Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Guarantee In 2018, we established a multi-currency notional cash pool for certain of our entities with a third-party bank provider. Actual cash balances are not physically converted and are not commingled between participating legal entities. As part of the notional cash pool agreement, the bank extends overdraft credit to our participating entities as needed, provided that the overall notionally pooled balance of all accounts in the pool at the end of each day is at least zero. In the unlikely event of a default by our collective entities participating in the pool, any overdraft balances incurred would be guaranteed by Facebook, Inc. Other Contractual Commitments We also have $12.85 billion of non-cancelable contractual commitments as of June 30, 2021, which are primarily related to our investments in network infrastructure, consumer hardware and content costs. These commitments are primarily due within five years. Legal and Related Matters Beginning on March 20, 2018, multiple putative class actions and derivative actions were filed in state and federal courts in the United States and elsewhere against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws, breach of fiduciary duties, and other causes of action in connection with our platform and user data practices as well as the misuse of certain data by a developer that shared such data with third parties in violation of our terms and policies, and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. Beginning on July 27, 2018, two putative class actions were filed in federal court in the United States against us and certain of our directors and officers alleging violations of securities laws in connection with the disclosure of our earnings results for the second quarter of 2018 and seeking unspecified damages. These two actions subsequently were transferred and consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California with the putative securities class action described above relating to our platform and user data practices. On September 25, 2019, the district court granted our motion to dismiss the consolidated putative securities class action, with leave to amend. On November 15, 2019, a second amended complaint was filed in the consolidated putative securities class action. On August 7, 2020, the district court granted our motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, with leave to amend. On October 16, 2020, a third amended complaint was filed in the consolidated putative securities class action. We believe these lawsuits are without merit, and we are vigorously defending them. In addition, our platform and user data practices, as well as the events surrounding the misuse of certain data by a developer, became the subject of U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), state attorneys general, and other government inquiries in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions. We entered into a settlement and modified consent order to resolve the FTC inquiry, which took effect in April 2020. Among other matters, our settlement with the FTC required us to pay a penalty of $5.0 billion, which was paid in April 2020 upon the effectiveness of the modified consent order. The state attorneys general inquiry and certain government inquiries in other jurisdictions remain ongoing. On July 16, 2021, a stockholder derivative action was filed in Delaware Chancery Court against certain of our directors and officers asserting breach of fiduciary duty and related claims relating to our historical platform and user data practices, as well as our settlement with the FTC. On July 20, 2021, other stockholders filed an amended derivative complaint in a related Delaware Chancery Court action, which asserts breach of fiduciary duty and related claims against certain of our current and former directors and officers in connection with our historical platform and user data practices. On April 1, 2015, a putative class action was filed against us in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California by Facebook users alleging that the "tag suggestions" facial recognition feature violates the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, and seeking statutory damages and injunctive relief. On April 16, 2018, the district court certified a class of Illinois residents, and on May 14, 2018, the district court denied both parties' motions for summary judgment. On May 29, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted our petition for review of the class certification order and stayed the proceeding. On August 8, 2019, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the class certification order. On December 2, 2019, we filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of the decision of the Ninth Circuit, which was denied. On January 15, 2020, the parties agreed to a settlement in principle to resolve the lawsuit, which provided for a payment of $550 million by us and was subject to court approval. On or about May 8, 2020, the parties executed a formal settlement agreement, and plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement by the district court. On June 4, 2020, the district court denied the plaintiffs' motion without prejudice. On July 22, 2020, the parties executed an amended settlement agreement, which, among other terms, provides for a payment of $650 million by us. On February 26, 2021, the court granted final approval of the settlement, and the payment was made in March 2021. On March 27 and March 29, 2021, objectors filed notices of appeal of the order granting final approval of the settlement. On June 15, 2021, one of the objectors filed a motion to dismiss the appeal voluntarily, and the court entered such dismissal on June 22, 2021. Beginning on September 28, 2018, multiple putative class actions were filed in state and federal courts in the United States and elsewhere against us alleging violations of consumer protection laws and other causes of action in connection with a third-party cyber-attack that exploited a vulnerability in Facebook's code to steal user access tokens and access certain profile information from user accounts on Facebook, and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. The actions filed in the United States were consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. On November 26, 2019, the district court certified a class for injunctive relief purposes, but denied certification of a class for purposes of pursuing damages. On January 16, 2020, the parties agreed to a settlement in principle to resolve the lawsuit. On November 15, 2020, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. On May 6, 2021, the court granted final approval of the settlement. We believe the remaining lawsuits are without merit, and we are vigorously defending them. In addition, the events surrounding this cyber-attack became the subject of Irish Data Protection Commission (IDPC) and other government inquiries. From time to time we also notify the IDPC, our designated European privacy regulator under the General Data Protection Regulation, of certain other personal data breaches and privacy issues, and are subject to inquiries and investigations regarding various aspects of our regulatory