Mastercard (MA) 10-Q31 Oct 132013 Q3 Quarterly reportFinancial data

Company Profile

Document_and_Entity_Informatio

Document and Entity Information	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013	Oct. 24, 2013	Oct. 24, 2013
	Sep. 30, 2013	Class A Common Stock [Member]	Class B Common Stock [Member]
Entity Registrant Name	'MASTERCARD INC	'	'
Trading Symbol	'MA	'	'
Entity Central Index Key	'0001141391	'	'
Current Fiscal Year End Date	'--12-31	'	'
Entity Filer Category	'Large Accelerated Filer	'	'
Document Type	'10-Q	'	'
Document Period End Date	30-Sep-13	'	'
Document Fiscal Year Focus	'2013	'	'
Document Fiscal Period Focus	'Q3	'	'
Amendment Flag	'false	'	'
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding	'	115,800,964	4,576,623

Consolidated_Balance_Sheet

Consolidated Balance Sheet (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
ASSETS	'	'
Cash and cash equivalents	$3,413	$2,052
Restricted cash for litigation settlement	727	726
Investment securities available-for-sale, at fair value	2,594	2,951
Accounts receivable	990	925
Settlement due from customers	1,333	1,117
Restricted security deposits held for customers	878	777
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	502	681
Deferred income taxes	122	128
Total Current Assets	10,559	9,357
Property, plant and equipment, net	474	472
Deferred income taxes	89	60
Goodwill	1,101	1,092
Other intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization of $716 and $596, respectively	655	672
Other assets	852	809
Total Assets	13,730	12,462
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY	'	'
Accounts payable	280	357
Settlement due to customers	1,218	1,064
Restricted security deposits held for customers	878	777
Accrued litigation	727	726
Accrued expenses	2,004	1,748
Other current liabilities	313	234
Total Current Liabilities	5,420	4,906
Deferred income taxes	93	104
Other liabilities	549	523
Total Liabilities	6,062	5,533
Commitments and Contingencies	'	'
Stockholders' Equity	'	'
Additional paid-in-capital	3,733	3,641
Class A treasury stock, at cost, 18,287,748 and 15,199,828 shares, respectively	-5,826	-4,139
Retained earnings	9,630	7,354
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)	120	61
Total Stockholders' Equity	7,657	6,917
Non-controlling interests	11	12
Total Equity	7,668	6,929
Total Liabilities and Equity	13,730	12,462
Class A Common Stock [Member]	'	'
Stockholders' Equity	'	'
Common stock value	0	0
Class B Common Stock [Member]	'	'
Stockholders' Equity	'	'
Common stock value	$0	$0

Consolidated_Balance_Sheet_Par

Consolidated Balance Sheet (Parenthetical) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Other intangible assets, accumulated amortization	$716	$596
Class A treasury stock, shares	18,287,748	15,199,828
Class A Common Stock [Member]	'	'
Common stock, par value	$0.00	$0.00
Common stock, authorized	3,000,000,000	3,000,000,000
Common stock, issued	134,083,998	133,604,903
Common stock, outstanding	115,796,250	118,405,075
Class B Common Stock [Member]	'	'
Common stock, par value	$0.00	$0.00
Common stock, authorized	1,200,000,000	1,200,000,000
Common stock, issued	4,577,623	4,838,840
Common stock, outstanding	4,577,623	4,838,840

Consolidated_Statement_of_Oper

Consolidated Statement of Operations (USD $)	3 Months Ended				9 Months Ended
In Millions, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012		Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012
Income Statement [Abstract]	'		'		'		'
Net Revenue	$2,218		$1,918		$6,220		$5,496
Operating Expenses	'		'		'		'
General and administrative	701		620		1,930		1,790
Advertising and marketing	205		176		520		480
Depreciation and amortization	64		58		187		168
Provision for litigation settlement	0		0		0		20
Total operating expenses	970		854		2,637		2,458
Operating income	1,248		1,064		3,583		3,038
Other Income (Expense)	'		'		'		'
Investment income	11		9		30		27
Interest expense	3		-4		-7		-13
Other income (expense)	-8		-3		-17		-13
Total other income (expense)	6		2		6		1
Income before income taxes	1,254		1,066		3,589		3,039
Income tax expense	375		294		1,096		885
Net Income	$879		$772		$2,493		$2,154
Basic Earnings per Share	$7.30		$6.19		$20.52		$17.13
Basic Weighted-Average Shares Outstanding	121		125		121		126
Diluted Earnings per Share	$7.27		$6.17		$20.46		$17.07
Diluted Weighted-Average Shares Outstanding	121	[1]	125	[1]	122	[1]	126	[1]

[1]	For the periods presented, the calculation of diluted EPS excluded a minimal amount of anti-dilutive share-based payment awards.

Consolidated_Statement_of_Comp

Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012
Statement of Comprehensive Income [Abstract]	'	'	'		'
Net Income	$879	$772	$2,493		$2,154
Other comprehensive income (loss):	'	'	'		'
Foreign currency translation adjustments	137	78	65	[1]	28
Defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans	-2	0	-1		2
Income tax effect	1	0	1		-1
Defined benefit pension and other postretirement plans, net of income tax effect	-1	0	0	[1]	1
Investment securities available-for-sale	-1	4	-9		10
Income tax effect	1	-1	3		-3
Investment securities available-for-sale, net of income tax effect	0	3	-6	[1]	7
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax	136	81	59	[1]	36
Comprehensive Income	$1,015	$853	$2,552		$2,190

[1]	During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, $3 million of deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses. In addition, $5 million of net gains on available-for-sale investment securities were recognized in investment income during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Tax amounts related to these items are insignificant.

Consolidated_Statement_of_Chan

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity (USD $)	Total		Retained Earnings [Member]	Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Net of Tax [Member]	Additional Paid-In Capital [Member]	Class A Treasury Stock [Member]	Non-Controlling Interests [Member]	Common Class A [Member]	Common Stock Class B [Member]
In Millions	Total		Retained Earnings [Member]		Additional Paid-In Capital [Member]	Class A Treasury Stock [Member]	Non-Controlling Interests [Member]	Common Class A [Member]	Common Stock Class B [Member]
Balance at Dec. 31, 2012	$6,929		$7,354	$61	$3,641	($4,139)	$12	'	'
Common Stock, Value, Issued	'		'	'	'	'	'	0	0
Net income	2,493		2,493	'	'	'	'	'	'
Activity related to non-controlling Interests	-1		'	'	'	'	-1	'	'
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax	59	[1]	'	59	'	'	'	'	'
Cash dividends declared on Class A and Class B common stock, $1.80 per share	-217		-217	'	'	'	'	'	'
Purchases of treasury stock	-1,692		'	'	'	-1,692	'	-1,692	'
Share-based payments	97		'	'	92	5	'	'	'
Balance at Sep. 30, 2013	$7,668		$9,630	$120	$3,733	($5,826)	$11	'	'

[1]	During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, $3 million of deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses. In addition, $5 million of net gains on available-for-sale investment securities were recognized in investment income during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Tax amounts related to these items are insignificant.

Consolidated_Statement_of_Chan1

Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity (Parenthetical) (USD $)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Statement of Stockholders' Equity [Abstract]	'
Cash dividends declared on Class A and Class B common stock, per share	$1.80

Consolidated_Statement_of_Cash

Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows (USD $)	9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Operating Activities	'	'
Net income	$2,493	$2,154
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:	'	'
Depreciation and amortization	187	168
Share-based payments	27	-21
Deferred income taxes	-34	-40
Other	48	34
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:	'	'
Accounts receivable	-67	-112
Income taxes receivable	158	-53
Settlement due from customers	-192	-213
Prepaid expenses	-44	-122
Obligations under litigation settlements	0	20
Accounts payable	-76	-36
Settlement due to customers	126	140
Accrued expenses	209	129
Net change in other assets and liabilities	101	34
Net cash provided by operating activities	2,936	2,082
Investing Activities	'	'
Purchases of investment securities available-for-sale	-1,936	-2,123
Acquisition of businesses, net of cash acquired	0	-70
Purchases of property, plant and equipment	-65	-68
Capitalized software	-88	-96
Proceeds from sales of investment securities available-for-sale	1,349	195
Proceeds from maturities of investment securities available-for-sale	959	576
Proceeds from maturities of investment securities held-to-maturity	36	0
Investment in nonmarketable equity investments	-12	-25
Other investing activities	-8	-1
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities	235	-1,612
Financing Activities	'	'
Purchases of treasury stock	-1,692	-1,135
Dividends paid	-182	-94
Tax benefit for share-based compensation	23	46
Cash proceeds from exercise of stock options	22	28
Other financing activities	-8	4
Net cash used in financing activities	-1,837	-1,151
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents	27	-8
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents	1,361	-689
Cash and cash equivalents - beginning of period	2,052	3,734
Cash and cash equivalents - end of period	$3,413	$3,045

Summary_of_Significant_Account

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	9 Months Ended
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	Sep. 30, 2013
Accounting Policies [Abstract]	'
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies	'
	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
	Organization
	MasterCard Incorporated and its consolidated subsidiaries, including MasterCard International Incorporated (“MasterCard International” and together with MasterCard Incorporated, “MasterCard” or the “Company”), is a technology company in the global payments industry that connects consumers, financial institutions, merchants, governments and businesses worldwide, enabling them to use electronic forms of payment instead of cash and checks. MasterCard offers a wide range of payment solutions, that enable the development and implementation of credit, debit, prepaid, commercial and related payment programs and solutions for consumers and merchants. The Company's customers encompass a vast array of entities, including financial institutions and others that act as "issuers" and "acquirers", as well as merchants, governments, telecommunications companies and other businesses. MasterCard manages a family of well-known, widely-accepted payment brands, including MasterCard®, Maestro® and Cirrus®, which its customers use in their payment programs and solutions. The Company processes payment transactions over the MasterCard Worldwide Network and provides support services to its customers and others.
	Consolidation and basis of presentation
	The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of MasterCard and its majority-owned and controlled entities, including any variable interest entities for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the 2013 presentation. The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).
	The balance sheet as of December 31, 2012 was derived from the audited consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2012. The consolidated financial statements for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 and as of September 30, 2013 are unaudited, and in the opinion of management, include all normal recurring adjustments that are necessary to present fairly the results for interim periods. The results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.
	The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements are presented in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission requirements for Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and, consequently, do not include all of the disclosures required by GAAP. Reference should be made to the MasterCard Incorporated Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 for additional disclosures, including a summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies.
	Non-controlling interest amounts are included in the consolidated statement of operations within other income (expense). For each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 income from non-controlling interests was insignificant.
	In December 2012, the Company made a $726 million payment into a qualified cash settlement fund related to its U.S. merchant class litigation. The Company has presented these funds as restricted cash for litigation settlement since the use of the funds under the qualified cash settlement fund is restricted for payment under a preliminary settlement agreement that is subject to court approval. The funds would be returned to the Company in the event that the settlement is not finalized. If the settlement is finalized, MasterCard anticipates that it would receive back approximately $165 million from the qualified cash settlement fund related to the opt out merchants. As part of the settlement, in July 2013 MasterCard implemented the short-term reduction in default credit interchange rates (the "Class Interchange Reduction"). Amounts collected, but not yet distributed, have been presented together with the qualified cash settlement funds as restricted cash for litigation settlement. The Class Interchange Reduction has no impact on the consolidated statement of operations. See Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further discussion of the U.S. merchant class litigation.
	Recent accounting pronouncements
	Comprehensive income - In February 2013, new accounting guidance was issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") that requires disclosure of amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to net income. The Company adopted the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2013. See Note 8 (Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income) for additional disclosures related to the new guidance.
	Balance sheet offsetting - In January 2013, the FASB issued accounting guidance clarifying the scope of its previously issued requirements to disclose gross and net amounts of eligible financial assets and financial liabilities recognized on the balance sheet. The Company adopted the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2013. See Note 13 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) for additional disclosures related to the new guidance.
	Income taxes - In July 2013, the FASB issued accounting guidance that requires entities to present an unrecognized tax benefit net with certain deferred tax assets when specific requirements are met. The Company will adopt the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2014. The Company is currently evaluating the effect this guidance will have on its consolidated balance sheet.

