Commitments and Contingencies | 3 Months Ended |
Dec. 31, 2014 |
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |
Commitments and Contingencies | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
Legal and Regulatory Matters |
Order Routing Litigation – Five putative class action complaints have been filed regarding TD Ameritrade’s routing of client orders. The cases are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska: Jay Zola et al. v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., et al.; Tyler Verdieck v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.; Bruce Lerner v. TD Ameritrade, Inc.; Michael Sarbacker v. TD Ameritrade Holding Corporation, et al.; Gerald Klein v. TD Ameritrade Holding Corporation, et al. The complaints in Zola, Klein and Sarbacker allege that the defendants failed to provide clients with “best execution” and routed orders to the market venue that paid the most for its order flow. The complaints in Verdieck and Lerner allege that the defendant routed its clients’ non-marketable limit orders to the venue paying the highest rates of maker rebates, and that clients did not receive best execution on these kinds of orders. The complaints variously include claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of best execution, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, violations of Section 10(b) and 20 of the Exchange Act and SEC Rule 10b-5, violation of Nebraska’s Consumer Protection Act, aiding and abetting, unjust enrichment and declaratory judgment. The complaints seek various kinds of relief including damages, restitution, disgorgement, injunctive relief, equitable relief and other relief. The Company intends to vigorously defend against these lawsuits. The Company is unable to predict the outcome or the timing of the ultimate resolution of these lawsuits, or the potential losses, if any, that may result. |
Reserve Fund Matters – During September 2008, The Reserve, an independent mutual fund company, announced that the net asset value of the Reserve Yield Plus Fund declined below $1.00 per share. The Yield Plus Fund was not a money market mutual fund, but its stated objective was to maintain a net asset value of $1.00 per share. TD Ameritrade, Inc.’s clients continue to hold shares in the Yield Plus Fund (now known as “Yield Plus Fund – In Liquidation”), which is being liquidated. On July 23, 2010, The Reserve announced that through that date it had distributed approximately 94.8% of the Yield Plus Fund assets as of September 15, 2008 and that the Yield Plus Fund had approximately $39.7 million in total remaining assets. The Reserve stated that the fund’s Board of Trustees has set aside almost the entire amount of the remaining assets to cover potential claims, fees and expenses. The Company estimates that TD Ameritrade, Inc. clients’ current positions held in the Reserve Yield Plus Fund amount to approximately 79% of the fund. |
On January 27, 2011, TD Ameritrade, Inc. entered into a settlement with the SEC, agreeing to pay $0.012 per share to all eligible current or former clients that purchased shares of the Yield Plus Fund and continued to own those shares. Clients who purchased Yield Plus Fund shares through independent registered investment advisors were not eligible for the payment. In February 2011, the Company paid clients approximately $10 million under the settlement agreement. |
In November 2008, a purported class action lawsuit was filed with respect to the Yield Plus Fund. The lawsuit is captioned Ross v. Reserve Management Company, Inc. et al. and is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Ross lawsuit is on behalf of persons who purchased shares of Reserve Yield Plus Fund. On November 20, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint naming as defendants the fund’s advisor, certain of its affiliates and the Company and certain of its directors, officers and shareholders as alleged control persons. The complaint alleges claims of violations of the federal securities laws and other claims based on allegations that false and misleading statements and omissions were made in the Reserve Yield Plus Fund prospectuses and in other statements regarding the fund. The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of compensatory damages including interest, attorneys’ fees, rescission, exemplary damages and equitable relief. On January 19, 2010, the defendants submitted motions to dismiss the complaint. The motions are pending. |
The Company estimates that its clients’ current aggregate shortfall, based on the original par value of their holdings in the Yield Plus Fund, less the value of fund distributions to date and payments to clients under the SEC settlement, is approximately $36 million. This amount does not take into account any assets remaining in the fund that may become available for future distributions. |
The Company is unable to predict the outcome or the timing of the ultimate resolution of the Ross lawsuit, or the potential loss, if any, that may result. However, management believes the outcome is not likely to have a material adverse effect on the financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of the Company. |