compliance. Although we are vigorously defending our regulatory compliance, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that the ultimate potential loss related to the inquiries and investigations by the IDPC could be material in the aggregate. In addition, from time to time, we are subject to litigation and other proceedings involving law enforcement and other regulatory agencies, including in particular in Brazil and Europe, in order to ascertain the precise scope of our legal obligations to comply with the requests of those agencies, including our obligation to disclose user information in particular circumstances. A number of such instances have resulted in the assessment of fines and penalties against us. We believe we have multiple legal grounds to satisfy these requests or prevail against associated fines and penalties, and we intend to vigorously defend such fines and penalties. With respect to the cases, actions, and inquiries described above, we evaluate the associated developments on a regular basis and accrue a liability when we believe a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In addition, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that we may incur a loss in some of these matters. With respect to the matters described above that do not include an estimate of the amount of loss or range of possible loss, such losses or range of possible losses either cannot be estimated or are not individually material, but we believe there is a reasonable possibility that they may be material in the aggregate. We are also party to various other legal proceedings, claims, and regulatory, tax or government inquiries and investigations that arise in the ordinary course of business. For example, from time to time we are subject to various litigation and government inquiries and investigations, formal or informal, by competition authorities in the United States, Europe, and other jurisdictions. Such investigations, inquiries, and lawsuits concern, among other things, our business practices in the areas of social networking or social media services, digital advertising, and/or mobile or online applications, as well as past acquisitions. For example, in June 2019 we were informed by the FTC that it had opened an antitrust investigation of our company. On December 9, 2020, the FTC filed a complaint against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging that we engaged in anticompetitive conduct and unfair methods of competition in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and Section 2 of the Sherman Act, including by acquiring Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 and by maintaining conditions on access to our platform. In addition, beginning in the third quarter of 2019, we became the subject of antitrust investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general. On December 9, 2020, the attorneys general from 46 states, the territory of Guam, and the District of Columbia filed a complaint against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia alleging that we engaged in anticompetitive conduct in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, including by acquiring Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 and by maintaining conditions on access to our platform. The complaint also alleged that we violated Section 7 of the Clayton Act by acquiring Instagram and WhatsApp. The complaints of the FTC and attorneys general both sought a permanent injunction against our company's alleged violations of the antitrust laws, and other equitable relief, including divestiture or reconstruction of Instagram and WhatsApp. On June 28, 2021, the court granted our motions to dismiss the complaints filed by the FTC and attorneys general, dismissing the FTC's complaint with leave to amend and dismissing the attorneys general's case without prejudice. The court set a deadline of August 19, 2021 for the FTC to file any amended complaint. On July 28, 2021, the attorneys general filed a notice of appeal of the order dismissing their case. Multiple putative class actions have also been filed in state and federal courts in the United States against us alleging violations of antitrust laws and other causes of action in connection with these acquisitions and other alleged anticompetitive conduct, and seeking unspecified damages and injunctive relief. We believe these lawsuits are without merit, and we are vigorously defending them. Additionally, we are required to comply with various legal and regulatory obligations around the world. The requirements for complying with these obligations may be uncertain and subject to interpretation and enforcement by regulatory and other authorities, and any failure to comply with such obligations could eventually lead to asserted legal or regulatory action. With respect to these other legal proceedings, claims, regulatory, tax, or government inquiries and investigations, and other matters, asserted and unasserted, we evaluate the associated developments on a regular basis and accrue a liability when we believe a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In addition, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that we may incur a loss in some of these other matters. We believe that the amount of losses or any estimable range of possible losses with respect to these other matters will not, either individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business and condensed consolidated financial statements. The ultimate outcome of the legal and related matters described in this section, such as whether the likelihood of loss is remote, reasonably possible, or probable, or if and when the reasonably possible range of loss is estimable, is inherently uncertain. Therefore, if one or more of these matters were resolved against us for amounts in excess of management's estimates of loss, our results of operations and financial condition, including in a particular reporting period in which any such outcome becomes probable and estimable, could be materially adversely affected. For information regarding income tax contingencies, see Note 12 — Income Taxes. Indemnifications In the normal course of business, to facilitate transactions of services and products, we have agreed to indemnify certain parties with respect to certain matters. We have agreed to hold certain parties harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or out of intellectual property infringement or other claims made by third parties. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. In addition, we have entered into indemnification agreements with our officers, directors, and certain employees, and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain similar indemnification obligations. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount under these indemnification agreements due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, payments made by us under these agreements have not had a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, as of June 30, 2021, there was not at least a reasonable possibility we had incurred a material loss with respect to indemnification of such parties. We have not recorded any liability for costs related to indemnification through June 30, 2021. |