Earnings_Per_Share

Earnings Per Share	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Earnings Per Share [Abstract]	'
Earnings Per Share	'
	Earnings Per Share
	The components of basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) for common shares were as follows:


		Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
		September 30,				September 30,
		2013		2012		2013		2012
		(in millions, except per share data)
	Numerator:
	Net income	$	879	$	772	$	2,493	$	2,154

	Denominator:
	Basic EPS weighted-average shares outstanding	121		125		121		126

	Dilutive stock options and stock units	—		—		—		—

	Diluted EPS weighted-average shares outstanding *	121		125		122		126

	Earnings per Share
	Basic	$	7.3	$	6.19	$	20.52	$	17.13

	Diluted	$	7.27	$	6.17	$	20.46	$	17.07


	Note that table may not sum due to rounding.
	* For the periods presented, the calculation of diluted EPS excluded a minimal amount of anti-dilutive share-based payment awards.

Fair_Value

Fair Value	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Financial Instruments, Financial Liabilities, Balance Sheet Groupings [Abstract]	'
Fair Value and Investment Securities	'
	Fair Value and *Investment Securities*
	Financial Instruments – Recurring Measurements
	In accordance with accounting requirements for financial instruments, the Company is disclosing the estimated fair values as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 of the financial instruments that are within the scope of the accounting guidance, as well as the methods and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value of those financial instruments. Furthermore, the Company classifies its fair value measurements in the Valuation Hierarchy. No transfers were made among the three levels in the Valuation Hierarchy during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013.
	The distribution of the Company’s financial instruments which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis within the Valuation Hierarchy was as follows:


		September 30, 2013
		Quoted Prices			Significant			Significant			Fair
		in Active			Other			Unobservable			Value
		Markets			Observable			Inputs
		(Level 1)			Inputs			(Level 3)
					(Level 2)
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities 1	$	—		$	262		$	—		$	262

	U.S. Government and Agency securities 2	—			595			—			595

	Taxable short-term bond funds	—			—			—			—

	Corporate securities	—			1,320			—			1,320

	Asset-backed securities	—			342			—			342

	Auction rate securities	—			—			16			16

	Other	—			106			—			106

	Total	$	—		$	2,625		$	16		$	2,641


		December 31, 2012
		Quoted Prices			Significant			Significant			Fair
		in Active			Other			Unobservable			Value
		Markets			Observable			Inputs
		(Level 1)			Inputs			(Level 3)
					(Level 2)
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities 1	$	—		$	531		$	—		$	531

	U.S. Government and Agency securities 2	—			582			—			582

	Taxable short-term bond funds	210			—			—			210

	Corporate securities	—			1,246			—			1,246

	Asset-backed securities	—			316			—			316

	Auction rate securities	—			—			32			32

	Other	—			63			—			63

	Total	$	210		$	2,738		$	32		$	2,980

	1 Available-for-sale municipal securities are carried at fair value and are included in the above tables. However, a held-to-maturity municipal bond was carried at amortized cost and excluded from the above table at December 31, 2012.
	2 Excludes amounts related to the preliminary U.S. merchant class litigation settlement of $727 million and $726 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, which would be included in Levels 1 and 2 of the Valuation Hierarchy. See Note 6 (Accrued Expenses) and Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further details.
	The fair value of the Company's taxable short-term bond funds are based on quoted prices for identical investments in active markets and are therefore included in Level 1 of the Valuation Hierarchy.
	The fair value of the Company's available-for-sale municipal securities, U.S. Government and Agency securities, corporate securities, asset-backed securities and other fixed income securities included in the Other category are based on quoted prices for similar assets in active markets and are therefore included in Level 2 of the Valuation Hierarchy. The Company's foreign currency derivative contracts have also been classified within Level 2 in the Other category of the Valuation Hierarchy, as the fair value is based on broker quotes for the same or similar derivative instruments. See Note 13 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) for further details.
	The Company's auction rate securities (“ARS”) investments have been classified within Level 3 of the Valuation Hierarchy as their valuation requires substantial judgment and estimation of factors that are not currently observable in the market due to the lack of trading in the securities. When a determination is made to classify a financial instrument within Level 3, the determination is based upon the significance of the unobservable parameters to the overall fair value measurement. However, the fair value determination for Level 3 financial instruments may include observable components. This valuation may be revised in future periods as market conditions evolve. The Company has considered the lack of liquidity in the ARS market and the lack of comparable, orderly transactions when estimating the fair value of its ARS portfolio. Therefore, the Company used the income approach, which included a discounted cash flow analysis of the estimated future cash flows adjusted by a risk premium for the ARS portfolio, to estimate the fair value of its ARS portfolio. The Company estimated the fair value of its ARS portfolio to be a 10% discount to the par value as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012. The Company did not realize any material losses on its ARS portfolio during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012.
	Financial Instruments - Non-Recurring Measurements
	Certain financial instruments are carried on the consolidated balance sheet at cost, which approximates fair value due to their short-term, highly liquid nature. These instruments include cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, accounts receivable, settlement due from customers, restricted security deposits held for customers, prepaid expenses, accounts payable, settlement due to customers and accrued expenses. In addition, nonmarketable equity investments are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis for purposes of initial recognition and impairment testing.
	Settlement and Other Guarantee Liabilities
	The Company estimates the fair value of its settlement and other guarantees using the market pricing approach which applies market assumptions for relevant though not directly comparable undertakings, as the latter are not observable in the market given the proprietary nature of such guarantees. At September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the carrying value and fair value of settlement and other guarantee liabilities were not material. Settlement and other guarantee liabilities are classified as Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy as their valuation requires substantial judgment and estimation of factors that are not currently observable in the market. For additional information regarding the Company's settlement and other guarantee liabilities, see Note 12 (Settlement and Other Risk Management).
	Refunding Revenue Bonds
The Company holds refunding revenue bonds with the same payment terms, and which contain the right of set-off with a capital lease obligation related to the Company's global technology and operations center located in O'Fallon, Missouri. The Company has netted the refunding revenue bonds and the corresponding capital lease obligation in the consolidated balance sheet and estimates that the carrying value approximates the fair value for these bonds.
Non-Financial Instruments
Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis for purposes of initial recognition and impairment testing. The Company's non-financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis include property, plant and equipment, goodwill and other intangible assets. These assets are not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis; however, they are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances, such as when there is evidence of impairment.
The valuation methods for goodwill and other intangible assets involve assumptions concerning comparable company multiples, discount rates, growth projections and other assumptions of future business conditions. The Company uses a weighted income and market approach for estimating the fair value of its reporting unit, when necessary. As the assumptions employed to measure these assets on a nonrecurring basis are based on management's judgment using internal and external data, these fair value determinations are classified in Level 3 of the Valuation Hierarchy.
Amortized Costs and Fair Values – Available-for-Sale Investment Securities
The major classes of the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities, for which unrealized gains and losses are recorded as a separate component of other comprehensive income on the consolidated statement of comprehensive income, and their respective amortized cost basis and fair values as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 were as follows:



	September 30, 2013
	Amortized			Gross			Gross			Fair
	Cost			Unrealized			Unrealized			Value
				Gain			Loss
	(in millions)
Municipal securities	$	262		$	—		$	—		$	262

U.S. Government and Agency securities	595			—			—			595

Taxable short-term bond funds	—			—			—			—

Corporate securities	1,320			—			—			1,320

Asset-backed securities	342			—			—			342

Auction rate securities 1	18			—			(2		)	16

Other	75			—			—			75

Total	$	2,612		$	—		$	(2	)	$	2,610


	December 31, 2012
	Amortized			Gross			Gross			Fair
	Cost			Unrealized			Unrealized			Value
				Gain			Loss
	(in millions)
Municipal securities	$	522		$	9		$	—		$	531

U.S. Government and Agency securities	582			—			—			582

Taxable short-term bond funds	209			1			—			210

Corporate securities	1,245			2			(1		)	1,246

Asset-backed securities	316			—			—			316

Auction rate securities 1	35			—			(3		)	32

Other	66			—			—			66

Total	$	2,975		$	12		$	(4	)	$	2,983


1 The unrealized losses related to ARS have been in an unrealized loss position longer than 12 months, but have not been deemed other-than-temporarily impaired. The ARS are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet. See Note 4 (Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets).
The municipal securities are primarily comprised of tax-exempt bonds and are diversified across states and sectors. The U.S. government and agency securities are primarily invested in U.S. government treasury bills and bonds and U.S. government sponsored agency bonds and discount notes. Taxable short-term bond funds were primarily invested in U.S. government and sponsored agency securities, corporate bonds and mortgage-backed securities. Corporate securities are comprised of commercial paper and corporate bonds. The asset-backed securities are investments in bonds which are collateralized primarily by automobile loan receivables. The ARS are exempt from U.S. federal income tax and are fully collateralized by student loans with guarantees (ranging from approximately 95% to 98% of principal and interest) by the U.S. government via the Department of Education.
Investment Maturities
The maturity distribution based on the contractual terms of the Company’s investment securities at September 30, 2013 was as follows:


	Available-For-Sale
	Amortized			Fair Value
	Cost
	(in millions)
Due within 1 year	$	1,522		$	1,522

Due after 1 year through 5 years	1,065			1,065

Due after 5 years through 10 years	7			7

Due after 10 years	18			16

Total	$	2,612		$	2,610

All the securities due after ten years are ARS.
Investment Income
Investment income was $11 million and $9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Investment income was $30 million and $27 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Investment income primarily consisted of interest income generated from cash, cash equivalents, investment securities available-for-sale and investment securities held-to-maturity. Dividend income and gross realized gains and losses were not significant.

Prepaid_Expenses_and_Other_Ass

Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets [Abstract]	'
Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets	'
	Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets
	Prepaid expenses and other current assets consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	239	$	222

	Investment securities held-to-maturity	—		36

	Prepaid income taxes	78		77

	Income taxes receivable	3		163

	Other	182		183

	Total prepaid expenses and other current assets	$	502	$	681

	Other assets consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	470	$	404

	Nonmarketable equity investments	233		249

	Auction rate securities available-for-sale, at fair value	16		32

	Income taxes receivable	75		72

	Other	58		52

	Total other assets	$	852	$	809

	Certain customer and merchant business agreements provide incentives upon entering into the agreement. Customer and merchant incentives represent payments made or amounts to be paid to customers and merchants under business agreements. Amounts to be paid for these incentives and the related liability were included in accrued expenses and other liabilities. Once the payment is made, the liability is relieved. Costs directly related to entering into such an agreement are deferred and amortized over the life of the agreement.
	Investments for which the equity method or historical cost method of accounting is used are recorded in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet. MasterCard’s share of net earnings or losses of entities accounted for under the equity method of accounting is included in other income (expense) on the consolidated statement of operations. The Company accounts for nonmarketable equity investments under the historical cost method of accounting when those investments do not qualify for the equity method of accounting. The decrease in investment securities held-to-maturity from December 31, 2012 to September 30, 2013 was due to contractual maturities.

