||||
2011 | 75 | 184 | 259 | |||||||
2012 | 72 | 158 | 230 | |||||||
2013 | 72 | 132 | 204 | |||||||
2014 | 73 | 108 | 181 | |||||||
Thereafter | 785 | 222 | 1,007 | |||||||
Total minimum lease payments | 1,151 | $ | 1,033 | $ | 2,184 | |||||
Less amount representing interest payments | (413 | ) | ||||||||
Present value of minimum lease payments | $ | 738 | ||||||||
Note 21.20. Expenses
DuringIn June 2009, the Staff of the SEC provided State Street Bank with a “Wells” notice related to the SEC’s ongoing investigation into disclosures and management by SSgA of certain of its active fixed-income strategies during 2007 and prior periods. Subsequent to the receipt of the Wells notice, we engaged in discussions with the SEC and other governmental and regulatory authorities regarding a potential settlement of this matter. Based on such discussions during the fourth quarter of 2009, we determined it appropriate to increase our reserve, initially established in 2007 to address litigation exposure and other costs associated with SSgA’s management of these fixed-income strategies, by $250 million, to take into account such a potential settlement with these governmental authorities and the other ongoing litigation related to the active fixed-income strategies. As a result, we recorded a provision of $250 million in our 2009 consolidated statement of income related to our estimate of this legal exposure. We settled regulatory inquiries related to this exposure in February 2010, which settlement is more fully described in note 10.
During 2007 and 2008, we elected to provide support tothe liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income securities markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in certain investment accounts managed by SSgA through the purchase of asset- and mortgage-backed securities and a cash infusion,SSgA. These accounts, which resulted in a charge of $450 million.
SSgA manages certain investment accounts,are offered to retirement plans, that allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account. The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value. The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account.
During 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in these accountsreaction to the point thataforementioned issues, the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts. Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the then current market environment, which we classified in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition, and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts. We have no ongoing commitment or intent to provide support to these accounts. The securities are carriedAccordingly, we recorded a provision of $450 million in investment securities available for sale in our 2008 consolidated statement of condition.income to provide for this infusion.
The components of other expenses were as follows for the years ended December 31:31,
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | $ | 200 | $ | 200 | ||||||||||||||
Securities processing | 187 | $ | 79 | $ | 37 | $ | 114 | 187 | $ | 79 | ||||||||
Regulator fees and assessments | 71 | 45 | 3 | |||||||||||||||
Other | 505 | 399 | 281 | 331 | 460 | 396 | ||||||||||||
Total other expenses | $ | 892 | $ | 478 | $ | 318 | $ | 516 | $ | 892 | $ | 478 | ||||||
In SeptemberDuring the third and Octoberfourth quarters of 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., or Lehman, Brothers, and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy or other insolvency proceedings. While we had no unsecured financial exposure to Lehman Brothers or its affiliates, we indemnified certain customers in connection with these and other collateralized repurchase agreements with Lehman Brothers entities. In the then current market environment, the market value of the underlying collateral had declined. DuringTo the third quarter of 2008, to the extent that these declines resulted in collateral value falling below the indemnification obligation, we recorded a balance sheet reserve, and a corresponding provision, of $200 million in our 2008 consolidated statement of income to provide for our estimated net exposure. The reserve which totaled $200 million, was based on the cost of satisfying the indemnification obligation net of the fair value of the collateral, which we purchased duringacquired subsequent to the fourth quarter of 2008.Lehman proceedings. The collateral, composed of commercial real estate loans which are discussed in note 5,4, is recorded in loans and leases in our consolidated statement of condition.
Note 22.21. Income Taxes
The components of income tax expense from continuing operations consisted of the following for the years ended December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||
Current: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal | $ | 1,065 | $ | 424 | $ | 328 | $ | 75 | $ | 1,065 | $ | 424 | |||||||||||
State | 299 | 133 | 82 | 39 | 299 | 133 | |||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 309 | 338 | 265 | 157 | 309 | 338 | |||||||||||||||||
Total current | 1,673 | 895 | 675 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total current expense | 271 | 1,673 | 895 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Deferred: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal | (442 | ) | (155 | ) | 27 | 383 | (442 | ) | (155 | ) | |||||||||||||
State | (194 | ) | (59 | ) | (9 | ) | 28 | (194 | ) | (59 | ) | ||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | (6 | ) | (39 | ) | (18 | ) | 40 | (6 | ) | (39 | ) | ||||||||||||
Total deferred (benefit) | (642 | ) | (253 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Total deferred expense (benefit) | 451 | (642 | ) | (253 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Total income tax expense from continuing operations | $ | 1,031 | $ | 642 | $ | 675 | |||||||||||||||||
Total income tax expense | $ | 722 | $ | 1,031 | $ | 642 | |||||||||||||||||
The table above excludes the income tax benefit of $2.41 billion associated with the extraordinary loss recorded in connection with the May 2009 conduit consolidation. Income tax expense related to net gains realized from sales of available-for-sale investment securities was $147 million, $27 million and $3 million for 2009, 2008 and $6 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Pre-tax income from continuing operations attributable to operations located outside the U.S. was $801 million, $1.11 billion and $1.13 billion for 2009, 2008 and $759 million for 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
Pre-tax earnings of non-U.S. subsidiaries are subject to U.S. tax when effectively repatriated. As of December 31, 2008, State Street has2009, we have chosen to indefinitely reinvest $773 million$1.15 billion of the retained earnings of certain foreignnon-U.S. subsidiaries. No provision has been recorded for U.S. income tax that could be incurred upon repatriation, and it is not practicable to determine the tax liability that could be incurred upon repatriation.
WeDuring 2008, we recorded a $4 million decrease in deferred income tax expense associated with Massachusetts legislation entitled “An Act Improving Tax Fairness and Business Competitiveness,” which was signed into law in July 2008.
Significant components of deferred tax liabilities and assets were as follows at December 31:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: | ||||||||
Lease financing transactions | $ | 535 | $ | 1,177 | ||||
Foreign currency translation | 63 | 152 | ||||||
Fixed and intangible assets | 775 | 731 | ||||||
Other | 51 | — | ||||||
Total deferred tax liabilities | 1,424 | 2,060 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets: | ||||||||
Unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities, net | 3,522 | 486 | ||||||
Deferred compensation | 172 | 122 | ||||||
Defined benefit pension plan | 169 | 85 | ||||||
Operating expenses | 272 | 402 | ||||||
Real estate | 44 | 56 | ||||||
Other | 49 | 81 | ||||||
Total deferred tax assets | 4,228 | 1,232 | ||||||
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets | (6 | ) | (2 | ) | ||||
Net deferred tax assets | 4,222 | 1,230 | ||||||
Net deferred tax (assets) liabilities | $ | (2,798 | ) | $ | 830 | |||
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: | ||||||||
Lease financing transactions | $ | 505 | $ | 535 | ||||
Foreign currency translation | — | 63 | ||||||
Fixed and intangible assets | 725 | 775 | ||||||
Other | 30 | 51 | ||||||
Total deferred tax liabilities | 1,260 | 1,424 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets: | ||||||||
Foreign currency translation | 32 | — | ||||||
Unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities, net | 3,353 | 3,522 | ||||||
Deferred compensation | 165 | 172 | ||||||
Defined benefit pension plan | 124 | 169 | ||||||
Operating expenses | 231 | 272 | ||||||
Real estate | 36 | 44 | ||||||
Other | 39 | 49 | ||||||
Total deferred tax assets | 3,980 | 4,228 | ||||||
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets | (7 | ) | (6 | ) | ||||
Net deferred tax assets | 3,973 | 4,222 | ||||||
Net deferred tax (assets) | $ | (2,713 | ) | $ | (2,798 | ) | ||
Management considers the valuation allowance adequate to reduce the total deferred tax assetassets to an aggregate amount that will more likely than not be realized. At December 31, 2008,2009, we had deferred tax assets associated with non-U.S. federal and state loss carryforwards of $6$16 million, included in “other” in the above table. Loss carryforwards expire beginning in 2009.2010.