Other Legal and Regulatory Matters – The Company is subject to a number of other lawsuits, arbitrations, claims and other legal proceedings in connection with its business. Some of these legal actions include claims for substantial or unspecified compensatory and/or punitive damages. In addition, in the normal course of business, the Company discusses matters with its regulators raised during regulatory examinations or otherwise subject to their inquiry. These matters could result in censures, fines, penalties or other sanctions. ASC 450, Loss Contingencies, governs the recognition and disclosure of loss contingencies, including potential losses from legal and regulatory matters. ASC 450 categorizes loss contingencies using three terms based on the likelihood of occurrence of events that result in a loss: “probable” means that “the future event or events are likely to occur;” “remote” means that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight;” and “reasonably possible” means that “the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely.” Under ASC 450, the Company accrues for losses that are considered both probable and reasonably estimable. The Company may incur losses in addition to the amounts accrued where the losses are greater than estimated by management, or for matters for which an unfavorable outcome is considered reasonably possible, but not probable. |
The Company estimates that the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses in excess of amounts accrued is from $0 to $30 million as of December 31, 2014. This estimated aggregate range of reasonably possible losses is based upon currently available information for those legal and regulatory matters in which the Company is involved, taking into account the Company’s best estimate of reasonably possible losses for those cases as to which an estimate can be made. For certain cases, the Company does not believe an estimate can currently be made, as some cases are in preliminary stages and some cases have no specific amounts claimed. The Company’s estimate involves significant judgment, given the varying stages of the proceedings and the inherent uncertainty of predicting outcomes. The estimated range will change from time to time as the underlying matters, stages of proceedings and available information change. Actual losses may vary significantly from the current estimated range. |
The Company believes, based on its current knowledge and after consultation with counsel, that the ultimate disposition of these legal and regulatory matters, individually or in the aggregate, is not likely to have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or cash flows of the Company. However, in light of the uncertainties involved in such matters, the Company is unable to predict the outcome or the timing of the ultimate resolution of these matters, or the potential losses, fines, penalties or equitable relief, if any, that may result, and it is possible that the ultimate resolution of one or more of these matters may be material to the Company’s results of operations for a particular reporting period. |
Income Taxes |
The Company’s federal and state income tax returns are subject to examination by taxing authorities. Because the application of tax laws and regulations to many types of transactions is subject to varying interpretations, amounts reported in the condensed consolidated financial statements could be significantly changed at a later date upon final determinations by taxing authorities. The Toronto-Dominion Bank (“TD”) has agreed to indemnify the Company for tax obligations, if any, pertaining to activities of TD Waterhouse Group, Inc. (“TD Waterhouse”) prior to the Company’s acquisition of TD Waterhouse in January 2006. |
General Contingencies |
In the ordinary course of business, there are various contingencies that are not reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements. These include the Company’s broker-dealer subsidiaries’ client activities involving the execution, settlement and financing of various client securities, options, futures and foreign exchange transactions. These activities may expose the Company to credit risk in the event the clients are unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. |
The Company extends margin credit and leverage to its clients. In margin transactions, the Company extends credit to the client, subject to various regulatory and internal margin requirements, collateralized by cash and securities in the client’s account. In connection with these activities, the Company also executes and clears client transactions involving the sale of securities not yet purchased (“short sales”). Such margin-related transactions may expose the Company to credit risk in the event a client’s assets are not sufficient to fully cover losses that the client may incur. Leverage involves securing a large potential future obligation with a lesser amount of cash and securities. The risks associated with margin credit and leverage increase during periods of rapid market movements, or in cases where leverage or collateral is concentrated and market movements occur. In the event the client fails to satisfy its obligations, the Company has the authority to purchase or sell financial instruments in the client’s account at prevailing market prices in order to fulfill the client’s obligations. However, during periods of rapid market movements, clients who utilize margin credit or leverage and who have collateralized their obligations with securities may find that the securities have a rapidly depreciating value and may not be sufficient to cover their obligations in the event of liquidation. The Company seeks to mitigate the risks associated with its client margin and leverage activities by requiring clients to maintain margin collateral in compliance with various regulatory and internal guidelines. The Company monitors required margin levels throughout each trading day and, pursuant to such guidelines, requires clients to deposit additional collateral, or to reduce positions, when necessary. |