Property_Plant_and_Equipment

Property, Plant and Equipment	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]	'
Property, Plant and Equipment	'
	Property, Plant and Equipment
	Property, plant and equipment consisted of the following:


		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
		(in millions)
	Property, plant and equipment	$	919		$	858

	Less accumulated depreciation and amortization	(445		)	(386		)
	Property, plant and equipment, net	$	474		$	472

Accrued_Expenses

Accrued Expenses	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Accrued Liabilities [Abstract]	'
Accrued Expenses	'
	Accrued Expenses
	Accrued expenses consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	1,243	$	1,058

	Personnel costs	356		354

	Advertising	111		122

	Income and other taxes	164		94

	Other	130		120

	Total accrued expenses	$	2,004	$	1,748

	As of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Company's provision related to the U.S. merchant class litigation was $727 million and $726 million, respectively. These amounts are not included in the accrued expenses table above and are separately reported as accrued litigation on the consolidated balance sheet. The increase in accrued litigation for the U.S. merchant class litigation is due to amounts collected under the Class Interchange Reduction, net of expenses paid by the fund related to administrative settlement activities. See Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further discussion of the U.S. merchant class litigation.

Stockholders_Equity

Stockholders' Equity	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Equity [Abstract]	'
Stockholders' Equity	'
	Stockholders’ Equity
	In June 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program authorizing the Company to repurchase up to $1.5 billion of its Class A common stock (the "June 2012 Share Repurchase Program"). This program became effective in June 2012 at the completion of the Company’s previously announced $2 billion Class A share repurchase program (this $2 billion repurchase program consisted of $1 billion authorized in September 2010 and $1 billion authorized in April 2011).
	On February 5, 2013, the Company's Board of Directors approved a new share repurchase program authorizing the Company to repurchase up to $2 billion of its Class A common stock (the "February 2013 Share Repurchase Program"). The new share repurchase program became effective at the completion of the June 2012 Share Repurchase Program, which occurred in March 2013.
	The following table summarizes the Company's share repurchase authorizations of its Class A common stock through September 30, 2013, as well as historical purchases:


		Authorization Dates
		Feb-13		Jun-12		April 20111		Total
		(in millions, except average price data)
	Board authorization	$	2,000	$	1,500	$	2,000	$	5,500

	Dollar value of shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		283		852		$	1,135

	Remaining authorization at December 31, 2012	**		$	604	$	—	$	604

	Dollar value of shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	1,088		604		$	—	$	1,692

	Remaining authorization at September 30, 2013	$	912	$	—	$	—	$	912

	Shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		0.67		2.11		2.78

	Average price paid per share during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		$	426.96	$	403.53	$	409.12

	Shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	1.94		1.17		—		3.11

	Average price paid per share during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	$	561.89	$	517.16	$	—	$	545.05

	Cumulative shares repurchased through September 30, 2013	1.94		3.11		6.54		11.59

	Cumulative average price paid per share	$	561.89	$	481.58	$	305.6	$	395.66

	** Not applicable
	1 The initial authorization in September 2010 for $1 billion was amended in April 2011 to increase the authorization to $2 billion.
	As of October 24, 2013, the cumulative repurchases by the Company under the February 2013 Share Repurchase Program totaled approximately 1.9 million shares of its Class A common stock for an aggregate cost of approximately $1.1 billion at an average price of $561.89 per share of Class A common stock.

Accumulated_Other_Comprehensiv

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Net of Tax [Abstract]	'
Comprehensive Income (Loss) Note [Text Block]	'
	Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
	The changes in the balances of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax, for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 were as follows:


		Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments		Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans			Investment Securities Available-for-Sale			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
		(in millions)
	Balance at December 31, 2012	$	93	$	(37	)	$	5		$	61

	Current period other comprehensive income (loss)*	65		—			(6		)	59

	Balance at September 30, 2013	$	158	$	(37	)	$	(1	)	$	120


	* During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, $3 million of deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses. In addition, $5 million of net gains on available-for-sale investment securities were recognized in investment income during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Tax amounts related to these items are insignificant.

Share_Based_Payment_and_Other_

Share Based Payment and Other Benefits	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Aggregate Disclosures [Abstract]	'
Share-Based Payments	'
	Share-Based Payments
	During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, the Company granted the following awards under the MasterCard Incorporated 2006 Long Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated (“LTIP”). The LTIP is a shareholder-approved omnibus plan that permits the grant of various types of equity awards to employees.


		Granted in 2013	Weighted-Average Grant-Date Fair Value
		(in thousands)
	Non-qualified stock options	183	$123
	Restricted stock units	153	$516
	Performance stock units	18	$560
	Stock options vest in four equal annual installments beginning one year after the date of grant, and have a term of ten years. The Company used the Black-Scholes option pricing model to estimate the grant date fair value of stock options. Beginning in 2013, the Company calculated the expected term and the expected volatility based on historical MasterCard information. As a result, the expected term of stock options granted in the first quarter 2013 was five years, while the expected volatility was determined to be 27.1%.
	Vesting of the shares underlying the restricted stock units and performance stock units will generally occur three years after the date of grant. The fair value of restricted stock units is determined and fixed on the grant date based on the Company's Class A common stock price, adjusted for the exclusion of dividend equivalents. The Monte Carlo simulation valuation model was used to determine the grant date fair value of performance stock units granted in the first quarter of 2013.
	Compensation expense is recorded net of estimated forfeitures over the shorter of the vesting period or the date the individual becomes eligible to retire under the LTIP. The Company uses the straight-line method of attribution over the requisite service period for expensing equity awards.

Income_Taxes

Income Taxes	9 Months Ended
Income Taxes	Sep. 30, 2013
Income Tax Expense (Benefit), Continuing Operations [Abstract]	'
Income Taxes	'
	Income Taxes
	The effective income tax rates were 29.9% and 27.6% for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The effective income tax rates were 30.5% and 29.1% for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. For the three months ended September 30, 2013, the Company experienced a more favorable mix of earnings and recorded discrete benefits related to expiring statutes. However, the effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2012 was lower, compared to the three months ended September 30, 2013, due primarily to the recognition in 2012 of both a larger benefit from the domestic production activity deduction in the U.S. related to our authorization software and a discrete benefit relating to additional export incentives. For the nine months ended September 30, 2013, the Company also experienced a more favorable mix of earnings. However, the effective tax rate for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was lower, due primarily to the recognition of a discrete benefit relating to additional export incentives in 2012.
	The Company conducts operations in multiple countries and, as a result, is subjected to tax examinations in various jurisdictions, including the United States. Uncertain tax positions are reviewed on an ongoing basis and are adjusted after considering facts and circumstances, including progress of tax audits, developments in case law and closing of statute of limitations. The Company has effectively settled its U.S. federal income tax obligations through 2008. With limited exception, the Company is no longer subject to state and local or non-U.S. audits by taxing authorities for years through 2002. It is possible that the amount of unrecognized benefit with respect to the Company's uncertain tax positions may change within the next twelve months. An estimate of the range of the possible change cannot be made until the issues are further developed, the examinations close, or the statutes expire.