A reconciliation of the U.S. statutory income tax rate to the effective tax rate based on income from continuing operations before income taxes, excluding the aforementioned extraordinary loss, was as follows for the years ended December 31:
| 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||
U.S. federal income tax rate | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | ||||||
Changes from statutory rate: | ||||||||||||||||||
State taxes, net of federal benefit | 3.4 | 2.2 | 2.9 | 1.7 | 3.4 | 2.2 | ||||||||||||
Tax-exempt income | (2.0 | ) | (1.7 | ) | (1.1 | ) | (3.1 | ) | (2.0 | ) | (1.7 | ) | ||||||
Tax credits | (0.9 | ) | (1.6 | ) | (1.4 | ) | (1.6 | ) | (0.9 | ) | (1.6 | ) | ||||||
Foreign tax differential | (1.4 | ) | (2.2 | ) | (1.2 | ) | (5.0 | ) | (1.4 | ) | (2.2 | ) | ||||||
Provision related to TIPRA | — | — | 1.8 | |||||||||||||||
Provision related to LILO and SILO transactions | 2.4 | 2.0 | 2.6 | |||||||||||||||
Provisions related to LILO and SILO transactions | 0.1 | 2.4 | 2.0 | |||||||||||||||
Non-deductible penalty | 1.0 | — | — | |||||||||||||||
Other, net | (0.3 | ) | — | (0.5 | ) | 0.5 | (0.3 | ) | — | |||||||||
Effective tax rate | 36.2 | % | 33.7 | % | 38.1 | % | 28.6 | % | 36.2 | % | 33.7 | % | ||||||
A summary of activity related to unrecognized tax benefits for 2008 and 2007as of December 31 follows:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||
Balance at beginning of year | $ | 305 | $ | 662 | $ | 345 | $ | 305 | |||||||
Increase related to tax positions taken during prior years | 41 | 150 | 14 | 41 | |||||||||||
Settlements | (1 | ) | (507 | ) | — | (1 | ) | ||||||||
Balance at end of year | $ | 345 | $ | 305 | $ | 359 | $ | 345 | |||||||
Included in the balances in the preceding table above areis $294 million and $285 million of tax positions for which the ultimate deductibility is highly certain, but for which the timing of such deductibility is uncertain, atas of December 31, 20082009 and 2007, respectively. Settlements for 2007 included amounts remitted during 2007 and identified amounts remitted in 2008.
We are presently under audit by a number of tax authorities. It is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits could change significantly over the next 12 months. We do not expect that any change would have a material effect on our effective tax rate.
We record interest and penalties related to income taxes as a component of income tax expense. Income tax expense included interest expense of approximately $22$3 million and $38$22 million for the years ended December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively. We had approximately $62$65 million and $83$62 million accrued at December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, respectively, for the payment of interest. The earliest year open to examination in our major jurisdictions is 2000.
Note 23.22. Earnings Per Common Share
The following table presents the computation of basic and diluted earnings per common share for the years ended December 31:
| (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss | $ | 1,803 | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | ||||||||||||||||
Less: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Prepayment of preferred stock discount | (106 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Preferred stock dividends | (18 | ) | — | — | (46 | ) | (18 | ) | — | |||||||||||||
Accretion of preferred stock discount | (4 | ) | — | — | (11 | ) | (4 | ) | — | |||||||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 1,789 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders | 1,640 | 1,789 | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||||
Payments for cash dividends(1) | (118 | ) | (389 | ) | (311 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Undistributed earnings | $ | 1,522 | $ | 1,400 | $ | 950 | ||||||||||||||||
Average shares outstanding (in thousands): | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic average shares | 470,602 | 413,182 | 360,675 | |||||||||||||||||||
Average participating securities | 875 | 713 | 698 | |||||||||||||||||||
Adjusted basic average shares | 471,477 | 413,895 | 361,373 | |||||||||||||||||||
Basic average shares | 413,182 | 360,675 | 331,350 | 470,602 | 413,182 | 360,675 | ||||||||||||||||
Effect of dilutive securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options and stock awards | 2,910 | 4,788 | 4,349 | 3,401 | 2,910 | 4,788 | ||||||||||||||||
Equity-related financial instruments | 8 | 25 | 33 | — | 8 | 25 | ||||||||||||||||
Diluted average shares | 416,100 | 365,488 | 335,732 | 474,003 | 416,100 | 365,488 | ||||||||||||||||
Anti-dilutive securities (in thousands)(1) | 2,012 | 1,091 | 973 | |||||||||||||||||||
Anti-dilutive securities(2) | 10,294 | 2,012 | 1,091 | |||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share before extraordinary loss: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributed | $ | 0.27 | $ | 0.94 | $ | 0.86 | ||||||||||||||||
Undistributed(3) | 3.23 | 3.38 | 2.63 | |||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | 4.33 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.34 | $ | 3.50 | $ | 4.32 | $ | 3.49 | ||||||||||
Diluted | 4.30 | 3.45 | 3.29 | $ | 3.46 | $ | 4.30 | $ | 3.45 | |||||||||||||
| (1) | Represents payments during the period to common shareholders and to participating securities, composed of holders of unvested restricted stock and director stock. |
| (2) | Represents stock options outstanding but not included in the computation of diluted average shares because the exercise prices of the instruments were greater than the average fair value of our common stock during the periods. |
| (3) | Represents undistributed earnings divided by adjusted basic average shares. |
Note 24.23. Line of Business Information
We reporthave two lines of business: Investment Servicing and Investment Management. Given our services and management organization, the results of operations for these lines of business are not necessarily comparable with those of other companies, including companies in the financial services industry.
Investment Servicing provides services for U.S. mutual funds, collective investment funds and other investment pools, corporate and public retirement plans, insurance companies, foundations and endowments worldwide. Products include custody, accounting, daily pricing and administration; master trust and master custody; recordkeeping; foreign exchange, brokerage and other trading services; securities finance; deposit and short-term investment facilities; loans and lease financing; investment manager and hedge fundalternative investment manager operations outsourcing; and performance, risk and compliance analytics to support institutional investors. We provide shareholder services, which include mutual fund and collective investment fund shareholder accounting, through 50%-owned affiliates, Boston Financial Data Services, Inc. and the International Financial Data Services group of companies.
Investment Management offers a broad array of services for managing financial assets, including investment management and investment research, primarily for institutional investors worldwide. These services include passive and active U.S. and non-U.S. equity and fixed-income investment management strategies, and other related services, such as securities finance.
Revenue and expenses are directly charged or allocated to the lines of business through management information systems. We price our products and services on the basis of overall customer relationships and other factors; therefore, revenue may not necessarily reflect market pricing on products within the business lines in the same way it would for independent business entities. Assets and liabilities are allocated according to rulespolicies that support management’s strategic and tactical goals. Capital is allocated based on risk-weighted assets employed and management’s judgment. Capital allocations may not be representative of the capital that might be required if these lines of business were independent business entities.
The following is a summary of our line of business results. The amounts in the “Divestitures” columns represent the operating results of our joint venture interest in CitiStreet prior to theour sale of that interest in July 2008. The amounts presented in the “Other” column for 2009 represent net interest revenue earned in connection with our participation in the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, the provision for loan losses associated with the commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 and merger and integration costs recorded in connection with our July 2007 acquisition of Investors Financial. The amounts in the “Other” column for 2008 represent the net interest revenue associated with our participation in the AMLF; the gain on the sale of our joint venture interest in CitiStreet; the restructuring charges recorded primarily in connection with our plan to reduce our expenses from operations; the provision related to our estimated net exposure for customer indemnification associated with collateralized repurchase agreements; and the merger and integration costs recorded in connection with our acquisition ofthe Investors Financial.Financial acquisition. The amounts in the “Other” column for 2007 amount represents therepresent merger and acquisition costs recorded in connection with the acquisition of Investors Financial.Financial acquisition. The amounts in the “Divestitures” and “Other” columns were not allocated to State Street’s business lines.
| Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Divestitures | Other | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 2,723 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management fees | — | — | — | $ | 1,028 | $ | 1,141 | $ | 943 | 1,028 | 1,141 | 943 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | — | — | — | 1,467 | 1,152 | 862 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 900 | 518 | 292 | 330 | 163 | 94 | 1,230 | 681 | 386 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 200 | 196 | 208 | 85 | 73 | 56 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 2 | $ | 8 | 277 | 271 | 272 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 6,312 | 5,254 | 4,085 | 1,443 | 1,377 | 1,093 | (8 | ) | 2 | 8 | 7,747 | 6,633 | 5,186 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,472 | 1,573 | 986 | 104 | 135 | 104 | 6 | 22 | 20 | $ | 68 | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue after provision for loan losses | 2,472 | 1,573 | 986 | 104 | 135 | 104 | 6 | 22 | 20 | 68 | 2,650 | 1,730 | 1,110 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | 15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 350 | 350 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 8,730 | 6,800 | 5,086 | 1,547 | 1,512 | 1,197 | (2 | ) | 24 | 28 | 418 | 10,693 | 8,336 | 6,311 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 5,642 | 4,787 | 3,742 | 1,133 | 974 | 791 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 6,780 | 5,768 | 4,540 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | — | (47 | ) | — | — | 514 | — | — | — | — | — | 467 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | ��� | — | — | 450 | — | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 306 | 306 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 200 | 200 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 115 | $ | 198 | 115 | 198 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 5,642 | 4,740 | 3,742 | 1,583 | 1,488 | 791 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 621 | 198 | 7,851 | 6,433 | 4,540 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes | $ | 3,088 | $ | 2,060 | $ | 1,344 | $ | (36 | ) | $ | 24 | $ | 406 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 17 | $ | 21 | $ | (203 | ) | $ | (198 | ) | $ | 2,842 | $ | 1,903 | $ | 1,771 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-tax margin | 35 | % | 30 | % | 26 | % | (2 | )% | 2 | % | 34 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average assets (in billions) | $ | 157.9 | $ | 120.0 | $ | 103.4 | $ | 3.3 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 2.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 161.7 | $ | 123.5 | $ | 106.4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment Servicing | Investment Management | Divestitures | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Years ended December 31, | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions, except where otherwise noted) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fee revenue: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Servicing fees | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | $ | 3,276 | $ | 3,745 | $ | 3,388 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management fees | — | — | — | $ | 824 | $ | 1,028 | $ | 1,141 | 824 | 1,028 | 1,141 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading services | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | — | — | — | 1,094 | 1,467 | 1,152 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities finance | 387 | 900 | 518 | 183 | 330 | 163 | 570 | 1,230 | 681 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Processing fees and other | 72 | 200 | 196 | 99 | 85 | 73 | $ | (8 | ) | $ | 2 | 171 | 277 | 271 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | 4,829 | 6,312 | 5,254 | 1,106 | 1,443 | 1,377 | (8 | ) | 2 | 5,935 | 7,747 | 6,633 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 2,489 | 2,472 | 1,573 | 68 | 104 | 135 | 6 | 22 | $ | 7 | $ | 68 | 2,564 | 2,650 | 1,730 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 141 | (54 | ) | (27 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 350 | — | 350 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 7,459 | 8,730 | 6,800 | 1,174 | 1,547 | 1,512 | (2 | ) | 24 | 7 | 418 | 8,640 | 10,693 | 8,336 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 24 | — | — | 1 | — | — | — | — | 124 | — | 149 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expenses from operations | 4,867 | 5,642 | 4,787 | 800 | 1,133 | 974 | 5 | 7 | — | — | 5,667 | 6,780 | 5,768 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for legal exposure, net | — | — | (47 | ) | 250 | — | 514 | — | — | — | — | 250 | — | 467 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for investment account infusion | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 450 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restructuring charges | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 306 | — | 306 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Customer indemnification obligation | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 200 | — | 200 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merger and integration costs | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 49 | 115 | $ | 198 | 49 | 115 | 198 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 4,867 | 5,642 | 4,740 | 1,050 | 1,583 | 1,488 | 5 | 7 | 49 | 621 | 198 | 5,966 | 7,851 | 6,433 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income (Loss) from continuing operations before income taxes | $ | 2,568 | $ | 3,088 | $ | 2,060 | $ | 123 | $ | (36 | ) | $ | 24 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 17 | $ | (166 | ) | $ | (203 | ) | $ | (198 | ) | $ | 2,525 | $ | 2,842 | $ | 1,903 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Pre-tax margin | 34 | % | 35 | % | 30 | % | 10 | % | (2 | )% | 2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average assets (in billions) | $ | 143.4 | $ | 157.9 | $ | 120.0 | $ | 3.4 | $ | 3.3 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 0.5 | $ | 146.8 | $ | 161.7 | $ | 123.5 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Note 25.24. Non-U.S. Activities
We define non-U.S. activities as those revenue-producing assets and business activities that arise from customers domiciled outside the United States. Due to the nature of our business, precise segregation of U.S. and non-U.S. activities is not possible. Subjective judgments have been applied to determine operating results of operations related to our non-U.S. activities, including theour application of transfer pricing and our asset and liability management policies. Interest expense allocations are based on the average cost of short-term borrowed funds.
The following table summarizes our non-U.S. operating results for the years ended December 31, and31:
| (In millions) | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||
Results of operations: | |||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 2,452 | $ | 3,129 | $ | 2,707 | |||
Net interest revenue | 426 | 632 | 713 | ||||||
Total revenue | 2,878 | 3,761 | 3,420 | ||||||
Expenses | 2,465 | 3,203 | 2,233 | ||||||
Income before income taxes | 413 | 558 | 1,187 | ||||||
Income tax expense | 158 | 215 | 415 | ||||||
Net income | $ | 255 | $ | 343 | $ | 772 | |||
The following table summarizes our non-U.S. assets as of December 31, based on the domicile location of our customers:
| (In millions) | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||
Results of operations: | |||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 3,129 | $ | 2,707 | $ | 2,349 | |||
Net interest revenue | 632 | 713 | 392 | ||||||
Total revenue | 3,761 | 3,420 | 2,741 | ||||||
Expenses | 3,203 | 2,233 | 1,840 | ||||||
Income before income taxes | 558 | 1,187 | 901 | ||||||
Income tax expense | 215 | 415 | 346 | ||||||
Net income | $ | 343 | $ | 772 | $ | 555 | |||
Assets: | |||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 15,534 | $ | 4,776 | $ | 5,193 | |||
Other assets | 33,189 | 29,455 | 19,510 | ||||||
Total assets | $ | 48,723 | $ | 34,231 | $ | 24,703 | |||
| 2009 | 2008 | |||||
(In millions) | ||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banks | $ | 15,052 | $ | 22,086 | ||
Non-U.S. investment securities | 21,168 | 9,611 | ||||
Other assets | 16,079 | 17,316 | ||||
Total assets | $ | 52,299 | $ | 49,013 | ||
Note 26.25. Parent Company Financial Statements
The following tables present the financial statements of the parent company without consolidation of its banking and non-banking subsidiaries.