The Company loans securities temporarily to other broker-dealers in connection with its broker-dealer business. The Company receives cash as collateral for the securities loaned. Increases in securities prices may cause the market value of the securities loaned to exceed the amount of cash received as collateral. In the event the counterparty to these transactions does not return the loaned securities, the Company may be exposed to the risk of acquiring the securities at prevailing market prices in order to satisfy its client obligations. The Company mitigates this risk by requiring credit approvals for counterparties, by monitoring the market value of securities loaned on a daily basis and requiring additional cash as collateral when necessary, and by participating in a risk-sharing program offered through the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”). |
The Company borrows securities temporarily from other broker-dealers in connection with its broker-dealer business. The Company deposits cash as collateral for the securities borrowed. Decreases in securities prices may cause the market value of the securities borrowed to fall below the amount of cash deposited as collateral. In the event the counterparty to these transactions does not return the cash deposited, the Company may be exposed to the risk of selling the securities at prevailing market prices. The Company mitigates this risk by requiring credit approvals for counterparties, by monitoring the collateral values on a daily basis and requiring collateral to be returned by the counterparties when necessary, and by participating in a risk-sharing program offered through the OCC. |
The Company transacts in reverse repurchase agreements (securities purchased under agreements to resell) in connection with its broker-dealer business. The Company’s policy is to take possession or control of securities with a market value in excess of the principal amount loaned, plus accrued interest, in order to collateralize resale agreements. The Company monitors the market value of the underlying securities that collateralize the related receivable on resale agreements on a daily basis and may require additional collateral when deemed appropriate. |
The Company has accepted collateral in connection with client margin loans and securities borrowed. Under applicable agreements, the Company is generally permitted to repledge securities held as collateral and use them to enter into securities lending arrangements. The following table summarizes the fair values of client margin securities and stock borrowings that were available to the Company to utilize as collateral on various borrowings or for other purposes, and the amount of that collateral loaned or repledged by the Company (dollars in billions): |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| December 31, | | September 30, | | | |
2014 | 2014 | | | |
Client margin securities | $ | 16.1 | | | $ | 16.2 | | | | |
| | |
Stock borrowings | 1 | | | 1 | | | | |
| | |
Total collateral available | $ | 17.1 | | | $ | 17.2 | | | | |
| | |
| | | | | | |
Collateral loaned | $ | 2 | | | $ | 2.4 | | | | |
| | |
Collateral repledged | 2.5 | | | 2.5 | | | | |
| | |
Total collateral loaned or repledged | $ | 4.5 | | | $ | 4.9 | | | | |
| | |
The Company is subject to cash deposit and collateral requirements with clearinghouses based on its clients’ trading activity. The following table summarizes cash deposited with and securities pledged to clearinghouses by the Company (dollars in millions): |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Assets | | Balance Sheet Classification | | December 31, | | September 30, |
2014 | 2014 |
Cash | | Receivable from brokers, dealers and clearing | | $ | 169 | | | $ | 104 | |
organizations |
U.S. government debt securities | | Securities owned, at fair value | | 286 | | | 181 | |
|
Total | | | | $ | 455 | | | $ | 285 | |
|
Guarantees |
The Company is a member of and provides guarantees to securities clearinghouses and exchanges in connection with client trading activities. Under related agreements, the Company is generally required to guarantee the performance of other members. Under these agreements, if a member becomes unable to satisfy its obligations to the clearinghouse, other members would be required to meet shortfalls. The Company’s liability under these arrangements is not quantifiable and could exceed the cash and securities it has posted to the clearinghouse as collateral. However, the potential for the Company to be required to make payments under these agreements is considered remote. Accordingly, no contingent liability is carried on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets for these guarantees. |
The Company clears its clients’ futures transactions on an omnibus account basis through unaffiliated clearing firms. The Company has agreed to indemnify the unaffiliated clearing firms for any loss that they may incur for the client transactions introduced to them by the Company. |
See “Insured Deposit Account Agreement” in Note 12 for a description of a guarantee included in that agreement. |