Legal_and_Regulatory_Proceedin

Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Legal and Regulatory Proceedings [Abstract]	'
Legal and Regulatory Proceedings	'
	Legal and Regulatory Proceedings
	MasterCard is a party to legal and regulatory proceedings with respect to a variety of matters in the ordinary course of business. Some of these proceedings are based on complex claims involving substantial uncertainties and unascertainable damages. Accordingly, except as discussed below, it is not possible to determine the probability of loss or estimate damages. Further, except as discussed below, MasterCard has not established reserves for any of these proceedings. Except as identified below, MasterCard does not believe that the outcome of any existing legal or regulatory proceedings to which it is a party will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition or overall business. However, with respect to the matters discussed below, an adverse judgment or other outcome or settlement with respect to any such proceedings could result in fines or payments by MasterCard and/or could require MasterCard to change its business practices. In addition, an adverse outcome in a regulatory proceeding could lead to the filing of civil damage claims and possibly result in damage awards in amounts that could be significant. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on MasterCard's results of operations, financial condition and overall business.
	Department of Justice Antitrust Litigation and Related Private Litigations
	In October 1998, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) filed suit against MasterCard International, Visa U.S.A., Inc. and Visa International Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging that both MasterCard's and Visa's governance structure and policies violated U.S. federal antitrust laws. The DOJ challenged (1) “dual governance”, where a financial institution has a representative on the Board of Directors of MasterCard or Visa while a portion of its card portfolio is issued under the brand of the other association, and (2) both MasterCard's Competitive Programs Policy (“CPP”) and a Visa bylaw provision that prohibited financial institutions participating in the respective associations from issuing competing proprietary payment cards (such as American Express or Discover). In October 2001, the judge issued an opinion upholding the legality and pro-competitive nature of dual governance. However, the judge also held that MasterCard's CPP and the Visa bylaw constituted unlawful restraints of trade under the federal antitrust laws. The judge subsequently issued a final judgment that ordered MasterCard to repeal the CPP and enjoined MasterCard from enacting or enforcing any bylaw, rule, policy or practice that prohibits its issuers from issuing general purpose credit or debit cards in the United States on any other general purpose card network.
	In April 2005, a complaint was filed in California state court on behalf of a putative class of consumers under California unfair competition law (Section 17200) and the Cartwright Act (the “Attridge action”). The claims in this action seek to piggyback on the portion of the DOJ antitrust litigation discussed above with regard to the District Court's findings concerning MasterCard's CPP and Visa's related bylaw. The Court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' Cartwright Act claims but denied the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' Section 17200 unfair competition claims. The parties have proceeded with discovery. In September 2009, MasterCard executed a settlement agreement that is subject to court approval in the separate California consumer litigations (see “U.S. Merchant and Consumer Litigations”). The agreement includes a release that the parties believe encompasses the claims asserted in the Attridge action. In August 2010, the Court in the California consumer actions granted final approval to the settlement. The plaintiff from the Attridge action and three other objectors filed appeals of the settlement approval. In January 2012, the Appellate Court reversed the trial court's settlement approval and remanded the matter to the trial court for further proceedings. In August 2012, the parties in the California consumer actions filed a motion seeking approval of a revised settlement agreement. The trial court granted final approval of the settlement in April 2013, to which the objectors have appealed.
	U.S. Merchant and Consumer Litigations
	Commencing in October 1996, several class action suits were brought by a number of U.S. merchants against MasterCard International and Visa U.S.A., Inc. challenging certain aspects of the payment card industry under U.S. federal antitrust law. The plaintiffs claimed that MasterCard's “Honor All Cards” rule (and a similar Visa rule), which required merchants who accept MasterCard cards to accept for payment every validly presented MasterCard card, constituted an illegal tying arrangement in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. In June 2003, MasterCard International signed a settlement agreement to settle the claims brought by the plaintiffs in this matter, which the Court approved in December 2003. Pursuant to the settlement, MasterCard agreed, among other things, to create two separate “Honor All Cards” rules in the United States - one for debit cards and one for credit cards.
	In addition, individual or multiple complaints have been brought in 19 states and the District of Columbia alleging state unfair competition, consumer protection and common law claims against MasterCard International (and Visa) on behalf of putative classes of consumers. The claims in these actions largely mirror the allegations made in the U.S. merchant lawsuit and assert that merchants, faced with excessive interchange fees, have passed these overhead charges to consumers in the form of higher prices on goods and services sold. MasterCard has successfully resolved the cases in all of the jurisdictions except California, where there continues to be outstanding cases. As discussed above under “Department of Justice Antitrust Litigation and Related Private Litigations,” in September 2009, the parties to the California state court actions executed a settlement agreement which required a payment by MasterCard of $6 million, subject to approval by the California state court. In August 2010, the court granted final approval of the settlement, subsequent to which MasterCard made the payment required by the settlement agreement. The plaintiff from the Attridge action described above under “Department of Justice Antitrust Litigation and Related Private Litigations” and three other objectors filed appeals of the settlement approval order. In January 2012, the Appellate Court reversed the trial court's settlement approval and remanded the matter to the trial court for further proceedings. As noted above, in August 2012, the parties in the California consumer actions filed a motion seeking approval of a revised settlement agreement. The trial court granted final approval of the settlement in April 2013, to which the objectors have appealed.
	ATM Non-Discrimination Rule Surcharge Complaints
	In October 2011, a trade association of independent Automated Teller Machine (“ATM”) operators and 13 independent ATM operators filed a complaint styled as a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against both MasterCard and Visa (the “ATM Operators Complaint”). Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of non-bank operators of ATM terminals that operate ATM terminals in the United States with the discretion to determine the price of the ATM access fee for the terminals they operate. Plaintiffs allege that MasterCard and Visa have violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by imposing rules that require ATM operators to charge non-discriminatory ATM surcharges for transactions processed over MasterCard's and Visa's respective networks that are not greater than the surcharge charged for transactions over other networks accepted at the same ATM. Plaintiffs seek both injunctive and monetary relief equal to treble the damages they claim to have sustained as a result of the alleged violations and their costs of suit, including attorneys' fees. Plaintiffs have not quantified their damages although they allege that they expect damages to be in the tens of millions of dollars.
	Subsequently, multiple related complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging both federal antitrust and multiple state unfair competition, consumer protection and common law claims against MasterCard and Visa on behalf of putative classes of users of ATM services (the “ATM Consumer Complaints”). The claims in these actions largely mirror the allegations made in the ATM Operators Complaint described above, although these complaints seek damages on behalf of consumers of ATM services who pay allegedly inflated ATM fees at both bank and non-bank ATM operators as a result of the defendants' ATM rules. Plaintiffs seek both injunctive and monetary relief equal to treble the damages they claim to have sustained as a result of the alleged violations and their costs of suit, including attorneys' fees. Plaintiffs have not quantified their damages although they allege that they expect damages to be in the tens of millions of dollars.
	In January 2012, the plaintiffs in the ATM Operators Complaint and the ATM Consumer Complaints filed amended class action complaints that largely mirror their prior complaints. MasterCard moved to dismiss the complaints for failure to state a claim. In February 2013, the district court granted MasterCard's motion to dismiss the complaints and the plaintiffs have since filed a motion seeking approval to amend their complaints.
	Interchange Litigation and Regulatory Proceedings
	Interchange fees represent a sharing of payment system costs among the financial institutions participating in a four-party payment card system such as MasterCard's. Typically, interchange fees are paid by the acquirer to the issuer in connection with purchase transactions initiated with the payment system's cards. These fees reimburse the issuer for a portion of the costs incurred by it in providing services which are of benefit to all participants in the system, including acquirers and merchants. MasterCard or its customer financial institutions establish default interchange fees in certain circumstances that apply when there is no other interchange fee arrangement between the issuer and the acquirer. MasterCard establishes a variety of interchange rates depending on such considerations as the location and the type of transaction, and collects the interchange fee on behalf of the institutions entitled to receive it and remits the interchange fee to eligible institutions. MasterCard's interchange fees and other practices are subject to regulatory and/or legal review and/or challenges in a number of jurisdictions, including the proceedings described below. At this time, it is not possible to determine the ultimate resolution of, or estimate the liability related to, any of these interchange proceedings (except as otherwise indicated below), as the proceedings involve complex claims and/or substantial uncertainties and, in some cases, could include unascertainable damages or fines. Except as described below, no provision for losses has been provided in connection with them. Some of the proceedings described below could have a significant impact on our customers in the applicable country and on MasterCard's level of business in those countries. The proceedings reflect the significant and intense legal, regulatory and legislative scrutiny worldwide that interchange fees and acceptance practices have been receiving. When taken as a whole, the resulting decisions, regulations and legislation with respect to interchange fees and acceptance practices may have a material adverse effect on the Company's prospects for future growth and its overall results of operations, financial position and cash flows.
	United States. In June 2005, the first of a series of complaints were filed on behalf of merchants (the majority of the complaints are styled as class actions, although a few complaints are filed on behalf of individual merchant plaintiffs) against MasterCard International Incorporated, Visa U.S.A., Inc., Visa International Service Association and a number of customer financial institutions. Taken together, the claims in the complaints are generally brought under both Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, which prohibit monopolization and attempts or conspiracies to monopolize a particular industry, and some of these complaints contain unfair competition law claims under state law. The complaints allege, among other things, that MasterCard, Visa, and certain of their customer financial institutions conspired to set the price of interchange fees, enacted point of sale acceptance rules (including the no surcharge rule) in violation of antitrust laws and engaged in unlawful tying and bundling of certain products and services. The cases have been consolidated for pre-trial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in MDL No. 1720. The plaintiffs have filed a consolidated class action complaint that seeks treble damages, as well as attorneys' fees and injunctive relief.
	In July 2006, the group of purported merchant class plaintiffs filed a supplemental complaint alleging that MasterCard's initial public offering of its Class A Common Stock in May 2006 (the “IPO”) and certain purported agreements entered into between MasterCard and its customer financial institutions in connection with the IPO: (1) violate U.S. antitrust laws and (2) constitute a fraudulent conveyance because the customer financial institutions are allegedly attempting to release, without adequate consideration, MasterCard's right to assess them for MasterCard's litigation liabilities. In November 2008, the district court granted MasterCard's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' supplemental complaint in its entirety with leave to file an amended complaint. The class plaintiffs repled their complaint. The causes of action and claims for relief in the complaint generally mirror those in the plaintiffs' original IPO-related complaint although the plaintiffs have attempted to expand their factual allegations based upon discovery that has been garnered in the case. The class plaintiffs seek treble damages and injunctive relief including, but not limited to, an order reversing and unwinding the IPO. In July 2009, the class plaintiffs and individual plaintiffs served confidential expert reports detailing the plaintiffs' theories of liability and alleging damages in the tens of billions of dollars. The defendants served their expert reports in December 2009 rebutting the plaintiffs' assertions both with respect to liability and damages.
	In February 2011, MasterCard and MasterCard International Incorporated entered into each of: (1) an omnibus judgment sharing and settlement sharing agreement with Visa Inc., Visa U.S.A. Inc. and Visa International Service Association and a number of customer financial institutions; and (2) a MasterCard settlement and judgment sharing agreement with a number of customer financial institutions. The agreements provide for the apportionment of certain costs and liabilities which MasterCard, the Visa parties and the customer financial institutions may incur, jointly and/or severally, in the event of an adverse judgment or settlement of one or all of the cases in the merchant litigations. Among a number of scenarios addressed by the agreements, in the event of a global settlement involving the Visa parties, the customer financial institutions and MasterCard, MasterCard would pay 12% of the monetary portion of the settlement. In the event of a settlement involving only MasterCard and the customer financial institutions with respect to their issuance of MasterCard cards, MasterCard would pay 36% of the monetary portion of such settlement.
	In October 2012, the parties entered into a definitive settlement agreement with respect to the merchant class litigation and separately also entered into a settlement agreement with the individual merchant plaintiffs (the terms of which were consistent with a memorandum of understanding that was executed by the parties in July 2012). The settlements included cash payments that were apportioned among the defendants pursuant to the omnibus judgment sharing and settlement sharing agreement described above. MasterCard also agreed to provide class members with a short-term reduction in default credit interchange rates and to modify certain of its business practices, including its No Surcharge Rule. The merchant class litigation settlement agreement is subject to court approval. The court granted preliminary approval of the settlement in November 2012 and held a final approval hearing in September 2013. Rule practice changes required by the settlement were implemented in late January 2013.
	Pursuant to the terms of the class settlement agreement described above, the final day for merchants to have opted out of the settlement was May 28, 2013. Based upon a report filed by the class administrator with the court, approximately 8,000 merchants opted out from the settlement class, representing slightly more than 25% of the MasterCard and Visa purchase volume over the relevant period as calculated by MasterCard and Visa. The defendants had the right to terminate the settlement agreement because this volume threshold was reached, but elected not to do so. MasterCard anticipates that most of the larger merchants who opted out of the settlement will initiate separate actions seeking to recover damages, and approximately 20 opt-out complaints have been filed on behalf of numerous merchants in various jurisdictions. Those cases are in the early stages and the defendants are seeking to consolidate the matters in front of the same court that is overseeing the approval of the settlement. In addition, certain competitors have raised objections to the settlement, including Discover. Discover's objections include a challenge to the settlement on the grounds that certain of the rule changes agreed to in the settlement constitute a restraint of trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
	MasterCard recorded a pre-tax charge of $770 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 and an additional $20 million pre-tax charge in the second quarter of 2012 relating to the settlement agreements described above. In 2012, MasterCard paid $790 million with respect to the settlements, of which $726 million was paid into a qualified cash settlement fund related to the merchant class litigation. The class settlement agreement provides for a return to the defendants of up to 25% of the total class cash settlement fund, based upon the percentage of class purchase volume represented by the opt out merchants (the "takedown payment"). As a result, if the settlement receives final court approval, MasterCard anticipates that it would receive back approximately $165 million from the cash settlement fund. The cash received would result in a reclassification from "restricted cash for litigation settlement" to "cash and cash equivalents". As of September 30, 2013, MasterCard recognized its estimated reserve for the merchant class litigation in "accrued litigation", including the portion of the reserve related to merchants who opted out of the settlement. MasterCard will continue to assess this reserve and adjust as appropriate.
	In the event that the merchant class litigation settlement agreement is not approved by the court, or if the class settlement agreement is otherwise terminated by the defendants pursuant to the conditions in the settlement agreement and the litigations are not settled, a negative outcome in the litigation could have a material adverse effect on MasterCard's results of operations, financial position and cash flows.
	Canada. In December 2010, the Canadian Competition Bureau (the “CCB”) filed an application with the Canadian Competition Tribunal to strike down certain MasterCard rules related to point-of-sale acceptance, including the “honor all cards” and “no surcharge” rules. On July 23, 2013, the Competition Tribunal issued a decision in MasterCard's favor and dismissed the CCB's application, which was not appealed. In December 2010, a complaint styled as a class action lawsuit was commenced against MasterCard in Quebec on behalf of Canadian merchants. That suit essentially repeated the allegations and arguments of the CCB application to the Canadian Competition Tribunal and sought compensatory and punitive damages in unspecified amounts, as well as injunctive relief. In March 2011, a second purported class action lawsuit was commenced in British Columbia against MasterCard, Visa and a number of large Canadian financial institutions, and in May 2011 a third purported class action lawsuit was commenced in Ontario against the same defendants. These suits allege that MasterCard, Visa and the financial institutions have engaged in a conspiracy to increase or maintain the fees paid by merchants on credit card transactions and establish rules which force merchants to accept all MasterCard and Visa credit cards and prevent merchants from charging more for payments with MasterCard and Visa premium cards. The British Columbia suit seeks compensatory damages in unspecified amounts, and the Ontario suit seeks compensatory damages of $5 billion. The British Columbia and Ontario suits also seek punitive damages in unspecified amounts, as well as injunctive relief, interest and legal costs. In April 2012, the Quebec suit was amended to include the same defendants and similar claims as in the British Columbia and Ontario suits. With respect to the status of the proceedings: (1) the Quebec suit has been stayed, (2) the Ontario suit is being temporarily suspended while the British Columbia suit proceeds, and (3) the British Columbia court held a class certification hearing in April 2013. Additional complaints styled as class actions have been filed in Saskatchewan and Alberta. The claims in these complaints largely mirror the claims in the British Columbia and Ontario suits. If the class action lawsuits are ultimately successful, negative decisions could have a significant adverse impact on the revenue of MasterCard's Canadian customers and on MasterCard's overall business in Canada and could result in substantial damage awards.
	European Union. In September 2003, the European Commission issued a Statement of Objections challenging MasterCard Europe's cross-border default interchange fees and, in June 2006, it issued a supplemental Statement of Objections covering credit, debit and commercial card fees. In December 2007, the European Commission announced a decision that applies to MasterCard's default cross-border interchange fees for MasterCard and Maestro branded consumer payment card transactions in the European Economic Area (“EEA”) (the European Commission refers to these as “MasterCard's MIF”), but not to commercial card transactions (the European Commission stated publicly that it has not yet finished its investigation of commercial card interchange fees). The decision required MasterCard to stop applying the MasterCard MIF, to refrain from repeating the conduct, and not apply its then recently adopted (but never implemented) Maestro SEPA and Intra-Eurozone default interchange fees to debit card payment transactions within the Eurozone. The decision did not impose a fine on MasterCard, but provides for a daily penalty of up to 3.5% of MasterCard's daily consolidated global turnover in the preceding business year (which MasterCard estimates to be approximately $0.8 million per day) in the event that MasterCard fails to comply. To date, MasterCard has not been assessed any such penalty. In March 2008, MasterCard filed an application for annulment of the European Commission's decision with the General Court of the European Union.
	Following discussions with the European Commission, MasterCard announced that, effective June 21, 2008, MasterCard would temporarily repeal its then current default intra-EEA cross-border consumer card interchange fees in conformity with the decision. In October 2008, MasterCard received an information request from the European Commission in connection with the decision concerning certain pricing changes that MasterCard implemented as of October 1, 2008. In March 2009, MasterCard gave certain undertakings to the European Commission and, in response, in April 2009, the Commissioner for competition policy and DG Competition informed MasterCard that, subject to MasterCard's fulfilling its undertakings, they do not intend to pursue proceedings for non-compliance with or circumvention of the December 2007 decision or for infringing the antitrust laws in relation to the October 2008 pricing changes, the introduction of new cross-border consumer default interchange fees or any of the other MasterCard undertakings. MasterCard's undertakings include: (1) repealing the October 2008 pricing changes; (2) adopting a specific methodology for the setting of cross-border consumer default interchange fees; (3) establishing new default cross-border consumer card interchange fees as of July 1, 2009 such that the weighted average interchange fee for credit card transactions does not exceed 30 basis points and for debit card transactions does not exceed 20 basis points; (4) introducing a new rule prohibiting its acquirers from requiring merchants to process all of their MasterCard and Maestro transactions with the acquirer; and (5) introducing a new rule requiring its acquirers to provide merchants with certain pricing information in connection with MasterCard and Maestro transactions. The undertakings were effective until the General Court of the European Union issued a judgment in May 2012.
	In May 2012, the General Court of the European Union issued a judgment dismissing the Company's appeal and upholding the European Commission's decision. The Company appealed the judgment to the European Union Court of Justice in August 2012, which heard oral argument on MasterCard's application for annulment in July 2013. The Advocate General to the Court of Justice stated that he would issue his advisory opinion in November 2013, and MasterCard anticipates that the Court of Justice would issue its opinion sometime in 2014. Subject to ongoing discussion with the European Commission, MasterCard intends to continue to comply with the terms of the interim agreement with the European Commission, even though that agreement, by its terms, formally ended on the day of the judgment.
	Although MasterCard believes that any other business practices it would implement in response to the decision would be in compliance with the December 2007 decision, the European Commission may deem any such practice not in compliance with the decision, or in violation of European competition law, in which case MasterCard may be assessed fines for the period that it is not in compliance. Furthermore, because a balancing mechanism like default cross-border interchange fees constitutes an essential element of MasterCard Europe's operations, the December 2007 decision could also significantly impact MasterCard International's European customers' and MasterCard Europe's business. The European Commission decision could also lead to additional competition authorities in European Union member states commencing investigations or proceedings regarding domestic interchange fees or initiating regulation. The possibility of such actions has increased due to the judgment of the General Court. The judgment also increases the possibility of an adverse outcome for the Company in related and pending matters (such as the interchange proceedings in Hungary, Italy and Poland, as further described below). In addition, the European Commission's decision could lead, and in the case of the United Kingdom and Belgium has led, to the filing of private actions against MasterCard Europe by merchants and/or consumers which, if MasterCard is unsuccessful in its appeal of the General Court decision, could result in MasterCard owing substantial damages.
	In April 2013, the European Commission announced that it has opened proceedings to investigate: (1) MasterCard's interregional interchange fees that apply when a card issued outside the EEA is used at a merchant location in the EEA, (2) central acquiring rules, which apply when a merchant uses the services of an acquirer established in another country and (3) other business rules and practices (including the "honor all cards" rule).
	Additional Litigations in Europe. In the United Kingdom, since May 2012, a number of retailers have filed claims against MasterCard for unspecified damages with respect to MasterCard's cross-border and U.K. and Ireland domestic interchange fees. In June 2013, the court denied MasterCard's request to stay the proceedings pending the result of MasterCard's appeal of the European Union General Court's judgment discussed above, but the court indicated it would not issue a final decision until the Court of Justice issues its decision. In Belgium, a retailer filed claims in December 2012 for unspecified damages with respect to MasterCard's cross-border and domestic interchange fees paid in Belgium, Greece and Luxembourg.
	Additional Interchange Proceedings. Regulatory authorities in a number of other jurisdictions around the world have commenced competition-related proceedings or inquiries into interchange fees and acceptance practices. These matters include:

	•	France. In 2009, the French Competition Authority (the “FCA”) sent an information request to MasterCard as part of an investigation concerning its domestic interchange rates. The investigation was initially suspended until the judgment of the General Court of the European Union with respect to MasterCard's appeal of the December 2007 cross-border interchange fee decision of the European Commission. In January 2013, the investigation was re-opened and the FCA informed MasterCard that it intends to commence a formal proceeding and issue a statement of objections unless MasterCard offers commitments to reduce its interchange fees. Subsequently, MasterCard made a commitments offer to the FCA, which was accepted by the FCA and announced in September 2013.

	•	Hungary. In December 2009, the Hungarian Competition Authority (the “HCA”) issued a formal decision that MasterCard's (and Visa's) historic domestic interchange fees violated Hungarian competition law and fined each of MasterCard Europe and Visa Europe approximately $3 million, which was paid during the fourth quarter of 2009. MasterCard appealed the decision to the Hungarian courts, which has stayed the proceeding until the completion of MasterCard's appeal to the European Union Court of Justice. If the HCA's decision is not reversed on appeal, it could have a significant adverse impact on the revenue of MasterCard's Hungarian customers and on MasterCard's overall business in Hungary. In June 2012, the HCA commenced a separate investigation of MasterCard's alleged abuse of dominant position in what it refers to as the domestic bankcard market during the period beginning in December 2010.

	•	Italy. In November 2010, the Italian Competition Authority (the “ICA”) adopted a decision in which it determined that MasterCard Europe's domestic interchange fees violate European Union competition law, fined MasterCard 2.7 million euro (approximately $4 million) and ordered MasterCard to refrain in the future from maintaining interchange fees that are not based on economic justifications linked to efficiency criteria and to eliminate any anticompetitive clauses from its licensing agreements. MasterCard appealed the ICA's infringement decision to the Administrative Court, and the decision was annulled by the Administrative Court in July 2011. The ICA has appealed the Administrative Court's judgment to the Council of State. If the ICA's infringement decision ultimately stands, it could have a significant adverse impact on the revenue of MasterCard's Italian customers and on MasterCard's overall business in Italy.

	•	Poland. In January 2007, the Polish Office for Protection of Competition and Consumers (the “PCA”) issued a decision that MasterCard's (and Visa Europe's) domestic credit and debit default interchange fees are unlawful under Polish competition law, and imposed fines on MasterCard's (and Visa Europe's) licensed financial institutions, the entities responsible for setting the fees. As part of this decision, the PCA decided that MasterCard (and Visa Europe) had not violated the law because they were not responsible for setting the fees. The decision is currently being appealed. If on appeal the PCA's decision is ultimately allowed to stand, it could have a significant adverse impact on the revenue of MasterCard's Polish customers and on MasterCard's overall business in Poland.

	•	United Kingdom. In February 2007, the Office for Fair Trading of the United Kingdom (the “OFT”) commenced an investigation of MasterCard's current U.K. default credit card interchange fees and so-called “immediate debit” cards to determine whether such fees contravene U.K. and European Union competition law. The OFT had informed MasterCard that it did not intend to issue a Statement of Objections or otherwise commence formal proceedings with respect to the investigation prior to the judgment of the General Court of the European Union with respect to MasterCard's appeal of the December 2007 cross-border interchange fee decision of the European Commission, and this period was extended until the completion of MasterCard's appeal to the Court of Justice. If the OFT ultimately determines that any of MasterCard's U.K. interchange fees contravene U.K. and European Union competition law, it may issue a new decision and possibly levy fines accruing from the date of its first decision. Such a decision could lead to the filing of private actions against MasterCard by merchants and/or consumers which could result in an award or awards of substantial damages and could have a significant adverse impact on the revenue of MasterCard International's U.K. customers and MasterCard's overall business in the U.K.
	Regulatory authorities and/or central banks in certain other jurisdictions, including Brazil, Chile, Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, Singapore and South Africa, are reviewing MasterCard's and/or its customers' interchange fees and/or other practices and may seek to commence proceedings related to, or otherwise regulate, the establishment of such fees and/or such practices.
	Other Regulatory Proceedings
	In addition to challenges to interchange fees, MasterCard's other standards and operations are also subject to regulatory and/or legal review and/or challenges in a number of jurisdictions from time to time. These proceedings tend to reflect the increasing global regulatory focus to which the payments industry is subject and, when taken as a whole with other regulatory and legislative action, such actions could result in the imposition of costly new compliance burdens on MasterCard and its customers and may lead to increased costs and decreased transaction volumes and revenue.

Settlement_and_Other_Risk_Mana

Settlement and Other Risk Management	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Settlement and Other Risk Management [Abstract]	'
Settlement and Other Risk Management	'
	Settlement and Other Risk Management
	MasterCard's rules guarantee the settlement of many of the MasterCard, Cirrus and Maestro branded transactions between its issuers and acquirers ("settlement risk"). Settlement exposure is the outstanding settlement risk to customers under MasterCard's rules due to the difference in timing between the payment transaction date and subsequent settlement. While the term and amount of the guarantee are unlimited, the duration of settlement exposure is short term and typically limited to a few days. Settlement exposure is primarily estimated using the average daily card volume during the quarter multiplied by the estimated number of days to settle. The Company has global risk management policies and procedures, which include risk standards, to provide a framework for managing the Company's settlement risk. Customer-reported transaction data and the transaction clearing data underlying the settlement exposure calculation may be revised in subsequent reporting periods.
	In the event that MasterCard effects a payment on behalf of a failed customer, MasterCard may seek an assignment of the underlying receivables of the failed customer. Subject to approval by the Board of Directors, customers may be charged for the amount of any settlement loss incurred during these ordinary course activities of the Company.
	The Company's global risk management policies and procedures are aimed at managing the settlement exposure. These risk management procedures include interaction with the bank regulators of countries in which it operates, requiring customers to make adjustments to settlement processes, and requiring collateral from customers. MasterCard requires certain customers that are not in compliance with the Company's risk standards in effect at the time of review to post collateral, typically in the form of cash, letters of credit, or guarantees. This requirement is based on management's review of the individual risk circumstances for each customer that is out of compliance. In addition to these amounts, MasterCard holds collateral to cover variability and future growth in customer programs. The Company may also hold collateral to pay merchants in the event of merchant bank/acquirer failure. Although the Company is not contractually obligated under its rules to effect such payments to merchants, the Company may elect to do so to protect brand integrity. MasterCard monitors its credit risk portfolio on a regular basis and the adequacy of collateral on hand. Additionally, from time to time, the Company reviews its risk management methodology and standards. As such, the amounts of estimated settlement exposure are revised as necessary.
	The Company's estimated settlement exposure from MasterCard, Cirrus and Maestro branded transactions was as follows:


		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
		(in millions)
	Gross settlement exposure	$	38,762		$	37,768

	Collateral held for settlement exposure	(3,121		)	(3,775		)
	Net uncollateralized settlement exposure	$	35,641		$	33,993

	MasterCard-branded travelers cheques are no longer being issued. For previously issued travelers cheques, MasterCard guarantees the payment of MasterCard-branded travelers cheques in the event of issuer default. The term of the guarantee is unlimited, while the exposure is limited to the cheques issued but not yet cashed. The notional amount of cheques issued, but not yet cashed was $510 million and $539 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, of which $409 million and $434 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, is mitigated by collateral arrangements.
	General economic and political conditions in countries in which MasterCard operates affect the Company's settlement risk. Many of the Company's financial institution customers have been directly and adversely impacted by political instability and uncertain economic conditions. These conditions present increased risk that the Company may have to perform under its settlement guarantee. This risk could increase if political, economic and financial market conditions deteriorate further. The Company's global risk management policies and procedures are revised and enhanced from time to time. Historically, the Company has experienced a low level of losses from customer financial institution failures.
	MasterCard also provides guarantees to customers and certain other companies indemnifying them from losses stemming from failures of third parties to perform duties. In addition, the Company enters into business agreements in the ordinary course of business under which the Company agrees to indemnify third parties against damages, losses and expenses incurred in connection with legal and other proceedings arising from relationships or transactions with the Company. Certain indemnifications do not provide a stated maximum exposure. As the extent of the Company's obligations under these agreements depends entirely upon the occurrence of future events, the Company's potential future liability under these agreements is not determinable. Historically, payments made by the Company under these types of contractual arrangements have not been material.