STATEMENT OF INCOME
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest on securities purchased under resale agreements | $ | 105 | $ | 446 | $ | 559 | $ | 105 | $ | 446 | ||||||||||||||
Cash dividends from consolidated banking subsidiary | — | 70 | 415 | $ | 250 | — | 70 | |||||||||||||||||
Cash dividends from consolidated non-banking subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | 52 | 120 | 177 | 25 | 52 | 120 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other, net | (8 | ) | 74 | 34 | (11 | ) | (8 | ) | 74 | |||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 149 | 710 | 1,185 | 264 | 149 | 710 | ||||||||||||||||||
Interest on securities sold under repurchase agreements | 64 | 360 | 463 | — | 64 | 360 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other interest expense | 211 | 208 | 146 | 178 | 211 | 208 | ||||||||||||||||||
Other expenses | 77 | 86 | 36 | 53 | 77 | 86 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 352 | 654 | 645 | 231 | 352 | 654 | ||||||||||||||||||
Income tax benefit | (75 | ) | (76 | ) | (4 | ) | (38 | ) | (75 | ) | (76 | ) | ||||||||||||
Income (loss) before equity in undistributed income of subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | (128 | ) | 132 | 544 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Equity in undistributed income (loss) of subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income (Loss) before equity in undistributed income of consolidated subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | 71 | (128 | ) | 132 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss, net of taxes | (20 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Equity in undistributed income (loss) of consolidated subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Consolidated banking subsidiary | 1,814 | 1,177 | 602 | (1,987 | ) | 1,814 | 1,177 | |||||||||||||||||
Consolidated non-banking subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | 125 | (48 | ) | (40 | ) | 55 | 125 | (48 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | $ | 1,106 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | (1,881 | ) | $ | 1,811 | $ | 1,261 | |||||||||||||||||
STATEMENT OF CONDITION
| As of December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with banking subsidiary | $ | 2,770 | $ | 2,067 | $ | 4,227 | $ | 2,770 | ||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements from: | ||||||||||||
Third parties | — | 6,798 | ||||||||||
Consolidated non-banking subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | — | 3 | ||||||||||
Investment securities available for sale | 256 | 122 | 128 | 256 | ||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility (fair value of $3,099) | 3,089 | — | ||||||||||
Investment securities held to maturity purchased under money market liquidity facility (fair value of $3,099 in 2008) | — | 3,089 | ||||||||||
Investments in subsidiaries: | ||||||||||||
Consolidated banking subsidiary | 13,339 | 11,932 | 14,668 | 13,339 | ||||||||
Consolidated non-banking subsidiaries | 1,158 | 876 | 1,947 | 1,158 | ||||||||
Unconsolidated entities | 252 | 184 | 256 | 252 | ||||||||
Notes and other receivables from: | ||||||||||||
Consolidated banking subsidiary | 422 | 205 | 143 | 422 | ||||||||
Consolidated non-banking subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | 239 | 210 | 301 | 239 | ||||||||
Other assets | 229 | 149 | 380 | 229 | ||||||||
Total assets | $ | 21,754 | $ | 22,546 | $ | 22,050 | $ | 21,754 | ||||
Liabilities: | ||||||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | $ | 6,293 | ||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility | $ | 3,063 | — | $ | 3,063 | |||||||
Commercial paper | 2,588 | 2,355 | $ | 2,777 | 2,588 | |||||||
Accrued taxes, expenses and other liabilities due to: | ||||||||||||
Consolidated banking subsidiary | 447 | 241 | — | 447 | ||||||||
Consolidated non-banking subsidiaries | 9 | 11 | 9 | 9 | ||||||||
Third parties | 255 | 213 | 165 | 255 | ||||||||
Long-term debt | 2,618 | 2,134 | 4,608 | 2,618 | ||||||||
Total liabilities | 8,980 | 11,247 | 7,559 | 8,980 | ||||||||
Shareholders’ equity | 12,774 | 11,299 | 14,491 | 12,774 | ||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 21,754 | $ | 22,546 | $ | 22,050 | $ | 21,754 | ||||
STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||
| (In millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities | $ | 144 | $ | 170 | $ | 497 | ||||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities | $ | (62 | ) | $ | 144 | $ | 170 | |||||||||||||||||
Investing Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase in interest-bearing deposits with banking subsidiary | (703 | ) | (1,226 | ) | (291 | ) | (1,457 | ) | (703 | ) | (1,226 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net (increase) decrease in securities purchased under resale agreements | 6,801 | 2,489 | (211 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from maturity of available-for-sale security | 10 | 4 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net decrease in securities purchased under resale agreements | — | 6,801 | 2,489 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities | 36 | 10 | 4 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Purchases of available-for-sale securities | (168 | ) | (3 | ) | (2 | ) | — | (168 | ) | (3 | ) | |||||||||||||
Purchases under money market liquidity facility, net | (3,089 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Investments in consolidated banking subsidiary, net | (4,572 | ) | (300 | ) | (5 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net decrease (increase) in securities related to AMLF | 3,104 | (3,089 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net investments in consolidated banking subsidiary | — | (4,572 | ) | (300 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Investments in non-banking subsidiaries and unconsolidated entities | (214 | ) | (13 | ) | 22 | (776 | ) | (214 | ) | (13 | ) | |||||||||||||
Net (increase) decrease in notes receivable from subsidiaries | (146 | ) | 18 | 1 | — | (146 | ) | 18 | ||||||||||||||||
Other, net | (21 | ) | 129 | 141 | — | (21 | ) | 129 | ||||||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities | (2,102 | ) | 1,098 | (345 | ) | 907 | (2,102 | ) | 1,098 | |||||||||||||||
Financing Activities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase (decrease) in securities sold under repurchase agreements | (6,293 | ) | (2,479 | ) | 148 | |||||||||||||||||||
Net increase in short-term borrowings under money market liquidity facility, net | | 3,063 | | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
Net decrease in securities sold under repurchase agreements | — | (6,293 | ) | (2,479 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Net (decrease) increase in short-term borrowings related to AMLF | (3,063 | ) | 3,063 | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Net increase in commercial paper | 233 | 1,357 | 134 | 189 | 233 | 1,357 | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of long-term debt, net of issuance costs | 493 | 1,488 | — | 1,992 | 493 | 1,488 | ||||||||||||||||||
Payments for long-term debt | (25 | ) | (516 | ) | — | — | (25 | ) | (516 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Proceeds from public offering of common stock, net of issuance costs | 2,251 | — | — | 2,231 | 2,251 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of preferred stock | 1,879 | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Redemption of TARP preferred stock investment | (2,000 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Repurchase of TARP common stock warrant | (60 | ) | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of TARP preferred stock | — | 1,879 | — | |||||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of warrant to purchase common stock | 121 | — | — | — | 121 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Purchases of common stock | — | (1,002 | ) | (368 | ) | — | — | (1,002 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuance of common stock for stock awards and options exercised | 12 | — | — | 34 | 12 | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Proceeds from issuances of treasury stock | 623 | 185 | 193 | — | 623 | 185 | ||||||||||||||||||
Payments for cash dividends | (399 | ) | (301 | ) | (259 | ) | (168 | ) | (399 | ) | (301 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities | 1,958 | (1,268 | ) | (152 | ) | (845 | ) | 1,958 | (1,268 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net change | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks at beginning of year | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks at end of year | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||||
STATISTICAL DISCLOSURE BY BANK HOLDING COMPANIES
Distribution of Average Assets, Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity; Interest Rates and Interest Differential (Unaudited)
Average statements of condition and net interest revenue analysis for the years indicated are presented below.
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | Average Balance | Interest | Average Rate | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with non-U.S. banks | $ | 17,645 | $ | 725 | 4.11 | % | $ | 7,420 | $ | 415 | 5.60 | % | $ | 9,581 | $ | 412 | 4.30 | % | $ | 11,744 | $ | 125 | 1.07 | % | $ | 17,645 | $ | 725 | 4.11 | % | $ | 7,420 | $ | 415 | 5.60 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with U.S. banks | 6,358 | 35 | .56 | 13 | 1 | 7.19 | 40 | 2 | 5.00 | 12,418 | 31 | .25 | 6,358 | 35 | .56 | 13 | 1 | 7.19 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements | 10,195 | 276 | 2.71 | 12,466 | 664 | 5.32 | 12,543 | 649 | 5.18 | 3,701 | 24 | .65 | 10,195 | 276 | 2.71 | 12,466 | 664 | 5.32 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds sold | 2,700 | 63 | 2.33 | 1,936 | 92 | 4.77 | 277 | 14 | 4.91 | 68 | — | .29 | 2,700 | 63 | 2.33 | 1,936 | 92 | 4.77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | 2,423 | 78 | 3.22 | 972 | 55 | 5.60 | 975 | 48 | 4.91 | 1,914 | 20 | 1.02 | 2,423 | 78 | 3.22 | 972 | 55 | 5.60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 23,434 | 889 | 3.79 | 21,705 | 1,106 | 5.10 | 21,160 | 1,011 | 4.78 | 23,892 | 520 | 2.18 | 23,434 | 889 | 3.79 | 21,705 | 1,106 | 5.10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 6,138 | 343 | 5.59 | 5,268 | 251 | 4.79 | 2,616 | 115 | 4.45 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions(2) | 5,958 | 348 | 5.85 | 6,138 | 343 | 5.59 | 5,268 | 251 | 4.79 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other investments | 42,655 | 1,931 | 4.53 | 44,017 | 2,292 | 5.21 | 37,803 | 1,830 | 4.84 | 51,340 | 2,075 | 4.04 | 42,655 | 1,931 | 4.53 | 44,017 | 2,292 | 5.21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF | 9,193 | 367 | 4.00 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 882 | 25 | 2.86 | 9,193 | 367 | 4.00 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial loans | 9,967 | 306 | 3.07 | 8,759 | 365 | 4.18 | 5,338 | 205 | 3.84 | 7,934 | 168 | 2.11 | 9,967 | 306 | 3.07 | 8,759 | 365 | 4.18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease financing(2) | 1,917 | (30 | ) | (1.57 | ) | 1,994 | 29 | 1.45 | 2,332 | 83 | 3.59 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease financing(2) | 1,769 | 74 | 4.18 | 1,917 | (30 | ) | (1.57 | ) | 1,994 | 29 | 1.45 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-earning assets | 1,303 | 2 | .15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets(2) | 132,625 | 4,983 | 3.75 | 104,550 | 5,270 | 5.04 | 92,665 | 4,369 | 4.72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets(2) | 122,923 | 3,412 | 2.78 | 132,625 | 4,983 | 3.75 | 104,550 | 5,270 | 5.04 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cash and due from banks | 5,096 | 3,272 | 2,977 | 2,237 | 5,096 | 3,272 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other assets | 23,976 | 15,660 | 10,802 | 21,650 | 23,976 | 15,660 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | $ | 106,444 | $ | 146,810 | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Liabilities and shareholders’ equity: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time | $ | 4,115 | 142 | 3.45 | $ | 2,476 | 135 | 5.45 | $ | 1,617 | 57 | 3.52 | $ | 6,905 | 58 | .84 | $ | 4,115 | 142 | 3.45 | $ | 2,476 | 135 | 5.45 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Savings | 7,101 | 81 | 1.14 | 5,081 | 178 | 3.50 | 836 | 32 | 3.81 | 711 | 3 | .46 | 7,101 | 81 | 1.14 | 5,081 | 178 | 3.50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 68,291 | 1,103 | 1.62 | 60,663 | 1,985 | 3.27 | 53,182 | 1,802 | 3.39 | 61,551 | 134 | .22 | 68,291 | 1,103 | 1.62 | 60,663 | 1,985 | 3.27 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing deposits | 79,507 | 1,326 | 1.67 | 68,220 | 2,298 | 3.37 | 55,635 | 1,891 | 3.40 | 69,167 | 195 | .28 | 79,507 | 1,326 | 1.67 | 68,220 | 2,298 | 3.37 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | 14,261 | 177 | 1.24 | 16,132 | 701 | 4.35 | 20,883 | 914 | 4.38 | 11,065 | 3 | .03 | 14,261 | 177 | 1.24 | 16,132 | 701 | 4.35 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds purchased | 1,026 | 18 | 1.77 | 1,667 | 86 | 5.15 | 2,777 | 140 | 5.04 | 956 | — | .04 | 1,026 | 18 | 1.77 | 1,667 | 86 | 5.15 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 5,996 | 180 | 2.99 | 4,225 | 172 | 4.09 | 2,039 | 91 | 4.46 | 16,847 | 197 | 1.17 | 5,996 | 180 | 2.99 | 4,225 | 172 | 4.09 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF | 9,170 | 299 | 3.26 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 877 | 18 | 2.02 | 9,170 | 299 | 3.26 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 4,106 | 229 | 5.59 | 3,402 | 225 | 6.62 | 2,621 | 178 | 6.77 | 7,917 | 304 | 3.84 | 4,106 | 229 | 5.59 | 3,402 | 225 | 6.62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-bearing liabilities | 1,131 | 5 | .46 | — | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | 114,066 | 2,229 | 1.95 | 93,646 | 3,482 | 3.72 | 83,955 | 3,214 | 3.83 | 107,960 | 722 | .67 | 114,066 | 2,229 | 1.95 | 93,646 | 3,482 | 3.72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Noninterest-bearing deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Special time | 14,547 | 9,836 | 7,282 | 372 | 14,547 | 9,836 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Demand | 5,384 | 225 | 663 | 14,804 | 5,384 | 225 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S.(3) | 678 | 579 | 329 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S.(3) | 267 | 678 | 579 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other liabilities | 14,614 | 9,769 | 7,471 | 10,090 | 14,614 | 9,769 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shareholders’ equity | 12,408 | 9,427 | 6,744 | 13,317 | 12,408 | 9,427 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | $ | 106,444 | $ | 146,810 | $ | 161,697 | $ | 123,482 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | $ | 2,754 | $ | 1,788 | $ | 1,155 | $ | 2,690 | $ | 2,754 | $ | 1,788 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Excess of rate earned over rate paid | 1.80 | % | 1.32 | % | .89 | % | 2.11 | % | 1.80 | % | 1.32 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest margin(1) | 2.08 | 1.71 | 1.25 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest margin(1) | 2.19 | 2.08 | 1.71 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1) | Net interest margin is fully taxable-equivalent net interest revenue divided by average interest-earning assets. |
| (2) | Fully taxable-equivalent revenue is a method of presentation in which the tax savings achieved by investing in tax-exempt investment securities are included in interest revenue with a corresponding charge to income tax expense. This method facilitates the comparison of the performance of tax-exempt and taxable securities. The adjustment is computed using a federal income tax rate of 35%, adjusted for applicable state income taxes, net of the related federal tax benefit. The fully taxable-equivalent adjustments included in interest revenue presented above were $126 million, $104 million |
| (3) | Non-U.S. noninterest-bearing deposits were $45 million, $270 |
The table below summarizes changes in fully taxable-equivalent interest revenue and interest expense due to changes in volume of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and due to changes in interest rates. Changes attributed to both volumes and rates have been allocated based on the proportion of change in each category.