Foreign_Exchange_Risk_Manageme

Foreign Exchange Risk Management	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Foreign Currency Derivatives [Abstract]	'
Foreign Exchange Risk Management	'
	Foreign Exchange Risk Management
	The Company enters into foreign currency forward contracts to manage risk associated with anticipated receipts and disbursements which are either transacted in a non-functional currency or valued based on a currency other than its functional currency. The Company also enters into foreign currency forward contracts to offset possible changes in value due to foreign exchange fluctuations of assets and liabilities denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the entity holding the assets and liabilities. The objective of these activities is to reduce the Company’s exposure to gains and losses resulting from fluctuations of foreign currencies against its functional currencies. The notional value of commitments to sell foreign currency was $1.7 billion and $1.6 billion at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.
	The Company does not designate foreign currency derivatives as hedging instruments pursuant to the accounting guidance for derivative instruments and hedging activities. The Company records the change in the fair value of the outstanding derivatives at the end of the reporting period to its consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations.
	As of September 30, 2013, all forward contracts to purchase and sell foreign currency had been entered into with customers of MasterCard. MasterCard’s derivative contracts are summarized below:


		September 30, 2013					December 31, 2012
		Notional		Estimated Fair			Notional		Estimated Fair
				Value					Value
		(in millions)
	Commitments to purchase foreign currency	$	30	$	(1	)	$	76	$	(1	)

	Commitments to sell foreign currency	1,732		32			1,571		(2		)

	Balance Sheet Location:
	Accounts Receivable*			$	38				$	12

	Other Current Liabilities*			(7		)			(15		)
	* The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis on the balance sheet and are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements, which contain various netting and setoff provisions.
	The amount of gain (loss) recognized in income for the contracts to purchase and sell foreign currency are summarized below:


		Three Months Ended					Nine Months Ended
		September 30,					September 30,
		2013		2012			2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Foreign currency derivative contracts
	General and administrative	$	26	$	25		$	38	$	15

	Net revenue	3		—			2		(3		)

	Total	$	29	$	25		$	40	$	12

	The fair value of the foreign currency forward contracts generally reflects the estimated amounts that the Company would receive (or pay), on a pre-tax basis, to terminate the contracts at the reporting date based on broker quotes for the same or similar instruments. The terms of the foreign currency forward contracts are generally less than 18 months. The Company had no deferred gains or losses related to foreign exchange in accumulated other comprehensive income as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 as there were no derivative contracts accounted for under hedge accounting.
	The Company’s derivative financial instruments are subject to both market and counterparty credit risk. Market risk is the risk of loss due to the potential change in an instrument’s value caused by fluctuations in interest rates and other variables related to currency exchange rates. The effect of a hypothetical 10% adverse change in foreign currency rates could result in a fair value loss of approximately $186 million on the Company's foreign currency derivative contracts outstanding at September 30, 2013 related to the hedging program. Counterparty credit risk is the risk of loss due to failure of the counterparty to perform its obligations in accordance with contractual terms. To mitigate counterparty credit risk, the Company enters into derivative contracts with selected financial institutions based upon their credit ratings and other factors. Generally, the Company does not obtain collateral related to derivatives because of the high credit ratings of the counterparties.

Summary_of_Significant_Account1

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Accounting Policies [Abstract]	'
Organization	'
	Organization
	MasterCard Incorporated and its consolidated subsidiaries, including MasterCard International Incorporated (“MasterCard International” and together with MasterCard Incorporated, “MasterCard” or the “Company”), is a technology company in the global payments industry that connects consumers, financial institutions, merchants, governments and businesses worldwide, enabling them to use electronic forms of payment instead of cash and checks. MasterCard offers a wide range of payment solutions, that enable the development and implementation of credit, debit, prepaid, commercial and related payment programs and solutions for consumers and merchants. The Company's customers encompass a vast array of entities, including financial institutions and others that act as "issuers" and "acquirers", as well as merchants, governments, telecommunications companies and other businesses. MasterCard manages a family of well-known, widely-accepted payment brands, including MasterCard®, Maestro® and Cirrus®, which its customers use in their payment programs and solutions. The Company processes payment transactions over the MasterCard Worldwide Network and provides support services to its customers and others.
Consolidation and basis of presentation	'
	Consolidation and basis of presentation
	The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of MasterCard and its majority-owned and controlled entities, including any variable interest entities for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the 2013 presentation. The Company follows accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).
	The balance sheet as of December 31, 2012 was derived from the audited consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2012. The consolidated financial statements for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 and as of September 30, 2013 are unaudited, and in the opinion of management, include all normal recurring adjustments that are necessary to present fairly the results for interim periods. The results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year.
	The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements are presented in accordance with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission requirements for Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and, consequently, do not include all of the disclosures required by GAAP. Reference should be made to the MasterCard Incorporated Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 for additional disclosures, including a summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies.
	Non-controlling interest amounts are included in the consolidated statement of operations within other income (expense). For each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 income from non-controlling interests was insignificant.
	In December 2012, the Company made a $726 million payment into a qualified cash settlement fund related to its U.S. merchant class litigation. The Company has presented these funds as restricted cash for litigation settlement since the use of the funds under the qualified cash settlement fund is restricted for payment under a preliminary settlement agreement that is subject to court approval. The funds would be returned to the Company in the event that the settlement is not finalized. If the settlement is finalized, MasterCard anticipates that it would receive back approximately $165 million from the qualified cash settlement fund related to the opt out merchants. As part of the settlement, in July 2013 MasterCard implemented the short-term reduction in default credit interchange rates (the "Class Interchange Reduction"). Amounts collected, but not yet distributed, have been presented together with the qualified cash settlement funds as restricted cash for litigation settlement. The Class Interchange Reduction has no impact on the consolidated statement of operations. See Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further discussion of the U.S. merchant class litigation.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements	'
	Recent accounting pronouncements
	Comprehensive income - In February 2013, new accounting guidance was issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") that requires disclosure of amounts reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to net income. The Company adopted the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2013. See Note 8 (Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income) for additional disclosures related to the new guidance.
	Balance sheet offsetting - In January 2013, the FASB issued accounting guidance clarifying the scope of its previously issued requirements to disclose gross and net amounts of eligible financial assets and financial liabilities recognized on the balance sheet. The Company adopted the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2013. See Note 13 (Foreign Exchange Risk Management) for additional disclosures related to the new guidance.
	Income taxes - In July 2013, the FASB issued accounting guidance that requires entities to present an unrecognized tax benefit net with certain deferred tax assets when specific requirements are met. The Company will adopt the revised accounting guidance effective January 1, 2014. The Company is currently evaluating the effect this guidance will have on its consolidated balance sheet.

Earnings_Per_Share_Tables

Earnings Per Share (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Earnings Per Share [Abstract]	'
Schedule of Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share	'
	The components of basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) for common shares were as follows:


		Three Months Ended				Nine Months Ended
		September 30,				September 30,
		2013		2012		2013		2012
		(in millions, except per share data)
	Numerator:
	Net income	$	879	$	772	$	2,493	$	2,154

	Denominator:
	Basic EPS weighted-average shares outstanding	121		125		121		126

	Dilutive stock options and stock units	—		—		—		—

	Diluted EPS weighted-average shares outstanding *	121		125		122		126

	Earnings per Share
	Basic	$	7.3	$	6.19	$	20.52	$	17.13

	Diluted	$	7.27	$	6.17	$	20.46	$	17.07


	Note that table may not sum due to rounding.
	* For the periods presented, the calculation of diluted EPS excluded a minimal amount of anti-dilutive share-based payment awards.

Fair_Value_and_Investment_Secu

Fair Value and Investment Securities (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Marketable Securities [Abstract]	'
Distribution of Financial Instruments, Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis	'
	The distribution of the Company’s financial instruments which are measured at fair value on a recurring basis within the Valuation Hierarchy was as follows:


		September 30, 2013
		Quoted Prices		Significant		Significant			Fair
		in Active		Other		Unobservable			Value
		Markets		Observable		Inputs
		(Level 1)		Inputs		(Level 3)
				(Level 2)
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities 1	$	—	$	262	$	—		$	262

	U.S. Government and Agency securities 2	—		595		—			595

	Taxable short-term bond funds	—		—		—			—

	Corporate securities	—		1,320		—			1,320

	Asset-backed securities	—		342		—			342

	Auction rate securities	—		—		16			16

	Other	—		106		—			106

	Total	$	—	$	2,625	$	16		$	2,641


		December 31, 2012
		Quoted Prices		Significant		Significant			Fair
		in Active		Other		Unobservable			Value
		Markets		Observable		Inputs
		(Level 1)		Inputs		(Level 3)
				(Level 2)
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities 1	$	—	$	531	$	—		$	531

	U.S. Government and Agency securities 2	—		582		—			582

	Taxable short-term bond funds	210		—		—			210

	Corporate securities	—		1,246		—			1,246

	Asset-backed securities	—		316		—			316

	Auction rate securities	—		—		32			32

	Other	—		63		—			63

	Total	$	210	$	2,738	$	32		$	2,980

	1 Available-for-sale municipal securities are carried at fair value and are included in the above tables. However, a held-to-maturity municipal bond was carried at amortized cost and excluded from the above table at December 31, 2012.
	2 Excludes amounts related to the preliminary U.S. merchant class litigation settlement of $727 million and $726 million at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, which would be included in Levels 1 and 2 of the Valuation Hierarchy. See Note 6 (Accrued Expenses) and Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further details.
Available-for-Sale Investment Securities, Unrealized Gains and Losses	'
	The major classes of the Company’s available-for-sale investment securities, for which unrealized gains and losses are recorded as a separate component of other comprehensive income on the consolidated statement of comprehensive income, and their respective amortized cost basis and fair values as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 were as follows:



		September 30, 2013
		Amortized		Gross		Gross			Fair
		Cost		Unrealized		Unrealized			Value
				Gain		Loss
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities	$	262	$	—	$	—		$	262

	U.S. Government and Agency securities	595		—		—			595

	Taxable short-term bond funds	—		—		—			—

	Corporate securities	1,320		—		—			1,320

	Asset-backed securities	342		—		—			342

	Auction rate securities 1	18		—		(2		)	16

	Other	75		—		—			75

	Total	$	2,612	$	—	$	(2	)	$	2,610


		December 31, 2012
		Amortized		Gross		Gross			Fair
		Cost		Unrealized		Unrealized			Value
				Gain		Loss
		(in millions)
	Municipal securities	$	522	$	9	$	—		$	531