| Years ended December 31, | 2008 Compared to 2007 | 2007 Compared to 2006 | 2009 Compared to 2008 | 2008 Compared to 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in millions; fully taxable-equivalent basis) | Change in Volume | Change in Rate | Net (Decrease) Increase | Change in Volume | Change in Rate | Net (Decrease) Increase | Change in Volume | Change in Rate | Net (Decrease) Increase | Change in Volume | Change in Rate | Net (Decrease) Increase | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest revenue related to: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with non-U.S. banks | $ | 573 | $ | (263 | ) | $ | 310 | $ | (93 | ) | $ | 96 | $ | 3 | $ | (243 | ) | $ | (357 | ) | $ | (600 | ) | $ | 573 | $ | (263 | ) | $ | 310 | ||||||||||||||||||
Interest-bearing deposits with U.S. banks | 34 | — | 34 | (1 | ) | — | (1 | ) | 34 | (38 | ) | (4 | ) | 34 | — | 34 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities purchased under resale agreements | (121 | ) | (267 | ) | (388 | ) | (4 | ) | 19 | 15 | (176 | ) | (76 | ) | (252 | ) | (121 | ) | (267 | ) | (388 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds sold | 37 | (66 | ) | (29 | ) | 81 | (3 | ) | 78 | (62 | ) | (1 | ) | (63 | ) | 37 | (66 | ) | (29 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trading account assets | 81 | (58 | ) | 23 | — | 7 | 7 | (16 | ) | (42 | ) | (58 | ) | 81 | (58 | ) | 23 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
U.S. Treasury and federal agencies | 88 | (305 | ) | (217 | ) | 26 | 69 | 95 | 17 | (386 | ) | (369 | ) | 88 | (305 | ) | (217 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
State and political subdivisions | 42 | 50 | 92 | 118 | 18 | 136 | (10 | ) | 15 | 5 | 42 | 50 | 92 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other investments | (71 | ) | (290 | ) | (361 | ) | 300 | 162 | 462 | 393 | (249 | ) | 144 | (71 | ) | (290 | ) | (361 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment securities purchased under AMLF | 367 | — | 367 | — | — | — | (332 | ) | (10 | ) | (342 | ) | 367 | — | 367 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial and financial loans | 51 | (110 | ) | (59 | ) | 130 | 30 | 160 | (62 | ) | (76 | ) | (138 | ) | 51 | (110 | ) | (59 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lease financing | (1 | ) | (58 | ) | (59 | ) | (12 | ) | (42 | ) | (54 | ) | 2 | 102 | 104 | (1 | ) | (58 | ) | (59 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-earning assets | 2 | — | 2 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | 1,080 | (1,367 | ) | (287 | ) | 545 | 356 | 901 | (453 | ) | (1,118 | ) | (1,571 | ) | 1,080 | (1,367 | ) | (287 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense related to: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deposits: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time | 89 | (82 | ) | 7 | 30 | 48 | 78 | 96 | (180 | ) | (84 | ) | 89 | (82 | ) | 7 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Savings | 71 | (168 | ) | (97 | ) | 162 | (16 | ) | 146 | (73 | ) | (5 | ) | (78 | ) | 71 | (168 | ) | (97 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Non-U.S. | 250 | (1,132 | ) | (882 | ) | 254 | (71 | ) | 183 | (108 | ) | (861 | ) | (969 | ) | 250 | (1,132 | ) | (882 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Securities sold under repurchase agreements | (81 | ) | (443 | ) | (524 | ) | (208 | ) | (5 | ) | (213 | ) | (40 | ) | (134 | ) | (174 | ) | (81 | ) | (443 | ) | (524 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Federal funds purchased | (33 | ) | (35 | ) | (68 | ) | (56 | ) | 2 | (54 | ) | (1 | ) | (17 | ) | (18 | ) | (33 | ) | (35 | ) | (68 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other short-term borrowings | 73 | (65 | ) | 8 | 98 | (17 | ) | 81 | 324 | (307 | ) | 17 | 73 | (65 | ) | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Short-term borrowings under AMLF | 299 | — | 299 | — | — | — | (270 | ) | (11 | ) | (281 | ) | 299 | — | 299 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt | 47 | (43 | ) | 4 | 53 | (6 | ) | 47 | 213 | (138 | ) | 75 | 47 | (43 | ) | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Other interest-bearing liabilities | 5 | — | 5 | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | 715 | (1,968 | ) | (1,253 | ) | 333 | (65 | ) | 268 | 146 | (1,653 | ) | (1,507 | ) | 715 | (1,968 | ) | (1,253 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | $ | 365 | $ | 601 | $ | 966 | $ | 212 | $ | 421 | $ | 633 | $ | (599 | ) | $ | 535 | $ | (64 | ) | $ | 365 | $ | 601 | $ | 966 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarterly Summarized Financial Information (Unaudited)
(Dollars and shares in millions, except per share amounts) | 2008 Quarters | 2007 Quarters | 2009 Quarters | 2008 Quarters | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fourth | Third | Second | First | Fourth | Third | Second | First | Fourth | Third | Second | First | Fourth | Third | Second | First | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total fee revenue | $ | 1,881 | $ | 1,899 | $ | 2,006 | $ | 1,961 | $ | 1,927 | $ | 1,799 | $ | 1,537 | $ | 1,370 | $ | 1,526 | $ | 1,471 | $ | 1,516 | $ | 1,422 | $ | 1,881 | $ | 1,899 | $ | 2,006 | $ | 1,961 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest revenue | 1,427 | 1,027 | 1,137 | 1,288 | 1,454 | 1,383 | 1,203 | 1,172 | 877 | 898 | 773 | 738 | 1,427 | 1,027 | 1,137 | 1,288 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense | 584 | 502 | 480 | 663 | 898 | 919 | 818 | 847 | 180 | 175 | 193 | 174 | 584 | 502 | 480 | 663 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue | 843 | 525 | 657 | 625 | 556 | 464 | 385 | 325 | 697 | 723 | 580 | 564 | 843 | 525 | 657 | 625 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest revenue after provision for loan losses | 843 | 525 | 657 | 625 | 556 | 464 | 385 | 325 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (Losses) related to investment securities, net | (51 | ) | (3 | ) | 9 | (9 | ) | (4 | ) | (23 | ) | (1 | ) | 1 | 57 | 42 | 26 | 16 | (51 | ) | (3 | ) | 9 | (9 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on sale of CitiStreet interest, net of exit and other associated costs | — | 350 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 350 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | 2,673 | 2,771 | 2,672 | 2,577 | 2,479 | 2,240 | 1,921 | 1,696 | 2,280 | 2,236 | 2,122 | 2,002 | 2,673 | 2,771 | 2,672 | 2,577 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for loan losses | 35 | 16 | 14 | 84 | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total expenses | 2,311 | 1,925 | 1,841 | 1,774 | 2,173 | 1,689 | 1,358 | 1,213 | 1,565 | 1,733 | 1,364 | 1,304 | 2,311 | 1,925 | 1,841 | 1,774 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense | 362 | 846 | 831 | 803 | 306 | 551 | 563 | 483 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense and extraordinary loss | 680 | 487 | 744 | 614 | 362 | 846 | 831 | 803 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income tax expense | 106 | 369 | 283 | 273 | 83 | 193 | 197 | 169 | 182 | 160 | 242 | 138 | 106 | 369 | 283 | 273 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 256 | $ | 477 | $ | 548 | $ | 530 | $ | 223 | $ | 358 | $ | 366 | $ | 314 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income before extraordinary loss | 498 | 327 | 502 | 476 | 256 | 477 | 548 | 530 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income available to common shareholders | $ | 234 | $ | 477 | $ | 548 | $ | 530 | $ | 223 | $ | 358 | $ | 366 | $ | 314 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Extraordinary loss, net of taxes | — | — | (3,684 | ) | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share from continuing operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) | $ | 498 | $ | 327 | $ | (3,182 | ) | $ | 476 | $ | 256 | $ | 477 | $ | 548 | $ | 530 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income before extraordinary loss available to common shareholders | $ | 498 | $ | 327 | $ | 370 | $ | 445 | $ | 234 | $ | 477 | $ | 548 | $ | 530 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders | $ | 498 | $ | 327 | $ | (3,314 | ) | $ | 445 | $ | 234 | $ | 477 | $ | 548 | $ | 530 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share before extraordinary loss: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Distributed | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.24 | $ | 0.24 | $ | 0.24 | $ | 0.23 | $ | 0.23 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Undistributed | 1.00 | 0.65 | 0.79 | 0.79 | 0.30 | 0.86 | 1.13 | 1.13 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | .55 | $ | 1.11 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 1.37 | $ | .58 | $ | .92 | $ | 1.09 | $ | .94 | $ | 1.01 | $ | .66 | $ | .80 | $ | 1.03 | $ | .54 | $ | 1.10 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 1.36 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diluted | .54 | 1.09 | 1.35 | 1.35 | .57 | .91 | 1.07 | .93 | 1.00 | .66 | .79 | 1.02 | .54 | 1.09 | 1.35 | 1.35 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings per common share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Earnings (Loss) per common share: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | $ | .55 | $ | 1.11 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 1.37 | $ | .58 | $ | .92 | $ | 1.09 | $ | .94 | $ | 1.01 | $ | .66 | $ | (7.16 | ) | $ | 1.03 | $ | .54 | $ | 1.10 | $ | 1.36 | $ | 1.36 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diluted | .54 | 1.09 | 1.35 | 1.35 | .57 | .91 | 1.07 | .93 | 1.00 | .66 | (7.12 | ) | 1.02 | .54 | 1.09 | 1.35 | 1.35 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Average common shares outstanding: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Basic | 431 | 431 | 402 | 388 | 385 | 387 | 336 | 334 | 493 | 493 | 462 | 432 | 431 | 431 | 402 | 388 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diluted | 432 | 435 | 407 | 394 | 392 | 392 | 341 | 339 | 498 | 498 | 466 | 435 | 432 | 435 | 407 | 394 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends per common share | $ | .24 | $ | .24 | $ | .24 | $ | .23 | $ | .23 | $ | .22 | $ | .22 | $ | .21 | $ | .01 | $ | .01 | $ | .01 | $ | .01 | $ | .24 | $ | .24 | $ | .24 | $ | .23 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common stock price: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
High | $ | 58.05 | $ | 74.85 | $ | 85.31 | $ | 86.55 | $ | 82.53 | $ | 73.76 | $ | 70.58 | $ | 72.82 | $ | 55.87 | $ | 55.46 | $ | 49.20 | $ | 46.09 | $ | 58.05 | $ | 74.85 | $ | 85.31 | $ | 86.55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low | 28.06 | 29.09 | 63.23 | 69.75 | 66.79 | 59.13 | 64.21 | 61.70 | 39.25 | 42.81 | 28.01 | 14.43 | 28.06 | 29.09 | 63.23 | 69.75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Close | 39.33 | 56.88 | 63.99 | 79.00 | 81.20 | 68.16 | 68.40 | 64.75 | 43.54 | 52.60 | 47.20 | 30.78 | 39.33 | 56.88 | 63.99 | 79.00 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ITEM 9. | CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE |
None.
| ITEM 9A. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES; CHANGES IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
State Street has established and maintains disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that material information relating to State Street and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis required to be disclosed in its reports filed or submitted under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to State Street’s management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. For the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008,2009, State Street’s management carried out an evaluation, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of State Street’s disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the evaluation of these disclosure controls and procedures, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that State Street’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2008.2009.
State Street has also established and maintains internal control over financial reporting as a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. In the ordinary course of business, State Street routinely enhances its internal controls and procedures for financial reporting by either upgrading its current systems or implementing new systems. Changes have been made and willmay be made to State Street’s internal controls and procedures for financial reporting as a result of these efforts. During the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008,2009, no change occurred in State Street’s internal control over financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, State Street’s internal control over financial reporting.
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The management of State Street is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements and other financial information contained in this Form 10-K. Management is also responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Management has designed business processes and internal controls and has also established and is responsible for maintaining a business culture that fosters financial integrity and accurate reporting. To these ends, management maintains a comprehensive system of internal controls intended to provide reasonable assurances regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the consolidated financial statements of State Street in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. State Street’s accounting policies and internal control over financial reporting, established and maintained by management, are under the general oversight of State Street’s Board of Directors, including State Street’s Examining and Audit Committee.
Management has made a comprehensive review, evaluation, and assessment of State Street’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008.2009. The standard measures adopted by management in making its evaluation are the measures in the Integrated Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO Framework).
Based upon its review and evaluation, management has concluded that State Street’s internal control over financial reporting is effective atas of December 31, 2008,2009, and that there were no material weaknesses in State Street’s internal control over financial reporting as of that date.
Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, which has audited and reported on the consolidated financial statements contained in this Form 10-K, has issued its written attestation report on its assessment of State Street’s internal control over financial reporting which follows this report.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
THE SHAREHOLDERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS
STATE STREET CORPORATION
We have audited State Street Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). State Street Corporation’s 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 Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s 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 company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed 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 company’s 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 company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, State Street Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,2009, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated statement of condition of State Street Corporation as of December 31, 20082009 and 2007,2008, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20082009 of State Street Corporation and our report dated February 26, 200922, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Boston, Massachusetts
February 26, 200922, 2010
| ITEM 9B. | OTHER INFORMATION |
None.
PART III
| ITEM 10. | DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE |
Information concerning our directors will appear in our Proxy Statement for the 20092010 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009,2010 (2010 Proxy Statement), under the caption “Election of Directors.” Information concerning compliance with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption, “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.” Information concerning our Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers and our Examining and Audit Committee will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement under the caption, “Corporate Governance at State Street.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information about a current director of State Street who will be retiring as director at the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is as follows:
Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of Aptius Education, Inc., an educational publishing company, since 2007. Mr. Darehshori, now age 72, was Chairman, director and co-founder of Cambium Learning, Inc., an educational publishing company, from 2004 to 2007. He was Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Houghton Mifflin Company, a publishing company, from 1990 to 2000. Mr. Darehshori is a director of Aviva USA Corporation. He is a trustee of Wellesley College and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and a director of the Tanenbaum Center for Interreligious Understanding. Mr. Darehshori received a B.A. degree from the University of Wisconsin.
Information concerningregarding our executive officers appears under the caption “Executive Officers of the Registrant” in Item 4A of this Form 10-K. Information concerning our Examining and Audit Committee will appear in our Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the caption “Corporate Governance at State Street—Committees of the Board of Directors.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference. Information concerning compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act will appear in our Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the caption “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
Our Board has adopted a Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers that applies to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Controller. The code of ethics has been posted on our Internet website atwww.statestreet.com. We intend to satisfy the disclosure requirementsincluded under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K regarding an amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of the code of ethics, and that relates to a substantive amendment or material departure from a provision of the code of ethics, by posting such information on our Internet website atwww.statestreet.com. We also intend to satisfy the disclosure requirements of the NYSE listing standards regarding waivers of the Standard of Conduct for Directors, and waivers for executive officers of the Standard of Conduct at State Street, by posting such information on our Internet website atwww.statestreet.com.4A.
| ITEM 11. | EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION |
Information in response to this item will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the caption “Executive Compensation.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
| ITEM 12. | SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS |
Information concerning security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement for the 2008 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the caption “Beneficial“Security Ownership of Shares.Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The following table disclosessets forth the number of outstanding common stock options, warrants and rights granted by State Street to participants in our equity compensation plans, as well as the number of securities remaining available for future issuance under these plans, as of December 31, 2008.2009. The table provides this information separately for equity compensation plans that have and have not been approved by shareholders.
| (Shares in thousands) | (a) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, | (b) Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights | (c) Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)) | (a) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options, | (b) Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights | (c) Number of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column (a)) | ||||||
Plan category: | ||||||||||||
Equity compensation plans approved by shareholders | 23,926 | $59.93 | 9,244 | 19,548 | $49.61 | 24,560 | ||||||
Equity compensation plans not approved by shareholders | 70 | — | — | 47 | — | — | ||||||
Total | 23,996 | $59.93 | 9,244 | 19,595 | $49.61 | 24,560 | ||||||
One compensation plan under which equity securities of State Street are authorized for issuance has been adopted without the approval of shareholders.
In 2001, the Board adopted the State Street Corporation Savings-Related Stock Plan, or “SAYE Plan,” for employees in the United Kingdom. Under the SAYE Plan, employee-participants could commit to save a specified amount from after-tax pay for a fixed period (either three or five years). Savings are deducted automatically. At the end of the period chosen, a tax-free bonus is added by State Street to the savings amount (the level of the bonus depends on the length of the fixed period of savings), and participants have the option to receive the savings and bonus amount in cash, or to use the amount to purchase common stock from State Street at an exercise price equal to the market price of the stock as of the date of joining the SAYE Plan less a discount fixed by State Street at the date of joining. For participants joining the SAYE Plan in 2001, the discount was 15%. There was no discount for participants joining in 2002. Options granted under the SAYE Plan are non-transferable. If a participant withdraws from participation before the end of the fixed period, the options to purchase stock are forfeited. If a participant terminates employment during the period due to retirement, disability, redundancy or sale of the employer from State Street’s group, the options may be exercised within six months of the occurrence, or one year if by reason of death. Under the SAYE Plan, an aggregate of 170,000 shares of common stock was authorized for issuance. The SAYE Plan has been discontinued and no new participations under the SAYE Plan are permitted. At December 31, 2008, there were no outstanding stock options.