	U.S. Government and Agency securities	582		—		—			582

	Taxable short-term bond funds	209		1		—			210

	Corporate securities	1,245		2		(1		)	1,246

	Asset-backed securities	316		—		—			316

	Auction rate securities 1	35		—		(3		)	32

	Other	66		—		—			66

	Total	$	2,975	$	12	$	(4	)	$	2,983


	1 The unrealized losses related to ARS have been in an unrealized loss position longer than 12 months, but have not been deemed other-than-temporarily impaired. The ARS are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet. See Note 4 (Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets).
Maturity Distribution Based on Contractual Terms of Investment Securities	'
	The maturity distribution based on the contractual terms of the Company’s investment securities at September 30, 2013 was as follows:


		Available-For-Sale
		Amortized		Fair Value
		Cost
		(in millions)
	Due within 1 year	$	1,522	$	1,522

	Due after 1 year through 5 years	1,065		1,065

	Due after 5 years through 10 years	7		7

	Due after 10 years	18		16

	Total	$	2,612	$	2,610

Prepaid_Expenses_and_Other_Ass1

Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Prepaid Expenses [Abstract]	'
Schedule of Other Current Assets [Table Text Block]	'
	Prepaid expenses and other current assets consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	239	$	222

	Investment securities held-to-maturity	—		36

	Prepaid income taxes	78		77

	Income taxes receivable	3		163

	Other	182		183

	Total prepaid expenses and other current assets	$	502	$	681

Schedule of Other Assets, Noncurrent	'
	Other assets consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	470	$	404

	Nonmarketable equity investments	233		249

	Auction rate securities available-for-sale, at fair value	16		32

	Income taxes receivable	75		72

	Other	58		52

	Total other assets	$	852	$	809

Property_Plant_and_Equipment_T

Property, Plant and Equipment (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]	'
Property, Plant and Equipment	'
	Property, plant and equipment consisted of the following:


		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
		(in millions)
	Property, plant and equipment	$	919		$	858

	Less accumulated depreciation and amortization	(445		)	(386		)
	Property, plant and equipment, net	$	474		$	472

Accrued_Expenses_Tables

Accrued Expenses (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Accrued Liabilities [Abstract]	'
Accrued Expenses	'
	Accrued expenses consisted of the following:


		September 30,		December 31,
		2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Customer and merchant incentives	$	1,243	$	1,058

	Personnel costs	356		354

	Advertising	111		122

	Income and other taxes	164		94

	Other	130		120

	Total accrued expenses	$	2,004	$	1,748

Stockholders_Equity_Stockholde

Stockholders' Equity Stockholders' Equity (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Equity [Abstract]	'
schedule of share repurchases and authorizations [Table Text Block]	'
	The following table summarizes the Company's share repurchase authorizations of its Class A common stock through September 30, 2013, as well as historical purchases:


		Authorization Dates
		Feb-13		Jun-12		April 20111		Total
		(in millions, except average price data)
	Board authorization	$	2,000	$	1,500	$	2,000	$	5,500

	Dollar value of shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		283		852		$	1,135

	Remaining authorization at December 31, 2012	**		$	604	$	—	$	604

	Dollar value of shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	1,088		604		$	—	$	1,692

	Remaining authorization at September 30, 2013	$	912	$	—	$	—	$	912

	Shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		0.67		2.11		2.78

	Average price paid per share during the nine months ended September 30, 2012	**		$	426.96	$	403.53	$	409.12

	Shares repurchased during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	1.94		1.17		—		3.11

	Average price paid per share during the nine months ended September 30, 2013	$	561.89	$	517.16	$	—	$	545.05

	Cumulative shares repurchased through September 30, 2013	1.94		3.11		6.54		11.59

	Cumulative average price paid per share	$	561.89	$	481.58	$	305.6	$	395.66

	** Not applicable
	1 The initial authorization in September 2010 for $1 billion was amended in April 2011 to increase the authorization to $2 billion.

Accumulated_Other_Comprehensiv1

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss), Net of Tax [Abstract]	'
Schedule of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Table Text Block]	'
	The changes in the balances of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax, for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 were as follows:


		Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments		Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans			Investment Securities Available-for-Sale			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
		(in millions)
	Balance at December 31, 2012	$	93	$	(37	)	$	5		$	61

	Current period other comprehensive income (loss)*	65		—			(6		)	59

	Balance at September 30, 2013	$	158	$	(37	)	$	(1	)	$	120


	* During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, $3 million of deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses. In addition, $5 million of net gains on available-for-sale investment securities were recognized in investment income during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Tax amounts related to these items are insignificant.

Share_Based_Payment_and_Other_1

Share Based Payment and Other Benefits Awards granted (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Share-Based Awards [Abstract]	'
Schedule of Compensation Cost for Share-based Payment Arrangements, Allocation of Share-based Compensation Costs by Plan [Table Text Block]	'
	During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, the Company granted the following awards under the MasterCard Incorporated 2006 Long Term Incentive Plan, as amended and restated (“LTIP”). The LTIP is a shareholder-approved omnibus plan that permits the grant of various types of equity awards to employees.


		Granted in 2013	Weighted-Average Grant-Date Fair Value
		(in thousands)
	Non-qualified stock options	183	$123
	Restricted stock units	153	$516
	Performance stock units	18	$560

Settlement_and_Other_Risk_Mana1

Settlement and Other Risk Management (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Settlement and Other Risk Management [Abstract]	'
Estimated Settlement Exposure and Portion of Uncollateralized Settlement Exposure for MasterCard-Branded Transactions	'
	The Company's estimated settlement exposure from MasterCard, Cirrus and Maestro branded transactions was as follows:


		September 30,			December 31,
		2013			2012
		(in millions)
	Gross settlement exposure	$	38,762		$	37,768

	Collateral held for settlement exposure	(3,121		)	(3,775		)
	Net uncollateralized settlement exposure	$	35,641		$	33,993

Foreign_Exchange_Risk_Manageme1

Foreign Exchange Risk Management (Tables)	9 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2013
Foreign Currency Derivatives [Abstract]	'
Classification of Outstanding Forward Contracts by Functional Currency	'
	MasterCard’s derivative contracts are summarized below:


		September 30, 2013					December 31, 2012
		Notional		Estimated Fair			Notional		Estimated Fair
				Value					Value
		(in millions)
	Commitments to purchase foreign currency	$	30	$	(1	)	$	76	$	(1	)

	Commitments to sell foreign currency	1,732		32			1,571		(2		)

	Balance Sheet Location:
	Accounts Receivable*			$	38				$	12

	Other Current Liabilities*			(7		)			(15		)
	* The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis on the balance sheet and are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements, which contain various netting and setoff provisions.
Foreign Exchange Risk Management	'
	The amount of gain (loss) recognized in income for the contracts to purchase and sell foreign currency are summarized below:


		Three Months Ended					Nine Months Ended
		September 30,					September 30,
		2013		2012			2013		2012
		(in millions)
	Foreign currency derivative contracts
	General and administrative	$	26	$	25		$	38	$	15

	Net revenue	3		—			2		(3		)

	Total	$	29	$	25		$	40	$	12

Summary_of_Significant_Account2

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Consolidation and basis of presentation (Details) (U.S. merchant litigation - class litigation [Member], USD $)	12 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013
U.S. merchant litigation - class litigation [Member]	'	'
Consolidation and basis of presentation [Line Items]	'	'
Payments for Legal Settlements	$726	'
Estimated amount to be received from the cash settlement fund	'	$165

Earnings_Per_Share_Schedule_of

Earnings Per Share Schedule of Basic and Diluted Earnings Per Share (Details) (USD $)	3 Months Ended				9 Months Ended
In Millions, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012		Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012
Numerator: [Abstract]	'		'		'		'
Net income	$879		$772		$2,493		$2,154
Denominator: [Abstract]	'		'		'		'
Basic EPS weighted-average shares outstanding	121		125		121		126
Dilutive stock options and stock units	0		0		0		0
Dilutive EPS weighted-average shares outstanding	121	[1]	125	[1]	122	[1]	126	[1]
Earnings per Share [Abstract]	'		'		'		'
Basic	$7.30		$6.19		$20.52		$17.13
Diluted	$7.27		$6.17		$20.46		$17.07

[1]	For the periods presented, the calculation of diluted EPS excluded a minimal amount of anti-dilutive share-based payment awards.

Fair_Value_and_Investment_Secu1

Fair Value and Investment Securities Narrative (Details) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Dec. 31, 2012
Fair Value By Balance Sheet Grouping [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Investment income	$11	$9	$30	$27	'
Percentage of fair value of investments using discounted cash flow pricing model	10.00%	'	10.00%	'	10.00%
Minimum [Member]	'	'	'	'	'
Fair Value By Balance Sheet Grouping [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Collateral Requirements Minimum Percentage Collateral To Fair Value Of Securities Loaned Under Security Lending Transactions	95.00%	'	95.00%	'	'
Maximum [Member]	'	'	'	'	'
Fair Value By Balance Sheet Grouping [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Collateral Requirements Minimum Percentage Collateral To Fair Value Of Securities Loaned Under Security Lending Transactions	98.00%	'	98.00%	'	'

Fair_Value_and_Investment_Secu2

Fair Value and Investment Securities Distribution of Financial Instruments, Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Amounts held in escrow for the preliminary U.S. merchant class litigation settlement	$727		$726
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	2,641		2,980
Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		210
Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	2,625		2,738
Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	16		32
Municipal securities [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	262	[1]	531	[1]
Municipal securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0	[1]	0	[1]
Municipal securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	262	[1]	531	[1]
Municipal securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0	[1]	0	[1]
U.S. Government and Agency securities [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	595	[2]	582	[2]
U.S. Government and Agency securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0	[2]	0	[2]
U.S. Government and Agency securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	595	[2]	582	[2]
U.S. Government and Agency securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0	[2]	0	[2]
Taxable short-term bond funds [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		210
Taxable short-term bond funds [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		210
Taxable short-term bond funds [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Taxable short-term bond funds [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Corporate securities [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	1,320		1,246
Corporate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Corporate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	1,320		1,246
Corporate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Asset-backed securities [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	342		316
Asset-backed securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Asset-backed securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	342		316
Asset-backed securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Auction rate securities [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	16		32
Auction rate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Auction rate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Auction rate securities [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	16		32
Other [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	106		63
Other [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 1 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	0		0
Other [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 2 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	106		63
Other [Member] \| Fair Value, Inputs, Level 3 [Member]	'		'
Fair Value, Option, Quantitative Disclosures [Line Items]	'		'
Fair Value, Measured on Recurring Basis	$0		$0

[1]	Available-for-sale municipal securities are carried at fair value and are included in the above tables. However, a held-to-maturity municipal bond was carried at amortized cost and excluded from the above table at DecemberB 31, 2012.
[2]	Excludes amounts related to the preliminary U.S. merchant class litigation settlement of $727 million and $726 million at SeptemberB 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively, which would be included in Levels 1 and 2 of the Valuation Hierarchy. See Note 6 (Accrued Expenses) and Note 11 (Legal and Regulatory Proceedings) for further details.

Fair_Value_and_Investment_Secu3

Fair Value and Investment Securities Available-for-Sale Investment Securities, Unrealized Gains and Losses (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	$2,612		$2,975
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		12
Gross Unrealized Loss	-2		-4
Fair Value	2,610		2,983
Municipal securities [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	262		522
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		9
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		0
Fair Value	262		531
U.S. Government and Agency securities [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	595		582
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		0
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		0
Fair Value	595		582
Taxable short-term bond funds [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	0		209
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		1
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		0
Fair Value	0		210
Corporate securities [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	1,320		1,245
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		2
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		-1
Fair Value	1,320		1,246
Asset-backed securities [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	342		316
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		0
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		0
Fair Value	342		316
Auction rate securities [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	18	[1]	35	[1]
Gross Unrealized Gain	0	[1]	0	[1]
Gross Unrealized Loss	-2	[1]	-3	[1]
Fair Value	16	[1]	32	[1]
Other [Member]	'		'
Investment Identifier [Line Items]	'		'
Amortized Cost	75		66
Gross Unrealized Gain	0		0
Gross Unrealized Loss	0		0
Fair Value	$75		$66

[1]	The unrealized losses related to ARS have been in an unrealized loss position longer than 12 months, but have not been deemed other-than-temporarily impaired. The ARS are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheet. See Note 4 (Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets).

Fair_Value_and_Investment_Secu4

Fair Value and Investment Securities Maturity Distribution Based on Contractual Terms of Investment Securities (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013
Available-For-Sale Amortized Cost	'
Due within 1 year	$1,522
Due after 1 year through 5 years	1,065
Due after 5 years through 10 years	7
Due after 10 years	18
Total	2,612
Available-For-Sale Fair Value	'
Due within 1 year	1,522
Due after 1 year through 5 years	1,065
Due after 5 years through 10 years	7
Due after 10 years	16
Total	$2,610

Prepaid_Expenses_and_Other_Ass2

Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets Schedule of Prepaid Expenses (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Prepaid Expenses [Abstract]	'	'
Customer and merchant incentives	$239	$222
Investment securities held-to-maturity	0	36
Prepaid income taxes	78	77
Income taxes receivable	3	163
Other	182	183
Total prepaid expense and other current assets	$502	$681

Prepaid_Expenses_and_Other_Ass3

Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets Schedule of Other Assets (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Prepaid Expenses [Abstract]	'	'
Customer and merchant incentives	$470	$404
Nonmarketable equity investments	233	249
Auction rate securities available-for-sale, at fair value	16	32
Income taxes receivable	75	72
Other	58	52
Total other assets	$852	$809

Property_Plant_and_Equipment_D

Property, Plant and Equipment (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]	'	'
Property, plant and equipment	$919	$858
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization	445	386
Property, plant and equipment, net	$474	$472

Accrued_Expenses_Details

Accrued Expenses (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Accrued Liabilities [Abstract]	'	'
Customer and merchant incentives	$1,243	$1,058
Personnel costs	356	354
Advertising	111	122
Income and other taxes	164	94
Other	130	120
Total accrued expenses	$2,004	$1,748

Accrued_Expenses_Accrued_Litig

Accrued Expenses Accrued Litigation Expense (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Accrued Expenses [Abstract]	'	'
Accrued litigation	$727	$726

Stockholders_Equity_Details

Stockholders' Equity (Details) (USD $)

9 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

12 Months Ended

33 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

33 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

12 Months Ended

33 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

12 Months Ended

33 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2013

Apr. 28, 2011

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2012

Dec. 31, 2012

Sep. 30, 2013

Feb. 28, 2013

Oct. 24, 2013

Sep. 30, 2013

Jun. 30, 2012

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2012

Dec. 31, 2012

Sep. 30, 2013

Apr. 30, 2011

Sep. 30, 2010

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2012

Dec. 31, 2012

Dec. 31, 2011

Sep. 30, 2013

Class A Common Stock [Member]

2013 Share repurchase plan [Member]

2012 repurchase plan [Member]

2010 repurchase plan [Member]

Class A Common Stock [Member]

Class of Stock [Line Items]

Board authorization

$5,500,000,000

$2,000,000,000

$1,500,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$2,000,000,000

Stock repurchased during period, shares

1,900,000

Additional amount approved for repurchase

1,000,000,000

Aggregate cost of shares repurchased

1,100,000,000

Dollar value of shares repurchased during period

1,692,000,000

1,135,000,000

1,088,000,000

604,000,000

283,000,000

852,000,000

Remaining authorization

$604,000,000

$912,000,000

$604,000,000

Average price paid per share

$545.05

$409.12

$395.66

$561.89

$517.16

$426.96

$481.58

$403.53

$305.60

Shares repurchased

3,110,000

2,780,000

11,590,000

1,940,000

1,170,000

670,000

3,110,000

2,110,000

6,540,000

Accumulated_Other_Comprehensiv2

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Details) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013		Sep. 30, 2012
Balance at December 31, 2012, Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments	'	'	$93		'
Balance at December 31, 2012, Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans	'	'	-37		'
Balance at December 31, 2012, Investment Securities Available-for-Sale	'	'	5		'
Balance at December 31, 2012, Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)	'	'	61		'
Current period other comprehensive income (loss), Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments	137	78	65	[1]	28
Current period other comprehensive income (loss), Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans	1	0	0	[1]	-1
Current period other comprehensive income (loss), Investment Securities Available-for-Sale	0	3	-6	[1]	7
Current period other comprehensive income (loss), Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)	136	81	59	[1]	36
Balance at September 30, 2013, Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments	158	'	158		'
Balance at September 30, 2013, Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans	-37	'	-37		'
Balance at September 30, 2013, Investment Securities Available-for-Sale	-1	'	-1		'
Balance at September 30, 2013, Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)	120	'	120		'
deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses	'	'	3		'
net gains on available-for-sale investment securities recognized in investment income	'	'	$5		'

[1]	During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, $3 million of deferred costs related to the Company's Defined Benefit Pension Plan were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to general and administrative expenses. In addition, $5 million of net gains on available-for-sale investment securities were recognized in investment income during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Tax amounts related to these items are insignificant.

Share_Based_Payments_Narrative

Share Based Payments (Narrative) (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2013
In Thousands, except Per Share data, unless otherwise specified	Class A Common Stock [Member]	Class A Common Stock [Member]	Non-qualified stock options [Member]	Restricted stock units [Member]	Performance stock units [Member]
			numberofinstallments
Share-based Compensation [Line Items]	'	'	'	'	'
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Term	'	'	'5 years	'	'
Stock granted under Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP)	'	'	183	153	18
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Equity Instruments Other than Options, Grants in Period, Weighted-Average Grant-Date Fair Value	'	'	'	$516	$560
Class A common stock, par value	$0.00	$0.00	'	'	'
Fair value of stock options, per share, estimated using a Black-Scholes option pricing model	'	'	$123	'	'
Stock options vested, number of annual installments	'	'	4	'	'
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Volatility Rate	'	'	27.10%	'	'
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Award Vesting Period	'	'	'1 year	'3 years	'3 years
Share Based Compensation Arrangement By Share Based Payment Award Options Term	'	'	'10 years	'	'

Income_Taxes_Details

Income Taxes (Details)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
Income Taxes (Details)	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Income Tax Expense (Benefit), Continuing Operations [Abstract]	'	'	'	'
Effective income tax rate	29.90%	27.60%	30.50%	29.10%

Legal_and_Regulatory_Proceedin1

Legal and Regulatory Proceedings (Details)

3 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

3 Months Ended

6 Months Ended

1 Months Ended

12 Months Ended

3 Months Ended

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2012

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2012

Dec. 31, 2012

Feb. 07, 2011

Dec. 31, 2009

Mar. 31, 2008

Jun. 30, 2008

Nov. 03, 2010

Sep. 30, 2013

Sep. 30, 2009

Mar. 31, 2009

Dec. 31, 2012

Sep. 30, 2013

Dec. 31, 2011

Sep. 30, 2012

USD ($)

Event Involving Visa Parties, Member Banks and MasterCard [Member]

Event Involving Member Banks and MasterCard [Member]

Hungarian Competition Authority [Member]

Cross Border [Member]

Italian Competition Authority [Member]

Canadian Competition Bureau [Member]

State Unfair Competition [Member]

Undertakings to European Commission [Member]

U.S. Merchant Lawsuit Settlement [Member]

U.S. merchant litigation - class litigation [Member]

Scenario, Forecast [Member]

USD ($)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Debit Card Transactions [Member]

Credit Card Transactions [Member]

USD ($)

merchant

Legal And Regulatory [Line Items]

Compensatory damages sought, Canadian Competition Bureau

$5,000,000,000

Percent of settlement MasterCard would pay

12.00%

36.00%

Approximate number of merchants that have opted out of settlement agreement

8,000

Provision for litigation settlement

20,000,000

770,000,000

20,000,000

Estimated Litigation Liability, Current

727,000,000

726,000,000

Daily penalty upon failure to comply European Commission's decision, percentage

3.50%

Daily penalty upon failure to comply European Commission's decision

800,000

Weighted Average Interchange Fee Transaction Basis Point

0.20%

0.30%

Payments for Legal Settlements

3,000,000

790,000,000

726,000,000

Return provided for in settlement agreement to defendants

25.00%

approximate percentage of merchants that opted out of settlement

25.00%

Legal proceeding complaints from merchants that have opted out of settlement

Estimated amount to be received from the cash settlement fund

165,000,000

Accrued litigation payment

6,000,000

Amount of fine

$4,000,000

€ 2,700,000

Settlement_and_Other_Risk_Mana2

Settlement and Other Risk Management Estimated Settlement Exposure and Portion of Uncollateralized Settlement Exposure for MasterCard-Branded Transactions (Details) (Guarantee Obligations [Member], USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Guarantee Obligations [Member]	'	'
Risks Inherent in Servicing Assets and Servicing Liabilities [Line Items]	'	'
Gross settlement exposure	$38,762	$37,768
Collateral held for settlement exposure	-3,121	-3,775
Net uncollateralized settlement exposure	$35,641	$33,993

Settlement_and_Other_Risk_Mana3

Settlement and Other Risk Management Travelers cheques issued (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 12. Settlement and Other Risk Management [Abstract]	'	'
Travelers Cheques Covered by Collateral Arrangements	$409	$434
Guarantor Obligations, Maximum Exposure, Undiscounted	$510	$539

Foreign_Exchange_Risk_Manageme2

Foreign Exchange Risk Management Classification of Outstanding Forward Contracts (Details) (USD $)	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Accounts Receivable [Member]	'		'
Foreign Exchange Risk Management [Line Items]	'		'
Foreign currency contract derivatives, Estimated Fair Value	$38	[1]	$12	[1]
Other Current Liabilities [Member]	'		'
Foreign Exchange Risk Management [Line Items]	'		'
Foreign currency contract derivatives, Estimated Fair Value	7	[1]	15	[1]
Commitments to purchase foreign currency [Member] \| Foreign Exchange Forward [Member]	'		'
Foreign Exchange Risk Management [Line Items]	'		'
Commitments to purchase/sell foreign currency, Notional	30		76
Commitments to purchase/sell foreign currency, Estimated Fair Value	-1		-1
Commitments to sell foreign currency [Member] \| Foreign Exchange Forward [Member]	'		'
Foreign Exchange Risk Management [Line Items]	'		'
Commitments to purchase/sell foreign currency, Notional	1,732		1,571
Commitments to purchase/sell foreign currency, Estimated Fair Value	$32		($2)

[1]	The fair values of derivative contracts are presented on a gross basis on the balance sheet and are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements, which contain various netting and setoff provisions.

Foreign_Exchange_Risk_Manageme3

Foreign Exchange Risk Management Foreign Exchange Risk Management (Details) (USD $)	3 Months Ended		9 Months Ended
In Millions, unless otherwise specified	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012	Sep. 30, 2013	Sep. 30, 2012
Derivatives Not Designated As Hedging Instruments	'	'	'	'
Terms of the foreign currency forward contracts and foreign currency option contracts	'18 months	'	'	'
Effect of a hypothetical 10% adverse change in foreign currency rates	$186	'	$186	'
Foreign Currency Derivative Contracts [Member]	'	'	'	'
Derivatives Not Designated As Hedging Instruments	'	'	'	'
Total	29	25	40	12
Foreign Currency Derivative Contracts [Member] \| General and administrative [Member]	'	'	'	'
Derivatives Not Designated As Hedging Instruments	'	'	'	'
Foreign Currency Derivative Contracts	26	25	38	15
Foreign Currency Derivative Contracts [Member] \| Net revenue [Member]	'	'	'	'
Derivatives Not Designated As Hedging Instruments	'	'	'	'
Foreign Currency Derivative Contracts	$3	$0	$2	($3)