In addition, individual
Individual directors who are not our employees have received annual awards of deferred stock for a number of shares based on the amount of their annual retainer, payable after the director leaves the Board or attains a specific age. The number of deferred shares includes, in the case of certain directors, additional deferred share amounts in respect of an accrual under a terminated retirement plan, and for all directors is increased to reflect dividends paid on the common stock. Also, directors who are not our employees may receive their annual retainer payable at their option either in shares of our common stock or cash, and may further elect to defer either 50% or 100% until after termination of their services as a director. The number of deferred shares is increased to reflect dividends paid on the common stock. Deferred stockStock awards totaling 187,258173,631 shares of common stock were outstanding at December 31, 2008;2009; awards made through June 30, 2003 have not been approved by shareholders. Awards of deferred stock made or non-deferred retainer shares paid to individual directors after June 30, 2003 have been or will be made under our 1997 or 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, which was approved by shareholders.
| ITEM 13. | CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE |
Information concerning certain relationships and related transactions and director independence will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the captions “Related Person Transactions” andcaption “Corporate Governance at State Street.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
| ITEM 14. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES |
Information concerning principal accounting fees and services and the Examining and Audit Committee’s pre-approval policies and procedures will appear in our 2010 Proxy Statement for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A on or before April 30, 2009, under the caption “Relationship with Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.“Examining and Audit Committee Matters.” Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
| ITEM 15. | EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES |
(A)(1) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The following consolidated financial statements of State Street are included in Item 8 hereof:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Statement of Income—Years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 20062007
Consolidated Statement of Condition—As of December 31, 20082009 and 20072008
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity—Years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 20062007
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows—Years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 2007 and 20062007
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
(A)(2) FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
Certain schedules to the consolidated financial statements have been omitted if they were not required by Article 9 of Regulation S-X or if, under the related instructions, they were inapplicable, or the information was contained elsewhere herein.
(A)(3) EXHIBITS
The exhibits listed in the Exhibit Index beginning on page 148160 of this Form 10-K are filed herewith or are incorporated herein by reference to other SEC filings.
Pursuant to the requirement 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, on February 26, 2009,22, 2010, thereunto duly authorized.
| STATE STREET CORPORATION | ||
| By | /s/ EDWARD J. RESCH | |
EDWARD J. RESCH, | ||
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||
| By | /s/ JAMES J. MALERBA | |
JAMES J. MALERBA, | ||
Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer | ||
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below on February 26, 200922, 2010 by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities indicated.
OFFICERS:
/s/ RONALD E. LOGUE | /s/ EDWARD J. RESCH | |||
RONALD E. LOGUE, | EDWARD J. RESCH, | |||
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Director |
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | |||
/s/ JAMES J. MALERBA | ||||
JAMES J. MALERBA, | ||||
Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer | ||||
DIRECTORS:
/s/ RONALD E. LOGUE | /s/ LINDA A. HILL | |||
| RONALD E. LOGUE | LINDA A. HILL | |||
/s/ JOSEPH L. HOOLEY | /s/ CHARLES R. LAMANTIA | |||
| JOSEPH L. HOOLEY | CHARLES R. LAMANTIA | |||
/s/ KENNETT F. BURNES | /s/ | |||
| KENNETT F. BURNES |
| |||
/s/ PETER COYM | /s/ RICHARD P. SERGEL | |||
| PETER COYM | RICHARD P. SERGEL | |||
|
| |||
| ||||
/s/ AMELIA C. FAWCETT | /s/ | |||
| AMELIA C. FAWCETT | ||||
/s/ DAVID P. GRUBER | /s/ | |||
| DAVID P. GRUBER | ||||
/s/ ROBERT S. KAPLAN | /s/ ROBERT E. WEISSMAN | |||
ROBERT S. KAPLAN | ROBERT E. WEISSMAN | |||
(filed herewith)
| 3.1 | Restated Articles of Organization, as amended (filed as Exhibit 3.1 to State Street’s | |
| 3.2 | ||
| 4.1 | The description of State Street’s Common Stock is included in State Street’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A, as filed on January 18, 1995 and March 7, 1995 (filed with the SEC on January 18, 1995 and March 7, 1995 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
(Note: None of the instruments defining the rights of holders of State Street’s outstanding long-term debt are in respect of indebtedness in excess of 10% of the total assets of State Street and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. State Street hereby agrees to furnish to the | ||
| 10.1† | State Street’s Management Supplemental Retirement Plan Amended and Restated (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.2† | State Street’s Executive Supplemental Retirement Plan (formerly “State Street Supplemental Defined Benefit Pension Plan for Executive Officers”) Amended and Restated (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008 filed with the | |
Jeffrey N. Carp, James S. Phalen | ||
| State Street’s Executive Compensation Trust Agreement dated December 6, 1996 (Rabbi Trust) (filed as Exhibit 10.5 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | ||
| State Street’s 1997 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, and forms of awards and agreements thereunder (filed as Exhibit 10.6 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | ||
| State Street’s 2006 Equity Incentive Plan and forms of award agreements thereunder (filed as Exhibit | ||
| State Street’s 2006 Senior Executive Annual Incentive Plan (filed as Appendix C to State Street’s definitive Proxy Statement filed with the | ||
| 10.8† | Forms of Letter Agreements entered into between State Street and each of Ronald E. Logue, Joseph L. Hooley, Jeffrey N. Carp, James S. Phalen and Edward J. Resch (filed as Exhibit 99.1 to State Street’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 6, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.9† | State Street’s Management Supplemental Savings Plan, Amended and Restated (filed as Exhibit 10.2 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 filed with the | |
| 10.10† | Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors of State Street Corporation, Restated (filed as Exhibit 10.10 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.11† | Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan for Directors of State Street Bank and Trust Company (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 filed with the | |
| 10.12† | Description of compensation arrangements for non-employee directors | |
| 10.13† | Memorandum of agreement of employment of Edward J. Resch, accepted October 16, 2002 (filed as Exhibit 10.13 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.14† | Separation Agreement between State Street Corporation and William W. Hunt, dated as of January 2, 2008 (filed as Exhibit 10.16 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 filed with the | |
| 10.15† | Terms of | |
| 10.16† | ||
| Form of Indemnification Agreement between State Street Corporation and each of its directors (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 filed with the | ||
| Form of Indemnification Agreement between State Street Corporation and each of its executive officers (filed as Exhibit 10.2 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 filed with the | ||
| Form of Indemnification Agreement between State Street Bank and Trust Company and each of its directors (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 filed with the | ||
| Form of Indemnification Agreement between State Street Bank and Trust Company and each of its executive officers (filed as Exhibit 10.4 to State Street’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 filed with the | ||
| 10.18† | Forms of Retention Award Agreements entered into with each of Joseph L. Hooley, Jeffrey N. Carp and Edward J. Resch on October 22, 2009 | |
| 10.19† | Form of Retention Award Agreement entered into with James S. Phalen on October 22, 2009 | |
| 10.20† | Description of transition award to Ronald E. Logue dated November 18, 2009 | |
| 10.21† | Forms of Waiver dated October 27, 2008 for compensation and benefit matters related to United States Department of Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program by each of Ronald E. Logue, Joseph L. Hooley, Jeffrey N. Carp, James S. Phalen and Edward J. Resch (filed as Exhibit 10.15 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.22† | Forms of Omnibus Amendment for compensation and benefits dated October 28, 2008 between State Street and each of Ronald E. Logue, Joseph L. Hooley, Jeffrey N. Carp, James S. Phalen and Edward J. Resch (filed as Exhibit 10.16 to State Street’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed with the SEC on February 27, 2009 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 10.23 | Purchase Agreement dated as of October 26, 2008 between State Street and the United States Department of the Treasury (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to State Street’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 27, 2008 filed with the SEC on October 31, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference) | |
| 11 | Computation of Earnings per Common Share (information appears in note | |
| 12 | Statement of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges | |
| 21 | Subsidiaries of State Street Corporation | |
| 23 | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm | |
| 31.1 | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | |
| 31.2 | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Chief Financial Officer | |
| 32 | Section 1350 Certifications | |
| 101.INS | XBRL Instance Document.* | |
| 101.SCH | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.* | |
| 101.CAL | XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document.* | |
| 101.DEF | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document* | |
| 101.LAB | XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document.* | |
| 101.PRE | XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document.* | |
| † | Denotes management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
| * | Submitted electronically herewith |
Attached as Exhibit 101 to this report are the following formatted in XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language): (i) Consolidated Statement of Income for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, (ii) Consolidated Statement of Condition as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, (iii) Consolidated Statement of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, (iv) Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, and (v) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
In accordance with Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, the XBRL-related information in Exhibit 101 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K is deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act, is deemed not filed for purposes of section 18 of the Exchange Act, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.
149162